Pirates DFA Zach Stewart

[membengal]

Originally Posted by lollipopcurve

Stewart's itinerary is a punchline at this point, just like Doug's Cy Young proclamation.

Folks who doubt what Rolen meant to the Reds should keep in mind this quote from Votto, a guy who measures his words carefully: "He changed my path as a player. He was a shining example of the kind of player I want to be."

lollipop...you left out the rest of that Votto quote, though, and it is important for context.

Votto goes on:

"But, man, that being said, I rue everyday that it cost us Zach Stewart to get Rolen. Scottie's been great and all, such as it is, but with Stewart, it seems likely we are counting multiple World Series titles at this point. He was Sidd Finch in the flesh. Unfortunate, really, that it had to go down like this..."

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by kaldaniels

Often repeated but rarely challenged.

What evidence do you have that the Reds were the only destination Rolen could have ended up at in July 2009? Even if you had no other contenders, they had to meet the Jays price. Why didn't they just trade a bag of balls for him? Would that have been too much?

I've seen the challenges because I've read dougdirt's response many, many times. The thing is it is one man's opinion and pure conjecture. The one holding the position can't provide hard evidence for his position anymore than you provide hard evidence against it. So have fun with that

[mattfeet]

Originally Posted by membengal

lollipop...you left out the rest of that Votto quote, though, and it is important for context.

Votto goes on:

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by traderumor

I've seen the challenges because I've read dougdirt's response many, many times. The thing is it is one man's opinion and pure conjecture. The one holding the position can't provide hard evidence for his position anymore than you provide hard evidence against it. So have fun with that

Not really opinion when you tell people to go look at who was playing 3b in the Midwest and that Cincy was the only option. That is being stated as fact.

[TRF]

There were no rumors of Rolen to any other city. CHI had Ramirez, STL DeRosa. Maybe PIT or HOU, but neither had even a whisper of a rumor. Stewart was one of the Reds top prospects. How he panned out is irrelevant. Especially if people want to use the EdE hasn't proved anything by then argument, because his bat looks pretty good right now. I'm also betting he could handle LF as well as the Reds current LF, with FAR more production offensively.

In just over 3 years, Scot Rolen has appeared in 330 games as a Red. Have his intangibles been a help to molding a young team? probably. But he hasn't been good since 2010. Meanwhile EE has played in almost 100 more games with 52 more HR's and seems to have broken out into an offensive force.

And remember, Josh Roenicke was in that deal as well and is also still employed by COL. So yes... the Reds overpaid for Rolen.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by TRF

There were no rumors of Rolen to any other city. CHI had Ramirez, STL DeRosa. Maybe PIT or HOU, but neither had even a whisper of a rumor. Stewart was one of the Reds top prospects. How he panned out is irrelevant. Especially if people want to use the EdE hasn't proved anything by then argument, because his bat looks pretty good right now. I'm also betting he could handle LF as well as the Reds current LF, with FAR more production offensively.

In just over 3 years, Scot Rolen has appeared in 330 games as a Red. Have his intangibles been a help to molding a young team? probably. But he hasn't been good since 2010. Meanwhile EE has played in almost 100 more games with 52 more HR's and seems to have broken out into an offensive force.

And remember, Josh Roenicke was in that deal as well and is also still employed by COL. So yes... the Reds overpaid for Rolen.

I agree with this.

That being said, I still think bringing in Rolen was a good idea. It probably could've/should've been done at less expense, but the idea to acquire him was sound IMO.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

Not really opinion when you tell people to go look at who was playing 3b in the Midwest and that Cincy was the only option. That is being stated as fact.

I forgot that all 30 major league teams played in the Midwest region. Obviously LA is in the Midwest. In other words, one has to assume that Rolen would not override his own preference if an offer was on the table. How would we know that? Let me answer that for you....we can't and don't. And that is the breakdown in the entire argument that dougdirt has been making.

So, yea, its an opinion based on conjecture.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by TRF

There were no rumors of Rolen to any other city. CHI had Ramirez, STL DeRosa. Maybe PIT or HOU, but neither had even a whisper of a rumor. Stewart was one of the Reds top prospects. How he panned out is irrelevant. Especially if people want to use the EdE hasn't proved anything by then argument, because his bat looks pretty good right now. I'm also betting he could handle LF as well as the Reds current LF, with FAR more production offensively.

In just over 3 years, Scot Rolen has appeared in 330 games as a Red. Have his intangibles been a help to molding a young team? probably. But he hasn't been good since 2010. Meanwhile EE has played in almost 100 more games with 52 more HR's and seems to have broken out into an offensive force.

And remember, Josh Roenicke was in that deal as well and is also still employed by COL. So yes... the Reds overpaid for Rolen.

Certainly you do not think "there were no rumors" is an argument for anything?

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by traderumor

Certainly you do not think "there were no rumors" is an argument for anything?

Or that bad team roster fodder actually needs to flagged as a lost resource

The Reds pumped up dogs like that for decade, it simply didn't work and now they are throw-ins and not possible roster surprises

[REDREAD]

Man, oh man.. The Rolen trade was one of the most lopsided trades in favor of the Reds in recent history, at least since the Arroyo deal. (I remember people thinking we'd regret trading Wily Mo at the time).

EdE eventually became a good DH. Not sure how that helps us if we still had him. Roenickee, an interchangable part.
Zach Stewart has pretty much proven that 1/3 of a season with gaudy numbers in AAA relief doesn't guarantee anything.

[Crumbley]

Originally Posted by kaldaniels

Often repeated but rarely challenged.

What evidence do you have that the Reds were the only destination Rolen could have ended up at in July 2009? Even if you had no other contenders, they had to meet the Jays price. Why didn't they just trade a bag of balls for him? Would that have been too much?

Or that Stewart was a "real talent." Reality trumps projections.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by REDREAD

Man, oh man.. The Rolen trade was one of the most lopsided trades in favor of the Reds in recent history, at least since the Arroyo deal. (I remember people thinking we'd regret trading Wily Mo at the time).

EdE eventually became a good DH. Not sure how that helps us if we still had him. Roenickee, an interchangable part.
Zach Stewart has pretty much proven that 1/3 of a season with gaudy numbers in AAA relief doesn't guarantee anything.

Jose Bautista workout regimen.

[TRF]

EE is an athletic ballplayer that was playing out of position. He's pretty good at 1B would probably be average in LF and he has a cannon for an arm. OF accuracy is not the same as IF accuracy. Had he been moved to LF then, and not only were people here talking about it, it was mentioned by the Reds as well, The Reds offense might look a bit different.

Roenicke was certainly replaceable, but it isn't like he's junk. He's had success, though not GREAT success. He manages to keep working at the MLB level. Stewart is the disappointment, BUT AT THE TIME her was considered one of the Reds top prospects.

That is three players for one guy without a single full season as a Red.

I won't argue the intangibles here. Clearly Rolen has been a great clubhouse guy, role model for Votto, Phillips, Bruce and now Frazier. For anyone to suggest this was lopsided is absurd as EE looks to be a 35+ HR threat for the foreseeable future. Last year he had a better offensive season than ANY Red. Now Everyone probably thought EE was capable of breaking out like that, but he never seemed to as a Red. though 26 HR's in 2008 showed his potential, injury kept him down.

So Rolen is likely no longer a Red. EE will probably hit 38 HR's next year with another .900+ OPS as yes, the DH and occasional 1B (68 games last year). If he stays healthy he's got three full years and a club option for a 4th left on his deal.if over the next three years he hits like he did in 2012, the option will likely get picked up. so, he's looking at close to 150 HR's over the next 4 seasons, 400 RBI, 300+ BB's.

All while Rolen bounces grandkids on his knees.

Perhaps the trade was necessary for the Reds to mature, to grow as a team. Perhaps they needed a leadership example for guys like Votto and Philips to emulate so they in turn become similar leaders.

And maybe he could have been had for less. Maybe not. But three players for one with chronic back and shoulder problems is a lot to pay. That is my opinion and it won't change.

[M2]

Originally Posted by REDREAD

Man, oh man.. The Rolen trade was one of the most lopsided trades in favor of the Reds in recent history, at least since the Arroyo deal. (I remember people thinking we'd regret trading Wily Mo at the time).

EdE eventually became a good DH. Not sure how that helps us if we still had him. Roenickee, an interchangable part.
Zach Stewart has pretty much proven that 1/3 of a season with gaudy numbers in AAA relief doesn't guarantee anything.

Exactly this.

[medford]

Originally Posted by TRF

There were no rumors of Rolen to any other city. CHI had Ramirez, STL DeRosa. Maybe PIT or HOU, but neither had even a whisper of a rumor. Stewart was one of the Reds top prospects. How he panned out is irrelevant. Especially if people want to use the EdE hasn't proved anything by then argument, because his bat looks pretty good right now. I'm also betting he could handle LF as well as the Reds current LF, with FAR more production offensively.

In just over 3 years, Scot Rolen has appeared in 330 games as a Red. Have his intangibles been a help to molding a young team? probably. But he hasn't been good since 2010. Meanwhile EE has played in almost 100 more games with 52 more HR's and seems to have broken out into an offensive force.

And remember, Josh Roenicke was in that deal as well and is also still employed by COL. So yes... the Reds overpaid for Rolen.

Man I hate that argument anytime its made regarding a trade (though you counterbalance it nicely in your post, so this isn't really a rant against your post, just that portion). Of course it matters how prospects or players turn out after a trade. it matters that Frank Robinson went on to win an MVP and triple crown after leaving the reds, it matters Arroyo went from a 6th starter to a reliable innings eater w/ better than average results with the Reds.

If the point of baseball is to win games/championships, then it absolutely matters how the players involved in trades perform following the trades. Otherwise, why the heck are we even paying attention.