Josh Willingham and Ben Revere

[HometownHero]

I think you way over value the market value of Revere.

24yo, good defense that can play at a plus at all 3 OF spots, speed, has bat control who can bat at the top of the order and can hit both LH and RHP and is cheap. This is a player every single team in the majors wants.

[rgslone]

But why give him away? In Stubbs, you have a guy who was a high draft pick, has all the tools you want, plays a premium position very well and actually hit well against LHP. By giving him away, that's the definition of buying high and selling low. Why not try to put him in positions to succeed (i.e. hit him against LHP only) and have a useful player who can platoon with a cheap option who can't hit lefties (like Rick Ankiel), you can keep Bailey and pursue Willingham with a lesser player like you said earlier

Money, if the Reds can pull that off I'm ok with that. I'm not in love with Willingham, I'm just a Reds fan trying to think of realistic possiblities for my team to get better.

Also, I understand every point you make about Stubbs because I've argued most of those same things too in the past (e.g., "if the Reds would just hit him 6th or lower in the line-up", "if they would just use him against LH pitchers", etc."). But I just finally gave in to what I always felt was true in the back of my mind (even when I followed him in the minors) - and that is this: Stubbs can't hit, he has never hit, and he will never hit. He just can't make enough contact and it's not his fault - he doesn't have the skill set to do it (including, maybe most importantly, pitch recognition) and it's not something he can learn. He has a lot of other skills, but making contact will never be one. But keep up the faith, I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

[rgslone]

24yo, good defense that can play at a plus at all 3 OF spots, speed, has bat control who can bat at the top of the order and can hit both LH and RHP and is cheap. This is a player every single team in the majors wants.

As I said, I like him too.

[MoneyInTheBank]

Money, if the Reds can pull that off I'm ok with that. I'm not in love with Willingham, I'm just a Reds fan trying to think of realistic possiblities for my team to get better.

Also, I understand every point you make about Stubbs because I've argued most of those same things too in the past (e.g., "if the Reds would just hit him 6th or lower in the line-up", "if they would just use him against LH pitchers", etc."). But I just finally gave in to what I always felt was true in the back of my mind (even when I followed him in the minors) - and that is this: Stubbs can't hit, he has never hit, and he will never hit. He just can't make enough contact and it's not his fault - he doesn't have the skill set to do it (including, maybe most importantly, pitch recognition) and it's not something he can learn. He has a lot of other skills, but making contact will never be one. But keep up the faith, I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

I have no problem with you making a trade proposal. I simply offered my own spin on it, no reason to go on the defensive.

As far as Stubbs goes, I'm not sure you'll find a bigger Stubbs hater than myself. I think you have misunderstood my post. I'm saying, why attach him to Bailey just to get rid of him? So my post was "keep Bailey", not "keep Stubbs". I'd rather keep him for a year, try and put some lipstick on him, so to speak, and see if someone will bite instead of trading him for a bag of balls or attaching him to a good player just to get rid of him.

[rgslone]

I have no problem with you making a trade proposal. I simply offered my own spin on it, no reason to go on the defensive.

As far as Stubbs goes, I'm not sure you'll find a bigger Stubbs hater than myself. I think you have misunderstood my post. I'm saying, why attach him to Bailey just to get rid of him? So my post was "keep Bailey", not "keep Stubbs". I'd rather keep him for a year, try and put some lipstick on him, so to speak, and see if someone will bite instead of trading him for a bag of balls or attaching him to a good player just to get rid of him.

If I came across that way Money, I apologize. I recall reading a number of your posts and they were well thought out and polite discussion that I enjoyed. I'll try to do better (and I mean that, I'm not being snarky).

[MoneyInTheBank]

If I came across that way Money, I apologize. I recall reading a number of your posts and they were well thought out and polite discussion that I enjoyed. I'll try to do better (and I mean that, I'm not being snarky).

No need to apologize at all. I appreciate the kind words

[rgslone]

Well, Revere is now off the board as a 2013 CF option for the Reds. But, Willingham is still available. Do you like him better than Ludwig? His total cost [e.g., $7M salary + player/prospect(s) in trade] would be more than Ludwig [approx. $8M salary]. Which would you prefer?

[Larkin88]

Ludwick.

[Bonzo]

Well, Revere is now off the board as a 2013 CF option for the Reds. But, Willingham is still available. Do you like him better than Ludwig? His total cost [e.g., $7M salary + player/prospect(s) in trade] would be more than Ludwig [approx. $8M salary]. Which would you prefer?

Willingham is the better player by a small margin, but he'll cost a good amount of talent to acquire. Since Ludwick will get roughly the same salary, but at no additional cost, he's preferable.