Reitsma Traded to the Braves.

[buckeyenut]

I mean DanO got more for Reitsma than Kullman got for Williamson.. Who whould've thought
that?

Reitsma had more trade value than Willy.

He is younger, far cheaper (at time of deals) this year and next, and has been talked about as having Trevor Hoffman upside as a closer without the control or stamina or motion problems that always came up when talking Scotty. Reitsma is seen as having stud closer potential. I think Willy had proven through his time in the role that he wasn't a stud closer, he was instead a notch below.

That is the nice thing about ML players with potential with limited opportunities, they can bring a lot in trade. They haven't proven they CAN'T handle the role yet.

[M2]

Reitsma had more trade value than Willy.

He is younger, far cheaper (at time of deals) this year and next, and has been talked about as having Trevor Hoffman upside as a closer without the control or stamina or motion problems that always came up when talking Scotty. Reitsma is seen as having stud closer potential. I think Willy had proven through his time in the role that he wasn't a stud closer, he was instead a notch below.

That is the nice thing about ML players with potential with limited opportunities, they can bring a lot in trade. They haven't proven they CAN'T handle the role yet.

On what planet would that be remotely true?

Williamson was a full-fledged, high octane closer with a 3.19 ERA being dealt near the trade deadline last season. Roughly 2/3 of the teams in the majors were in the playoff hunt and almost all of them needed an arm like Williamson's. I don't know what rating system it is you're using to establish who is and isn't a stud closer, but Williamson had undoubtedly established himself as a better at that moment than Ugy Urbina, who fetched a king's ransom from the Marlins.

And if Williamson was a notch below stud closer, then Reitsma's got to be about three notches below. He's been in the bigs for three seasons. He's not that much of an unknown.

[Boss-Hog]

On what planet would that be remotely true?

Williamson was a full-fledged, high octane closer with a 3.19 ERA being dealt near the trade deadline last season. Roughly 2/3 of the teams in the majors were in the playoff hunt and almost all of them needed an arm like Williamson's. I don't know what rating system it is you're using to establish who is and isn't a stud closer, but Williamson had undoubtedly established himself as a better at that moment than Ugy Urbina, who fetched a king's ransom from the Marlins.

And if Williamson was a notch below stud closer, then Reitsma's got to be about three notches below. He's been in the bigs for three seasons. He's not that much of an unknown.

What M2 said. I like the return for Reitsma...the return for Williamson was a joke.

[princeton]

Gammons' report would seem to suggest that the Reds could have gotten much more than the Braves offered.

To reinforce, there's this from DDN:

"As for traded pitcher Chris Reitsma, major-league scouts continue to shake their heads over why the Reds would trade him for what they did — 23-year-old Bong and 22 year-old Bubba Nelson.

"Said one scout, "We wanted him, and I know we offered better than what they got, although Nelson has a very good arm." Industry sources say in addition to the Philadelphia Phillies, the Minnesota Twins, Cleveland Indians and Seattle Mariners also had interest"

I'd be interested in what other offers were available, in order to track them over the next year or so

[Redsfaithful]

The Twins definitely had interest, there was a blurb in their local paper, but it didn't say who they were dangling.

They're so heavy in outfielders and light on pitching that I'm not sure how they could have helped the Reds.

[15fan]

Of course the "losers" in the Reitsma sweepstakes are going to say that they made a better offer. Part of the job is to pump up the guys within their respective organizations for future deals.

It's like when the pretty girl at the dance starts talking to another guy. There's no way that the other guy is as smart, good-looking, witty, or athletic as you are. If she's wasting her time talking to him instead of you, that's her loss.

(Unless, of course, that him is yours truly. In that case, she clearly made the best choice. )

It would be interesting to know what other offers were on the table, though.

On a related note, this morning's AJC had a few lines about the guys getting their first look at Reitsma. They mentioned that he has the killer change, but what makes it so effective is that CR could go 95 mph with his fastball.

I choked on my Cheerios when I read that.

[princeton]

Of course the "losers" in the Reitsma sweepstakes are going to say that they made a better offer. Part of the job is to pump up the guys within their respective organizations for future deals.

if they were going to do that, then they'd name names

And that's all I ask. Don't spread rumors, AL scout, spread good rumors. Name some names. take some initiative in feeding the hungry message boards.

[buckeyenut]

On what planet would that be remotely true?

Williamson was a full-fledged, high octane closer with a 3.19 ERA being dealt near the trade deadline last season. Roughly 2/3 of the teams in the majors were in the playoff hunt and almost all of them needed an arm like Williamson's. I don't know what rating system it is you're using to establish who is and isn't a stud closer, but Williamson had undoubtedly established himself as a better at that moment than Ugy Urbina, who fetched a king's ransom from the Marlins.

And if Williamson was a notch below stud closer, then Reitsma's got to be about three notches below. He's been in the bigs for three seasons. He's not that much of an unknown.

Trevor Hoffman was a stud closer and Reitsma has been continually compared to him in the half a season or less since he became a closer.

Williamson, as much as I personally loved him, made 2M more than Reitsma and had control problems which kept him from being a stud closer. Now, he was very good, better than Ugi as you mention, in the top ten of closers IMO. And would have been even better as a starter. And the return on him was crap. But, Reitsma has that P word and Willy was already a "known" quantity.

Willy's value in my mind still was and is if someone were to use him as a starter. But I think that ship has sailed.

[buckeyenut]

The Twins definitely had interest, there was a blurb in their local paper, but it didn't say who they were dangling.

They're so heavy in outfielders and light on pitching that I'm not sure how they could have helped the Reds.

We talked twins all offseason for Reitsma. Cuddyer for Reitsma was the fit we saw. My guess? MIN wouldn't do that one and was dangling less.

I think we got more than what Reitsma was worth in this deal with ATL. Not sure how we could have gotten much more elsewhere.

[traderumor]

Gammons' report would seem to suggest that the Reds could have gotten much more than the Braves offered.

To reinforce, there's this from DDN:

"As for traded pitcher Chris Reitsma, major-league scouts continue to shake their heads over why the Reds would trade him for what they did — 23-year-old Bong and 22 year-old Bubba Nelson.

"Said one scout, "We wanted him, and I know we offered better than what they got, although Nelson has a very good arm." Industry sources say in addition to the Philadelphia Phillies, the Minnesota Twins, Cleveland Indians and Seattle Mariners also had interest"

I'd be interested in what other offers were available, in order to track them over the next year or so

It is this kind of writing that makes me shake my head harder than the once again anonymous scouts. Reitsma was overvalued and we got two younger highly regarded prospects in return. This looks like jilted lover comments to me.

[Aronchis]

Must like prospect ratings, these types of reports by Gammons and DDN are suspiciously flat with no juice to them. They do sound like sour grapes and should be taken that way.

If Nelson wins 15 games for the Reds in 2005 or 2006, I don't think anybody is going to complain except Braves fans wondering why they traded away their best young pitchers. It is the players involved who should be watched, not some "anonymous" shadow who is a supposed know it all.

[princeton]

Must like prospect ratings, these types of reports by Gammons and DDN are suspiciously flat with no juice to them. They do sound like sour grapes and should be taken that way.

I don't think that it's hard to believe. First, there should have been other offers, as the Reds have been shopping CR for months. Second, the Reds have no lefties and recently showed their desperation by overpaying for two of them (Dumatrait, Pelland). If some other team offered a more talented prospect than Bong to pair up with a prospect as talented as Nelson, it's not clear that the lefty-starved Reds wouldn't have rejected the better offer for the offer that included the lefty. Needs often win out over best available, as the Bengals show during nearly every NFL draft.

[M2]

While I'm suspect that anyone actually outbid the Braves (largely because Nelson's a quality starter prospect), I find it a constant cause for amusement that people with no contacts in the baseball world get their jollies out of bashing Peter Gammons, who has more contacts in the baseball world than anyone in history. You may not agree with what his contacts are saying, but I appreciate that the guy picks the brains of people inside the game for comments on pretty much every single move that gets made.

Philadelphia as a potential trading partner for Reitsma would have been interesting. I'm a big fan of Ryan Madson, who's ready now. Nelson's got a higher ceiling though and I'm thinking it'll take a month of real games before the Phillies wake up to what their areas of deficit are.

[REDREAD]

Williamson, as much as I personally loved him, made 2M more than Reitsma and had control problems which kept him from being a stud closer.

The problem with that assumption is that most clubs do not think like the Reds.

Three million for a guy like Williamson is reasonable to a lot of clubs.
There's much worse relievers making comparable money.
So I don't think Willie's salary had much to do with it.

IMO, Williamson was basically what we hoped Reitsma will become.
Williamson was a truely dominant reliever..

[traderumor]

While I'm suspect that anyone actually outbid the Braves (largely because Nelson's a quality starter prospect), I find it a constant cause for amusement that people with no contacts in the baseball world get their jollies out of bashing Peter Gammons, who has more contacts in the baseball world than anyone in history. You may not agree with what his contacts are saying, but I appreciate that the guy picks the brains of people inside the game for comments on pretty much every single move that gets made.

Philadelphia as a potential trading partner for Reitsma would have been interesting. I'm a big fan of Ryan Madson, who's ready now. Nelson's got a higher ceiling though and I'm thinking it'll take a month of real games before the Phillies wake up to what their areas of deficit are.

No jollies here in criticizing a sportswriter for a lack of identifiable sources, I'm not that easily amused . That's my big rub with your boy, M2, as I think is an ongoing complaint with his detractors around here. I understand the whole anonymous source game, but am able to take many things he says as lacking credibility because of the almost exclusive use of anonymous sources. In using one of your pet phrases, bully for Gammons because he has a lot of unnamed sources. And bully for those of us which consider the information lacking credibility because of that.