Turn Off Ads?
Page 12 of 19 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 276

Thread: Sully to Chi Sox with $$$ For PTBNL

  1. #166
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    9,836
    Originally posted by creek14
    Why wasn't he going to be on the team next year? We have all that money between 40 (current) - 60 (projected bwahahahahaha) in the budget to sign a couple vets.
    Creek, I'm sorry but if you wanted to give Scott Sullivan a contract extension at $2+ a year, I am just glad you are not employed by the Reds FO.

    What use does a retooling, small market team have for a high priced, declining middle reliever that has logged more innings in the past four years than virtually anyone in history?!?!! Especially with the plethora of young, inexpensive and talented pitching (specifically RELIEF pitching) that we have just acquired??

    That is EXACTLY not how we need to be using our limited resources. Please don't submit your name to the Reds for consideration for the GM job if this is the direction you would like to see the team pursue.
    Go BLUE!!!

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #167
    RaisorZone Raisor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Charlotte, Nc
    Posts
    15,171
    Originally posted by creek14
    I understand the reasoning behind trading a FA for something. I have just been more than a little suspect of all the trades since the Willy cash grab. That one left such a bad taste in my mouth that even a 1985 Dom Pérignon couldn't cleanse it.

    I agree that the Williamson trade was bad, but I'm of the belief that the others were all at least good trades that will help the club in the future.

    2003 is over, I'm just considering this a very long off season.
    "But I do know Joey's sister indirectly (or foster sister) and I have heard stories of Joey being into shopping, designer wear, fancy coffees, and pedicures."

  4. #168
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    796
    I think one thing has been missing from this discussion:

    *Wouldn't Sullivan have garnered draft picks as compensation if the Reds had kept him through the offseason and let him sign elsewhere? Of course there are two big downside risks: he accepts arbitration (he would probably get big $$ after five years of 90+ innings), or other teams might be scared off by having to relinquish a draft pick for signing Sullivan.

    I can't say I'm overly impressed with Hummel. Nevertheless, I do like how Hummel plays several IF positions, given that 3/4 of the infield is unsettled for next year. The options he brings to the table have immense value--Tony Phillips was the most underrated player in baseball for several years because no one realized that someone who could play seven positions made it much easier for the decisionmmakers to manage a team w/ scarce resources (i.e., a 25-man roster).

  5. #169
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,977
    Originally posted by Raisor
    Sullivan CAN be resigned next year, and the team would still keep Hummel.
    That's true, he COULD be resigned, but I'm not holding my breath, considering he was on Allen's dump list.

    But you raise a good point.. In an ideal world, where the GM has flexiblity to use the 300k saved in this trade to sign draft picks, etc.. then this trade becomes a lot more palatable.

    If all these trades since July give the Reds financial flexiblity to make some moves in the winter, I'll view them much more favorable.. But based on the past 6 years, I expect that Allen is simply trying to drive the 2004 to rock bottom, to make up for his lowered projected attendence..

    That's been my main beef on a lot of these trades, they shave salary, BUT they don't give the team any corresponding financial flexiblity.. it all goes into Carl's pocket.
    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!

  6. #170
    RaisorZone Raisor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Charlotte, Nc
    Posts
    15,171
    Originally posted by D-Man
    I think one thing has been missing from this discussion:

    *Wouldn't Sullivan have garnered draft picks as compensation if the Reds had kept him through the offseason and let him sign elsewhere? Of course there's the big downside risk that he accepts arbitration (he would probably get big $$ after five years of 90+ innings), or other teams might be scared off by having to relinquish a draft pick for signing Sullivan.

    Would Sullivan been rated a class A or B free agent, especially after his season last year?
    "But I do know Joey's sister indirectly (or foster sister) and I have heard stories of Joey being into shopping, designer wear, fancy coffees, and pedicures."

  7. #171
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,613
    Originally posted by D-Man
    I think one thing has been missing from this discussion:

    *Wouldn't Sullivan have garnered draft picks as compensation if the Reds had kept him through the offseason and let him sign elsewhere? Of course there's the big downside risk that he accepts arbitration (he would probably get big $$ after five years of 90+ innings), or other teams might be scared off by having to relinquish a draft pick for signing Sullivan.

    To get draft picks, we would have to offer him arbitation, where he would get a min. of $2.24M which he would accept gleefully. And that's the min. number, he might get way more.

    No thanks. There's no chance of Sullivan being offered arbitration. Way better, and even cheaper, players than Sullivan are being non-tendered.

  8. #172
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,977
    Originally posted by PuffyPig

    If we got a great, young cheaper version of Sullivan, for Sullivan, it would be pretty pointless of the Sox to do that, wouldn't it.?
    Let me clarify.. if for example, we got a prospect from the Sox that projected to be similiar to Sully in 1-2 years, that would be a great trade, and the Sox might do it because they need bullpen help now.

    The Mercker trade might turn out to be a trade like that..

    I just don't see Hummel at this point being anything more than a utility man/fill in guy.. and we have those in spades.
    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!

  9. #173
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    42,622
    So let me pose this question again.. What about Heredia? Is it worth bringing him back next year, or should he be dumped for the best we can get for him? Let's assume Heredia would cost between 1-1.5 million next year..
    You bet, he's a LH on a team that is getting destroyed by LH hitters in a LH hitters park, he's in his late 20's and has pitched 260 less innings than Sullivan.

    He's exactly where some of Sullys money should/will be sent.

    The Reds are leveraging their bets that what they get for Sullivan will be better for the organization than what Sullivan could give.

    Like I said projections of players careers point to Sullivan experiencing a downward trend.

    All trades are gambles and an organization needs to shore up weaknesses, ours is the AAA/ML left side, with Lopez possibly being out until June (and probably not being full strength until 2005) this is a good trade IMO.

    Especially considering that Sullivan has pitched a grand total of 21 innings since June 1st.

  10. #174
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,376
    Originally posted by PuffyPig
    If the Cards want to give Sullivan $2.8M (or a little more) next year, be my guest.

    He'll get closer to a third of that.
    I could see the Cards overpaying for Sully since their bullpen is so bad.He could be that bridge in the middle innings to Izzy.
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

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

  11. #175
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,977
    ok, thanks WOY..
    I too hope they can keep Heredia.. despite the fact that he's a potential FA, I don't want him dumped..

    I wish the Reds' FO would move and sign the guy now.
    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!

  12. #176
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    princeton, nj
    Posts
    9,482
    I'd certainly have offered to extend him before the deal. Who knows-- maybe his home situation would have prompted him to sign cheap. A cheap, proven reliever in hand is worth more than an older prospect...

    here's a question that I have. In Gammons column, he writes about Rafael Palmeiro: "But what he missed was that he has more of a chance to return to the Rangers if he finishes the season with the Cubs than if he were with the Rangers, because he's going to be a January signee and the Rangers aren't about to offer him salary arbitration"

    so the Reds weren't about to offer Sully arbitration either-- does this mean that he's more likely to return to the Reds post-trade? What does a "January signee" mean?

    I vaguely recall a rule about a team not being able to re-sign a guy until May 15-- is this the consequence of not offering arbitration or am I muddling two different rules together?

  13. #177
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,613
    Originally posted by princeton

    here's a question that I have. In Gammons column, he writes about Rafael Palmeiro: "But what he missed was that he has more of a chance to return to the Rangers if he finishes the season with the Cubs than if he were with the Rangers, because he's going to be a January signee and the Rangers aren't about to offer him salary arbitration"

    so the Reds weren't about to offer Sully arbitration either-- does this mean that he's more likely to return to the Reds post-trade? What does a "January signee" mean?

    I
    Good point. If the Reds did not offer Sullivan arbitration, he could not resign with them until May1. Now he can sign as a FA at any time.

  14. #178
    Member CougarQuest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Bright, Indiana USA
    Posts
    5,573
    I say lets see what the kids got before we rush to judgement on this trade. The way the White Sox organization used him, IMO, it's hard to truly judge the kid, he's been bounced from position to position all year. Anyone here actually seen the kid play? I see things in his stats that I really appreciate.
    Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

  15. #179
    Dunnilicious creek14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Beavercreek
    Posts
    11,774
    Originally posted by CougarQuest
    he's been bounced from position to position all year.
    And that never happens to the guys who wear the Wishbone C.
    Will trade this space for a #1 starter.

  16. #180
    charlotte_14
    Guest
    When I've watched Joe Borchard this season, I feel like I'm looking at this year's Adam Dunn.....we don't want him in exchange for anything/anyone. They are already projecting Jeremy Reed to start in CF for the White Sox next year.

    Having watched the Knights over the last 4 years, Tim Hummel (can play 3B, SS or 2B) is likely the most worthwhile player on their current roster. If we've got Dunn, Griffey & Kearns for the power numbers, it would sure help if someone could just get on base in front of them.

    The only other choices are:

    2B Aaron Myles, who hits for average and plays a good 2B but is 26 or 27 and is just finishing his 1st full season at AAA.

    1B/OF Ross Gload, good average with some power.....but the Reds need a 1B/OF candidate like they need another hole in their head.


    THE ONLY worthwhile pitcher in the Chisox organization is Jon Rauch.


    One other side note on PTBNL from Chicago's view......they may be trying to "throw a bone" to their AAA organization. The Knights have faint hopes of making the International League playoffs. If Hummel goes now, so does the potential money making opportunity for the Knights..........and they don't draw well at all (on top of the fact, they were 20-30 games under .500 last season.). If all likelyhood, the Knights season will be over Sept. 1.


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