Will the Reds make any trades before the deadline?

[fewfirstchoice]

I say YES. I believe the Reds will make 2 or 3 trades involving around 3 or 4 players maybe. Should be interesting.

[BEETTLEBUG]

Saw on org that yankees dfa latroy hawkins are we interested?

[redhawk61]

No the Reds will miss the opportunity to improve this ball club because for some reason they believe this team is under achieving

[AFalcon10]

everybody in our pen is better than hawkins

[Ahhhorsepoo]

while our pen is improved.. our defense is still TERRIBLE.. sans B-Phill, and the fielding end of EE..

[fewfirstchoice]

Hawkins is better than Coffey and The magic man.

[Slyder]

Saw on org that yankees dfa latroy hawkins are we interested?

Please God not another Dusty Boy. We saw the damage Duhhhsty did with CPat. Could you imagine the damage Duhhsty could do with "proving" he was right about Hawkins. Anyways back to the initial question...

Should the Reds make any trades before the deadline? Of course.
Will the Reds make any trades? Probably not. I cant see Cast admitting he was wrong and saleing off guys at this point, plus we all know its better to finish 500 and get a few more butts in the seat than to actually have a plan and BUILD.

[757690]

I think if they make any trades it will be on a eye for next year. Maybe unload guys they know won't be here next year, who are somewhat replaceable for the remainder of the year with minor leaguers, i.e. Weathers, Affeldt, but only if they can get someone who can help sometime next year.

I think the Reds FO thinks they can at least stay close enough to the wild card to keep the main guys. I know most people don't like it, but if the Reds can stay in the hunt until the last week of the season, I think it will have a huge motivational effect going into next year, on both the fans and the players.

That and the fact that it is a buyers market, which means that the Reds would not get good value for the players they trade, makes me want to keep them so the Reds can compete. They don't have to make the playoffs, just stay in the race. The experience of being in a playoff hunt, even if it is just the wild card, is very valuable, especially considering the young age of the players.

[Slyder]

I think if they make any trades it will be on a eye for next year. Maybe unload guys they know won't be here next year, who are somewhat replaceable for the remainder of the year with minor leaguers, i.e. Weathers, Affeldt, but only if they can get someone who can help sometime next year.

I think the Reds FO thinks they can at least stay close enough to the wild card to keep the main guys. I know most people don't like it, but if the Reds can stay in the hunt until the last week of the season, I think it will have a huge motivational effect going into next year, on both the fans and the players.

That and the fact that it is a buyers market, which means that the Reds would not get good value for the players they trade, makes me want to keep them so the Reds can compete. They don't have to make the playoffs, just stay in the race. The experience of being in a playoff hunt, even if it is just the wild card, is very valuable, especially considering the young age of the players.

Were not even in the playoff race now. Were 9.5 back of the Brewers for the Wild Card with about a half a dozen teams between us and them to jump. Thats not even close to even being mentioned. I think someone has said that it would take a record of 40-16 to be in legitimate wild card hope? What has shown from this team to do something that not even the 1990 Reds and BRM werent able to do?

Whats the point in keeping guys like Weathers and Griffey (whom I seriously doubt wed get any compensation for) for 2 months when both are likely to walk regardless because they arent getting any younger they serve a larger benefit to the team to try and get something for them in the way of prospects sometimes you get lucky or you get that one guy a GM falls in love with and you can flip him for someone who you need during the offseason or trade deadline last year. The return may be minimal but what exactly do the Reds get if they keep all these guys and they just walk with no compensation?

[Ghosts of 1990]

I think Weathers or Affeldt. That's probably it.

[TheBigLebowski]

I have a feeling Jocketty is going to make a big trade before the 31st.

[757690]

Were not even in the playoff race now. Were 9.5 back of the Brewers for the Wild Card with about a half a dozen teams between us and them to jump. Thats not even close to even being mentioned. I think someone has said that it would take a record of 40-16 to be in legitimate wild card hope? What has shown from this team to do something that not even the 1990 Reds and BRM werent able to do?

Whats the point in keeping guys like Weathers and Griffey (whom I seriously doubt wed get any compensation for) for 2 months when both are likely to walk regardless because they arent getting any younger they serve a larger benefit to the team to try and get something for them in the way of prospects sometimes you get lucky or you get that one guy a GM falls in love with and you can flip him for someone who you need during the offseason or trade deadline last year. The return may be minimal but what exactly do the Reds get if they keep all these guys and they just walk with no compensation?

First, it is 40-18, which is a big difference from 40-12. THe 1990 Reds went 40-19 to start the season, and the BRM went 50-20 in the middle of 1976, which is better than 40-18. Also there exactly four teams ahead of the Reds.

But regardless, I am not talking about winning the wild card, I am talking about being competitive. There is a very big difference. To be competitive, the Reds probably need to go 35-23, which is very doable. That would keep them in the hunt until the very end.

The experience of being in the playoff hunt is valuable in and of itself. I think the problem with the Brewers last year is that they had no experience of being in the race. They folded at the end last year, but if they had been in the hunt the year before, they might have handled the pressure better. Last year seems to help them this year.

Also, I would have no problem trading Griffey, but he doesn't want to be traded, has a full no trade clause, and nobody would give up anything good for him anyway. Would you?

I can see trading Weathers or Affeldt, since they won't be a Reds next year, and losing them doesn't hurt that much. But I was talking more about Dunn. If I thought the Reds could get something that could really help them the rest of this year, and especially next year, that would be one thing, but after the Marte-Nady trade, I just don't see that happening.

[Jefferson24]

I say no. It seems like the front office is satisfied with the progress so far. Why else would they run out this bunch of below .500 guys. If they were serious about improving this team they would have spent the money and did something about it. Until they start drawing 10,000 or less per game, we probably don't see any real changes.

[redhawk61]

I say no. It seems like the front office is satisfied with the progress so far. Why else would they run out this bunch of below .500 guys. If they were serious about improving this team they would have spent the money and did something about it. Until they start drawing 10,000 or less per game, we probably don't see any real changes.

Agreed, they'll find some way to make themselves believe that this is a good team with only "tweaking" needing to be done, even after this game

[Jefferson24]

e. There is a very big difference. To be competitive, the Reds probably need to go 35-23, which is very doable.

Not with this team! This is a losing team, below .500. Forget any ideas about a run. Major changes and much rebuilding are necessary. Changes from the top down. Not just the players are the problem. Until they spend some money, draft and trade wisely, and go young this team is doomed to finish below .500.