Wickman To The Braves

[registerthis]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeRedleg

Just the point that Majewski is not that good.

But he's *certainly* worth an Olmedo.

And majewski is a better reliever than what we've seen of him so far. He may not be 2005 good, but he'll be serviceable.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

I wonder if Wickman will bring a draft pick when he leaves the Braves in the off-season.

Only if you offer him arbitration.Which you can't do.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by Falls City Beer

Wickman's better than Guardado, Majewski, and for the time being Bray.

Wickman isn't better than any of them, but other than that, I agree with you.

Just ask Dunn.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by pedro

I hear a lot of noise from you about how stupid the trade was and how valuable Lopez was.

How do you rectify the the fact that Lopez was incapable of playing his position defensively, may have already had his career year, and was about to get really expensive with your contention that he somehow had ton of trade value? Because frankly I don't see it.

He's still young. He's still productive as a SS. He had a great year last year. He's on pace for .254/.344/.372 with 94 runs, 16 HRs, 52 RBI and 40 steals, which isn't as bad as some would make him out to be (esp since he has been hitting at the top of the order a lot).

OK, the errors are there. Where aren't the errors? We, as fans, have put up with Dunn in LF, Griffey in CF and EE at 3rd. That isn't really gold glove central and if defense is as important to the Reds as they claim, something would be done with those guys (i.e., moving positions in the OF).

And for everyone who harps on FeLo and how bad he has been, don't forget AK was involved in this deal. I think losing him was a lot worse than losing FeLo. The two of them together and this trade still doesn't make sense over a week later. I think Wayne was pulling damage control when he started talking about the market for relievers. I seriously doubt the market will be as high as what he paid...ever.

[pedro]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

He's still young. He's still productive as a SS. He had a great year last year. He's on pace for .254/.344/.372 with 94 runs, 16 HRs, 52 RBI and 40 steals, which isn't as bad as some would make him out to be (esp since he has been hitting at the top of the order a lot).

OK, the errors are there. Where aren't the errors? We, as fans, have put up with Dunn in LF, Griffey in CF and EE at 3rd. That isn't really gold glove central and if defense is as important to the Reds as they claim, something would be done with those guys (i.e., moving positions in the OF).

And for everyone who harps on FeLo and how bad he has been, don't forget AK was involved in this deal. I think losing him was a lot worse than losing FeLo. The two of them together and this trade still doesn't make sense over a week later. I think Wayne was pulling damage control when he started talking about the market for relievers. I seriously doubt the market will be as high as what he paid...ever.

color me unimpressed.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by pedro

color me unimpressed.

It's amazing how selective the board is. There's one thread where everyone is wetting themselves about how tremendous Hatteberg has been to this team and this one where Lopez was single-handedly taking Cincy to the cellar.

It's very easy to cherry pick what stats you want and make that player look good or bad. FeLo's on pace to up his walk total from 57 to 86 in one season. How come no one is talking about him avoiding outs, scoring runs, etc etc etc? If he was better liked then this could show his growth at the plate, becoming more patient, selective, etc. But since somehow he has become the scapegoat, no one cares.

It's just very funny.

[REDREAD]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

I wonder if Wickman will bring a draft pick when he leaves the Braves in the off-season.

I think the Braves won't offer him salary arb. With all those saves Wickman has, that's a very high risk thing. They already got burned by Maddux accepting arb when they figured he wouldn't.

[REDREAD]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeRedleg

I think he was exaggerating a bit, but the point was made nevertheless.

It got a good laugh out of me I'm sure he was exaggerating, but it brings up a good point.

If you trade minor league fodder for a Wickman/Guarado and the vet reliever fails, you aren't out much.

If you trade an 834 OPS rightfielder with above average defense, and that reliever fails, you've really set the club back. I'm not saying that Maj will fail, but it's an extreme high risk scenerio.

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

It's amazing how selective the board is. There's one thread where everyone is wetting themselves about how tremendous Hatteberg has been to this team and this one where Lopez was single-handedly taking Cincy to the cellar.

It's very easy to cherry pick what stats you want and make that player look good or bad. FeLo's on pace to up his walk total from 57 to 86 in one season. How come no one is talking about him avoiding outs, scoring runs, etc etc etc? If he was better liked then this could show his growth at the plate, becoming more patient, selective, etc. But since somehow he has become the scapegoat, no one cares.

It's just very funny.

I agree edabbs, and I think his defensive deficiencies are a tad overblown.

Especially considering he just turned 26.

[registerthis]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

It's amazing how selective the board is. There's one thread where everyone is wetting themselves about how tremendous Hatteberg has been to this team and this one where Lopez was single-handedly taking Cincy to the cellar.

Hatteberg is undervalued and Lopez is overvalued.

It's not a difficult conclusion to make.

[Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by REDREAD

If you trade an 834 OPS rightfielder with above average defense, and that reliever fails, you've really set the club back. I'm not saying that Maj will fail, but it's an extreme high risk scenerio.

And what if Kearns fails? It's just as risky for them. Of course they have to pay that failing player $5M next season.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by pedro

I hear a lot of noise from you about how stupid the trade was and how valuable Lopez was.

How do you rectify the the fact that Lopez was incapable of playing his position defensively, may have already had his career year, and was about to get really expensive with your contention that he somehow had ton of trade value? Because frankly I don't see it.

Oh, certainly Lopez hasn't been good defensively this season. We know this. He's at the bottom of the ZR barrel this year after finishing mid-pack in 2005. That being said, I've always been of the opinion that he could play another position if Shortstop didn't work out, particularly when he's only 26 years old. Oh, I dunno. Second Base? And it's not like the Reds are running big improvements out there at the moment.

The fact that Lopez is only 26 also bodes well for him offensively and he's still above-average in that department. If you're looking or a career year out of him, you might be best served to look forward to his age-prime seasons rather than backward. His plate discipline has improved. If Lopez is failing during his slow first half, then he's failing well. All of that stacks up well for him and he's still very gifted physically.

And I'm not sure you've noticed an inconsistency in your thought process. If Lopez isn't at all valuable- meaning he was worth what the Reds got for him- then why would a player of such low value project to become "really expensive"? Answer? He wouldn't. In fact, the only way Felipe Lopez is ready to get really expensive is if he's much better than you give him credit for.

Can't have it both ways. Either Lopez isn't any good, has little trade value, and projects a lower future paycheck that'll reflect his performance or Lopez is good, has more trade value, and projects a higher future paycheck that'll relect his performance.

That's not noise. That's logic.

[westofyou]

Can't have it both ways. Either Lopez isn't any good, has little trade value, and projects a lower future paycheck that'll reflect his performance or Lopez is good, has more trade value, and projects a higher future paycheck that'll relect his performance.

And yet the arb market is what sets his pay scale for the next 2 years while folks sit on their hands and wait to see if he's too poor a fielder to play ML SS or if he's capable of switching positions and slugging like last year.

I guess the the Reds didn't want to pay for that (roughly 10-12 million for the next 2 years until he could walk)

I can't blame em for taking that position myself.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by registerthis

Hatteberg is undervalued and Lopez is overvalued.

It's not a difficult conclusion to make.

Lopez is 26 and Hatteberg is 56. Obviously FeLo isn't that overvalued, since he didn't bring much in return.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by westofyou

And yet the arb market is what sets his pay scale for the next 2 years while folks sit on their hands and wait to see if he's too poor a fielder to play ML SS or if he's capable of switching positions and slugging like last year.

I guess the the Reds didn't want to pay for that (roughly 10-12 million for the next 2 years until he could walk)

I can't blame em for taking that position myself.

If Lopez finishes strong and repeats his 2005 season, he's a player worth having at that cost. If he's much less valuable (as you and pedro contend), then he's not going to get a bump to those figures. Heck, Brian Roberts posted a .902 OPS last season and he asked (yes, asked) for only 3.6 mil and settled for around 3.0 mil. Lopez is being paid 2.7 and is simply not going to double that should he be the player you and pedro contend he is.

In any case, he didn't have to be moved immediately if he had to be moved. There wasn't some kind of "last chance" sign hanging around Lopez' neck. If the Reds wanted to "avoid" paying Lopez over the next two seasons, they had the rest of this year, this offseason, next season, and next offseason to move him.