Next week, after Bruce has hit a couple HR's and raised his average back to .270, no one will want to think about losing him.
I hope.
Next week, after Bruce has hit a couple HR's and raised his average back to .270, no one will want to think about losing him.
I hope.
2015 Rotation: Under Construction
I think it's more of smart business than anything else. I'm not sure that Markakis' upside is worthy of Bruce's potential and payroll flexibility. I'm not sure of Markakis' defensive prowess, but UZR isn't a huge fan. His bat hasn't taken off as some predicted. And he has a hefty price tag.
To be honest, I don't even think that Bruce would need to be in the discussion to get Markakis. His market value is probably materially higher than Markakis', I would imagine. Taking on a guy signed at $14MM per for 4 years who doesn't provide plus anything? No thanks, unless it makes a whole lot of sense for my club.
I would love to get markasis for LF and keep bring in RF somehow. Would heisey, Alonso and Frazier for markasis get it done?
Markakis is a better player than Jay Bruce today. But I'll take 2012 and beyond Bruce over 2012 and beyond Markakis -- and would save a boatload of cash in the process.
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.
That is pretty much the prevailing argument in this debate. In my mind there really isn't an issue that Markakis is a better player than Jay in both 2010 and 2011. The Reds are in a pennant race this season and they need production out of the RF spot and not potential. That is my biggest issue with Jay right now, not that he is a bad player, just most of his value is wrapped up in defense and potential. It isn't a bad thing to have and its not like he is a negative ball player but potential isn't going to help this 2010 team hitting in the 5-6 hole down the stretch.
The bigger issue is what does Jay Bruce look like in 2012? Does he look like the current version of Jay Bruce? Does he look like Austin Kearns? Does he look like an MVP caliber RF? No one knows. Then add to the issue that with Bruce being a super 2 the Reds would control him in 2011,12,13 and if he starts to put up Markakis overall production I don't know how much money you will save because he will get very expensive.
If you are able to trade Jay Bruce for a player like Markakis who is young, productive, and under contract for several years you substantially limit your downside. And if Bruce does become a good baseball player its not like you are left hanging with chop liver. In order to be successful in baseball you need to take risks. The issue I am seeing more and more is Jay Bruce is no sure think in 2012, he has quite a bit of potential but so did the likes of Kearns, Willie Green, Encarnacion, etc.
I think Bruce is a better player than those guys, but yes -- this is precisely the argument in re: 2012 and beyond. Add that to the notion that Markakis makes the team better in the near-term, and it's enough for me.If you are able to trade Jay Bruce for a player like Markakis who is young, productive, and under contract for several years you substantially limit your downside. And if Bruce does become a good baseball player its not like you are left hanging with chop liver. In order to be successful in baseball you need to take risks. The issue I am seeing more and more is Jay Bruce is no sure think in 2012, he has quite a bit of potential but so did the likes of Kearns, Willie Green, Encarnacion, etc.
I'm torn on this one, but I have the sense that because the mindset needs to shift from waiting for to capitalizing on unrealized young talent -- no one would argue that the time is not ripe for the Reds to deal prospects for talent that helps the big-league club for several seasons -- that if the best deal of that nature has to involve Jay Bruce, you do it. Could be wrong, but, as bucksfan says, you're not left with chopped liver, either.
Very tough call.
Affordability is not production. And neither is payflex.
When dealing with a fixed budget, Affordability and Payflex do equal production.
Case in point. If the Reds did not have to pay Cordero $12M this year and next, they could have gotten another veteran starting pitcher, or SS, or left fielder for this season and the future. They would have similar production from Masset or Rhodes in the closer role to Cordero's current production, and then more production from that starting pitcher/SS/LF than they currently are getting from whoever is in those spots currently. Payflex and affordability leads to more production, when it is used correctly.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein
If I'm trading away Jay's future, I want a bigger present value upgrade than Markakis. WAR has Markakis at 2.0 to Bruce's 1.3 this year.
I'm all for going after Markakis, but trading Bruce is just marginally better than running in place in 2010. If you want to get a ~1 win upgrade, go after a LF or SS. Trading away a very high ceiling player who is a positive contributor as is strikes me as a silly way to pick up a win given all of the other options. Offer them Alonso, Hesiey, and Maloney, keep Bruce and stick Markakis in LF.
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.
While getting a guy like Markakis is a very Jocketty-like thing to do, it's not very likely to happen. Payroll won't be added.
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. |