Championships for MY teams in my lifetime:
Cincinnati Reds - 75, 76, 90
Chicago Blackhawks - 10, 13, 15
University of Kentucky - 78, 96, 98, 12
Chicago Bulls - 91, 92, 93, 96, 97, 98
“Everything that happens before Death is what counts.”
― Ray Bradbury, Something Wicked This Way Comes
His ERA and WHIP went down because he had a very unsustainable batting average on balls in play and HR per FB rate. Both of those are going to go up next year, meaning his ERA and WHIP are going to also go up unless he changes something in his walk rate or strikeout rate to counteract those things. Baseball history has shown us these things happen over and over and over and only incredibly special types of pitchers can "beat" history and while I like Cueto, he isn't that type of pitcher.
I wouldn't be comfortable saying anyone WILL be. I do think some could be. Cueto is the safe bet to be the best, but he won't come close to repeating what he did this year unless he comes out and has changes in his peripherals (lower walk rate, higher strikeout rate, better K/BB, more ground balls).
I've heard this comment a lot when the Cardinals traded JD Drew to the Braves. Everybody was saying that Adam Wainwright couldn't be very good if the Braves were willing to give him up. Well... there may be some truth to the statement, but they were very wrong about Adam Wainwright.
I don't think anybody wants to trade him. The Reds are not looking to get rid of him or give up on him. Saying the Reds should listen to offers for Cueto is not the same as saying the Reds should trade Cueto. As good as Cueto is there are players out there that are better. It would be foolish to reject a great trade offer simply because he is the Reds best pitcher. If you can get an even better pitcher for him wouldn't you do it? It all depends on what the other team is offering. If you want to get something good you have to give up something good.
I do think Cueto's reduced strikeout rate is a concern. A pitcher's K/BB and K/9IP ratios are far better indicators of future success than his prior season's ERA. He should be (and likely is) still trying to strike out batters as often as possible. The key is to throw strikes and rely on your "stuff" (movement, speed and location) to cause swings and misses. In the past he relied too heavily on tricking batters into swinging at balls out of the strike zone (the "Edison Volquez syndrome"), but this year he avoided wasting pitches much better. If you have great stuff you don't have to burn up 5-7 pitches to strike out each batter. Just trust your stuff, throw it in the zone and watch the batters strike out in 3-4 pitches. Then you can go deeper into the game and provide more value for your team.
Cueto isn't good enough to be untouchable. Come on. He's not Kershaw. If someone wants to really overpay then you do it. He is good enough that he might entice an overpayment, too, and then you use extra talent you've acquired plus perhaps or part or two on hand to acquire a Pineda, or a Shields. Then you've added a pitcher just as good, or better, and added another player or two who can really help. If no one wants to knock your socks then you keep him. Dangling Cueto is almost a can't lose proposition - you win if you keep him, you win if you deal in (in those circumstances).
We don't have the proven arms behind Cueto to even consider trading him in a no chance to lose deal. We need to add to our pitching not trade the one guy who has been closest to the pinnacle that we have had since Jose Rijo and the 90 Reds. You take Cueto off this team without getting 2 upper rotation arms (at least) and its a waste of a very limited resource. You trade from a strength to address a weakness, the Reds have plenty of 3-5 guys already but we have only 1 who has proven on the field to be better than that.
I would rather trade Bruce AND Votto before I would consider trading Cueto. Pitchers who are proven and signed affordably are worth their weight in GOLD. We might as well nuke this thing and start over if we are serious about trading Cueto because we don't currently have the arms to compete with the NL even with him and without him we are even further behind the rest of the league.
Originally Posted by teamselig
I agree. The Reds finished 3rd and under .500. They have Votto for 2 more years or less if they decide to trade him before free agency. The Reds have small market budget constraints.
Every player on the Reds team should be available for the right price. If other teams aren't willing to overpay, then you keep them.
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. |