How would you rate the Reds' 2009 draft signings? - Page 2 - RedsZone.com - Cincinnati Reds Fans' Home for Baseball Discussion

HokieRed · 08-18-2009, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Screwball

I think he'll be on the Stewart plan. I expect him to be in AAA this time next year.

Don't know that I'd call it the Stewart plan. My sense is that the Stewart plan was set up to produce maximum attention for a player picked out to be traded. Later Walt "gave in," while giving J.P. exactly what he thought he'd have to give--and wanted to give--all along.

GIDP · 08-18-2009, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Screwball

I think he'll be on the Stewart plan. I expect him to be in AAA this time next year.

Pretty bad plan for the Reds if you ask me.

Screwball · 08-18-2009, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HokieRed

Don't know that I'd call it the Stewart plan. My sense is that the Stewart plan was set up to produce maximum attention for a player picked out to be traded. Later Walt "gave in," while giving J.P. exactly what he thought he'd have to give--and wanted to give--all along.

Why would Walt want to trade Stewart? Dude was dominating the minors and has projectable, above-average stuff. Coming out of college (like Leake), he was able to move quickly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GIDP

Pretty bad plan for the Reds if you ask me.

Why? Were you upset with the way they handled Stewart? If he shows he's able to blow away the competition, and given the fact he's already developed at college thus starting at Sarasota this year, why would it be so bad for the Reds to have him move up a couple levels over the course of a year?

GIDP · 08-18-2009, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Screwball

Why would Walt want to trade Stewart? Dude was dominating the minors and has projectable, above-average stuff. Coming out of college (like Leake), he was able to move quickly.

Why? Were you upset with the way they handled Stewart? If he shows he's able to blow away the competition, and given the fact he's already developed at college thus starting at Sarasota this year, why would it be so bad for the Reds to have him move up a couple levels over the course of a year?

If they stop the stewart plan before trading him sure sounds fine to me. The Stewart plan to me is build up great numbers build up trade value then sell for half price. If they go by the Stewart plan I expect Leake to be traded for Aaron Rowand or something.

HokieRed · 08-18-2009, 11:16 PM

Walt might have wanted to trade Stewart because he wanted to get a third baseman who could actually play the position and put up an OPS over .800 and move a player, EE, who was a perennial project. This is not to say Stewart wasn't valuable. Of course he was. That's why we drafted him second and why Toronto wanted him. But you had to give Toronto something to get Scott Rolen and have EE taken off your hands.

Screwball · 08-18-2009, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GIDP

If they stop the stewart plan before trading him sure sounds fine to me. The Stewart plan to me is build up great numbers build up trade value then sell for half price. If they go by the Stewart plan I expect Leake to be traded for Aaron Rowand or something.

However, I doubt they drafted Leake 8th overall to trade him. Then again, I didn't think Jock would ever give up as much as he did for Rolen, so who knows...

And Hokie, maybe I'm just arguing semantics, but I think you mean to say Walt had to trade Stewart for Rolen, not that he wanted to.

GIDP · 08-18-2009, 11:18 PM

Thankfully Leake wont be able to be traded in a deal that gets Willy Taveras taken off our hands.

HokieRed · 08-18-2009, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GIDP

Thankfully Leake wont be able to be traded in a deal that gets Willy Taveras taken off our hands.

Actually that might be worth moving Leake for.

GIDP · 08-18-2009, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HokieRed

Actually that might be worth moving Leake for.

We better get rid of Walt before he ends up having to put Votto in a deal to get rid of someone if thats the case.

HokieRed · 08-18-2009, 11:45 PM

Of course you never "want" to trade any valuable player, but if you don't realize you're going to be trading players whom both you and other teams want, then you're not going to be doing much trading. I don't think we know how much Walt wanted or had to trade Stewart because we don't know what Toronto asked for. I know I don't believe Walt's "giving in" remark any more than I'd believe a similar remark from any experienced trader of anything--cars, horses, etc. The whole psychology of trading is to make the other side think it's won the trade, and you do that by getting them to take something you weren't that concerned to keep all along. And you do that by showing them how good it is--like moving Stewart up three levels in one season [but shutting him down pretty quick at AAA so as not to let the shine off too much.]

GIDP · 08-18-2009, 11:46 PM

They didnt shut him down at AAA. To me thats just as dumb as people trying to use Yonders AA numbers to bash him.

HokieRed · 08-19-2009, 12:10 AM

They certainly did shut him down. He pitched 12.1 innings in 9 appearances. They cut back his innings which, in terms used around minor league baseball, means shutting him down--whether because they were concerned about his arm, the fact he hadn't really been a starter or whatever. By the way, during those innings, he had a not very glorious 1.54 WHIP. I'm not knocking the kid; I think he's a good pitcher. They got one of the best third basemen in the game for him and moved a player with a pretty hefty contract himself and no real position in Cinti--EE.

GIDP · 08-19-2009, 12:14 AM

They limited his innings but they were gonna have to do it no matter what. It wasnt shutting him down to keep the polish. Actually I really dont feel like rehashing this again so reply with what you think then lets just drop it. Its done and over with. People on one side believe what they believe and the other side are the same way.

Hondo · 08-19-2009, 01:18 AM

Isn't anyone disapointed with this Draft Class?

HokieRed · 08-19-2009, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GIDP

They limited his innings but they were gonna have to do it no matter what. It wasnt shutting him down to keep the polish. Actually I really dont feel like rehashing this again so reply with what you think then lets just drop it. Its done and over with. People on one side believe what they believe and the other side are the same way.

Limiting innings equals shutting down. Simple as that.

08-18-2009, 11:16 PM	#20
HokieRed Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 4,053	Re: How would you rate the Reds' 2009 draft signings? Walt might have wanted to trade Stewart because he wanted to get a third baseman who could actually play the position and put up an OPS over .800 and move a player, EE, who was a perennial project. This is not to say Stewart wasn't valuable. Of course he was. That's why we drafted him second and why Toronto wanted him. But you had to give Toronto something to get Scott Rolen and have EE taken off your hands.

08-18-2009, 11:18 PM	#22
GIDP Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 6,419	Re: How would you rate the Reds' 2009 draft signings? Thankfully Leake wont be able to be traded in a deal that gets Willy Taveras taken off our hands.

08-18-2009, 11:45 PM	#25
HokieRed Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 4,053	Re: How would you rate the Reds' 2009 draft signings? Of course you never "want" to trade any valuable player, but if you don't realize you're going to be trading players whom both you and other teams want, then you're not going to be doing much trading. I don't think we know how much Walt wanted or had to trade Stewart because we don't know what Toronto asked for. I know I don't believe Walt's "giving in" remark any more than I'd believe a similar remark from any experienced trader of anything--cars, horses, etc. The whole psychology of trading is to make the other side think it's won the trade, and you do that by getting them to take something you weren't that concerned to keep all along. And you do that by showing them how good it is--like moving Stewart up three levels in one season [but shutting him down pretty quick at AAA so as not to let the shine off too much.]

08-18-2009, 11:46 PM	#26
GIDP Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 6,419	Re: How would you rate the Reds' 2009 draft signings? They didnt shut him down at AAA. To me thats just as dumb as people trying to use Yonders AA numbers to bash him.

08-19-2009, 12:10 AM	#27
HokieRed Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 4,053	Re: How would you rate the Reds' 2009 draft signings? They certainly did shut him down. He pitched 12.1 innings in 9 appearances. They cut back his innings which, in terms used around minor league baseball, means shutting him down--whether because they were concerned about his arm, the fact he hadn't really been a starter or whatever. By the way, during those innings, he had a not very glorious 1.54 WHIP. I'm not knocking the kid; I think he's a good pitcher. They got one of the best third basemen in the game for him and moved a player with a pretty hefty contract himself and no real position in Cinti--EE.

08-19-2009, 12:14 AM	#28
GIDP Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 6,419	Re: How would you rate the Reds' 2009 draft signings? They limited his innings but they were gonna have to do it no matter what. It wasnt shutting him down to keep the polish. Actually I really dont feel like rehashing this again so reply with what you think then lets just drop it. Its done and over with. People on one side believe what they believe and the other side are the same way.

08-19-2009, 01:18 AM	#29
Hondo Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Weatherford, Texas Posts: 2,124	Re: How would you rate the Reds' 2009 draft signings? Isn't anyone disapointed with this Draft Class?

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