Dexter Fowler

[mdccclxix]

Originally Posted by cinreds21

I guess Fowler would be OK. As I've expressed, I am fine giving up Bailey in a trade. The only thing, is that until last season, his numbers weren't really that good. He hit around .260 for most of his career until he hit .300 last year. If we're going to trade for a longterm player, it needs to be a left fielder and not in center because that'll just send the wrong message to Hamilton with his transition to the outfield. I just think it is a wasted opportunity if you go out and trade for Fowler when you have Hamilton who will be up in September.

Fowler could move to LF for a year or two and not hurt things at all, especially if his OPS is around .800.

[cincinnati chili]

Originally Posted by cinreds21

I guess Fowler would be OK. As I've expressed, I am fine giving up Bailey in a trade. The only thing, is that until last season, his numbers weren't really that good. He hit around .260 for most of his career until he hit .300 last year. If we're going to trade for a longterm player, it needs to be a left fielder and not in center because that'll just send the wrong message to Hamilton with his transition to the outfield. I just think it is a wasted opportunity if you go out and trade for Fowler when you have Hamilton who will be up in September.

You're right that last year was his best year, but he had pretty much attained his current levels in the 2nd half of 2011 (after a stint in the minors in which he destroyed the Pacific Coast League. His 2nd half of 2011 was .288/.381/.498. His power declined in the 2nd half last year, but I attribute that to his getting less to hit with the Triple-A lineups (other than CarGo) that the Rox were running out by then. His 1st and 2nd half obps were identical.

Not worried about the Billy Hamilton thing. If he can outplay Fowler in CF, Fowler gets moved to left. If not, Hamilton gets moved to left. This happened to Vince Coleman and Rickey Henderson too, IIRC.

[RANDY IN INDY]

If you have both Fowler and Hamilton in the outfield, you better have someone that can consistently put up power numbers at third base and either catcher or shortstop.

[Wonderful Monds]

Originally Posted by RANDY IN INDY

If you have both Fowler and Hamilton in the outfield, you better have someone that can consistently put up power numbers at third base and either catcher or shortstop.

What's wrong with Dexter Fowler's power?

[cinreds21]

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

What's wrong with Dexter Fowler's power?

Typically you want a left fielder to hit ~25 homeruns. Fowler hit 13 last year and I don't really see him getting more than that. The only homerun you will see from Hamilton will be via the inside-the-park variety. Subbing power in left field for Fowler would kinda hurt, but it's not that big of a deal, assuming Frazier hits around 20 at third. Another issue I have with Fowler, is he has never played one single inning in left, including the minors. Now, I know it's that big of a transition, but still something to consider.

[gilpdawg]

All of the advanced fielding metrics hate Fowler. Coors Field effect or is he not good out there? I haven't seen him enough to judge. The Rockies haven't been mlb.TV darlings the past couple years obviously, so I have only seen him when they play the Reds.

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk HD

[Scrap Irony]

If Mesoraco is for real, the Reds could have 15+ HR from each position across the diamond, aside from Hamilton. That's not bad HR power at all.

What's better than that, however, is that almost everyone on the team has above average extra base hit power for his position and that all but two would be well above average in terms of obp.

Assuming Hamilton's for real (a large assumption, I know), Cincinnati could suddenly own above average hitters (via wRC+) across every position on the diamond, with All Star-level production from 1B and 2B. (With luck and/or marginal improvement, that could also include 3B and all three OF spots.)

[FlightRick]

The more I think about it, the more I lean towards doing this trade. Fowler immediately fixes lead-off for us, and assuming Billy Hamilton is what we hope he is, I think he'll also excel as a #2 hitter in 2014 and 2015. [He's just reaching his peak years, and has a big frame that might develop a bit more power. He could/should put up 15-20 HR in GABP. Hitting directly in front of Votto will only help him to see better pitches than he ever has in the past, too.]

Giving up Bailey is basically an "all-in" bet on Chapman moving into the rotation without any complications, and doing it while retaining electric/top-of-rotation stuff. In my mind, somehow there's a lot more need for Chapman to be uber-productive if he's replacing Bailey than if he were replacing Leake. It's probably just all in my head, and a matter of flawed perception... but this really is the stumbling block for me when it comes to moving Homer.

I think Fowler brings enough to the table for me to overcome that mental block. I roll it around in my brain, and basically here's what I figure: we sign Ludwick for 2-3 years, and we still have Stubbs. Taking everybody's splits into account, it's Ludwick in LF and Fowler in CF against RHP, and Fowler in LF and Stubbs in CF against LHP. This has the added benefit of keepign Ludwick fresh by sitting him once or twice a week (he did seem to wear down from time to time last year). If we sign Rolen on the cheap, and he gets a start or two per week, that frees up Frazier to make a spot start or two in the OF (maybe giving Bruce a night off against LHP, or providing more rest for Ludwick). And then you consider who's on the bench on any given night, and suddenly, Miguel F. Cairo isn't your #1 option as a pinch hitter, since you'll always have at least one genuinely dangerous option (Rolen, Stubbs, Ludwick) available at all times.

Once/if Hamilton arrives as an everyday CF, Stubbs is expendable, and Ludwick probably becomes a professional pinch hitter and our no-brainer DH in interleague situations, and that's not an entirely bad thing, either.

So yeah, I can definitely talk myself into doing Homer-for-Fowler, straight up....


Rick


EDIT TO ADD: Another thing worth considering is how much fun it would be to have a different "The Trade" to argue about for years. Assessing who won and who lost the trade would be a roller coaster ride of wackiness, with little to no agreement. I mean, for starters, all Fowler has to do is not be Stubbs, and many may consider that a victory in and of itself... on the other hand, if Homer tanks at Coors, others may point to park effects and opine that he would have stayed a very good pitcher if the Reds hadn't traded him. Smell the fun!!!

[Scrap Irony]

I'd much prefer Leake, Arredondo, and Masset for Fowler deal and really think Colorado might bite on that.

[mdccclxix]

If you get Fowler for Bailey you net 1 million dollars. Then look to move Stubbs and Masset for a few prospects that could help for minimum in the bullpen or bench. That frees up 7 million total to sign Ludwick and a AAAA vet starter.

[cinreds21]

Why does everyone think Nick Masset is getting traded? He is coming off missing the entire year and is making over $3 million. A team isn't going to target him.

[mdccclxix]

Originally Posted by cinreds21

Why does everyone think Nick Masset is getting traded? He is coming off missing the entire year and is making over $3 million. A team isn't going to target him.

I was thinking salary dump, so the return would be nothing, or he would eat into whatever value was going from the Reds. Just thinking from a tight payroll perspective.

[cincinnati chili]

Originally Posted by cinreds21

Fowler hit 13 last year and I don't really see him getting more than that.

This guy agrees with you: http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/ind...ks-out-barely/

I don't. I see a drop in batting average, not power.

Randy's point is well taken. I'm not crazy about a club having any - let alone two - outfielders that aren't homer threats. This is one of the reasons I was so disappointed to hear that Hamilton was being moved from shortstop into the OF. Maybe the Reds are right that he can't cut it at short, but it was still disappointing to hear. However, I don't worry about Fowler. He may be best in the 1 or the 2 hole, but I'd feel good about him in the five hole on just about any team.

42 extra base hits in 454 at-bats is nothing to sneeze at. His isolated power was 66th in the majors among players with at least 502 plate appearances. Better than all qualifying Reds (including Brandon) except Jay Bruce.

Especially if the Reds continue to employ speed throughout the lineup, a double with ducks anywhere on the pond is going to drive in run(s).

[RedlegJake]

Originally Posted by mdccclxix

If you get Fowler for Bailey you net 1 million dollars. Then look to move Stubbs and Masset for a few prospects that could help for minimum in the bullpen or bench. That frees up 7 million total to sign Ludwick and a AAAA vet starter.

For me Id take lower but better prospects one each just for Masset and Stubbs. Feed the beast. I don't see either bringing much ML ready talent back but they might bring a couple riskier but higher ceiling A or hiA talents. Just primes thepump when even great kids get chewed up as time goes and increases odds of better replacements in a couple years. Take care of this season first by landing a Fowler and re-upping Lud, then move some excess to refeed the system.

[cincinnati chili]

Originally Posted by gilpdawg

All of the advanced fielding metrics hate Fowler. Coors Field effect or is he not good out there? I haven't seen him enough to judge. The Rockies haven't been mlb.TV darlings the past couple years obviously, so I have only seen him when they play the Reds.

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk HD

I admit to never deconstructing exactly why the Coors outfielders are ranked so poorly by advanced fielding metrics. Is it because the "zones" they have to cover are larger?

He has been good enough to push a gold glover like CarGo to a corner, and it seems with the naked eye like he's getting jobbed by the metrics. But I'd be lying if I said I've looked into this topic in depth.