Turn Off Ads?
Page 7 of 29 FirstFirst ... 3456789101117 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 431

Thread: Here we go...Haren/D'backs get Haren

  1. #91
    Churlish Johnny Footstool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Olathe, KS
    Posts
    13,821

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by chicoruiz View Post
    Those of you who are willing to give both Bailey and Cueto for Haren: What would you do for a fifth starter? And how will you deal with the inevitable injuries?

    I just think that if we go that way, by June we'll be trotting Tom Shearn and Jim Brower out there for 40% of our starts...
    I'd rather be scrounging for a 5th starter than scrounging for a 3rd starter.

    The team needs to acquire high-end talent if they're going to compete in the next two seasons. Sometimes, you need to sacrifice some depth if you're in that situation.

    It's a gamble, sure. But then again, when *isn't* it a gamble?
    "I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #92
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,365

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool View Post
    I'd rather be scrounging for a 5th starter than scrounging for a 3rd starter.

    The team needs to acquire high-end talent if they're going to compete in the next two seasons. Sometimes, you need to sacrifice some depth if you're in that situation.

    It's a gamble, sure. But then again, when *isn't* it a gamble?
    Exactly.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  4. #93
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Redsland
    Posts
    830

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool View Post
    It's a gamble, sure. But then again, when *isn't* it a gamble?
    Yeah, and its not like it's a gamble for an unsure thing. Haren would almost certainly become the Red's BEST pitcher. That in turn pushes everyone down a slot to where they belong.

    You have to take that "risk."

    Also, there isn't really a safer, less risky alternative. Keeping both Baily and Cueto is risk in that they could end up doing nothing and the Red's could get nothing for them.

    I would say that Haren is a safer choice.

  5. #94
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,149

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool View Post
    I'd rather be scrounging for a 5th starter than scrounging for a 3rd starter.

    The team needs to acquire high-end talent if they're going to compete in the next two seasons. Sometimes, you need to sacrifice some depth if you're in that situation.

    It's a gamble, sure. But then again, when *isn't* it a gamble?
    Umm.. Top flight prospects shouldn't be considered "depth". Matt Belisle, Bobby Livingston, Matt Maloney, Jon Coutlangus, Todd Coffey - that's depth. Guys who are positive contributors and deserve to be on a 25 man roster somewhere, but who are low cost and low ceiling and thus somewhat fungible - that's depth.

    Cueto and Bailey are high-end talent. I'm not saying they'll be aces next year, or ever, necessarily. But in terms of collecting high end talent, trading away 2 or 3 of the top 4+1 for 2 years of a single player is a step backwards. I understand your point in terms of fully realized talent. You want top performance, not just unproven top talent. But it's still trading away a higher ceiling for a higher floor.
    Last edited by RedsManRick; 12-12-2007 at 02:01 PM.
    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.

  6. #95
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Redsland
    Posts
    830

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    Umm.. Top flight prospects shouldn't be considered "depth". Matt Belisle, Bobby Livingston, Matt Maloney, Jon Coutlangus, Todd Coffey - that's depth. Guys who are positive contributors and deserve to be on a 25 man roster somewhere, but who are low cost and low ceiling and thus somewhat fungible - that's depth.

    Cueto and Bailey are high-end talent. I'm not saying they'll be aces next year, or ever, necessarily. But in terms of collecting high end talent, trading away 2 or 3 of the top 4+1 for 2 years of a single player is a step backwards. I understand your point in terms of fully realized talent. You want top performance, not just unproven top talent. But it's still trading away a higher ceiling for a higher floor.
    It isn't like Haren is a low-ceiling guy. I would say that a pitcher of his caliber is their ceiling. Also, three years is more than a rental. If one of them pitch like Haren could for the Reds for three years it would be a huge success story.
    Last edited by CaiGuy; 12-12-2007 at 02:22 PM.

  7. #96
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,779

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by CaiGuy View Post
    It isn't like Haren is a low-ceiling guy. I would say that a pitcher of his caliber is their ceiling. Also, three years is more than a rental. If one of them pitch like Haren could the Reds for three years it would be a huge success story.
    Right, but the thing is, what if they both pitch a little bit worse than Haren over the next 6 years. Then you are completely losing that deal. Two slightly worse pitchers over 6 years is light years more vauable than 1 slightly better pitcher over 3 years.

  8. #97
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Redsland
    Posts
    830

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Right, but the thing is, what if they both pitch a little bit worse than Haren over the next 6 years. Then you are completely losing that deal. Two slightly worse pitchers over 6 years is light years more vauable than 1 slightly better pitcher over 3 years.
    Of course, and that is where the cost/risk comes in. But that being said, three years of Haren is worth that risk, IMO. Of course, ideally, you could try to only loose one of them and preserve the other.

    And this is, of course, assuming that Haren would only be in Cincy for this contract. Then there is the possibility, if you can't keep him, you could trade him for prospect(s) later on.

  9. #98
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    25,060

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Two slightly worse pitchers over 6 years is light years more vauable than 1 slightly better pitcher over 3 years.
    This gets a little tricky too, though. If the "slightly worse" pitcher happens to get good over his pre-free agency years, then the team will likely have to trade him prior to the end of the fifth season or just after the fifth season to avoid having to pay him as a FA.

  10. #99
    Member Topcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,934

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    This is my theory. And my concern. Bailey and Votto have more cachet in the Reds' eyes than in the eyes of other GMs, particularly a guy like Beane, who knows what real talent is.

    I see your point and my only concern is that a man like Beane as a rule does not trade away front line Pitching assets unless there is something murky in the Haren waters. I also would like to add passing the a physical done by the Reds medical staff is not exactly a glowing endorsement of health.
    2006 Redzone mock Draftee's- 1(st) Daniel Bard(redsox), 1(st sup)( Jordan Walden (Angels), 2(nd) rd.- Zach Britton(Orioles), 3(rd) Blair Erickson(Cardinals), 3(rd) Tim Norton( Yankees),(cuz its a Tim Hortons thing

    Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever.

  11. #100
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Redsland
    Posts
    830

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by Topcat View Post
    I see your point and my only concern is that a man like Beane as a rule does not trade away front line Pitching assets unless there is something murky in the Haren waters. I also would like to add passing the a physical done by the Reds medical staff is not exactly a glowing endorsement of health.
    You have the remember, though, Bean's goal in trading isn't to screw another team but to help his own. If they are rebuilding, it would be smart to trade for prospects.

    You don't make trades to hose other teams (well you do if you can, but that isn't the goal). The goal in a trade is to improve your own team/org.

  12. #101
    Member membengal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    9,068

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Chico: Lieber. Or someone like him. Someone to chew innings back of the rotation for cheap.

  13. #102
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,149

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by CaiGuy View Post
    It isn't like Haren is a low-ceiling guy. I would say that a pitcher of his caliber is their ceiling. Also, three years is more than a rental. If one of them pitch like Haren could the Reds for three years it would be a huge success story.
    I never said he wasn't. Haren is an ace. But both Bailey and Cueto might be that caliber too. Might point is that you are trading the chance for 8+ years of that performance for the likelihood of 3 years of that performance.

    It's not necessarily a bad deal, but don't undersell the value of that 8+ opportunity. It's like trading away a 50% chance at 50 bucks for a $20 bill. The average value of the former is greater (see Justin Inaz's blog) but possible value certainty is great too.

    I do agree that I would much prefer Haren over Bedard for reasons of cost, health, and most importantly, contract length. And the significant issue not being discussed at all is the very real possibility that Haren, Bedard, etc. don't continue pitching at their peak level -- be it due to injury, regression, etc. It's possible that they are only league average guys for the next few years and ignoring that possibility can get you in trouble. Valuing guys based solely on their maximum value is rarely a good idea. We seem to be considering the range of possible outcomes with our prospects and ignoring the range of possible outcomes with our trade targets.
    Last edited by RedsManRick; 12-12-2007 at 02:23 PM.
    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.

  14. #103
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,365

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by princeton View Post
    I have no doubt that the agent will put teams possessing a lot of money on the list.
    Big money contenders would be the likely targets. The fly in that ointment though is if the Reds are in the hunt (and they may be), then Dunn isn't going anywhere no matter who's on that list.

    Moving him this winter will probably prove difficult because teams seem resolutely unwilling to help themselves. A power LH bat is a need on a whole host of clubs and there's pretty much nothing on that front on the free agent market (unless you want to count Geoff Jenkins). It's the new collusion, not designed to suppress wages, but to anesthitize the bottom third of the league. Prospects rule, players are to be viewed with deep suspicion. .900 OPS potential trumps .900 OPS reality.

    There's a number of clubs who'd benefit from having Jr. around too and I get the feeling he might be easier to move because someone will fall in love with his box office potential. It also makes more sense to move Jr. because you might want to keep Dunn around past 2008.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  15. #104
    Titanic Struggles Caveat Emperor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    The 513
    Posts
    12,656

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    It's not necessarily a bad deal, but don't undersell the value of that 8+ opportunity. It's like trading away a 50% chance at 50 bucks for a $20 bill. The average value of the former is greater (see Justin Inaz's blog) but possible value certainty is great too.
    The trouble is, you're making that deal without any knowledge of the percentages -- just a guess. It might be a 75% chance at a $50 or it might be a 5% chance.

    If you want to deal in certainties, the certanties are this:

    Haren has performed at the level of a top-flight major league pitcher.

    Neither Bailey nor Cueto has ever performed at the level of a top-flight major league pitcher.

    Anything else you want to speculate about is total guesswork.
    Championships Matter.
    24 Years and Counting...

  16. #105
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    14,069

    Re: Here we go...Haren

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Right, but the thing is, what if they both pitch a little bit worse than Haren over the next 6 years. Then you are completely losing that deal. Two slightly worse pitchers over 6 years is light years more vauable than 1 slightly better pitcher over 3 years.
    Doug, I don't think this accurately reflects the concept in making the trade. Two slightly worse pitchers over 6 years may or may not tell you if the trade succeeded.

    We are talking about a team going for the playoffs. If a Haren will help the Reds -- once or possibly twice -- get into the playoffs or, better, deep in the playoffs, the deal is worthwhile. Bailey and Cueto being "slightly worse" provides nothing for me if the team is losing.

    One advantage of a proven vet is that he is more likely, in the short term, to stand up well in the stretch run and post-season. And a "slightly worse" performance in a big game could turn the whole season around.

    So, it's a more complicated equation. Of course, it could turn out opposite-- a Bailey or Cueto could turn out to be post-season heroes. But the concept of the trade is that a vet is more likely to hold up in those situations.


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