Get MLBtraderumors Reds updates on Facebook.
The team IMO is very devoted to the concept of playing Billy Hamilton in CF. I just don't see them turning CF into a high paying veteran position. Even for one season. I think they will get a cheaper player and move Billy very rapidly to the major leagues.
Also seems to me that it would be a shame to trade Homer just as he seems to be maturing and healthy. The best asset you can have a top starting pitcher, I don't see the upside of trading somebody who may be just that.
I don't think people know how valuable Homer Bailey really is.
Even if he repeats this season, he's a solid MOR guy.
That-- at 200 IP-- is a HUGE bargain.
Plus, he has a (good) chance at becoming a true TOR guy.
His playoff starts and September show what he's capable of. You don't trade that away.*
* This assumes he's not the centerpiece deal in a game-changing offensive player, a la Giancarlo Stanton.
"You can learn little from victory. You can learn everything from defeat."
-- Christy Matthewson
"Show me a good loser and I'll show you an idiot."
-- Leo Durocher
By the way, Homer Bailey has about the same number of innings under his belt that Tom Glavine had after that disappointing 1990 season. Never give up on talented starting pitchers too early.
I voted "yes" for the simple reason that Homer Bailey hates GABP and it's clearly in his mind when he takes the mound. And that's half his games. I know Homer dazzled in NLDS Game 3, but that's the exception rather than the rule with him at home. And it's not like we haven't seen these end-of-season stretches of good pitching before, only to see him revert to norm back in April.
Homer as part of a bigger package to solve some longstanding needs for the Reds -- yes.
Homer just to trade Homer -- no.
Win the Division
Bailey is a solid middle of the rotation guy who is still relatively cheap AND still has the potential to turn into a top of the rotation guy. If Bailey can join Cueto and Latos as legit top of the rotation starters, the Reds are going to be handful for any team in a short series.
Depends on what the return is if they trade him. Giancarlo Stanton? Sign me up.
Denard Span? I wouldn't trade Homer for Span.
It just depends.
Trade high? Yes, if you get a killer return. But there is no reason to trade him otherwise.
"I can't take this homerism anymore." - 10xWSChamps, August 11, 2010. A Cardinals fan having a problem with all the homerism on Redszone. Classic.
"Man do I miss the days where were didn't need a calculator and an encyclopedia of baseball metrics to enjoy a baseball game ... - MikeS21" - 8/2/12 game thread
Sign him up long term
Most Vottomatic Player
I voted yes for two reasons:
1. I'm still not convinced he's 'put it together' considering a month ago we were still talking about his inconsistency, but more importantly
2. There's a guy named Aroldis in the bullpen that can be converted to a starter and probably worst-case scenario (health permitting) be an upgrade from Homer.
Homer could be parlayed into a starting centerfielder or leftfielder. I'd risk the chance he has in fact "put it together' with the knowledge that his trade value would yield the Reds a real position of need. Even if Homer Bailey is ready to realize his potential, when you have Aroldis there for the conversion the Reds need Homer less than they need an outfielder. Fans are too often only willing to trade the players they don't care about which leads me to believe if they treated baseball players like prize possessions rather than stocks, they'd make terrible stock traders. But players are assets and sometimes you have to know when to sell. To me, even if you truly believe Homer is about to turn the corner, one has to recognize there are more pressing needs and he would be the most likely to get a return that satisfies them.
Last edited by Brutus; 10-26-2012 at 07:08 PM.
"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
I voted no, but only because the Reds are very shallow at starting pitching after the top six of Cueto, Latos, Arroyo, Bailey, Leake and Chapman. Most teams need 7-8 decent starting pitchers over a full season. Trading Bailey only makes the rotation more shallow.
I would trade him, if another starter came back, but what's the point?
"Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.