Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Sarasota, Fl
    Posts
    228

    Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    The win now, to hell with the future, crowd acts as if a proven ace is a sure thing but that just isn't true. Two years ago Willis was a sure thing. Colon, Akiel, Rijo, and many other erstwhile aces have lost their ace status overnight through injury or just unexpected drop in performance. I haven't researched the subject but subjectively I think the Randy Johnson's and Gregg Maddox's who sustain their elite status long term are the exception among pitchers.

    If the Reds trade three or four top prospects for a proven ace, they could weaken their bright mid term future(09, and 10) without any guarantee of success in 08. I feel the risk of Bailey failing perform at a #3 level in 08 is no higher than the "ace" we trade him(and several other top prospects) for failing to perform as expected.

    I've been a Reds fan for nearly seventy years and they have never had the young core they have now(Dunn, EE, Hamilton, Phillips, Burton, Bruce, Votto, Bailey, Cueto). That core and Harang, Arroyo, Cordero and others make a WS appearance in 09 a reasonable possibility. Yet half the Redszone community want to trade away several of that core for, what could well be, the mirage of winning this year.

    Also I don't consider 08 a lost cause w/o a trade for an ace. A trade not including any of the above could net an above replacement value #4 or #5 starter or as others have suggested such a starter could be obtained through free agency on a 1 or 2 year incentive laden contract without giving up any prospects.

    If I can be patient at my age(76), you youngsters here a Redszone who have many years ahead of you should also be able to hold out for another year or two for what could be a several year dynasty.

    Don't make any ill-advised trades and follow the ideas set forth by Triples in his latest thread and we fans could be in for a long term treat.

    Edit: Anyone who experienced the agony of Frank Robinson as a non-RED would be sick at the thought of trading Jay Bruce.
    Last edited by Stingray; 12-20-2007 at 12:35 PM. Reason: add on

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Member Stephenk29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Northern Illinois
    Posts
    710

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stingray View Post
    Anyone who experienced the agony of Frank Robinson as a non-RED would be sick at the thought of trading Jay Bruce.
    That is the scary part. I hope we keep him personally, but that pretty much goes without saying for about 80% of Reds fans.

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    135

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    Bedard is a sure-thing. Outside of injuries, of course.

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    135

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    The Frank Robinson thing is overstated. It was a different era.

    If it was 20 years of Jay Bruce for 2 years of Bedard, of course that's crazy. But it's not 20 years of Bruce. It's 6 years of Bruce. Then he leaves as a FA to the Yankees. And he probably won't reach his potential until the last 2 or 3 of those years, anyway.

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,411

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    Why do you automatically assume we won't be able to sign Bruce long term if that's what we want after 6 years? There's no reason to assume that.

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    135

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    Because if he becomes the player we want him to be, and it's 6 years from now, he'll command $30 million/year.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Sarasota, Fl
    Posts
    228

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    Quote Originally Posted by TN Red Fan View Post
    Because if he becomes the player we want him to be, and it's 6 years from now, he'll command $30 million/year.
    If he performs to that level his trade value in his last year will be higher than Bedard's is now.

  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Sarasota, Fl
    Posts
    228

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    Quote Originally Posted by TN Red Fan View Post
    Bedard is a sure-thing. Outside of injuries, of course.
    Did anyone predict Willis's performance, for example, would drop as it has?

    Pitchers are not nearly as likely to have long consisently productive careers as hitters. Quailty pitchers frequently flameout after just a few years.

  10. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    132

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    Quote Originally Posted by TN Red Fan View Post
    The Frank Robinson thing is overstated. It was a different era.

    If it was 20 years of Jay Bruce for 2 years of Bedard, of course that's crazy. But it's not 20 years of Bruce. It's 6 years of Bruce. Then he leaves as a FA to the Yankees. And he probably won't reach his potential until the last 2 or 3 of those years, anyway.
    This actually brings up a question I've had (but lack the post count to start a new thread): Are players more inclined to sign long-term with the team that gave them their first big shot out of the minors?

    Jay Bruce, if he lives up to his potential, would be hard to see going to the Yankees searching for the (relatively) larger paycheck, as a fan anyways. I guess that's what happens when you grow up a fan of Barry Larkin, you wish for some franchise loyalty in the age of Free Agency.

  11. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    544

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    People assume Bruce will be gone in 6 years, but if the Reds are smart, they should give him a LT contract during his 2-3 year of ML service, such as the Mets did for Wright.
    Wright signed a 6 year + option extension after 2 years of ML service.
    The Mets will have 10 years of Wright for less than 75 Million total.
    Sizemore was signed after 1 year of ML service, and the Indians get 9 years for less than 35 Million Total.
    A LTC to a player so early is very risky and has resulted in horrible moves by a few teams, but when you get that star player, any good team will do it.

  12. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    544

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    Quote Originally Posted by podgejeff_ View Post
    This actually brings up a question I've had (but lack the post count to start a new thread): Are players more inclined to sign long-term with the team that gave them their first big shot out of the minors?

    Jay Bruce, if he lives up to his potential, would be hard to see going to the Yankees searching for the (relatively) larger paycheck, as a fan anyways. I guess that's what happens when you grow up a fan of Barry Larkin, you wish for some franchise loyalty in the age of Free Agency.
    Usually players who declare FA after those arb years will go to the highest payer. The reason why many teams can get discounts by extended contracts past those arb years is due to security. Any player can get a career ending injury at any time, so by getting that extension, they are guaranteeing a large raise even if they could get more in a couple years, but risk being out of baseball.

  13. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    132

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    Then the Reds need to definitely take advantage of giving earlier LTCs to players like Bruce (based on initial performance of course).

    If he's not a candidate then who is?

  14. #13
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,214

    Re: Trading for an established ace is not without it's own risks.

    Quote Originally Posted by TN Red Fan View Post
    Because if he (Bruce) becomes the player we want him to be, and it's 6 years from now, he'll command $30 million/year.
    I understand your skepticism, given the Reds past. But that was a different regime. Linder would not even add Chuck Finely in 2002 because his trade would add $100,000 to the budget.

    But Cast as shown that he is willing to sign quality players to long term contracts and set the budget at whatever it takes to produce a winner. He signed Harang and Arroyo to huge raises, he said he wants to sign Dunn to a long term contract, he just signed Cordero for $46M.

    I have complete faith that if Bruce or Bailey, or Votto put up great numbers, Cast will do what it takes to keep them.


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