Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 44

Thread: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

  1. #1
    Member Spitball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    5,626

    How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    I don't believe the Reds should entertain trading an inexpensive Bailey for a soon to be expensive Willis. However, I believe a Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom trade is much more logical.

    I believe the Reds should trade any easily replaceable offensive strength, inexpensive or not, for pitching depth. The Reds have proven they can plug in retreads like Aurilia, Hatteberg, Randa, et al, but they have not found the formula for finding pitching depth.

    I remember the mid-1970's and the Red Sox parlaying Ted Cox's hot September call-up into a trade for future Hall of Famer, future 20 game winner, and funky delivery guy Dennis Eckersley. Whatever happened to Cox anyway?

    Personally, I'd do the trade. Votto may be a future all-star, but Willis and Lindstrum would give the Reds pitching depth. First basemen are much, much more easily developed and/or traded for than 1-3 starters plus bullpen depth.
    "I am your child from the future. I'm sorry I didn't tell you this earlier." - Dylan Easton

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    8,843

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spitball View Post
    I don't believe the Reds should entertain trading an inexpensive Bailey for a soon to be expensive Willis. However, I believe a Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom trade is much more logical.

    I believe the Reds should trade any easily replaceable offensive strength, inexpensive or not, for pitching depth. The Reds have proven they can plug in retreads like Aurilia, Hatteberg, Randa, et al, but they have not found the formula for finding pitching depth.

    I remember the mid-1970's and the Red Sox parlaying Ted Cox's hot September call-up into a trade for future Hall of Famer, future 20 game winner, and funky delivery guy Dennis Eckersley. Whatever happened to Cox anyway?

    Personally, I'd do the trade. Votto may be a future all-star, but Willis and Lindstrum would give the Reds pitching depth. First basemen are much, much more easily developed and/or traded for than 1-3 starters plus bullpen depth.
    And Cueto is expensive how? I'm all for trading (great) offense for pitching, but trading a cheap Cueto to me for an expensive Willis doesn't make any sense and sort of contradicts your argument. Many believe Cueto could be better than Bailey.

  4. #3
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,918

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spitball View Post
    I don't believe the Reds should entertain trading an inexpensive Bailey for a soon to be expensive Willis. However, I believe a Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom trade is much more logical.

    I believe the Reds should trade any easily replaceable offensive strength, inexpensive or not, for pitching depth. The Reds have proven they can plug in retreads like Aurilia, Hatteberg, Randa, et al, but they have not found the formula for finding pitching depth.

    I remember the mid-1970's and the Red Sox parlaying Ted Cox's hot September call-up into a trade for future Hall of Famer, future 20 game winner, and funky delivery guy Dennis Eckersley. Whatever happened to Cox anyway?

    Personally, I'd do the trade. Votto may be a future all-star, but Willis and Lindstrum would give the Reds pitching depth. First basemen are much, much more easily developed and/or traded for than 1-3 starters plus bullpen depth.
    I'm not that enthusiastic about the Reds trading away pitching. Cueto projects to be at least a high leverage bullpen arm. With some luck, he could even be in the rotation.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  5. #4
    Member Spitball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    5,626

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Quote Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1 View Post
    And Cueto is expensive how?
    Where did I say Cueto was expensive? I just don't feel he has the near the same ceiling as Bailey.

    I'm all for trading (great) offense for pitching, but trading a cheap Cueto to me for an expensive Willis doesn't make any sense and sort of contradicts your argument. Many believe Cueto could be better than Bailey.
    Cueto may be better, but I very seriously doubt it. Any trade for pitching depth will have to include some inexpensive pitching quality. It is just the sign of the times. And, I would gamble with Cueto or Travis Wood before I would gamble with Bailey.
    "I am your child from the future. I'm sorry I didn't tell you this earlier." - Dylan Easton

  6. #5
    Churlish Johnny Footstool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Olathe, KS
    Posts
    13,792

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Willis is pretty bad. How many subpar years will it take to erase the memory/hype of his rookie season?
    "I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    8,843

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spitball View Post
    Where did I say Cueto was expensive? I just don't feel he has the near the same ceiling as Bailey.



    Cueto may be better, but I very seriously doubt it. Any trade for pitching depth will have to include some inexpensive pitching quality. It is just the sign of the times. And, I would gamble with Cueto or Travis Wood before I would gamble with Bailey.
    You didn't state that Cueto was expensive, but you stated that your reason for not wanting to trade Bailey was that he was inexpensive (which Cueto is also).

    Bailey may have a higher ceiling (even though I think that's debateable), but he also has more trade value than Cueto does. If the Reds were willing to part with Bailey, I think they could do better than Willis in some sort of package deal with another team. I just don't think the Reds should be trying to trade any of their higher pitching prospects unless it's a can't-refuse type of deal (I would not consider Willis to be that kind of trade). Trade away offense for pitching...sure. Not pitching though.

  8. #7
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    24,979

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool View Post
    Willis is pretty bad. How many subpar years will it take to erase the memory/hype of his rookie season?
    Willis has had one bad season. Yeah, it's this season, but really, he's been nearly as good as recent Harang before this season.

    I do worry about his health, though. So I'd be hesitant.

  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,673

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    Willis has had one bad season. Yeah, it's this season, but really, he's been nearly as good as recent Harang before this season.

    I do worry about his health, though. So I'd be hesitant.
    Actually Willis was showing decline last year. I don't see the Reds taking on anymore expensive money in the next 2 years for the starting pitching with Harang and Arroyo already signed on.

    Willis gets way to much hype on these boards. Classic early bloomer that may have a 2nd career rebound as a soft tossing lefty down the road, most likely next decade type down the road.

  10. #9
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,021

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?



    You trade away expensive players on the decline. You trade for productive players who you control for a number of years cheaply. Let's not out think ourselves here.
    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.

  11. #10
    The Lineups stink. KronoRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West N. Carolina
    Posts
    55,670

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Willis is arbitration eligible, meaning if he's expensive and a disaster then it'll only be a one year drain and not a 3-5 year one that a bad FA signing would be.
    Go Gators!

  12. #11
    Manliness Personified HumnHilghtFreel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,690

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    I don't really get the love for Dontrelle Willis. He had an incredible start to his career, but he seems to be coming down to earth somewhat. Last year he posted a 3.87 ERA, but his BAA was .274 and this year his ERA ballooned up to 5.17 with a BAA of a whopping .294 with a 1.60 WHIP

    His K/9 has stayed constant though
    2005: 6.47
    2006: 6.44
    2007: 6.40

    But his walk rate(BB/9) has started to grow
    2005: 2.09
    2006: 3.34
    2007: 3.81

    He's also started giving up a lot of HR, which as you may know, our ballpark has a penchant for giving up. My personal theory is that the league is finally adjusting to his quirky delivery and making him work harder, hence the rise in his walks.

    I'd pass and keep our young talent.

  13. #12
    Big Red Machine RedsBaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Out Wayne
    Posts
    22,834

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    No thanks.
    "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."

  14. #13
    Member Spitball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    5,626

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Quote Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1 View Post
    Trade away offense for pitching...sure. Not pitching though.
    I would hate to part with Cueto, but I don't believe anyone is going to trade quality pitching without demanding some pitching potential in return. Willis is coming off a poor season or he would demand far more than Votto and Cueto.

    Who is really the bigger question mark for future big league success, Cueto or Willis? Unless it is a salary dump, a trade is a gamble.
    "I am your child from the future. I'm sorry I didn't tell you this earlier." - Dylan Easton

  15. #14
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    24,979

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spitball View Post
    I would hate to part with Cueto, but I don't believe anyone is going to trade quality pitching without demanding some pitching potential in return. Willis is coming off a poor season or he would demand far more than Votto and Cueto.

    Who is really the bigger question mark for future big league success, Cueto or Willis? Unless it is a salary dump, a trade is a gamble.
    I like the thinking in this trade. I'm just a bit afraid of Willis' arm. And it's actually Votto I'm not wild about giving up.

  16. #15
    THAT'S A FACT JACK!! GAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Bellefontaine, Ohio
    Posts
    26,671

    Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post


    You trade away expensive players on the decline. You trade for productive players who you control for a number of years cheaply. Let's not out think ourselves here.
    Exactly.

    Maybe we can get Lohse back?
    "panic" only comes from having real expectations


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