Turn Off Ads?
Page 14 of 43 FirstFirst ... 410111213141516171824 ... LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 644

Thread: Cliff Lee

  1. #196
    Member Marc D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,724

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Question for those who know the FA comp rules;

    I keep seeing Lee referred to as a rental and I agree the chance of him signing to stay in Cincy would have to be pretty slim but wouldn't he be a type A FA and therefore net the Reds a 1st round and supplemental pick?

    If so and we are really just talking about cycling through a couple of prospects (if he could be had for that) then a few months of Cliff Lee, a possible NL Central pennant and even a 1/100th of a chance at keeping him would seem like a no brainer to me. Worst thing that happens is (theoretically) you turn two near MLB ready prospects into two first round draft picks again and had half a season of Cliff Lee in your rotation for the effort.

    I know a lot depends on the exact prospects and the situation with Alonzo isn't ideal but if Alonzo and anyone else not named Chapman would do the trick (and my assumption of the comp picks for losing Lee is correct), then I think you do that deal before anyone in Seattle could change their mind.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #197
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,505

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc D View Post
    Question for those who know the FA comp rules;

    I keep seeing Lee referred to as a rental and I agree the chance of him signing to stay in Cincy would have to be pretty slim but wouldn't he be a type A FA and therefore net the Reds a 1st round and supplemental pick?

    If so and we are really just talking about cycling through a couple of prospects (if he could be had for that) then a few months of Cliff Lee, a possible NL Central pennant and even a 1/100th of a chance at keeping him would seem like a no brainer to me. Worst thing that happens is (theoretically) you turn two near MLB ready prospects into two first round draft picks again and had half a season of Cliff Lee in your rotation for the effort.

    I know a lot depends on the exact prospects and the situation with Alonzo isn't ideal but if Alonzo and anyone else not named Chapman would do the trick (and my assumption of the comp picks for losing Lee is correct), then I think you do that deal before anyone in Seattle could change their mind.
    He would cost the Reds a first round pick. The supplemental pick is essentially created out of thin air and awarded to the team losing the player.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  4. #198
    Roster glue
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Covington
    Posts
    521

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc D View Post
    Question for those who know the FA comp rules;

    I keep seeing Lee referred to as a rental and I agree the chance of him signing to stay in Cincy would have to be pretty slim but wouldn't he be a type A FA and therefore net the Reds a 1st round and supplemental pick?

    If so and we are really just talking about cycling through a couple of prospects (if he could be had for that) then a few months of Cliff Lee, a possible NL Central pennant and even a 1/100th of a chance at keeping him would seem like a no brainer to me. Worst thing that happens is (theoretically) you turn two near MLB ready prospects into two first round draft picks again and had half a season of Cliff Lee in your rotation for the effort.

    I know a lot depends on the exact prospects and the situation with Alonzo isn't ideal but if Alonzo and anyone else not named Chapman would do the trick (and my assumption of the comp picks for losing Lee is correct), then I think you do that deal before anyone in Seattle could change their mind.
    Mark's point above is similar to what I was going to write.

    The buyer in this situation is trading for 2-3 months of Lee (depending on the timing of the deal) and Type A free agent compensation in the form of 2 high draft picks, one first-round and one sandwich round unless I "misremember." There is no risk of Lee accepting arbitration: he is one of the top performers in the game.

    Alonso+ for Lee is a deal you make every time in my opinion. Bruce, Cueto, or Leake--as a PTBNL--as the main piece is where the debate begins. I personally would not deal one of those 3 but can appreciate the arguments where others would.

    Also, the financial windfall of a playoff appearance should not be discounted. I believe the financials for the "typical" playoff appearance have been published as in the $25-30MM range, so some fraction of that can be invested in the club to bolster a .500 ish team augmented toward a division title or wild card berth. I am going off memory, so feel free to correct that guesstimate if I am grossy in error.

    Lee is easily one of the top 10 pitchers in the game right now and it is a matter of preference where he is ranked beside Wainwright, Halladay, Sabathia, Lincecum, Jimenez, Josh Johnson, King Felix, Carpenter, Lester, or Greinke. I contend the Reds should get him...pun intended.

  5. #199
    Member OnBaseMachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    34,844

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNext44 View Post
    Anyone know much about Shelby Miller? Is he really that good that he would prevent a team from acquiring one of the best pitchers in baseball? I really don't know much about him.
    He was one of the guys I wanted the Reds to stay away from in the first round of the 2009 draft. He throws hard (mid-90's) with average movement according to milb.com's scouting report. He also throws a breaking ball but doesn't have a feel for a changeup.

    Here are his numbers in Low-A:

    44.1 IP, 46 H, 3 HR, 17 BB, 60 K, 4.67 ERA

    He's pitching in the Midwest League which is a pitcher friendly league. If I'm the Mariners, I want a a lot more than just Miller.
    I miss Adam Dunn.

  6. #200
    Member dunner13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    607

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp View Post
    He would cost the Reds a first round pick. The supplemental pick is essentially created out of thin air and awarded to the team losing the player.
    Im confused as to how he would cost the reds a first round pick. My understanding is that they only way he would cost us a pick is if he waited til the offseason and signed him as a free agent.

  7. #201
    Socratic Gadfly TheNext44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,228

    Re: Cliff Lee

    It depends on who signs Lee next season. Whoever loses him would receive that team's first round pick, unless the signing team's pick is one of the first 15 picks in the first round. In that case, the original team would get the signing team's second round pick. Plus a supplemental pick no matter what.

    So basically, the original team would get two picks between picks number 16 and around 60.
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein

  8. #202
    Member Spitball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    5,620

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNext44 View Post
    Actually, the Reds made the right move here, even if it cost them the division.

    Syd Thrift, the Pirates GM, demanded that Larkin be included in any deal. He asked for Larkin, Kal Daniels, and Tracy Jones. The Reds countered with Stillwell instead of Larkin. Thrift never backed down on his demand for Larkin, and the Reds never gave in, and eventually, he traded Reuschel to the Reds rival for next to nothing, almost out of spite.
    Do you have a link to this story? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I really don't remember it this way. First, I think the Larkin/Stillwell story may have been the Danny Jackson trade scenario. Second, I can't imagine the Pirates demanding three players who were starters for the Reds at the time the trade was made in late August, 1987...and then only demanding journeymen Jeff Robinson and Scott Medvin from the Giants. That just seems odd.

    You might be right, but I can remember Peter Gammons discussing the possible trade proposals with top prospect Scudder being mentioned but don't remember Larkin, Daniels, and Jones being discussed (that would have been memorable). At the time of the trade, I believe Larkin, Daniels, and Jones were pretty well past the prospect stage.
    Last edited by Spitball; 06-29-2010 at 01:15 PM.
    "I am your child from the future. I'm sorry I didn't tell you this earlier." - Dylan Easton

  9. #203
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,505

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Quote Originally Posted by dunner13 View Post
    Im confused as to how he would cost the reds a first round pick. My understanding is that they only way he would cost us a pick is if he waited til the offseason and signed him as a free agent.
    You're absolutely right. I was responding more to the rule and didn't stop to consider it wouldn't apply to the Reds in this case. I'm having a bad day.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  10. #204
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,929

    Re: Cliff Lee

    The Type A compensation is surely to be considered by the M's as part of the value they'd be giving up. Basically, what they'd want to do is trade Lee to get at least two players who are either of better quality than what they'd get with the comps and/or closer to the majors and thus much more likely to make it. They're trading Lee to upgrade over Type A compensation. That's why I don't think you'll see a guy in the low minors, like Miller, anchor the deal.

    The rumored Mets package of Meija and Pagan seems to best fit their needs, unless they decide they want to go the catcher route with Wilson Ramos.
    Last edited by RedsManRick; 06-29-2010 at 02:11 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.

  11. #205
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    9,796

    Re: Cliff Lee

    He would not cost the Reds at 1st round pick, he would net the Reds a 1st round pick, assuming the team that signs him isn't one of the 15 worst in baseball. (Unless he signs with the Cubs, that seems likely.) In other words, Marc D's analysis is correct.

    I stand by what I've been saying all along- I think the price for Lee would be any 2 of Alonso, Mesoraco, and Wood. All three of those players fit the Mariners' biggest needs. That should be enough to get a deal done, and if so, I hope the Reds can make it happen.

    If they can find a way to snag Brandon League by including an extra prospect, I would do that too.
    Go BLUE!!!

  12. #206
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    8,827

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Keith Law rates Shelby Miller the 15th best prospect in all of baseball, FWIW.

  13. #207
    Member OnBaseMachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    34,844

    Re: Cliff Lee

    From Ken Rosenthal's latest column:

    The Reds are deep enough in prospects, but their attendance does not appear to support a payroll addition of even Lee’s magnitude -- and besides, the team probably is more in need of bullpen help.

    No club is an obvious favorite. Some team could slip in and grab Lee.
    http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/c...senthal-062910
    I miss Adam Dunn.

  14. #208
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,126

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Quote Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine View Post
    From Ken Rosenthal's latest column:

    The Reds are deep enough in prospects, but their attendance does not appear to support a payroll addition of even Lee’s magnitude -- and besides, the team probably is more in need of bullpen help.

    No club is an obvious favorite. Some team could slip in and grab Lee.
    http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/c...senthal-062910
    Lee doesn't make that much money though. He is making $8M this season which would put him around $4M for the 2nd half of the year. I would hope the owners would roll the dice if the Reds were in contention. Heck if Lee is the player who pushes the Reds into the playoffs he is well worth the $4M.

  15. #209
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,929

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Any team doing the attendance-payroll math should be looking at the value of making the playoffs on future years' attendance, which is well-established and significant, not just the value of the attendance during the remainder of this year.
    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.

  16. #210
    Socratic Gadfly TheNext44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,228

    Re: Cliff Lee

    Quote Originally Posted by Spitball View Post
    Do you have a link to this story? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I really don't remember it this way. First, I think the Larkin/Stillwell story may have been the Danny Jackson trade scenario. Second, I can't imagine the Pirates demanding three players who were starters for the Reds at the time the trade was made in late August, 1987...and then only demanding journeymen Jeff Robinson and Scott Medvin from the Giants. That just seems odd.

    You might be right, but I can remember Peter Gammons discussing the possible trade proposals with top prospect Scudder being mentioned but don't remember Larkin, Daniels, and Jones being discussed (that would have been memorable). At the time of the trade, I believe Larkin, Daniels, and Jones were pretty well past the prospect stage.
    I think this is one of the rare cases where Gammons got his fact wrong.

    Scudder had only been drafted the year before out of high school, so I doubt his name was ever brought up, and if it was, I'm not sure he even could have been traded then.

    I don't have a link, but I don't need one. I was in college then and remember listening to WLW for constant updates on the trade proposals and arguing about them with my dorm mates.

    Larkin and Stillwell were sharing SS at this point, and Larkin was not doing that well. There was lots of discussion over who was better, Stillwell or Larkin, and it really wasn't clear at this point who was.

    And the Reds had Paul O'Neill coming up, so he could have replaced Daniels.

    I do remember a dorm mate from NY who wanted the Reds to trade Larkin to the Pirates, because there was another rumor that the Mets offered Strawberry for Larkin and Davis. He was afraid the Reds would say yes and didn't want either of them on the Mets. lol
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein


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