A's designate Milton Bradley for assignment

[Benihana]

Here's what I don't understand. For all of you Denorfiates (nice word!) who claim that he wasn't given enough of a chance to play, who did you want to see him play over? If he wasn't out for the year, would you play him over Hamilton? Griffey? Dunn? I just don't get it! Best case scenario, he never had a shot, nor should he have had the chance to be anything more than the 4th outfielder, and that job is/was already taken by Ryan Freel. I was fine with trading Freel before the season began and giving the #4 job to Denorfia, but once Freel resigned for cheap, Denorfia was a goner. And I can't envision any other way that it should have went down.

As for your comments Cyclone, if and when the Reds started to struggle in May because of their bullpen woes, you would honestly be against acquiring bullpen help because a guy might be imporant to hang onto for 2009 (when he'll be starting his first season as a regular at age 30) when and if the Reds trade two or more of their current outfielders, I think you would have met some opposition.

Any guy at any position can be considered valuable because they provide depth in case your star players at that position get injured or traded. But especially when they aren't (by anyone's calculations) considered future stars, those are the exact same guys you have to be willing to trade to improve your weaknesses. And that is exactly what happened with Denorfia.

[Cyclone792]

Originally Posted by Benihana

Here's what I don't understand. For all of you Denorfiates (nice word!) ...

And that blanket label is when I stopped reading.

That type of blanket label reminds me when certain people just started firing around the "statheads" label.

[bucksfan2]

I cant wait until the daily Deno updates that will surface on this board when he is back to playing full time next season. Fact of the matter is Deno really didn't have a place to play. This organization went with Freel, probably becasue that had simliar skill sets and Freel's popularity with the fans. IMO that your 3rd and 4th outfielders are dime a dozen type players. There is little doubt that in a reserve roll Hopper can give the reds simliar production to what Deno can do. Maybe the reds felt that Deno's best bet was for him to play everyday and realized that they would use him as the 4th outfielder. If that was the case to trade him for a young reliever made sense.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by Cyclone792

And that blanket label is when I stopped reading.

That type of blanket label reminds me when certain people just started firing around the "statheads" label.

wow. lighten up

[Always Red]

Originally Posted by Benihana

Here's what I don't understand. For all of you Denorfiates (nice word!) who claim that he wasn't given enough of a chance to play, who did you want to see him play over? If he wasn't out for the year, would you play him over Hamilton? Griffey? Dunn? I just don't get it! Best case scenario, he never had a shot, nor should he have had the chance to be anything more than the 4th outfielder, and that job is/was already taken by Ryan Freel. I was fine with trading Freel before the season began and giving the #4 job to Denorfia, but once Freel resigned for cheap, Denorfia was a goner. And I can't envision any other way that it should have went down.

As for your comments Cyclone, if and when the Reds started to struggle in May because of their bullpen woes, you would honestly be against acquiring bullpen help because a guy might be imporant to hang onto for 2009 (when he'll be starting his first season as a regular at age 30) when and if the Reds trade two or more of their current outfielders, I think you would have met some opposition.

Any guy at any position can be considered valuable because they provide depth in case your star players at that position get injured or traded. But especially when they aren't (by anyone's calculations) considered future stars, those are the exact same guys you have to be willing to trade to improve your weaknesses. And that is exactly what happened with Denorfia.

Beni, would that make you an anti-Denorfiate?

Is there any doubt that Denorfia did not get an opportunity? I think that's pretty clear, for whatever reason, the Reds did not want to play him.

Me? I'd have traded Freel away, or put him back in the super-sub role, and Deno would have been my everyday CF. At the beginning of the season, Hamilton was literally a spare part, a guy who needed to be here on the bench to stick with this organization. Hamilton's production sure changed that, for me, and I'd have ultimately given him those AB's instead of Deno. But I believe either Griffey or Dunn will be gone from here soon, and then Hamilton could be moved to RF, which might be his best spot in the OF.

It's a moot point; like I said, I feel the Reds missed on Denorfia. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm not. If McBeth turns into a bonafide end of the game pitcher, the trade will have been a good one for the Reds, and in the end that's what matters to me.

[Highlifeman21]

Originally Posted by Always Red

I think it's obvious that the Reds FO agrees with you, Beni.

I'll be interested to see what Deno can do in a full time role in CF, if the A's give him that opportunity next year. I agree with what Cyclone has written concerning Deno, but to me, that's water under the bridge.

Brady Clark (whom Deno is often compared to) looked like a big loss, early on, but his career did not stay on track.

Denorfia may turn out to be a spare part, as you say. But he earned a better chance than he got here, with the numbers he put up for this organization throughout the minor leagues, especially his past two years in AAA. I do agree that Hamilton's presence and immediate production pushed Deno one step down the ladder.

It's the Reds' inability to accurately identify talent that worries me the most.

They missed the boat on Denorfia (shouldn't have let him go, should have given him more PAs post-Kearns) and they really missed the boat on Stubbs (should have never drafted him).

I think they've also largely overvalued Ryan Freel, as well as Norris Hopper.

Conversely, I think they've largely undervalued Adam Dunn, as well as Edwin Encarnacion.

Bottomline, I'm very worried about Krivsky and our scouts collective inability to accurately judge talent.

Votto and Bruce both project well, but after that, we have a steep dropoff offensively and after Bailey, we really have no arms that you can say with any certainty will have long MLB careers.

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

It's the Reds' inability to accurately identify talent that worries me the most.

They missed the boat on Denorfia (shouldn't have let him go, should have given him more PAs post-Kearns) and they really missed the boat on Stubbs (should have never drafted him).

That's what bothered me about giving up on Deno. Just a year earlier he was the Reds minor league player of the year - a title that seems to cause problems for the winners. Then a year later, he's traded. Now either the Reds are stacked at outfielder in the minors or it's an indictment of the Reds minor league system that their POTY one year removed was traded that soon.

I don't know how good Deno is, was or will be but I agree that they should have given him a better shot post-trade.

[Aronchis]

I disagree. They didn't miss the boat on Deno at all, they knew exactly what he is and the type of player he would be...................which they feel they can replicate again........and again and again.

I think when the A's offered the late blooming McBeth into the picture, it was enough to move the injured soon to be 29 year old player in 2008.

[KronoRed]

I love how Deno is getting older the more pages this thread has

[Rojo]

Outfield depth over bullpen depth?

Whatever.

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by KronoRed

I love how Deno is getting older the more pages this thread has

A few more pages and he'll be old enough for Wayne to trade for and put in the bullpen.

[Mario-Rijo]

Originally Posted by Chip R

That's what bothered me about giving up on Deno. Just a year earlier he was the Reds minor league player of the year - a title that seems to cause problems for the winners. Then a year later, he's traded. Now either the Reds are stacked at outfielder in the minors or it's an indictment of the Reds minor league system that their POTY one year removed was traded that soon.

I don't know how good Deno is, was or will be but I agree that they should have given him a better shot post-trade.

They only took 4 OF's in the draft maybe they think so.

[Mario-Rijo]

If he could sustain these #'s he would hold some value if he can play CF.

Career 164 PA's
.278 BA, .358 OBP, .382 Slg% (ugh, a little rough but I can overlook that)

Problem is he had this line:

.339 BABIP

I'm not insuating that he couldn't maintain it, for all I know he is elite with his bat control which he would have to be to maintain that BABIP. If he can't however that BA and OBP go way down to bench player at best.

Hopper is fairly comparable but with a much lower BABIP

163 PA's
.288, .340, .370

.315 BABIP

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

It's the Reds' inability to accurately identify talent that worries me the most.

They missed the boat on Denorfia (shouldn't have let him go, should have given him more PAs post-Kearns) and they really missed the boat on Stubbs (should have never drafted him).

I think they've also largely overvalued Ryan Freel, as well as Norris Hopper.

Conversely, I think they've largely undervalued Adam Dunn, as well as Edwin Encarnacion.

Bottomline, I'm very worried about Krivsky and our scouts collective inability to accurately judge talent.

Votto and Bruce both project well, but after that, we have a steep dropoff offensively and after Bailey, we really have no arms that you can say with any certainty will have long MLB careers.

How does a difference in opinon mean the reds are have an inability to accurately identify talent? I don't want to even get into the Stubbs debate so I will leave that alone. What exactly did Deno prove at the major league level. He was a very good minor league player but he really had no where to play when Hamilton showed that he was better than expected his first season. So they move Deno, a guy who is unproven, injured until 2008, and will not be a starter for a reliever who shows some promise and you conclude that they can not accurately identify talent?

[Heath]

IMO -

Denorfia > Hopper

However, when you can get a live arm like McBeth for Denorfia, it's a good deal. And, with The Josh Hamilton Experience exceeding all expectations, Denorfia would have been "expendable". Would Norris Hopper be able to land a Marcus McBeth?

This coming from a guy who really, really, really wanted Denorfia to get regular at-bats.