Turn Off Ads?
Page 20 of 25 FirstFirst ... 10161718192021222324 ... LastLast
Results 286 to 300 of 368

Thread: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

  1. #286
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,667

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by westofyou
    Even the 3 little pigs had to move from a straw house to a stick house before they could build one of brick.
    I agree. Obviously (to coin DanO's new favorite word) we would love to go out and pick up a top shelf pitcher or have one in the minors on the cusp of breaking out. I have a feeling that no one is offering us that, even for Dunn. So, you take what you can get when you can get it. And good luck DMos, hope you prosper from here on out.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #287
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,667

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by MWM
    Making marginal to bad trades just to do something to keep fans interested is NOT in any way, shape, or form good for long-term business. On the contrary, it's just BAD business. There's one and ONLY one way to keep fans interested in the long run, and we all know what that is. So if the trade isn't going to help in that respect, it does NOTHING for the long term health of the franchise.
    So please tell me how disinterested fans help the long-term health of the franchise?

  4. #288
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor
    So please tell me how disinterested fans help the long-term health of the franchise?
    They don't. That's my point. Because your question assumes that I buy the argument that trades like these keep fans interested. I don't believe that.Wins and losses are the ONLY thing that keeps them interested in the long term. How many fans do you think will be interested in this trade by next week beyond the die-hards here at RedsZone?
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  5. #289
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,432

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD
    I see your point.. but is it worth throwing away DJ and being commited to this infield experiment just to give Wily Mo more at bats? IMO, that's a horrible plan.
    I'm not saying that they should get rid of D'Lo. I'm not even suggesting that they are considering it. What I'm saying is I can see their logic in keeping Freel on the bench and keeping D'Lo at 2nd. But I could also understand getting rid of D'Lo and plugging Freel in at 2nd. Like I said, he's a better leadoff hitter and he's more versatile. Of course versatility isn't something you want in a guy who is supposed to be your starter at 2nd. It's nice but since you are planning to start him most of the time, it's not really what you're looking for. But if you get rid of D'Lo you really shorten your bench for the inevitable injury. And God forbid we put Machado in there full time.
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rally-...24872650873160

  6. #290
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,071

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by MWM
    Making marginal to bad trades just to do something to keep fans interested is NOT in any way, shape, or form good for long-term business. On the contrary, it's just BAD business. There's one and ONLY one way to keep fans interested in the long run, and we all know what that is. So if the trade isn't going to help in that respect, it does NOTHING for the long term health of the franchise.
    But if the boss isn't willing to do what is best for the long run (I'm guessing you mean to either build a Cleveland/Oakland farm system or sign a true #1),
    then why not do the best you can do?

    IMO, winning keeps the fans interested, short term and long term. A 110 loss season does damage to the fan base that takes a long time to recover from.

    Ortiz is a step towards respectablity, IMO. Until the team gets respectable, there's no reason to think a Clement, Perez, etc would even want to come here (unless they were grossly overpaid). There's probably 10 teams with at least some interest in Perez/Clement.. How are the Reds going to be guaranteed to win that bidding war?

    As far as the farm goes, Allen is unwilling to pour 6 million/year into the farm like Cleveland and Oakland have done in the past to get the pipeline moving.
    We could've signed Markalis, Sowers, Kazmir, and some other guys if the money was available and been much better off in the farm department.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  7. #291
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,071

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip R
    I'm not saying that they should get rid of D'Lo. ... And God forbid we put Machado in there full time.
    Yeah, I know you weren't suggesting it, just saying it from the Reds' point of view. I didn't word my response carefully.

    I do hope they don't nontender DJ.. that would be stupidity, IMO.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  8. #292
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Orland Park, IL
    Posts
    186

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    I have a hard time understanding the assumption that Freel all of the sudden has figured out how to be an every day player at this stage of his career. If there is concern regarding payroll - non-tender Reidling but keep DLo. With the fraility of Junior, the potential of WillyMo crashing and burning, pitchers knocking the bat out of Freel's hands, limited offensive options at shortstop - you can't give away a major league player like DJ.

  9. #293
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD
    But if the boss isn't willing to do what is best for the long run (I'm guessing you mean to either build a Cleveland/Oakland farm system or sign a true #1),
    then why not do the best you can do?
    I guess I reject the notion that this was the best they could do.

    And I don't agree that this was a step in the right direction.
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  10. #294
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,667

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by MWM
    They don't. That's my point. Because your question assumes that I buy the argument that trades like these keep fans interested. I don't believe that.Wins and losses are the ONLY thing that keeps them interested in the long term. How many fans do you think will be interested in this trade by next week beyond the die-hards here at RedsZone?
    It isn't about the trade keeping them interested. I don't think that's the mind set of anyone who is OK with the move. I believe the opinion is that it does improve the rotation, whether we like how much it does or not. Based on the current state of our pitching staff, an average major league pitcher added to the worst staff in the majors last year should mean a few more victories.

    Also, I haven't seen opinions that this trade knocks their socks off. But the cost was reasonable in talent and in what we'll have to pay him. So, the fallout should be an improvement in the overall rotation and in a middle reliever as a lower quality starter was just bumped to the bullpen where that person is probably better suited. The rest of the house of cards such as Dunn's LTC money and non-tendering Jiminez are unrelated.

  11. #295
    I thought you'd be bigger OldXOhio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Green Country
    Posts
    2,784

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by Gary Redus
    I have a hard time understanding the assumption that Freel all of the sudden has figured out how to be an every day player at this stage of his career.
    He's 28 years old....this is supposed to be the time in his career when he does figure that out. Based on what we saw in 2004, it looks like he has.
    Originally Posted by nate
    Chapman can be downright pornographic at times.

  12. #296
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    tr, I don't believe that this trade really helps the rotation, even a little. I don't see him being any better than Corey Lidle was this year, so I don't view this as an improvement. See the stats Stormy put regarding his last two years as a starter.
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  13. #297
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,125

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Saying they "could have done better" is easy. But unverifiable. Just doesn't hold water in any "thumbs up/thumbs down" debate about the trade, in my opinion.
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  14. #298
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by lollipopcurve
    Saying they "could have done better" is easy. But unverifiable.
    Not if you believe doing NOTHING would have been better.
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  15. #299
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,071

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by MWM
    I guess I reject the notion that this was the best they could do.

    And I don't agree that this was a step in the right direction.
    Ok, I can see your point.. My premise was that Ortiz is an upgrade to the rotation, but if you disagree with that premise, I can see your point.

    I like the trade, but I do acknowledge that it's risky, and might blow up in our faces. Ortiz might stink up the place in 2005.. Maybe I'm too giddy about the thought of Hancock being out of the rotation and Robertson being pushed one slot deeper on the depth chart.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  16. #300
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    4,949

    Re: Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz

    Quote Originally Posted by gm
    Wrong. I never stated or implied that I could do a better job than Bowden. Neither have I called any fellow poster "arrogant" (at least, not since the days of Richard Hand...) I do point out that there's a culture of sports fans who cross the line regularly from "active rooting" to "show him the door!" If you want to take the Philadelphia road to caustic complaining, I have no means to prevent you. Just don't expect me to join the pile.
    I was referring to your first post "Yes, there are 30 MLB jobs in MLB and at least 30 folks on here who think its child's play." I haven't seen a single poster mindlessly blast O'Brien - rather they've mostly stated the reasons they dislike the trade, and why it doesn't fit in with our long-term plans. I don't like the move - I think his W/L total was inflated by great run support, I think he gives up a lot of home runs, I think he is a potential attitude problem... but I don't think the job is simple and I don't think those sort of remarks imply that at all.

    I'm just curious - what posts in this thread are in line with what you would consider "Philadelphia level caustic complaining." Granted there are always a few bad apples in any sports city who will complain about anything, but what I'm seeing here is intelligent, informed discussion about the future of the franchise and what this move does for it. I think this is a decidedly positive Reds board compared to others I've briefly read. And given the results we've seen over the past 5 seasons (i.e. one winning season, front office strife, complaints about fans by the FO, little to no moves which legitimately upgrade the team, deals torpedoed over minimal financial considerations, trades which can't be considered true baseball trades, embarrassing public relations gaffes, numerous employees leaving with disparaging comments....), what exactly is there to be positive about? The Reds have been plenty guilty of breeding ill will with their fanbase - why should we be doing backflips over the acquisition of a guy with mediocre stats, at the loss of one of one of our best prospects? And NOT acting happy over this acquisition certainly doesn't imply that a person is a bad fan, a complainer, or a malcontent. It simply means they care enough about the team to want the direction to improve.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

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.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25