Turn Off Ads?
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 84

Thread: Why no Bruce??

  1. #46
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,262

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    Quote Originally Posted by Team Clark View Post
    The kid has played a lot of baseball with great success? Why put a bump in the road. Not to mention he is going to the AFL and play for Team USA correct? He's got plenty on his plate. 15 Big league AB's can wait.
    He isn't going to the AFL. He is playing for Team USA in November though. As a part of the Team USA schedule though, they will play each of the AFL teams.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #47
    You know his story Redsland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    7,714

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    Not only does keeping Bruce off the 40-man give the Reds greater flexibility, it also greatly enhances Bruce's tradeability.

    When you trade a guy who is on your 40-man, he has to go onto his new team's 40-man, as well. When you trade a guy who is not on the 40-man, the team receiving him does not have to open a place for him on their 40-man.

    Food for thought.
    Makes all the routine posts.

  4. #48
    He has the Evil Eye! flyer85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south of the border
    Posts
    23,858

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    Bruce really needs more time in the minors. That .34 BB/K(47/135) ratio is troubling and would likely morph into a sub .2 ratio(30bb/160+k) if he spends 2008 in the majors.
    What are you, people? On dope? - Mr Hand

  5. #49
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,385

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    Quote Originally Posted by paulrichjr View Post
    Actually I believe that an option is not used if he is brought up after Sept 1.
    Even so, you bring him up and if he doesn't make the 25 man roster out of ST, you burn an option year.

    Everybody said about Homer that when he's up, he's up to stay and you don't have to worry about options. Now he's on the 40 man and if he doesn't pitch well in ST, you either keep him on the 25 man roster or burn an option year. So that's 2 option years you will use on him and he's only got one more left.
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

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

  6. #50
    Redsmetz redsmetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Winton Place
    Posts
    11,160

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    I just found this over on Lonnie Wheeler's blog from the other day

    Wayne Krivsky said that the reason Jay Bruce wasn’t called up to the Reds, now that Louisville's season is over, was that there weren’t enough at-bats available to make it worthwhile. And that’s probably true. And it’s probably okay as far as this year is concerned, because Bruce is only 20 and will be playing in the Arizona Fall League and then for Team USA in Taiwan. So he’ll be challenged and pitched to, plenty.

    But it’s not okay if the same situation faces him next spring. Bruce is already the best player in all of the minor leagues, and he belongs in the Cincinnati outfield in April. That won’t happen if Josh Hamilton, Adam Dunn and Ken Griffey Jr. are still around.

    Hamilton will be for certain. Dunn will be if the Reds pick up the $13 million option on his contract. Griffey will be unless the Reds trade him in the offseason.

    Of course, they’re unlikely to do that if Junior has not hit the eight more home runs he needs to reach 600. Which is another reason why there wouldn’t be many at-bats available for Bruce in September. Griffey needs them.

    If he makes the most of them, and arrives at 600, it might accomplish several things. It might make him tradable to a team that is otherwise ready for the 2008 postseason, and enable him to play out his career in style. It might enable the Reds to swap for an accomplished pitcher. It might, with the money saved, enable them to sign one in the free-agent market. It might shake up the chemistry on a club that has been losing for seven straight years.

    And it surely would, as noted, make room for the best player in the minor leagues. Which Griffey himself once was. (Also the majors.)

  7. #51
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,762

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    Am I the only one who doesn't get all the fuss over JR's 600th HR?

    Its not an unprecedented feat anymore and the attendance bump would hardly offset the $16.5 Million it would cost to keep him around ($12.5 Million in 08 and a $4 Million option buyout).

    It seems like trading him and using the cash to help reshape the roster (i.e. trading a young cheap player for a needed starter w/o dollars getting in the way or financing whatever moves that lead to acquiring the depth to deal as needed) would be better for attendance then the temporary bump the chase for 600 will bring. After 600 is struck the attendance bump will be over and shortly afterwards (at latest end of 2008) Griffey will be gone anyway.

    There is also the possibility that the injury bug pops up again as Griffey gets more years and miles on his body. That would be a scenario where the Reds have no Griffey, no salary relief and no talent returned back for him.

    There is an heir apparent for RF ready to go. The Defense in RF is awful (I think Dunn has more range than Griffey these days) and could immediately be improved with a residual favorable impact on every pitcher on the roster, and the reshaping could begin. I just don't see why anyone is kept around in order to achieve what is now a relatively minor milestone.

    I like Griffey and wish him well. But it isn't like we're seeing the end of a guy who played like a Hall of Famer here. He played like a Hall of Famer in Seattle. In Griffey's case Cincy is Vegas and Seattle is Memphis. It isn't Griffey's fault and its very unfortunate, but Cincinnati got the fat Elvis version of Griffey for the last 8 years while Seattle got the guy that made him a legend to begin with.

    Its time for Jay Bruce and Josh Hamilton to share the CF and RF positions that Griffey has manned during this decade.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

    Having better players makes "the right time" or "the big hit" happen a lot more often. PLUS PLUS

  8. #52
    2009: Fail Ltlabner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    7,441

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Am I the only one who doesn't get all the fuss over JR's 600th HR?

    I just don't see why anyone is kept around in order to achieve what is now a relatively minor milestone. .
    Minor milestone? Huh? 5 players have hit 600 home runs. 5 out of the thousands who have played MLB baseball over the years. In a game with an average player carear length of what....4 or 5 years?

    Arod will likely acheive 600 (has 512) as will Manny (490). There are a couple others (Thome, Thomas and Sheffield) still playing that *might* possibly reach it, although I doubt it. Even if all 5 reach 600 that's 10 total players who've reached 600 homers in a carear.

    Guys who have not hit 600? Jackson, Schmitt, Killabrew, Foxx, Mantle, Williams. Those are some monster players, yet they couldn't hit the 600 mark.

    Minor milestone? Wow.

    Not saying that justifies keeping Jr, and you are right that the "chase for 600" isn't likely to boost attendence except in the last few games. I'm not saying I want to see them trade Jr, but you have a point that once again there is a log jam out there, and someone has to be traded if we want Bruce to see any playing time.

    But 600 homers is a minor milestone? Come on.
    a super volcano of ridonkulous suckitude.

    I simply don't have access to a "cares about RBI" place in my psyche. There is a "mildly curious about OBI%" alcove just before the acid filled lake guarded by robot snipers with lasers which leads to the "cares about RBI" antechamber though. - Nate

  9. #53
    Matt's Dad RANDY IN INDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Brownsburg, Indiana
    Posts
    15,268

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    No kiddin' Ltlabner.
    Talent is God Given: be humble.
    Fame is man given: be thankful.
    Conceit is self given: be careful.

    John Wooden

  10. #54
    15 game winner Danny Serafini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sultanes de Monterrey
    Posts
    4,183

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    A milestone isn't near as exciting when it's the third time in the past couple years someone hits it. 600 is impressive, no doubt, but the more people pass it the less magic it holds.

  11. #55
    Redsmetz redsmetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Winton Place
    Posts
    11,160

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    Quote Originally Posted by Danny Serafini View Post
    A milestone isn't near as exciting when it's the third time in the past couple years someone hits it. 600 is impressive, no doubt, but the more people pass it the less magic it holds.
    Some might consider it passe given it's frequent recent occurance, but as Ltlabner pointed out, it's no small feat.

  12. #56
    Matt's Dad RANDY IN INDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Brownsburg, Indiana
    Posts
    15,268

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    With only 5 players in the club, anyone with an ounce of respect for baseball history would hardly consider it passe, most notably because it is being done by a player with no steroid accusations.
    Talent is God Given: be humble.
    Fame is man given: be thankful.
    Conceit is self given: be careful.

    John Wooden

  13. #57
    You know his story Redsland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    7,714

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Am I the only one who doesn't get all the fuss over JR's 600th HR?
    Nope.

    I certainly don't think it's enough of a reason to keep him around if the right trade comes along.
    Makes all the routine posts.

  14. #58
    Charlie Brown All-Star IslandRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    4,848

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    I hope Castellini has enough sense not to use Drayton McLane as a role model. McLane, from what I've read, was the one that ordered management to play Biggio all year so he could get to 3,000 hits, and as a result forced a sub-optimal team onto the field. Then he fires the GM and manager because the team didn't contend. Now, Biggio's not all to blame for that by any means, but there needs to be a consistent message coming from the top.

    If there is a chance this offseason to trade Griffey somewhere he'd like to go, it's a key opportunity to reshape the club. If Castellini really wants to win, he's got to allow that to happen, even if Griffey's sitting at 599. The alternative is to commit the Reds to another year of Griffey's salary and poor defense and risky wheels and keeping Jay Bruce stuck in the minors for the sake of a "600" photo-op.

    Of course, if Griffey does not wish to leave, that's that.
    Not all who wander are lost

  15. #59
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,990

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    Quote Originally Posted by IslandRed View Post
    I hope Castellini has enough sense not to use Drayton McLane as a role model. McLane, from what I've read, was the one that ordered management to play Biggio all year so he could get to 3,000 hits, and as a result forced a sub-optimal team onto the field. Then he fires the GM and manager because the team didn't contend. Now, Biggio's not all to blame for that by any means, but there needs to be a consistent message coming from the top.
    Not really a fair comparison at all. Biggio was harming the team by being in the lineup at all, let alone at the top of the lineup. He extended his career for the sole purpose of acheiving the milestone and McLane enabled it. Had Biggio been at 2,800 hits, he wouldn't have been playing.

    Junior has been the 2nd most productive offensive player on the Reds and has at least another couple years left in the tank making positive contributions, milestone or not. His milestone would come in the course of helping the team win games. If we're offered Justin Verlander and Cameron Maybin for him and Castellini says, "no way, Junior's gonna hit 600 as a Red", then you have a point. But unlike Biggio, a case can be made for keeping Junior because doing so gives us the best chance to win.

    As for the scope of the milestone, can you name all the guys who have hit 3,000 hits? Can you name all the guys who have hit 600 homers? It's a very big milestone and should be celebrated accordingly.

    Don't get me wrong, milestones are things that should happen in the course of winning baseball games. They are notable points in the course of the game, not an objective thereof. If the right deal was there, I'd deal Junior. I don't think we should keep him for the sake of the milestone. I think we should keep him because he's a good player and he should only be dealt if doing so improves the club. (and fwiw, I'd be shopping Junior as soon as I possibly could)
    Last edited by RedsManRick; 09-07-2007 at 11:40 AM.
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  16. #60
    Charlie Brown All-Star IslandRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    4,848

    Re: Why no Bruce??

    It's not meant to be a comparison of the value of Biggio's play versus the value of Griffey's play. It's meant to be a question of, does ownership allow the milestone to take priority over doing what's best for the ballclub. In Griffey's case, "what's best for the ballclub" might be keeping him or might be trading him, we don't know right now. But if trading Griffey was not even allowed to be discussed because #600 hadn't been hit yet, then that's what I'm getting at.
    Not all who wander are lost


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