Turn Off Ads?

View Poll Results: What option best describes your feelings about the Hamilton-Volquez trade?

Voters
87. You may not vote on this poll
  • I liked it then and I still like the trade now

    46 52.87%
  • I liked it then but have regrets about it now

    6 6.90%
  • I liked it then but I'm indifferent on it now

    9 10.34%
  • I didn't like it then, but I do like it now

    1 1.15%
  • I didn't like it then and still don't like it

    13 14.94%
  • I didn't like it then but now I'm indifferent

    6 6.90%
  • I was previously indifferent but like the trade now

    0 0%
  • I was previously indifferent but don't like it in hindsight

    3 3.45%
  • I was indifferent then and am indifferent now

    3 3.45%
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 86

Thread: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

  1. #31
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    34,860

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp View Post
    But shouldn't what happened before the trade play into discussing the merits of the trade? I mean, people will mention what Hamilton did in Cincinnati before being traded. I think it's only fair what Volquez did in his years with Texas should at least be counted. Especially since Volquez has been up in the Majors in five different seasons, even excluding his 12 innings in 2005, and other than the first half of the year in 2008, he really hasn't done much.

    Now, make no mistake, the first 3-4 months of 2008, he was pretty electrifying. But he's also not done much outside of that timeframe. This month is encouraging, because he's been consistent since being recalled from Dayton. But he's been all over the map thus far in his career.
    I will lean on the eyes test.... he passes it with flying colors. I just have more faith in him than I do in a drug addict. Maybe its my life in dealing with such people and a lack of any type of trust of them, but for me, its always going to be the first thing about him that I think about.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #32
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    I don't think there's a team in baseball that would take Volquez over Hamilton given the choice. That's not a knock on Edinson, it's just Hamilton is that good.
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  4. #33
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,475

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    I will lean on the eyes test.... he passes it with flying colors. I just have more faith in him than I do in a drug addict. Maybe its my life in dealing with such people and a lack of any type of trust of them, but for me, its always going to be the first thing about him that I think about.
    I'm not saying I disagree about whether or not the Reds should have done the trade. I'm just specifically saying I don't agree with the assertion that Volquez, overall, has been dominant. There are a lot of good reasons to justify the trade--the personal history of Hamilton being one of them (though I think it's unfair to call him a drug addict as it seems he has put those demons behind him to this point). But that doesn't necessarily mean Volquez has, on the field, yet fully lived up to the production one would expect of him in such a trade.
    "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

  5. #34
    Worst Behavior. reds44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    25,267

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp View Post
    As a preface to my comments, I was in favor of the trade then, and am no worse than indifferent on it now. So I want you to know where I stand on that.

    But I don't think it's accurate to call Volquez a "dominant" starter before his injury.

    His career numbers in 388 innings:

    4.38 ERA
    1.48 WHIP
    8.7 K/9 but 4.7 BB/9
    4.31 FIP

    Nothing about those numbers suggest he's been a dominant starter. Good starter, yes, absolutely. But he's been far from dominant thus far. He definitely shows the ability to be dominant. If he keeps improving his command, he will be a dominant starter. But to this point, even prior to the injury, I don't see it with him. Actually his overall FIP this year is better than his numbers prior to the injury.
    I was not talking about his career with the Rangers, I was talking about his time with the Reds. He was a dominant starter, after the trade, before his arm fell off.
    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    Let's face it, you mis-hit the bun with the mustard squirter, no one will really care.

  6. #35
    Member mdccclxix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Crown
    Posts
    3,615

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    I think the term 'one in the hand is worth two in the bush' helps with my appreciation of the trade. To hold an ace quality starter in hand has allowed the Reds to shape their rotation throughout the time Volquez has been here. It's made the decline of Harang more manageable, the urgency of Bailey's career lesser (he doesn't need to be the future ace), likewise with Cueto. Let's not forget how those two are buds, either. Volquez really fits into the fabric of this team. Despite old reports from Texas, I think he has a great attitude nowadays and a strong work ethic.

    That said, Hamilton is an awesome talent. He's more gifted than about anyone else in baseball. Given all the question marks he had which Doug brings up, add the development of Bruce coming on at the time, and we still had Dunn perhaps resigning if needed and Griff was healthy and happy, it was the right time to make a move for pitching. Think of what we paid for Hamilton, nothing. He wasn't a top draft pick who had been coached in our system or anything. Poof, now we have an awesome TOR pitcher.

    That's why I don't dwell on it, it was a great trade.
    Unofficial Johnny Cueto Cy Young Campaign President For Reds Fans by a Reds Fan
    Johnny Cueto's Next Start:
    JUNE 27, 10:15 PM ET @ AT&T Park
    Crushing their heads!

  7. #36
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,475

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    Quote Originally Posted by reds44 View Post
    I was not talking about his career with the Rangers, I was talking about his time with the Reds. He was a dominant starter, after the trade, before his arm fell off.
    That's really not accurate though.

    Look at 2008:

    April: 1.23 ERA
    May: 1.63 ERA
    June: 3.45 ERA
    July: 4.54 ERA
    Aug: 4.50 ERA
    Sep: 4.09 ERA

    Then in 2009 prior to the injury:

    4.35 ERA

    So if you want to say he was dominant in his first two months as a starter for the Reds, OK fine. But since then... where are you seeing this dominance? For the last 4 months of 2008 and then in the first two months of 2009... there was no dominance to be found.

    I think the sheer awesome start in 2008 has jaded people into revisionist history thinking that he carried over that performance into 2009, or even later in 2008. That really didn't happen.
    "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

  8. #37
    Worst Behavior. reds44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    25,267

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp View Post
    That's really not accurate though.

    Look at 2008:

    April: 1.23 ERA
    May: 1.63 ERA
    June: 3.45 ERA
    July: 4.54 ERA
    Aug: 4.50 ERA
    Sep: 4.09 ERA

    Then in 2009 prior to the injury:

    4.35 ERA

    So if you want to say he was dominant in his first two months as a starter for the Reds, OK fine. But since then... where are you seeing this dominance? For the last 4 months of 2008 and then in the first two months of 2009... there was no dominance to be found.

    I think the sheer awesome start in 2008 has jaded people into revisionist history thinking that he carried over that performance into 2009, or even later in 2008. That really didn't happen.
    You're cherry picking stats right now.

    Volquez had a 3.21 ERA and 204 strikesout 196 innings in 2008. He was also probably the best pitcher in baseball during the first half of the season. His 2008 season was dominant.
    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    Let's face it, you mis-hit the bun with the mustard squirter, no one will really care.

  9. #38
    Bread Gloves Razor Shines's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    6,304

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    As I've said for the rest of this one season I'd rather have Hamilton, but for the future I'd probably t!me Volquez.

  10. #39
    SERP Emeritus paintmered's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Cbus
    Posts
    7,042

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    It was a win-win then, and it's a win-win now.
    What if this wasn't a rhetorical question?

    All models are wrong. Some of them are useful.

  11. #40
    Viva la Rolen kaldaniels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,802

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    I like/liked the deal and the final results are yet to be gathered, but man I wish the Reds had Hamilton going into this postseason rather than Volquez.

  12. #41
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,475

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    Quote Originally Posted by reds44 View Post
    You're cherry picking stats right now.

    Volquez had a 3.21 ERA and 204 strikesout 196 innings in 2008. He was also probably the best pitcher in baseball during the first half of the season. His 2008 season was dominant.
    I'm not cherry-picking anything. You said he was dominant before the injury. But he played 8 months as a Reds' starter and he was only "dominant" for two of them. To me, you're exaggerating more than I'm cherry-picking.

    I think he's been a good starter for the Reds. But I don't see how someone can be dominant when they were only even much above average in 2-3 of the 8 months they played.

    That's like saying Chris Heisey has been a dominant outfielder for the Reds because he tore it up in May & June.
    "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

  13. #42
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,697

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    I loved it then and I still love it now. I just can't trust drug addicts.
    My thoughts exactly.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

    Having better players makes "the right time" or "the big hit" happen a lot more often. PLUS PLUS

  14. #43
    Miami Redhawks Redhook's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincy
    Posts
    2,257

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    Quote Originally Posted by Razor Shines View Post
    As I've said for the rest of this one season I'd rather have Hamilton, but for the future I'd probably t!me Volquez.
    This about sums it up. Does anyone think the Reds would've traded Hamilton if he never had any drug problems? Obviously, he probably would've still been with the Rays, but I don't think he would've been traded if there wasn't the drug risk.

    I still remember watching Hamilton on tv during Spring Training that first year with the Reds. I was shocked at what I saw. I remember telling my friend that if you didn't know better and you were watching the Reds for the first time you would've thought Hamilton was the best hitter on the team. By far. I miss watching him play for the Reds.
    "....the two players I liked watching the most were Barry Larkin and Eric Davis. I was suitably entertained by their effortless skill that I didn't need them crashing into walls like a squirrel on a coke binge." - dsmith421

    www.kylevoska.com - Golfer? Check out my blog for golf tips.

  15. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,494

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    I like having Volquez a great deal, but I'd rather have Hamilton. That was true when we made the trade, is true today, and will be, I suspect, true in future. Two things could change that evaluation, one I hope does not happen, one I hope does. What I hope doesn't happen is that Josh has a relapse, what I do hope happens is that Volquez significantly reduces his walks per nine. If he can do that, I might change my evaluation of the trade.

  16. #45
    Member VR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Vancouver, Wa
    Posts
    8,556

    Re: Hamilton for Volquez - then & now

    Quote Originally Posted by MWM View Post
    I don't think there's a team in baseball that would take Volquez over Hamilton given the choice. That's not a knock on Edinson, it's just Hamilton is that good.
    We have a winner.


    I hated it at the time, and am indifferent now, knowing the team has been shaped for two years. It's not as simple as Hamilton replacing Gomes and Volquez replacing Texas' 5th starter.
    Baseball is like church. Many attend, few understand


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