How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom? - RedsZone.com - Cincinnati Reds Fans' Home for Baseball Discussion

Spitball · 10-01-2007, 11:11 PM

I don't believe the Reds should entertain trading an inexpensive Bailey for a soon to be expensive Willis. However, I believe a Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom trade is much more logical.

I believe the Reds should trade any easily replaceable offensive strength, inexpensive or not, for pitching depth. The Reds have proven they can plug in retreads like Aurilia, Hatteberg, Randa, et al, but they have not found the formula for finding pitching depth.

I remember the mid-1970's and the Red Sox parlaying Ted Cox's hot September call-up into a trade for future Hall of Famer, future 20 game winner, and funky delivery guy Dennis Eckersley. Whatever happened to Cox anyway?

Personally, I'd do the trade. Votto may be a future all-star, but Willis and Lindstrum would give the Reds pitching depth. First basemen are much, much more easily developed and/or traded for than 1-3 starters plus bullpen depth.

fearofpopvol1 · 10-01-2007, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spitball

I don't believe the Reds should entertain trading an inexpensive Bailey for a soon to be expensive Willis. However, I believe a Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom trade is much more logical.

I believe the Reds should trade any easily replaceable offensive strength, inexpensive or not, for pitching depth. The Reds have proven they can plug in retreads like Aurilia, Hatteberg, Randa, et al, but they have not found the formula for finding pitching depth.

I remember the mid-1970's and the Red Sox parlaying Ted Cox's hot September call-up into a trade for future Hall of Famer, future 20 game winner, and funky delivery guy Dennis Eckersley. Whatever happened to Cox anyway?

Personally, I'd do the trade. Votto may be a future all-star, but Willis and Lindstrum would give the Reds pitching depth. First basemen are much, much more easily developed and/or traded for than 1-3 starters plus bullpen depth.

And Cueto is expensive how? I'm all for trading (great) offense for pitching, but trading a cheap Cueto to me for an expensive Willis doesn't make any sense and sort of contradicts your argument. Many believe Cueto could be better than Bailey.

jojo · 10-01-2007, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spitball

I don't believe the Reds should entertain trading an inexpensive Bailey for a soon to be expensive Willis. However, I believe a Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom trade is much more logical.

I believe the Reds should trade any easily replaceable offensive strength, inexpensive or not, for pitching depth. The Reds have proven they can plug in retreads like Aurilia, Hatteberg, Randa, et al, but they have not found the formula for finding pitching depth.

I remember the mid-1970's and the Red Sox parlaying Ted Cox's hot September call-up into a trade for future Hall of Famer, future 20 game winner, and funky delivery guy Dennis Eckersley. Whatever happened to Cox anyway?

Personally, I'd do the trade. Votto may be a future all-star, but Willis and Lindstrum would give the Reds pitching depth. First basemen are much, much more easily developed and/or traded for than 1-3 starters plus bullpen depth.

I'm not that enthusiastic about the Reds trading away pitching. Cueto projects to be at least a high leverage bullpen arm. With some luck, he could even be in the rotation.

Spitball · 10-01-2007, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1

And Cueto is expensive how?

Where did I say Cueto was expensive? I just don't feel he has the near the same ceiling as Bailey.

Quote:

I'm all for trading (great) offense for pitching, but trading a cheap Cueto to me for an expensive Willis doesn't make any sense and sort of contradicts your argument. Many believe Cueto could be better than Bailey.

Cueto may be better, but I very seriously doubt it. Any trade for pitching depth will have to include some inexpensive pitching quality. It is just the sign of the times. And, I would gamble with Cueto or Travis Wood before I would gamble with Bailey.

Johnny Footstool · 10-01-2007, 11:44 PM

Willis is pretty bad. How many subpar years will it take to erase the memory/hype of his rookie season?

fearofpopvol1 · 10-01-2007, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spitball

Where did I say Cueto was expensive? I just don't feel he has the near the same ceiling as Bailey.

Cueto may be better, but I very seriously doubt it. Any trade for pitching depth will have to include some inexpensive pitching quality. It is just the sign of the times. And, I would gamble with Cueto or Travis Wood before I would gamble with Bailey.

You didn't state that Cueto was expensive, but you stated that your reason for not wanting to trade Bailey was that he was inexpensive (which Cueto is also).

Bailey may have a higher ceiling (even though I think that's debateable), but he also has more trade value than Cueto does. If the Reds were willing to part with Bailey, I think they could do better than Willis in some sort of package deal with another team. I just don't think the Reds should be trying to trade any of their higher pitching prospects unless it's a can't-refuse type of deal (I would not consider Willis to be that kind of trade). Trade away offense for pitching...sure. Not pitching though.

Falls City Beer · 10-01-2007, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool

Willis is pretty bad. How many subpar years will it take to erase the memory/hype of his rookie season?

Willis has had one bad season. Yeah, it's this season, but really, he's been nearly as good as recent Harang before this season.

I do worry about his health, though. So I'd be hesitant.

Aronchis · 10-02-2007, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falls City Beer

Willis has had one bad season. Yeah, it's this season, but really, he's been nearly as good as recent Harang before this season.

I do worry about his health, though. So I'd be hesitant.

Actually Willis was showing decline last year. I don't see the Reds taking on anymore expensive money in the next 2 years for the starting pitching with Harang and Arroyo already signed on.

Willis gets way to much hype on these boards. Classic early bloomer that may have a 2nd career rebound as a soft tossing lefty down the road, most likely next decade type down the road.

RedsManRick · 10-02-2007, 12:13 AM

You trade away expensive players on the decline. You trade for productive players who you control for a number of years cheaply. Let's not out think ourselves here.

KronoRed · 10-02-2007, 02:04 AM

Willis is arbitration eligible, meaning if he's expensive and a disaster then it'll only be a one year drain and not a 3-5 year one that a bad FA signing would be.

HumnHilghtFreel · 10-02-2007, 03:05 AM

I don't really get the love for Dontrelle Willis. He had an incredible start to his career, but he seems to be coming down to earth somewhat. Last year he posted a 3.87 ERA, but his BAA was .274 and this year his ERA ballooned up to 5.17 with a BAA of a whopping .294 with a 1.60 WHIP

His K/9 has stayed constant though
2005: 6.47
2006: 6.44
2007: 6.40

But his walk rate(BB/9) has started to grow
2005: 2.09
2006: 3.34
2007: 3.81

He's also started giving up a lot of HR, which as you may know, our ballpark has a penchant for giving up. My personal theory is that the league is finally adjusting to his quirky delivery and making him work harder, hence the rise in his walks.

I'd pass and keep our young talent.

RedsBaron · 10-02-2007, 05:57 AM

No thanks.

Spitball · 10-02-2007, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1

Trade away offense for pitching...sure. Not pitching though.

I would hate to part with Cueto, but I don't believe anyone is going to trade quality pitching without demanding some pitching potential in return. Willis is coming off a poor season or he would demand far more than Votto and Cueto.

Who is really the bigger question mark for future big league success, Cueto or Willis? Unless it is a salary dump, a trade is a gamble.

Falls City Beer · 10-02-2007, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spitball

I would hate to part with Cueto, but I don't believe anyone is going to trade quality pitching without demanding some pitching potential in return. Willis is coming off a poor season or he would demand far more than Votto and Cueto.

Who is really the bigger question mark for future big league success, Cueto or Willis? Unless it is a salary dump, a trade is a gamble.

I like the thinking in this trade. I'm just a bit afraid of Willis' arm. And it's actually Votto I'm not wild about giving up.

GAC · 10-02-2007, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

You trade away expensive players on the decline. You trade for productive players who you control for a number of years cheaply. Let's not out think ourselves here.

Exactly.

Maybe we can get Lohse back?

10-01-2007, 11:11 PM	#1
Spitball Member Join Date: Apr 2000 Posts: 5,491	How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom? I don't believe the Reds should entertain trading an inexpensive Bailey for a soon to be expensive Willis. However, I believe a Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom trade is much more logical. I believe the Reds should trade any easily replaceable offensive strength, inexpensive or not, for pitching depth. The Reds have proven they can plug in retreads like Aurilia, Hatteberg, Randa, et al, but they have not found the formula for finding pitching depth. I remember the mid-1970's and the Red Sox parlaying Ted Cox's hot September call-up into a trade for future Hall of Famer, future 20 game winner, and funky delivery guy Dennis Eckersley. Whatever happened to Cox anyway? Personally, I'd do the trade. Votto may be a future all-star, but Willis and Lindstrum would give the Reds pitching depth. First basemen are much, much more easily developed and/or traded for than 1-3 starters plus bullpen depth. __________________ "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously."- Noam Chomsky

10-01-2007, 11:44 PM	#5
Johnny Footstool Churlish Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Olathe, KS Posts: 13,664	Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom? Willis is pretty bad. How many subpar years will it take to erase the memory/hype of his rookie season? __________________ "I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful

10-02-2007, 12:13 AM	#9
RedsManRick Stat Wanker Hodiernus Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 14,917	Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom? You trade away expensive players on the decline. You trade for productive players who you control for a number of years cheaply. Let's not out think ourselves here. __________________ Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

10-02-2007, 02:04 AM	#10
KronoRed The Lineups stink. Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: West N. Carolina Posts: 55,342	Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom? Willis is arbitration eligible, meaning if he's expensive and a disaster then it'll only be a one year drain and not a 3-5 year one that a bad FA signing would be. __________________ Go Gators!

10-02-2007, 03:05 AM	#11
HumnHilghtFreel Manliness Personified Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 2,690	Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom? I don't really get the love for Dontrelle Willis. He had an incredible start to his career, but he seems to be coming down to earth somewhat. Last year he posted a 3.87 ERA, but his BAA was .274 and this year his ERA ballooned up to 5.17 with a BAA of a whopping .294 with a 1.60 WHIP His K/9 has stayed constant though 2005: 6.47 2006: 6.44 2007: 6.40 But his walk rate(BB/9) has started to grow 2005: 2.09 2006: 3.34 2007: 3.81 He's also started giving up a lot of HR, which as you may know, our ballpark has a penchant for giving up. My personal theory is that the league is finally adjusting to his quirky delivery and making him work harder, hence the rise in his walks. I'd pass and keep our young talent.

10-02-2007, 05:57 AM	#12
RedsBaron Big Red Machine Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Out Wayne Posts: 22,366	Re: How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom? No thanks. __________________ "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode