Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Gambling on the future - Where do you Stand?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    515

    Gambling on the future - Where do you Stand?

    A lot of us disagree on the philosophy the Reds should take this offseason... I hear arguments that fall along these lines: (1)Plan for the future/Sit back and wait, (2) Plan for the future/trade our prospect for more expensive established prospects, (3) Mortgage the future/Do whatever we have to in order to win now .. in other words trade for Santana ...

    I see myself as (2) on the spectrum, where are you?

    I know that it's improbable that Bedard, Kazmir, & Peavey are actually on the market, if they aren't then I guess I'm a (1), but if they are... I want 'em and here's why:

    -over on the org there's a thread about whether or not to trade Stubbs for Capuano.... I know that Capuano was probably never valued as highly as Bailey (and I don't debate that), but to me its just another example of how quickly a prospect can fall off the table if he has a couple bad years... if Bailey finishes the season w/ a 5+ ERA... what's he worth - right now Bailey & Cueto are probably amongst the top 5 pitching prospects in all of baseball... WK really doesn't know what he can get for them unless he shops them.

    1. I think we definitely target Kazmir - he's under team control for 3 years ... those are 3 important years in which we'd have an ace pitcher for a much cheaper rate than in free agency. The Rays want pitching... if Wayne can get him for a package centering around Bailey/Cueto & Maloney .. I do that...

    2. Next we land Bedard or Peavey - which ever team bites on an offer centering around Bailey/Cueto & Hamilton/Bruce. Peavey's more expensive (though really reasonable) and they're both tied up for 2 years, so neither would be a bad deal.

    The result
    We'd be losing two potential starting pitching stars for two actual starting pitching stars. We'd be getting 2 aces in which we'd be paying a collective amount equal to or less than what Carlos Silva will be getting in free agency. We'd also lose Hamilton or Bruce, which would hurt, but I think we'll be okay as long as we keep one of the two.

    If we end up w/ a starting rotation of Bedard/Peavey, Harang, Kazmir, Arroyo, ????? for the next 3 years (we'll lose Bedard/Peavey after 2 if we don't resign him) - we'll have the best pitching staff in all of baseball, while also maintaining one of the youngest, cheapest and offensively potent offenses in all of baseball.

    - In this scenario, I think our best chance to win the Series would be next year because we'll have a 3-ace pitching staff and Griffey & Dunn (whereas Griff & Dunn aren't guaranteed for '09). If we do win the series next year, I would then trade Peavey/Bedard and get serious pitching prospect(s) back in return (also, possibly making space in the payroll to resign Dunn), thereby keeping an eye toward the future, while holding onto Kazmir and maintaining the possibility of winning for the next 2 years. This, in my mind, is the best of both worlds - giving us fans a series ... which would be monumental and awesome... but not ruining the future.

    What are your thoughts?

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    187

    Re: Gambling on the future - Where do you Stand?

    I do understand where you are coming from but the problem is you have to give more than just Bailey to get Peavy or Bedard or Kazmir and more than Cueto to get the 2nd piece of your puzzle. If it were just those 2 then it might be a good scenario but when you have to go farther than that you do mortgage the future. Then you are in the situation that the YAnkees were in when they traded prospect after prospect for now - the problem is we don't have the resources to buy FAs every year. If we had unlimited resources then it would not really matter, we could just go out and buy the best SP available in a few years or would be guaranteed to re sign whoever we traded for. I would love to have Peavy, Kazmir and Bedard - any of the 3 would merit trading Dunn and a mid prospect for sure - I don't want to trade him either but would for that good of a pitcher. I think if we just had one of them and could keep Bailey and Cueto we could have an awesome staff - good enough to win the NL central. I just don't think we can give up our future for 2 years. Just my opinion. Thanks for the post.

  4. #3
    The Future GoReds33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    2,463

    Re: Gambling on the future - Where do you Stand?

    With our current prospects I have to go with 1. I stand there because even if we make no trades at all, our roster will be good enough to contend in a couple years.
    If you can't build a winning team with that core a fire-sale isn't the solution. Selling the franchise, moving them to Nashville and converting GABP into a used car lot is.
    -LTlabner

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    515

    Re: Gambling on the future - Where do you Stand?

    I don't know... the more I think about it .. it seems there's a high demand for top prospects and alot of pitchers available on the market, in exchange for those prospects. That fact, paired w/ teams (like the Yankees) reluctance to trade those prospects means if Wayne puts our prospects on the market.. I think we'd be surprised at what we get.

    Bailey & Cueto are most likely two of the best pitching prospects out there and baseball analysts have rated Bruce as a all-around Top 10 prospect. That being said, I didn't just say Bailey for one and Cueto for the other. The Rays are asking for pitching prospects - lets offer him the number one pitching prospect last year - Bailey & successful, possibly major league ready, pitching prospect Maloney, who has put up great numbers in the minors, but some say isn't a match for GABP. I think Bailey & Maloney would be excellent "centerpieces" in an exchange for Kasmir, WK could add in pretty much anyone else he wants to sweeten the deal, but I wouldn't (and don't think we would have to) dip into the pool of Hamilton, Bruce, Votto, EdE, Cueto.

    Secondly, I said "Hamilton/Bruce AND Cueto" as centerpieces in a deal for either Peavey or Bedard... we're talking 2 highly-rated major league ready prospects here (plus whoever Wayne might throw in) ... I think a team that was trying to free-up salary in exchange for top prospects seriously considers that deal.

    No, there's no guarantee either team would do those deals, but my point is.. if that were possible I would do it.. which puts me into the (2) category, whereas some are in the (1) category and don't want to trade our prospects for anyone.

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    515

    Re: Gambling on the future - Where do you Stand?

    Oh, and my mind keeps coming back to the Beckett for Hanley Ramirez deal .. .what's the difference in that deal and what we'd be offering in Bruce for Peavey/Bedard .. and we'd also be including Cueto... if these teams are really willing to save money/get younger.. we don't know what they'll do untill we try.

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Amarillo,Texas
    Posts
    4,357

    Re: Gambling on the future - Where do you Stand?

    1. It is a risk because we only have Harang and Arroyo thru about 2009-2010. We can expect to see Hamilton Votto, Bruce, and Encarcion develop into everyday players. The young pitchers in the bullpen will help considerably, and Bailey and Cueto have a good chance to be considerable starting pitchers at the end of this time period. I simply think we are a better team if we keep our young prospects instead of trading them for short-term gain.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    407

    Re: Gambling on the future - Where do you Stand?

    Quote Originally Posted by AmarilloRed View Post
    1. It is a risk because we only have Harang and Arroyo thru about 2009-2010. We can expect to see Hamilton Votto, Bruce, and Encarcion develop into everyday players. The young pitchers in the bullpen will help considerably, and Bailey and Cueto have a good chance to be considerable starting pitchers at the end of this time period. I simply think we are a better team if we keep our young prospects instead of trading them for short-term gain.
    1

    We'll be in the playoffs by 2009 if we do, I promise you. Not only that, but we'll be consistently in the playoffs for years to come because of young talent. Think of 2009 starting rotation of Bailey, Harang, Cueto, Arroyo. By then, the FA market will be out of this world. When compared to that market, what we'll be paying all four of those guys will be considered pocket change.

  9. #8
    Member durl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Nashvull
    Posts
    1,749

    Re: Gambling on the future - Where do you Stand?

    I would have to go with #1.

    This team has a good core of young talent. While we're a starter and a couple of middle-relievers away from really contending, I don't believe we need to trade most of our top prospects to get them. Still, we may very well have to part with one or two very talented kids in order to get good pitching and I'm OK with that. I just don't want to see all of them shipped off.

  10. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Blue Ash
    Posts
    2,616

    Re: Gambling on the future - Where do you Stand?

    I think you put their names out there and see what you can get. If you don't good return, then you don't do it. It's pretty simple.

    We are not desperate. I see alot of things that make me optimistic about this team in the next couple of years. KGJ's contract will be up and we should save money on him. Fortunately we have Hamilton and Bruce to replace him, and a contact hitting Hopper too.

    We have alot more options than I can remember in recent years.

    Just don't make a stupid trade, and things will be fine. If you can get Kazmir, Peavy or Bedard for just a couple of top prospects, I say do it.
    Who's on first?


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