Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: 2009 or 2010?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    1,033

    2009 or 2010?

    Why not 2009?

    Conventional wisdom on this board is the Reds will contend in 2010 but not 2009. What do we expect to gain in 2010 that we don't have now?

    Do people think Bruce and Cueto need one more year before they perform to expectations? I expect 2009 is a breakout for both.

    I don't expect a better year in 2010 than I do in 2009 from Harang and Arroyo. I think Harang will be back. There's a better chance one of both of them drop off in 2010.

    Are we counting on a youth movement in 2010? Realistically who can we count as a sure thing for 2010 in the same way we did with Bruce and Votto last year?

    Alonzo?

    I hope Walt goes bully on '09 and goes after Magglio hard instead of waiting for Alonzo, Frazier, Stubbs, Soto, etc. who may or may not ever pan out.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Member kpresidente's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,989

    Re: 2009 or 2010?

    Losing Freel and Gonzalez frees up $10 million.

    Cordero's no-trade clause is lifted.

    Alonso, Frazier, Thompson, Dorn and possibly Bailey is a nice class of prospects. Not like the big-4 from last year, but still pretty good. Plus, the system will also fill out the bench and bullpen with guys like Rosales, Valaika, Cumberland, Henry, Roenicke, Herrera, Fisher, Pelland, and Manuel. When you can fill out the bottom of the roster on the cheap like that, then all your free money can go to significant upgrades, because there's not holes to fill. Look what graduating a couple of mediocre prospects like Dickerson and Hanigan does for our outlook in '09.

    I expect the jump from '08-'09 to be bigger than '09-'10, but I also think we're going to leave too many question marks to be anything more than a darkhorse. By 2010, all those question marks should have answers.
    Last edited by kpresidente; 11-08-2008 at 03:29 PM.

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    1,033

    Re: 2009 or 2010?

    Won't Edwin take some of the Freel/Gonz money saved? Not sure his status but woud think he's getting close to arbitration.

  5. #4
    Member kpresidente's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,989

    Re: 2009 or 2010?

    Quote Originally Posted by UPRedsFan View Post
    Won't Edwin take some of the Freel/Gonz money saved? Not sure his status but woud think he's getting close to arbitration.
    Count the salary jumps in the payroll inflation. Besides, Edwin becomes expendable if Frazier graduates.

  6. #5
    Member redsfandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,564

    Re: 2009 or 2010?

    it's not that we can't contend in '09 as much as it's more realistic that we'll be able to contend in 2010-2015. prospects are important for any team but the youth movement is especially important for the reds with the financial limitations that they have. like kpresidente pointed out, the more players that make the mlb minimum, or even players that make less than $2 million, that means it will be easier to retain the studs like volquez when you need to and spend for the few parts the team may need to contend.
    "Now that's a real shame when folks be throwin' away a perfectly good white boy like that."

  7. #6
    Member redsfandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,564

    Re: 2009 or 2010?

    by the way, as young as bruce and cueto are i wouldn't be surprised by some inconsistencies by them in their sophomore year. it's not that uncommon and wouldn't necessarily affect their long term outlook.

    by now we know what to expect from harang (if he's 100% healthy) and arroyo and i wouldn't expect much difference from '09 to 2010 unless the defense continues to improve which is likely.

    if walt goes "bully" for maggs he'll have to surrender prospects that we'll need to help contend in the future. as much as i like ordonez we have prospects like alonso and frazier that could be a much better value long term. both have good offensive potential, a good shot at being up in 2010, and will cost peanuts compared to ordonez. the most value is often in the prospects and, while ordonez would help for a couple years, it wouldn't be worth it if we had to deal prospects who could help for a lot longer than just a couple years.

    the wisdom of an ordonez acquisition depends on the cost and i'd rather have the reds contend every year instead of just one or two. for a long time the reds didn't concentrate on the farm system as much as they should've and that was a big reason why the reds have lost so much in the last 9 years. the renewed emphasis on the farm system is starting to pay off and will continue to help but the importance of the farm system can't be overrated for teams with financial limitations like the reds. everyone is frustrated by the losses and wants a winner but we're ALOT closer to contender status than we've been in years.
    "Now that's a real shame when folks be throwin' away a perfectly good white boy like that."

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,173

    Re: 2009 or 2010?

    With the economy down it seems almost certain that revenues will also be down next year. I know I will be buying fewer $40 tickets here in San Diego. I think many of the Type A free agents are going to find it difficult to get a good contract this off season. My hunch is that there will be bargains in February.

    Most teams seem to be trying to dump salary and get younger. The Reds are in a good position with a core group of young players and a farm system that is finally producing. IMO accommodating other teams by taking salary off their books and giving them young players in return would be exactly the wrong thing to do.

    At 35, Ordonez's best years are behind him. His production and his health would be risks. Nor is he the last piece of the puzzle for the Reds. Ultimately, it all depends on the terms of a deal. On the surface of it, however, the Reds would likely incur a $21M (18 salary + 3 buy out) obligation for a one year rental and give up at least one prospect.

  9. #8
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    10,328

    Re: 2009 or 2010?

    Quote Originally Posted by RED VAN HOT View Post
    With the economy down it seems almost certain that revenues will also be down next year. I know I will be buying fewer $40 tickets here in San Diego. I think many of the Type A free agents are going to find it difficult to get a good contract this off season. My hunch is that there will be bargains in February.

    Most teams seem to be trying to dump salary and get younger. The Reds are in a good position with a core group of young players and a farm system that is finally producing. IMO accommodating other teams by taking salary off their books and giving them young players in return would be exactly the wrong thing to do.
    This part is just as important as the economy. We started to see it last year, with the mid level veterans, the ones that are not difference makers. Guys like Lofton, Lohse, Patterson, J. Weaver, either signed late and well below market value, or not at all. Granted, most were not very good, but that is the point. I think that GM's have learned that spending big free agent bucks on spare parts is foolish. If you spend big free agent buck, you over spend on difference makers, or you don't spent at all.

    This will be even more true this year. Sure, CC, Manny, Tex, will get paid, but they should. But guys like Blake, Crede, C. Izturis, J. Rivera will be available maybe even as late as Spring Training, and for bargain.

    And because teams want to dump payroll and the Reds can now afford to add some, I think they can get a solid veteran like Maggs, or Beltre, or Swisher for next to nothing in terms of prospects.

    Because of this, and the fact that the Reds have a great nucleus, I think they can compete in 2009. If they get one big bat for the middle of the lineup, whether it is Beltre, Maggs, Swisher, or someone else, and fill in the rest with bargains, they can compete.

  10. #9
    Member kpresidente's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,989

    Re: 2009 or 2010?

    If we're talking global variables like the economy, I think that baseball's popularity in general will grow in the post-steroid era. It's hard to quantify that, and I realize WS ratings were down, but the Rays and Phillies don't exactly have strong national fan bases, either.


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