Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

[REDREAD]

ok, this is a historic moment..

GOOD JOB, DANO (seriously :MandJ: )

I've been thinking about this, and I don't understand why people are so upset.

1. Mosely has been off the Reds' radar. I'm willing to give the Reds' FO the benefit of the doubt now and assume Mosely would be no better than the other plentiful #5 starter types we have now. Not a big loss. Sure, he was one of our "top prospects", but this is the Reds, that doesn't mean much.

2. Ortiz would not have been nontendered. No chance. I'm willing to bet several other teams were interested. Decent starting pitching is scarce. Ortiz is no ace, but he's decent, and had trade value. Starting pitchers that are even slightly below average are simply never nontendered. Only the Haynes/Dempsters of the world are, in general. Heck, if push came to shove, Ortiz would've been kept as a bullpenner and shopped again in July.

3. Again, Ortiz is no Clement, but this is a HUGE upgrade to the rotation. Bye, bye Hancock. This could seriously be a 8-10 game swing in our W-L record, because Hancock has 2-18 potential.

4. It shows that the FO has a pulse. That they have enough pride to not field Wilson and 4 crapshoot rookies. It reversed the downward spiral a bit. The team now has the potential to actually improve in 2005, especially if they are in the running for a couple decent bullpen arms.

5. IMO, Jimmeniz is probably gone whether this trade is made or not. I agree it's stupid, but they seem heck-bent on putting Freel at 2b and Kearns at 3b.
We can only hope they're able to trade Jimmeniz before the 20th.

So, IMO, they gave up very little to get a 31 year old starter with upside. Sure, it's a risk, but at the level we are willing to spend at, we're going to have to take some risks.

I can see the arguement with Wilson+ Ortiz = payflex, but I almost think DanO was under orders from a higher power to get Wilson signed. For some reason, the Reds wanted to market/promote him as some kind of a hero.

Nice to see DanO did something other than get ice at the winter meetings. Good move, big upgrade in our rotation (mainly because Hancock was so awful), for little cost. Although I will miss Tmos and wish his son well.

For those that are panning the trade, how would you spend approx 4million that Ortiz will probably get? It's pretty slim pickings, and it's not like we are going to be that desirable to free agents. We have to get respectable before we can attract quality FA, IMO. This was a good step in the right direction, even if Ortiz ends up blowing in our face. The cost was certainly in line with the risk, IMO.

[Rocket_Fuel]

Very solid deal by O'Brien, I like it. Ortiz has #2 talent and the Reds gave up basically nothing. Lets be truthful here, there are people who are suddenly falling in love with Moseley because of this deal. Dustin Moseley wasn't going to be in the Reds starting rotation. The guy likely topped off. The Reds have a proven starter, who has won 13 or more games 3 of the last 4 years, has a world championship ring and a proven track record. Now people are suddenly complaining about money? You can't have it both ways. People complain the Reds don't spend money, then they spend money, not a ton of money, decent money, or a solid, top shelf pitcher who could be a #2 pitcher, #1 for the Reds, and they only gave up a prospect who wasn't going to do squat for the Reds, and people are complaining?

[Stormy]

What is the most important stat in baseball? I have always thought it was wins and Losses. Just ask Randy Johnson about it right now or any player on a losing team. I bet all the GM's will tell you that too since most of their jobs depend on it.

That's absurd. See, your stated rationale is exactly the kind of assertion that fools teams into re-signing Jimmy Haynes (because afterall he "Wins games") and in the process costs them money, budget and roster space and leaves them holding a bag when the guy returns to career norms and lays a 6.00+ERA 15 loss season on you. No offense, but that's just terrible analysis. You can like this trade, and make a solid case for why... but that sure isn't it. Ramon Ortiz won 16 games in spite of his ABYSMAL numbers, because he was the beneficiary of great Angels run support. Expecting him to do the same here is absolutely no different than expecting Jimmy Haynes to duplicate his 15 win season. How did that turn out?

[Redmachine2003]

Nice post Redread I agree totally

[Rocket_Fuel]

I swear I have visions of last offseason's Cory Lidle thread in my head right now.

Every pitcher isn't going to turn into Corey Lidle for the Reds. I mean, if people are going to use the Lidle deal that burned the Reds as a reason to NEVER make deals like that then, I'm sorry, the Reds are going nowhere. The Reds have been burned with guys like Lidle and Haynes. They have also been rewarded with guys like Dessens, Wilson and Harnish. And the best part is that Ortiz had ONE down year. If people are willing to trash him and pass up on him because of one down year after multiple good years then you know what? You would have given up on Freddy Garcia. Garcia had a couple of good to great years, had one down year and people were dumping on him like they're dumping on Ortiz. Then Garcia came alive and had a good year last year and people were clamoring for the Reds and others to get him. And Garcia is 30 years old. Ortiz is 31. Garcia is the perfect example of why you don't give up on a player after he has one down year.

[Redmachine2003]

That's absurd. See, your stated rationale is exactly the kind of assertion that fools teams into re-signing Jimmy Haynes (because afterall he "Wins games") and in the process costs them money, budget and roster space and leaves them holding a bag when the guy returns to career norms and lays a 6.00+ERA 15 loss season on you. No offense, but that's just terrible analysis. You can like this trade, and make a solid case for why... but that sure isn't it. Ramon Ortiz won 16 games in spite of his ABYSMAL numbers, because he was the beneficiary of great Angels run support. Expecting him to do the same here is absolutely no different than expecting Jimmy Haynes to duplicate his 15 win season. How did that turn out?

If Wins and Losses are not important to you then don't complain about the Reds record and just sit back and enjoy the game.

[REDREAD]

I think the scary thing is that some of the people who didn't like the Lidle acquisition don't feel too bad about this one.

Well, I'm one of those. I hated the Lidle signing, but I'm more optimistic about this one. I'm willing to eat my Rhubarb pie in July if I'm wrong though

[Stormy]

Very solid deal by O'Brien, I like it. Ortiz has #2 talent and the Reds gave up basically nothing. Lets be truthful here, there are people who are suddenly falling in love with Moseley because of this deal. Dustin Moseley wasn't going to be in the Reds starting rotation. The guy likely topped off. The Reds have a proven starter, who has won 13 or more games 3 of the last 4 years, has a world championship ring and a proven track record. Now people are suddenly complaining about money? You can't have it both ways. People complain the Reds don't spend money, then they spend money, not a ton of money, decent money, or a solid, top shelf pitcher who could be a #2 pitcher, #1 for the Reds, and they only gave up a prospect who wasn't going to do squat for the Reds, and people are complaining?

So, you maintain that even though he posted a 5.20ERA as a Starter in 2003, then followed it with a 5.47ERA as a Starter in 2004 before being demoted to bullpen duty... that Ramon Ortiz is A #2 type starter who can be a legitimate #1 for the Reds? I'd love to understand that rationale.

[RBA]

Bad Deal for Reds. Ortiz = Batting Practice Pitcher.

[Stormy]

If Wins and Losses are not important to you then don't complain about the Reds record and just sit back and enjoy the game.

I leave that to you. You're always pleased with the Reds moves amidst 4 consecutive losing seasons, so I think it's more appropriate that you ignore the record and just sit back and enjoy the game. I'll stick to inquiring as to why we've spent nearly $7 million the past 2 years bringing in fodder pitchers with 5+ERAs, and terrible peripherals, as our primary offseason pitching acquisitions (Lidle/Ortiz).

[REDREAD]

ESPN's scouting report:

Scouting Report

2003 Season
Hey, 16 wins. Pretty good, right? Ramon Ortiz became the first Angels righthander to win 16 games since 1989, the highlight of a deceptively poor year. In an otherwise sorry offensive season, the Angels provided Ortiz with the fourth-best run support of any American League pitcher. In return, he failed to complete six innings 14 times in 32 starts. His ERA leaped from 3.77 in 2002 to 5.20 last year.


Pitching
Ortiz struck out none in his one complete game, the single-most compelling statistic in noting the alarming drop in his strikeouts from 162 in 2002 to 94 last summer. He once complained, in April, of feeling "no power" in his arm, but beyond that, he and the Angels insisted no injury was evident. Nonetheless, the zip came and went on his fastball, his slider was effective but inconsistent and he had to be reminded to stop throwing his changeup so hard.


Defense
Ortiz made great strides in not letting one poor pitch or one questionable call rattle him, but he still isn't as calm as he should be when fielding, leading to needless errors. His pickoff move is better, but far from good, and even Gold Glove catcher Bengie Molina could throw out only one of the nine runners who tried to steal with Ortiz pitching.


2004 Outlook
Ortiz' father died in September after fighting emphysema for years, and Ortiz pitched with a heavy heart as the illness worsened. He vowed to dedicate the rest of his career to his late father. Ortiz, once dubbed "Pocket Pedro," is no Martinez, but can be a solid No. 2 or 3 starter when right. The Angels have a $5.5 million option on Ortiz for the 2005 season, so he must rebound this year to remain in Anaheim beyond 2004.

[letsgojunior]

At least he'll fit in well with the rest of the Reds gopherball staff.

[gm]

Yessir, there are 30 GM jobs in MLB and at least 30 folks on here who think that it's childs play and they could do so much better

Yeah, surrre

I'm not saying DanO did right or screwed up this trade. Time will tell. I do observe that Moseley was sent to AA out of Sarasota last April and that was a loud/clear signal re: his standing in the system. Naehring mentions the FO's desire "to get younger" as far as prospects go, then a day later Dustin is gonzo. Now you'll see the Gardners and Paulys get their shot to impress. After a decade-long dearth of pitching prospects worth a sniff in trade discussions, Cincy actually parlays their very own drafted/developed arm into something of value. If no one else wants to mark this occasion, I'll take a moment and reflect upon the wonder of it.

...

It's possible that Ortiz would've been available in 6 days to sign as a FA. But it's more likely that he would've 1) been dealt to another team had DanO hesitated, or 2) signed with a different ballclub had he become a FA. The opportunity for the Reds was now, and they rolled the dice. 30-odd wanna-be GMs may not buy into it, but (at the end of the day) they'll still have their noses pressed up against the glass, looking in on the paid decision-makers building upon their oh-so-public track records

[OldXOhio]

I agree that Reds management lacks the fortitude to work the trade market in that fashion, though my take is that's a fairly damning statement, the basic equivalent of saying the Reds are a rudderless ship.

.

Bingo. The appearance of a rudderless ship indeed and one that seems to lack the savvy necessary to incorporate any constructive change. Who knows, maybe Ortiz will exceed all expectations and OB will look like a genius for pulling this off. The reality of that statement is in the very uncertainty which underlies it - the Reds will continue to operate in this second rate, guessing game for the foreseeable future.

[Ga_Red]

2/09/07