Reds/Tigers, hot after Laird

[redhawk61]

Originally Posted by OnBaseMachine
Tigers, Reds showing interest in Laird
Texas on lookout for pitching in return for veteran backstop

By T.R. Sullivan / MLB.com

ARLINGTON -- The Cincinnati Reds and the Detroit Tigers appear to have shown the most interest in Rangers catcher Gerald Laird, according to Major League sources.

General manager Jon Daniels said Thursday he is having conversations with a number of clubs about the Rangers' catching depth. He declined to discuss specifics, but it appears the Rangers are moving closer to getting something done and it likely involves Laird.

Teams have also expressed interest in Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Taylor Teagarden and Max Ramirez. But the Rangers appear to be more interested in trading Laird, who is eligible for arbitration. He could make around $3 million next year and can also be a free agent after the 2010 season.

"We've touched base with everybody, and have had more extensive dialogue with some clubs," Daniels said. "We have a good handle on our options. We have a sense of the type of deals we can move on. We've had second and third conversations and followup conversations with clubs. There's a potential for something to happen."

The Rangers have also had discussions with the Red Sox, but they appear more interested in Saltalamacchia or Teagarden. They have also no interest in trading Clay Buchholz. The Rangers have interest in some of their other young pitchers, including Michael Bowden and Justin Masterson.

The Houston Astros are looking for catching help, but don't have much in the way of young pitching to offer. The Rangers are looking for pitching in return for any deal involving their catchers.

"Pitching is our priority this offseason," Daniels said.

The Reds' most appealing young pitcher is reliever Joshua Roenicke, a hard-throwing right-hander who was 6-2 with a 2.82 ERA, 13 saves and 71 strikeouts in 61 innings between Double-A Carolina and Triple-A Louisville this past season. He appeared in five games for the Reds in September, and he is high on the Rangers' list.

Other Reds pitchers of interest are right-handed starters Daryl Thompson and Homer Bailey, and relievers Carlos Fisher, Pedro Viola and Robert Manuel. Viola is a left-hander who was converted to a starter at the end of this past season, and, in seven starts, was 3-1 with a 2.45 ERA in Double-A. In 33 innings, he gave up 27 hits, nine walks and struck out 30.

The Tigers' two best young pitchers that are Major League ready are right-handers Zach Miner and Chris Lambert. Miner was 8-5 with a 4.27 ERA in 45 games -- including 13 starts -- in 2008, while Lambert, a former first-round pick for the Cardinals, was 1-2 with a 5.66 ERA. He was 12-8 with a 3.50 ERA in Triple-A Toledo.

But it was the Tigers' overall lack of good young pitching that made them take a chance on former Rangers pitcher Armando Galarraga last April, and he became one of their most reliable starters.

Other young arms in the Tigers system that are raw but could enter into the discussion are right-handers Luis Marte, Guillermo Moscoso and Alfredo Figaro. But none of them have pitched in the Major Leagues or are deemed close to being ready for the big league level.

Laird hit .276 with six home runs and 41 RBIs in 95 games and 344 at-bats in 2008. Over the past three years, he has the fourth-best percentage (36.3) of throwing out basestealers among Major League catchers.

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/...=.jsp&c_id=cin

[757690]

Thanks for the update.

I would give the Rangers any of those names mentioned for Laird except Bailey, and maybe even two of them depending on the two. Laird would be very valuable as a platoon partner with Hanigan, but no way he is worth a top 10 prospect, let alone Bailey who was a top 10 prospect in all the majors last year.

[UPRedsFan]

As a right handed hitter Laird hit .288 against rhp in 250 at bats last year. Not only is he an upgrade defensively, he's an upgrade offensively as well. Would you give Roenicke? I think yes.

[Hondo]

Why would you want to go with Laird and have to pay 3 Million in arbitration...

Go for Salty...

[Bip Roberts]

Id give up pretty much any bullpen arm for him. I dont think hes all that good but maybe im just missing something in his game.

[GoReds33]

Originally Posted by Hondo

Why would you want to go with Laird and have to pay 3 Million in arbitration...

Go for Salty...

We have to remember that three million isn't that much money in baseball. Sure, three million dollars a year can add up with a bunch of players, but IMO, he is well worth it. Good catching is almost priceless in baseball.

[ChatterRed]

I just don't get all the hype in trying to acquire Laird. He just turned 29 in November. He has a career .255 batting average and .306 OBP and .383 SLG. He's played over 100 games once in his 6 year career (120 games in 2007). I would not give up much for him because I don't think anyone else would either.

If the Reds are looking to platoon, it doesn't make much sense, since both Hanigan and Laird are righties.

If Laird wants to be the backup, then okay, that's fine. But you don't trade a Homer Bailey for a backup catcher.

The whole giddy about acquiring Laird ordeal really strikes me as weird to say the least.

[Hondo]

Originally Posted by GoReds33

We have to remember that three million isn't that much money in baseball. Sure, three million dollars a year can add up with a bunch of players, but IMO, he is well worth it. Good catching is almost priceless in baseball.

Bud, 3 Million Bucks on this team Buys ya Mike Stanton...

This team would be better to put that 3 Million and the 2.5 Million it is paying Lincoln into 5.5 Million, then chuck 10 Million on that and sign someone good...

[Emin3mShady07]

Originally Posted by GoReds33

We have to remember that three million isn't that much money in baseball. Sure, three million dollars a year can add up with a bunch of players, but IMO, he is well worth it. Good catching is almost priceless in baseball.

1. Gerald Laird is not very good at the plate and I would hate to see the reds throw away a decent prospect to get him. His offense is very poor. He OPSed .727 last year and .627 the year before not to mention his career high OBP in the majors is .332. Hanigan has a career OPS of .754 in the minors with a .382 OBP (which is more important than slugging) to go with it. Why not save the money and play a guy who will most likely be just as good if not better. In his only complete year in AAA Hanigan had an OPS of .811 last year. Laird has a career .789 OPS against lefties but is playing less than hald a season worth $3 million and a good prospect or two? Not in my opinion

2. Laird isn't anything special on defense either. It has been proven that catchers really don't have a huge impact on what a pitching staff does (the writers of baseball between the numbers dedicated a chapter to that). And He isn't a blocking wizard either http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/200...-block-percent so I really don't see why the reds should waste a good prospect on him.

[TheNext44]

Originally Posted by Emin3mShady07

1. Gerald Laird is not very good at the plate and I would hate to see the reds throw away a decent prospect to get him. His offense is very poor. He OPSed .727 last year and .627 the year before not to mention his career high OBP in the majors is .332. Hanigan has a career OPS of .754 in the minors with a .382 OBP (which is more important than slugging) to go with it. Why not save the money and play a guy who will most likely be just as good if not better. In his only complete year in AAA Hanigan had an OPS of .811 last year. Laird has a career .789 OPS against lefties but is playing less than hald a season worth $3 million and a good prospect or two? Not in my opinion

2. Laird isn't anything special on defense either. It has been proven that catchers really don't have a huge impact on what a pitching staff does (the writers of baseball between the numbers dedicated a chapter to that). And He isn't a blocking wizard either http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/200...-block-percent so I really don't see why the reds should waste a good prospect on him.

I think it is an overstatement to say that this has been proven. I have not read the chapter or the book you are refering to, but I think it is impossible to "prove" that something like that either exists or does not exist. Just because there are no numbers to suggest that it exists does not mean that it doesn't. It just means that no one has found stats that back it up. There was a time that you could say that there is no proof that walks help a team win almost as much as hits, but then all sorts of new stats came out that suggested that they do. We are at just the beginning of understanding defensive stats, and I really believe that in the next few years, we will understand them like we understand offensive one.

Anyway, I do agree that there is no need to spend resources on acquiring him, unless he is like Mike Matheny or one of the Molina brothers. I have no idea how good he is behind the plate. I have seen like one Ranger game in the last two years.
Hanigan is fine for next year, and the Reds would be fine with a player like Bako backing him up, as long he doesn't get as much playing time as Bako got last year.

[TheNext44]

Originally Posted by 757690

Thanks for the update.

I would give the Rangers any of those names mentioned for Laird except Bailey, and maybe even two of them depending on the two. Laird would be very valuable as a platoon partner with Hanigan, but no way he is worth a top 10 prospect, let alone Bailey who was a top 10 prospect in all the majors last year.

I wouldn't even get that much. Maybe Viola or Manual, but that would be the most.

[Emin3mShady07]

Originally Posted by TheNext44

I think it is an overstatement to say that this has been proven. I have not read the chapter or the book you are refering to, but I think it is impossible to "prove" that something like that either exists or does not exist. Just because there are no numbers to suggest that it exists does not mean that it doesn't. It just means that no one has found stats that back it up. There was a time that you could say that there is no proof that walks help a team win almost as much as hits, but then all sorts of new stats came out that suggested that they do. We are at just the beginning of understanding defensive stats, and I really believe that in the next few years, we will understand them like we understand offensive one.

Very true and I do realize that it was indeed a bit of an overstatement. The chapter, and I only point it out because you mention his name, was "Is Mike Matheny a catching Genius?" but anyways, my point is that even if Gerald Laird called a "great" game, it is more on the pitchers to execute than it is for Laird to call the correct pitch. I'm just stressing that it would be foolish to think that a guy like Laird could turn aroung pitchers performances just by his pitch selection. I mean last year the Rangers ERA when he was catching was 5.21 http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstat...lastName=laird but I would attribute that to the Rangers really crappy pitching staff as opposed to Laird's pitch selection.

[schmidty622]

Originally Posted by Hondo

Why would you want to go with Laird and have to pay 3 Million in arbitration...

Go for Salty...

Salty is terrible behind the plate. Where would he play?

[Kingspoint]

I wouldn't give Thompson or Bailey for Laird under any scenario. Thompson's going to be much, much, more valuable to the Major League club over the next 7 seasons than Laird will be.

[Steviejoe]

Today i would trade Thompson for Laird,tomorrow i don't know.The way this game goes you never what's going to happen.Trade Thompson he becomes a star,keep him Laird becomes on.dun if you do,durn if you don't.Hittin .285 in 2008 was great for Laird,but do we remember a guy named David Ross.His first year in cincy was a hit,2008 released in midseason.i know i can't compare Laird to Ross,but think about it.Thompson may be the next Volquez,but who know's 7 years down the road.