Blue Jays "aggressively" moving to trade Eric Hinske to the Reds [Archive] - RedsZone.com - Cincinnati Reds Fans' Home for Baseball Discussion

jmcclain19

10-27-2004, 10:33 AM

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Baseball/MLB/Toronto/2004/10/27/687490.html

Jays trying to deal Hinske

By BOB ELLIOTT -- Toronto Sun

Cover boy on the Blue Jays media guide in 2003.

In which media guide will you find third baseman Eric Hinske come spring training in 2005?

The Blue Jays are aggressively attempting to move Hinske to the Cincinnati Reds, who don't have an everyday third baseman.

If Hinske is moved, perhaps the Jays would enter the sweepstakes for free-agent third baseman Corey Koskie of the Minnesota Twins. Another prime free agent at third base will be Troy Glaus of the Anaheim Angels.

Hinske hit .246 this season with 15 homers and 69 RBIs, while striking out 109 times.

In 2003, bothered by a hand injury, Hinske, hit .243 with 12 homers and 63 RBIs.

In 2002, he batted .279 with 24 homers and 84 RBIs and was the American League rookie of the year.

That rookie year earned Hinske a fat contract -- a five-year, $14.75-million US deal -- from Jays management the following St. Patrick's Day.

Centre fielder Vernon Wells signed the same day for slightly less -- five years for $14.7 million.

The Reds won't be able to take on the entire $12.95 million still owed Hinske over the next three seasons -- $3 million next season, $4.325 million in 2006 and $5.625 million in 2007 -- so the Jays will have to agree to pay part of it to make a trade.

The Reds opened the 2004 season with Brandon Larson, their former No. 1 pick from 1997, at third base. After he was released, Juan Castro, Tim Hummell and former Jay Ryan Freel played there.

Doc. Scott

10-27-2004, 10:40 AM

http://www.sports-wired.com/players/profile.asp?Name=ECHJ

This could work. I'd want to see who the Blue Jays wanted back (D'Angelo Jimenez?) and how much of that salary they'd want to pick up first.

Eric is a better option than Freel, Castro, Larson, OR Hummel... and if Austin Kearns doesn't move to third. If I'm DanO, I table this until we have the early returns on Austin.

Unassisted

10-27-2004, 10:44 AM

Hinske doesn't appear to be much of an upgrade for what he would cost. If the Jays send cash along in the deal, maybe he's worth a try. Change of scenery, change of fortune.

Roy Tucker

10-27-2004, 10:47 AM

If they could fit Danny Graves into the trade mix somehow, it might be a win-win thing.

2002 Rookie of the Year, 2003 wrist injury, 2004 in a funk.

Low BB rate, high SO rate, good pop.

If the $$$ work, I agree he's an upgrade at 3B over what the Reds have.

Doc. Scott

10-27-2004, 10:55 AM

If you notice Hinske's fielding stats, his errors have dropped from 20 in 2002 and 22 in 2003 to just eight in 2004. His DPs have gone up as well.

Perhaps he's not the mediocre fielder he was as a rookie.

He's entering his prime years (27 this coming August), he draws walks, and even runs a little (13, 12, and 12 steals in three years). The wrist injury has just killed his power production over the past two years.

If Toronto's willing to do it for minor-leaguers of some type, I might be willing to talk. I have a feeling they'd want D'Angelo Jimenez, so they can move either he or Orlando Hudson to shortstop, since Chris Woodward can't hit and Chris Gomez and Frankie Menechino ain't the saviors.

10-27-2004, 11:00 AM

Can he pitch?

If not, then the Jays had better be paying big chunks of his contract because the Reds need to spend whatever PayFlex they've got on quality arms.

Johnny Footstool

10-27-2004, 11:05 AM

Low BB rate, high SO rate, good pop.

Actually, his walk rate isn't that low. It's over 10% of his ABs. It was even higher in 2002 when he was having good success, but it has declined each of the past two years. It looks like someone in Toronto has been putting "be aggressive" ideas into his head -- the same kind of ideas that blitzed Adam Dunn's 2003 season. The same kind of ideas that Chris Chambliss helped Dunn overcome this season.

I think Hinske has good upside, and I'd like to see this deal happen. The only problem is that he is a LH bat, which the Reds have in abundance.

If Graves is involved, I'd do this deal in a heartbeat.

Chip R

10-27-2004, 11:09 AM

If Graves is involved, I'd do this deal in a heartbeat.Oh yeah. But does this mean the Kearns to 3rd experiment is dead?

westofyou

10-27-2004, 11:15 AM

Oh yeah. But does this mean the Kearns to 3rd experiment is dead?

Put a mirror under its nose and see if it ever really took a breath.

10-27-2004, 11:20 AM

Actually, his walk rate isn't that low. It's over 10% of his ABs. It was even higher in 2002 when he was having good success, but it has declined each of the past two years. It looks like someone in Toronto has been putting "be aggressive" ideas into his head -- the same kind of ideas that blitzed Adam Dunn's 2003 season. The same kind of ideas that Chris Chambliss helped Dunn overcome this season.

I think Hinske has good upside, and I'd like to see this deal happen. The only problem is that he is a LH bat, which the Reds have in abundance.

If Graves is involved, I'd do this deal in a heartbeat.

Good points all, though the Yankees have shown over the past 85 years that you never can have too many LH hitters in your lineup.

I like Hinkse and agree that he'd be an easy shine-up for Chambliss. If it's Graves going the other way in the deal, then that eliminates my salary concerns. In that case I wouldn't worry about the long-term cost of Hinske's contract because he'll be easy to move if he plays well.

traderumor

10-27-2004, 11:48 AM

I had forgotten that Hinske is a lefty, his OBA, SLG is higher against lefties.

WVRed

10-27-2004, 11:53 AM

If Chambliss can get Hinske to hit for average, he would be a good 2 hitter in the Reds lineup. Problem is, I dont like having Casey, Hinske, Dunn, and Griffey all hitting pretty much hitting 4 in a row.

Now if we could move Griffey or Casey and put Pena in there somewhere, I could see more balance.

buckeyenut

10-27-2004, 12:24 PM

I like the idea of Hinske for Graves and a midlevel prospect. I would rather not send back Jiminez and if they would take back Graves, I would not ask them to pay any cash in the deal either.

Clemson

10-27-2004, 12:44 PM

what would you think of kearns and graves for hinske and halladay
wont happen but i would do it

or potentially pena and graves for hinske and lilly/bush

heck they might even want jr or casey to play 1B after losing delgado to FA

IslandRed

10-27-2004, 01:33 PM

Left unspoken in the article is what the Jays are trying to accomplish. Are they targeting us because we need a 3B? Are they targeting us because we have "sucker" stamped on our foreheads? Are they trying to clear payroll -- even if they have to pay some of the contract, it's still savings -- or do we have something they want?

I have a feeling that the Jays are just trying to dump a bad contract, and if so, forget sending them Jiminez or Graves or anyone else making as much or more.

RBA

10-27-2004, 01:38 PM

Why the rush to trade? Is he out of options?

REDREAD

10-27-2004, 01:47 PM

The Reds won't be able to take on the entire $12.95 million still owed Hinske over the next three seasons -- $3 million next season, $4.325 million in 2006 and $5.625 million in 2007 -- so the Jays will have to agree to pay part of it to make a trade.

If this is true, is the writing on the wall for Jimminez? I'm guessing Jimmeniz will get close to 3 million in 2005. Walker was shipped out when he got that pricey.

Granted though, if Hinske doesn't improve, Jimmeniz is a better player.

I'm going to buck the trend and say I wouldn't trade Graves for
Hinske. The problem is that we need help in the bullpen too.
The premise of unloading Graves is to get 7 million in payflex
to more efficiently spend on other pitching. If you could talk
the Jays into taking Graves (doubtful), there's no way they'd
subsidize Hinske's contract (my guess).

So, you unload Graves, but due to Hinske's contract, you really
haven't gained much payflex. In theory, you have 4 million for 2005,
but my guess is that Allen would hold on to that to pay off the rest
of Hinske's contract.

The other line of thought is that once you get Hinske, you could move Hinske elsewhere and
get the Graves' payflex.. but Hinske was that easy to move, wouldn't
the Jays move him there instead of accepting Graves?

So, trading Graves kills the pen and gets you a mediocre 3b (assuming
he doesn't get new life in Cincy).

The only reason this trade talk is alive is because Toronto is so desparate
to move Hinske that they'll eat a chunk of his contract. If we can get
him for a few mediocre prospects and he's heavily subsidized, then sure,
the Reds should do it. But, IMO, the bullpen is so thin that losing Graves
would cost us more wins than Hinske would add.

johngalt

10-27-2004, 02:39 PM

So, trading Graves kills the pen and gets you a mediocre 3b (assuming
he doesn't get new life in Cincy).

I would have to agree here. As much as I groan at the thought of Graves closing for another season, I don't see how this trade would strengthen us all that much, especially since we'd be back to square one with fitting in all of the outfielders.

Aside from that, if Graves has another really good first half save wise and the Reds aren't in the race, he might still be able to fetch something good at the deadline from a team who really needs bullpen help. His contract will be almost over after all and that might make it easier to make a deal then.

Krusty

10-27-2004, 03:01 PM

If the Reds could get Hinske at a low return while having the Jays pay a portion of his contract, it's worth the gamble.

Rojo

10-27-2004, 03:33 PM

I'm with Redread, why dump Graves to spend it on Hinske. DG will probably win more games next year.

wheels

10-27-2004, 04:23 PM

I find it hard to believe that Ricchardi would take Graves on. It's probably a straight up dump on Toronto's part, and they think the Reds are dumb enough to take the bait.

Not that Hinske's the worst they can do, but there is no way they can lose a guy like Jimmenez in the deal....And I'd also wonder which prospects (if any) 'ol J.P.'s got his eyes on. The Reds might be wise to really look closely at what they'd be giving away.

Kc61

10-27-2004, 04:43 PM

Don't know much about Hinske. I do think it is a good idea to have a professional third baseman on the team. Last year's team did not have one.
Somebody who can field the position and hit decently in the seventh spot.

Ravenlord

10-27-2004, 04:49 PM

Year AB H 2B 3B HR BB K SB OBP SLG AVG
2002 566 158 38 2 24 77 138 13 365 481 279
2003 449 109 45 3 12 59 104 12 329 437 243
2004 570 140 23 3 15 54 109 12 312 375 246
Total 1585 407 106 8 51 190 351 37 336 430 257

the real question is if the Reds got him, and he went back to his rookie form, what becomes of Encarnacion?

WrongVerb

10-27-2004, 04:50 PM

Can he pitch?

If not, then the Jays had better be paying big chunks of his contract because the Reds need to spend whatever PayFlex they've got on quality arms.

Exactly. I'm not convinced this team has a hole at 3rd base (freel, Lopez, Kearns) that needs filled by anything less than a bonefide superstar.

This team needs top-shelf pitching.

ODERED

10-27-2004, 05:05 PM

Ravenlord

10-27-2004, 05:07 PM

MLB player's Range Factor at 3B who had 81 or more games at the positon...and the myriad of players Cincinnati had. i'm pretty sure Lopez and Hummel are skewed very much (judging by their career numbers there) by having played less than 30 games at 3B

Freel 3.42
Lopez 3.16
Chavez 3.10
Castilla 3.08
Tracy 3.07
Rolen 3.06
Hummel 2.99
Beltre 2.97
Bell 2.88
Randa 2.87
Mora 2.83
Alfonzo 2.78
Munson 2.77
Castro 2.69
Batista 2.65
Blake 2.64
Jones 2.64
Lowell 2.64
Burroughs 2.62
Wigginton 2.62
Koskie 2.56
Huff 2.53
Mueller 2.53
Blalock 2.50
Larson 2.45
Crede 2.43
Hinske 2.40
Ensberg 2.39
Rodriguez 2.39
Ramirez 2.26

jmcclain19

10-27-2004, 05:32 PM

This must be all the buzz today, third different website I've seen that's brought it up

http://www.cbc.ca/story/sports/national/2004/10/27/Sports/koskie041027.html

CBC SPORTS ONLINE - Corey Koskie couldn't lead the Minnesota Twins to the American League Championship Series with a strong post-season, but may have increased his market value.

According to Wednesday's Toronto Sun, the Blue Jays are said to be serious about trading third baseman Eric Hinske to Cincinnati, which doesn't boast an everyday player at the position.

In turn, the Jays would pursue Koskie, who is set to become a free agent after the season. Anaheim's Troy Glaus is expected to be another sought-after free agent.

Koskie, 31, batted .308 with two runs batted in during Minnesota's divisional series loss to the New York Yankees. That followed a disappointing season at the plate by his standards (.251, 25 home runs, 71 RBIs in 118 games).

Hinske, on the other hand, hit .246 this season with 15 homers, 69 RBIs and 109 strikeouts in 570 at-bats. A far cry from 2002 when the 27-year-old batted .279 and slugged 24 HRs and 84 RBIs to win AL rookie of the year honours.

It's believed the Reds wouldn't be able to shoulder the entire $12.95 million still owed on Hinske's five-year contract signed during the 2002 off-season, so Toronto would have to pick up some salary to complete a deal.

Former No. 1 pick Brandon Larson started the season at third base for Cincinnati and was later released. Juan Castro, Tim Hummell and former Blue Jay Ryan Freel also had stints on the corner.

Koskie, a native of Anola, Man., has never returned to his form of 2001 when he hit .276 with a career-high 26 HRs and 103 RBIs. Injuries also have prevented Koskie, who earned $4.5 million US this season, from playing more than 140 games in each of the last three seasons.

He missed 35 games in 2004 with injuries to his wrist, sternum and ankle. He also suffered from on-and-off back pain.

However, Koskie did have a .342 on-base percentage, a favourite statistical category of Jays general manager J.P. Ricciardi. Hinske's on-base percentage was .312.

Wonder if there is a baseball reporter hotline that JP Ricciardi keeps calling and leaving messages that this trade is going on

savafan

10-27-2004, 05:51 PM

The Reds should sign Koskie

REDJAKE

10-27-2004, 06:48 PM

None of this third base talk helps our biggest need PITCHING lets not take our eye off the REAL PROBLEM. GO CINCY!!!!!

KronoRed

10-27-2004, 07:14 PM

Falls City Beer

10-27-2004, 07:39 PM

Ravenlord

10-27-2004, 07:44 PM

Well, the most likely thing is that Hinske will repeat his dreadful 04 campaign, seeing as though he's closest to that season. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that he could return to 2002 form, but it's not a risk the Reds NEED to take; they NEED to take these kinds of risks with pitchers. And bottom feed for offense. The offensive core of this team is enough as it stands.
exactly. the Reds need to find some stuff pitchers (Jesus Sanchez, but used correctly unlike last time)...but that brings me to the question, does Gullet even know how to deal with power/stuff pitchers anymore?

LvJ

10-27-2004, 08:11 PM

Graves, LaRue, and Jiminez for Hinske, Frasor and Batista. :)

Steve4192

10-27-2004, 08:24 PM

Well, the most likely thing is that Hinske will repeat his dreadful 04 campaign
After looking at Hinske's minor league numbers, he looks like a pretty good candidate to return to his rookie of the year form.

G AB OBP SLG
--- --- --- ---
AAA 127 459 373 532
AA 131 436 373 486
A 204 713 389 513

Hinske put up numbers similar to those minor league totals in his rookie year (365 OBP, 481 SLG). No reason to believe he can't return to those levels.

Falls City Beer

10-27-2004, 08:27 PM

"he looks like a pretty good candidate"

Weighed against his contract, "pretty good" is not enough of an assurance for me, nor should it be for the Reds. Again, risk to reward.

Steve4192

10-27-2004, 08:34 PM

I actually agree with that point. I was just pointing out that, based on his entire professional resume, it is NOT 'the most likely thing' that he'll put up a 312 OBP & a 375 SLG again.

Ravenlord

10-27-2004, 08:35 PM

i think the Brewers and Hinske would be a great match.

Falls City Beer

10-27-2004, 08:39 PM

I actually agree with that point. I was just pointing out that, based on his entire professional resume, it is NOT 'the most likely thing' that he'll put up a 312 OBP & a 375 SLG again.

Fair enough. But why are the odds any better than 50/50 that he'll return to rookie form, particularly in light of the fact that his 2004 campaign was, unlike his 2003 campaign, essentially injury-free? Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I subscribe to Murphy's Law fairly stringently--so many things must go right before things go right for success to happen--success is the anomaly; failure is the rule.

Steve4192

10-27-2004, 08:53 PM

why are the odds any better than 50/50 that he'll return to rookie form
I'm just a big believer in guys always gravitating towards their 'normal' level of performance. Over his first five professional seasons, Hinske established himself as a solid 370 OBP, 500 SLG performer. On the whole, it is pretty rare for a guy under 30 to totally lose it. Not to say that it doesn't happen, but it is more the exception than the norm.

GAC

10-27-2004, 09:01 PM

How much did Hinske's hand problem play in his drop in production? Can we afford two guys on this squad with hand problems vying to play 3B (Hinske or Kearns)? :lol:

This will definitely hurt their post-baseball careers at wanting to be hand models. :allovrjr:

In my dream world, we go for Glaus.

flyer85

10-27-2004, 09:11 PM

I would go after Koskie only if he is interested in 1 year deal.

Trading for Hinske would be just plain stupid, unless of course they wanted Jr in return. :)

wheels

10-27-2004, 09:21 PM

This is a tough situation for the DanO.

Does he bring in decent guy (not Hinske, per se) knowing he's got quite a decent young stud waiting in the wings?

I don't think that the third base situation needs to be addressed via phenomenal measures.

Just bring in a guy with decent plate discipline that can field his position aptly on a one year deal.

Don't trade anyone of worth for him, and don't spend precious money that can be used for pitching.

See....There's this little hill in the middle of the infield, and there's a guy that throws the ball from it with the intent to make outs. What they need to do is find guys that are really good at it.

flyer85

10-27-2004, 10:01 PM

Does it bother anybody that having to pay Hinske(who isn't even that good) over $5M in 2007 could force the trading of Dunn, Pena or Kearns and block EE from a path to the majors?

It bothers me.

If the Reds are to start winning it isn't about acquiring an expensive 3b, it's the pitching, stupid.

Redmachine2003

10-27-2004, 10:12 PM

If the Jays are willing to eat half his contract jump on it DanO.

RosieRed

10-27-2004, 10:17 PM

In related news: Word on the street is that Kearns did well enough at instructional league that they'll continue having him work at 3B in the offseason.

Steve4192

10-27-2004, 11:14 PM

In related news: Word on the street is ...
Who is your source? Antonio Fargas?

wheels

10-27-2004, 11:36 PM

Playadlc

10-28-2004, 05:59 AM

I don't really like the idea of Hinske, considering we have EE and hopefully Kearns will pan out there, but I do like the fact that Cincinnati is already mentioned in a trade rumor.

I think this is going to be a pretty fun offseason.

Gary Redus

10-28-2004, 08:25 AM

It is all about the $ ... I'd rather have Cuddyer but I suppose the Twinkies aren't going for that ...

Graves and a shortstop suspect for Hinske - I'd do. Jays pay 1/2, I'd do. Would trade DJ for him though. EE is unproven. I am interested in major league players for a change.

Do we really think there will be a significant investiment in pitching?

guernsey

10-28-2004, 08:28 AM

From Thursday's Enquirer. It reads to me as if the Kearns move to 3rd is a feint, and that the Jays are more interested in moving Hinske than the REds are in acquiring him.

So far, so good for Kearns at third
Experiment continues, but Reds discuss other 3B options

By Kevin Kelly
Enquirer staff writer

Encouraged by Austin Kearns' progress at third base during an Instructional League stint that ended Friday, the Reds are making plans to continue the experiment through the offseason.

General manager Dan O'Brien said Wednesday, however, that no decision has been made regarding a position change for the 24-year-old outfielder.

"I would say there was some progress," O'Brien said Wednesday from St. Louis. "I think we need to keep it all in the appropriate context, because this is very much a sequential process, hopefully getting to an end result everyone is pleased with. But there are no promises."

The Reds are asking Kearns to follow a daily workout schedule for the next two months in Lexington.

Minor-league infield coordinator Freddie Benavides and first base coach Randy Whisler are devising the workout regimen. O'Brien said Kearns probably will be re-evaluated in early January.

"I definitely was doing a lot better by the time I left there than when I first got there," Kearns said Wednesday. "The last three or four days there, I was having trouble walking from all the stuff I was doing.

"In the infield, it's all about your legs. You've got to stay low and use your legs for everything. As far as fielding, I think I got a little smoother toward the end."

Kearns has played only outfield since coming to the major leagues in 2002 but did play some at shortstop and third base at Lafayette High School in Lexington. He agreed to the third base experiment when approached by the Reds after this past season.

Should this work, it would be favorable for the Reds, who are looking for an everyday third baseman and want Kearns' bat in the lineup with outfielders Adam Dunn, Wily Mo PeÒa and Ken Griffey Jr.

"I think by virtue of Austin's involvement down in the Instructional League, our priorities aren't quite the same going into the offseason as they might have been otherwise," O'Brien said. "So we are ... hopeful of the possibilities."

Last season was an injury-filled campaign for Kearns. He batted .230 with nine home runs and 32 RBI in just 64 games, missing 84 games while on the disabled list.

The Reds' need for an everyday third baseman is widely known around baseball.

A report in Wednesday's Toronto Sun said the Blue Jays were "aggressively" trying to move third baseman Eric Hinske to the Reds.

O'Brien confirmed Wednesday he has spoken with Blue Jays officials, as well as those with other teams in recent days, but termed those talks as being preliminary and somewhat generic in nature.

Krusty

10-28-2004, 09:35 AM

Graves for Hinske and a pitching prospect? Seems fair to me. How about you?

GAC

10-28-2004, 09:42 AM

Kearns definitely has the arm for 3B. Lets hope the rest is there.

Personally, I'd stay way from these other guys. It's not our highest priority IMO. They'd haveta make me an offer I couldn't refuse. ;)

zombie-a-go-go

10-28-2004, 09:42 AM

I just don't know why you take on the salary when we need pitching. That's the end of the discussion for me, right there. Graves' contract is up at the end of the year anyway. If you could flip Hinske at the deadline, then do it if it lets you unload Graves, but that means Eric's going to have to play better than he has the last two years.

Too many things have to fall into place to make it work. I say skip it. Save the cash for proven starter(s).

Roy Tucker

10-28-2004, 09:46 AM

From Thursday's Enquirer.
"I would say there was some progress," O'Brien said Wednesday from St. Louis. "I think we need to keep it all in the appropriate context, because this is very much a sequential process, hopefully getting to an end result everyone is pleased with. But there are no promises."

Curriculum of Baseball GM 101, week 2 topics - "How to have words come out of your mouth and say nothing" and "How to keep things open-ended".

westofyou

10-28-2004, 10:55 AM

I just don't know why you take on the salary when we need pitching.

The Reds don't have to pay anybody until opening day, if they want to overshoot their payroll budget and not worry about it now is the time.

It's all Tetris, every piece makes other pieces more plyable.

Acquire a 3rd baseman and someone else who plays becomes the piece to move.

westofyou

10-28-2004, 11:07 AM

Curriculum of Baseball GM 101, week 2 topics - "How to have words come out of your mouth and say nothing" and "How to keep things open-ended".

Ever get the feeling D.O looked at Bowden and decided to do a "Complete Opposite" ala George Costanza?

Here is a Bowden gem in relation to Dans wordy response of air.

“We probably have more pitching prospects in the minor leagues right now than we've had in the last 10 years,” Reds general manager Jim Bowden said. “Whether they're ready on Opening Day or in September, we'll find out.”

Sunday, September 29, 2002

NJReds

10-28-2004, 11:39 AM

westofyou

10-28-2004, 11:47 AM

I'd rather sign Hillenbrand...RH, line drive hitter, low Ks, can play 3rd and 1st.

Even w/Kearns (short term) and EdE coming, he'd be a solid guy to have on the bench.

But I agree on the poster above...let's solidify the pitching staff first.

Shea?

Ughhhh, free swinger who carries his whole game in his BA... he has 86 BB in his career... that's over 2100 ab's... that's Ricky Jordan country.

He smashed it at the BOB and stunk it up on the road... beware.

NJReds

10-28-2004, 12:00 PM

buckeyenut

10-28-2004, 12:02 PM

Why do we pick up Hinske?

if #1) it allows us to move another, more undesirable contract (Graves) or #2) the cost in $$ and prospects is such that we cannot pass it up (TOR pays half his deal or something like that)

If we picked up Hinske and thought he could do the job, it would open us up to being able to trade another, more sought after commodity for pitching because it would take Kearns back out of the 3B mix.

You don't get a young kid of Hinske's production history prior to last year without some warts or paying through the nose. If you can counterbalance the risk, this is how small market teams hit it big. Joe Crede would be a similar player that I would look to target on the cheap if this was the plan.

westofyou

10-28-2004, 12:09 PM

I'd love an All-Star 3B, too, but I'm thinking w/in the constraints of our budget :rolleyes:

He's not awful:
2004: 562 ABs, 68 R, 174 H, 36 2B, 3 3B, 15 HR, 80 RBI, 24 BB, 49 K, .310 avg, .348 oba, .464 slg, .812 ops

Considering he doesn't play 3rd well (or very much anymore) and he's mainly a 1st baseman he ain't worth 2.5 million bucks.

He gives me Phil Plantier feelings.

flyer85

10-28-2004, 12:20 PM

I'd rather sign Hillenbrand...RH, line drive hitter, low Ks, can play 3rd and 1st.

Actually he can play neither. They just put him their with a glove. :)

NJReds

10-28-2004, 12:26 PM

Actually he can play neither. They just put him their with a glove. :)

LOL...then he'd fit right in w/this team :thumbup:

10-28-2004, 01:37 PM

The Reds don't have to pay anybody until opening day, if they want to overshoot their payroll budget and not worry about it now is the time.

It's all Tetris, every piece makes other pieces more plyable.

Acquire a 3rd baseman and someone else who plays becomes the piece to move.

That's my thinking too. IMO the key is to move Graves for Hinske. It gives the Reds $3.25M in their pocket this season. If Hinkse plays well, he immediately becomes a moveable chip (or Encarnacion does or Casey does, back to the Tetris idea). It's a fair trade. Toronto pays a little more up front, but sheds the burden of Hinske down the road while Cincinnati saves money today and accepts the risk of Hinske's longer term commitment.

So Hinske could even help the club in the immediate as far as freeing up money to land better starting pitching. IMO, that alone makes the deal worth the risk.

flyer85

10-28-2004, 01:45 PM

That's my thinking too. IMO the key is to move Graves for Hinske. It gives the Reds $3.25M in their pocket this season. If Hinkse plays well, he immediately becomes a moveable chip (or Encarnacion does or Casey does, back to the Tetris idea). It's a fair trade. Toronto pays a little more up front, but sheds the burden of Hinske down the road while Cincinnati saves money today and accepts the risk of Hinske's longer term commitment.

So Hinske could even help the club in the immediate as far as freeing up money to land better starting pitching. IMO, that alone makes the deal worth the risk.

If the Reds actually want to win a few games in '05 Graves will be far more important than Hinske to the team.

While Graves is not a good closer he is a far better relief pitcher than almost anyone else in the pen.

Hinske won't have much trade value with the size of his contract in 06 and 07.

10-28-2004, 02:29 PM

If the Reds actually want to win a few games in '05 Graves will be far more important than Hinske to the team.

While Graves is not a good closer he is a far better relief pitcher than almost anyone else in the pen.

Hinske won't have much trade value with the size of his contract in 06 and 07.

I disagree. If Hinske can post an .800+ OPS, he's got a great contract. In fact, it's the kind of contract that teams looking to fill a 3B hole would trip over themselves to get. Obviously Hinske has to rebound, but if he does, the market's a sure thing.

I don't really care about the won-lost total in 2005. Barring a total rebuild of the pitching staff, it's not going to be very good. What the Reds have to do is start acquiring long-term pieces of that puzzle. Graves won't be around when staff comes together, whomever the team gets with the $3.25M it'd save next season by trading Graves for Hinske might be. Hanging onto Graves is a pointless endeavor.

My advice is take the money (and the 3B) and run.

REDREAD

10-28-2004, 03:07 PM

. Graves won't be around when staff comes together, whomever the team gets with the $3.25M it'd save next season by trading Graves for Hinske might be. .

It's a big risk though. That 3.5 million saved this year will cost you 10 million over the next 2 years. If he doesn't rebound, you have almost a Graves sized albtross for 2006-2007. I agree, though, if he rebounds to rookie form, it's a sweet deal.

We might be better off just keeping Graves in 2005 and then gaining his entire 7 million payflex after 2005 is over.

Of course, this is all under the assumption that the club could freely operate with any payflex generated (doubtful).

Redmachine2003

10-28-2004, 03:09 PM

No risk No reward

flyer85

10-28-2004, 03:14 PM

I don't really care about the won-lost total in 2005.

No reason to acquire Hinske then. He just isn't that good. He hit in the .240's in both 03 and 04 with 12 HRs and 15 HRs.

Given the data it is looking more like 2002 may have been a fluke and the pitchers have now figured him out.

His OPS has went from .846 to .766 to .687. A very disturbing trend. His BB Rate was ~33% lower in 2004 than 2002. No wonder the Jays want to unload him and replace him with Koskie. Nobody wants a sub.700 OPS 3B even if they are paying him the minimum much less more than $12M+ over the next three years.

Let someone else have the risk, I think the odds are higher that EE would perform at a better in 2005 than Hinske.

flyer85

10-28-2004, 03:17 PM

If Hinske can post an .800+ OPS, he's got a great contract.

Given the trend of his numbers there is little reason to believe that a .800+ OPS is likely and think even if it is with $12M+ due over 3 years he would need an OPS closer to .900 to earn that contract.

flyer85

10-28-2004, 03:21 PM

No risk No reward

That is true but I prefer to stay away from High Risk/Low Reward and I hope the Reds FO does as well.

If they want a 3B go sign Koskie to a 1 yr $4M dollar deal. He has NEVER had a sub .800 OPS. He has been amazingly consistent over his 6 season. High of .855 and a low of .817 and he is MUCH better defensively.

Aronchis

10-28-2004, 03:27 PM

The Kearns to third definitely looks like a "feint". He will be "revaluated" in January? Come on.

Boss-Hog

10-28-2004, 03:46 PM

10-28-2004, 03:50 PM

Given the trend of his numbers there is little reason to believe that a .800+ OPS is likely and think even if it is with $12M+ due over 3 years he would need an OPS closer to .900 to earn that contract.

A .900+ OPS at 3B would be worth eight digits on the open market. 3Bs simply don't reach that level all that often. In fact I don't think any Reds 3B has ever come close.

I like the Koskie idea, but no way is he signing a 1 year, $4M contract. He's getting a lot more than that both in terms of years and dollars. And that's why Hinske's deal will become relatively affordable if he gets back to .800+ production.

I can understand viewing Hinske as too much of a risk. The ONLY way I'd do the deal is if Graves gets shipped out and the Reds get that immediate burst of cash in pocket. For me, it's a starting pitcher acquisition move. That extra $3.25M could do a lot of good right here, right now. Used properly, the money is where you get the impact. Hinske's the tack-on. The way I view it is as a question of how far are you willing to go to get those starting pitchers you need. For me, the up front cash bump is worth the risk on Hinske. I understand it's not a safe bet, but the Reds aren't getting anywhere if they only make safe bets.

flyer85

10-28-2004, 03:50 PM

Am I missing something, or has any source mentioned Graves being part of a possible trade for Hinske? Of course it makes sense to trade his salary from our perspective. I just can't imagine someone like Ricciardi being interested in someone like Graves given that a). he has a large salary and b). he's not a very reliable closer. Like I said though, unless I didn't see a mention of it, I imagine Ricciardi would have his eyes on targets other than Graves.

Boss

I would have to agree. The Jays reason for trading Hinske is to pay some now and get out from under that salary obligation in 2006 and 2007. Just like the Reds and Jr albeit on a much smaller scale.

If the Jays figure a bounce back is likely from Hinske they would want to trade him and replace him with Koskie. I think they are trying to find someone to be the stuckee.

Redmachine2003

10-28-2004, 03:51 PM

10-28-2004, 03:54 PM

Am I missing something, or has any source mentioned Graves being part of a possible trade for Hinske? Of course it makes sense to trade his salary from our perspective. I just can't imagine someone like Ricciardi being interested in someone like Graves given that a). he has a large salary and b). he's not a very reliable closer. Like I said though, unless I didn't see a mention of it, I imagine Ricciardi would have his eyes on targets other than Graves.

Boss

I suspect you're right. Ricciardi's also got a JimBoesque need to "win" trades. So a deal where teams swap burdens probably isn't going to appeal to him.

For my part, though, my interest in the deal (if I were DanO) would begin and end with Danny Graves as the return part of the equation. Without that 2005 cash savings the deal makes no sense to me.

flyer85

10-28-2004, 04:01 PM

Hinske is a big boy 6' 2" 230 lbs. he has left handed power and can play third with out throwing the ball away a few times a week. His first three years are like Kearn's first three years so I feel Hinske still has a high up side.

Kearns is 24 and Hinske is 27. Kearns at a much younger age has posted OPS of 907 819 and 740 much better than Hinske.

Even as bad as Kearns was in 04 he was 60 points higher than Hinske.

Redmachine2003

10-28-2004, 04:26 PM

I look at Hinske as a left handed A. Boone. With a little more power. Kearns and Hinske was drafted the same year and made the same rise through the system (in time wise) They both are young enough to develop even more then what they have and injuries have slowed both down.

CougarQuest

10-28-2004, 07:29 PM

Interesting situation that DanO is in on this. Actually, I like the idea of Hinske for Graves. Of course, from reading the article, I thought it was going to be for some minor leaguer for Hinski and the Blue Jays paying a major part of his salary. Hinske's number have obviously lowered because of his injuries the last two years. I think he will be worth his contract, if he stays healthy. But I am more interested in how Kearns is looking at third. Because I think Kearns could be worth more than Hinske, but will that be at 3rd or OF? But if DanO waits until Jan to evaluate Kearns, then the Hinkse option will long be over with. And DanO doesn't strike me as making fast decisions.

Krusty

10-28-2004, 07:59 PM

I think O'Brien isn't seriously considering Kearns as his third baseman in 2005. It would be nice to have Kearns be able to play third if Miley ever gets in a pinch during a game with his bench.

As for Hinske, don't you think he might be able to improve on his stats especially with Chris Chambliss working with him? Look what Chambliss did in one season with Pena, Dunn and even Casey. Don't you think working under Chambliss could help Hinske too?

DoogMinAmo

10-28-2004, 10:46 PM

It's a big risk though. That 3.5 million saved this year will cost you 10 million over the next 2 years. If he doesn't rebound, you have almost a Graves sized albtross for 2006-2007. I agree, though, if he rebounds to rookie form, it's a sweet deal.

We might be better off just keeping Graves in 2005 and then gaining his entire 7 million payflex after 2005 is over.

Of course, this is all under the assumption that the club could freely operate with any payflex generated (doubtful).

I believe the lesson this FO learned is that long term contracts are a very sticky subject. The last thing they would seem to be willing to do is take on another team's albatross to relieve short term salary. If anything, those on this board are advocating dumping our own long term contracts for short term strain and long term relief, and this seems closer to the FO's strategy.

However, as with all contracts, their terms eventually end. There is always the "grin and bear it" approach.

And this is where the big question mark comes into play. O'Brien has Casey believing the opportunity to compete is still here and strong, sidestepping the whole trade demand demon. In all reality, either the Reds are planning on resigning Casey to a much cheaper contract after 2006, or they plan on trading him. With both Graves (7 million) off the books in 2005, and Casey (8 million) off in 2006, the Reds are due for even more payflex, possibly without conducting one single trade.

Granted, we do not get any talent in return, but one thing everyone seems to lose sight of in there incessant woes about these long term contracts is, as Redread pointed out, the term stops eventually, and that eventually is finally soon.

deltachi8

10-29-2004, 12:59 PM

what has Hinske's ERA WHIP and K ratio last year?

nuff said?

flyer85

10-29-2004, 01:25 PM

what has Hinske's ERA WHIP and K ratio last year?

nuff said?

Maybe that's the secret, the Reds will convert him into a pitcher.

Steve4192

10-29-2004, 01:29 PM

what has Hinske's ERA WHIP and K ratio last year?
Hey, that's the ticket. The Reds just need to acquire pitching and ignore improving anywhere else.

Trade Dunner for a stud starter, trade Griffey and sign a stud starter with his salary, trade Casey and sign another starter ... then watch the Reds proceed to lose games 2-1 rather than 8-7.

I'd love to see the Reds improve their pitching, but I'll settle for improvement ANYWHERE on the diamond. The pitching isn't the ONLY problem on this team.

deltachi8

10-29-2004, 02:12 PM

Hey, that's the ticket. The Reds just need to acquire pitching and ignore improving anywhere else.

Trade Dunner for a stud starter, trade Griffey and sign a stud starter with his salary, trade Casey and sign another starter ... then watch the Reds proceed to lose games 2-1 rather than 8-7.

I'd love to see the Reds improve their pitching, but I'll settle for improvement ANYWHERE on the diamond. The pitching isn't the ONLY problem on this team.

Its just the biggest one. I think there are in house options at 3B which are fine IF the team rehabilitates.fixes. whatever you want to call it it's pitching staff.

Its not that I think Hinske is a bad player or worthless, just not waht the Reds need to rigt the ship.

10-29-2004, 02:49 PM

Its just the biggest one. I think there are in house options at 3B which are fine IF the team rehabilitates.fixes. whatever you want to call it it's pitching staff.

Its not that I think Hinske is a bad player or worthless, just not waht the Reds need to rigt the ship.

Which is why I'd only be interested in him if he came with that $3.25M attached. Then the Reds would have a 3B AND money to pursue starting pitching.

Krusty

10-31-2004, 09:31 AM

Don't know if this has been posted but here goes:

Kearns taking next step

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANDY LYONS/Getty Images
Austin Kearns will follow a daily workout plan over the next two months with an eye toward playing third base when he reports to spring training next year.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Marc Lancaster
Post staff reporter

Dan O'Brien's words were cautious as usual, but the Reds general manager's message was clear.
The Austin Kearns experiment has been judged successful enough not only to morph into a full-fledged offseason training program for the former right fielder, but also to turn the Reds' attention away from trying to acquire an established third baseman.

O'Brien said Wednesday consultations with the coaches who oversaw Kearns' 10-day stint in the Instructional League that ended last week resulted in a conclusion that sufficient progress had been made to move forward.

Freddie Benavides, the Reds' minor league infield coordinator, and Randy Whisler, the Reds' first base coach and infield instructor, worked with Kearns in Sarasota and are putting together a daily workout plan for Kearns to follow from the first of November through the end of December.

"We're going to give that to Austin," O'Brien said. "He is committed to giving this his best shot, and that is the key right there.

"He's got an indoor facility of some sort he's got access to in Lexington. He is going to follow through on the program, and then probably in early January we're going to reconvene, he and Randy Whisler, and try to make an assessment at that point as to additional progress that has been made so that we can then make a determination as to the next step."

Barring an unforeseen setback -- either some sort of injury or a sudden change in attitude by Kearns -- it's likely the 24- year-old will enter spring training in mid-February slated to play third base.

The Reds are trying to keep the pressure off Kearns and leave their options open, but it appears finding a third baseman from outside the organization has dropped significantly on the front office's offseason to-do list.

"I would have to say that, based on what took place in the Instructional League, it causes us to make some adjustment in our priorities, in terms of looking at our club needs," was how O'Brien phrased it.

That statement takes plenty of steam out of the rumors emanating from Toronto the past few days that the Blue Jays might trade third baseman Eric Hinske to the Reds. The 27-year-old was the American League Rookie of the Year in 2002, but his production has dropped dramatically in the last two seasons just as his contract is reaching big-money territory.

Hinske signed a five-year, $14.75 million deal after a rookie season in which he hit .279 with 24 home runs and 84 RBI. In 2003, while dealing with a hand injury, those numbers dipped to .243 with 12 homers and 63 RBI. He was healthy in 2004, appearing in 155 games, but hit .246 with 15 homers and 69 RBI.

Hinske's contract calls for salaries of $3 million next year, $4.325 million in 2006 and $5.625 million in 2007, which would be a hefty commitment for the Reds to take on, especially with top prospect Edwin Encarnacion perhaps a year away from the majors.

Asked specifically about Hinske, O'Brien had little to say.

"There really is nothing to comment on," he said. "We've had discussions with every team, save probably those in the postseason, and it's the preliminary looking at our prospective needs, strengths, weaknesses and seeing if there are any particular matches. But it's all been on a preliminary basis and there have been no specific names on any front with any club brought into the equation at this time."

Blue Jays general manager J.P. Ricciardi told the Toronto Star he wouldn't comment on rumors.

In the meantime, O'Brien and assistant general manager Dean Taylor spent this week making the rounds at the World Series, laying the groundwork for more serious trade talks at the general managers' meetings in November and baseball's winter meetings in December. Finding help for the pitching staff is the main focus, O'Brien said.

The Kearns situation will work itself out.

"Phase One, we were encouraged," O'Brien said. "We'll see where Phase Two leads us."

Publication Date: 10-28-2004

10-31-2004, 10:53 AM

"We've had discussions with every team, save probably those in the postseason, and it's the preliminary looking at our prospective needs, strengths, weaknesses and seeing if there are any particular matches. But it's all been on a preliminary basis and there have been no specific names on any front with any club brought into the equation at this time."

Then what exactly are you talking to all those clubs about, DanO? I mean if you haven't mentioned any names in those discussions then it's difficult to imagine you were talking about baseball, as you'd invariably run into the subject of players, who come complete with names, if baseball was the topic of conversation.

Clearly phrases like "no specific names" and words like "discussions" or "talk" mean different things to DanO than it does to us lay folk. DanO's assertion that he's burning up the phones constantly, but never delving into specifics is bull and, as such, I don't see any reason why we'd take his word for it on these matters. For instance, if he were to say, "I've never discussed Eric Hinske with the Blue Jays," that would not mean he didn't have substantive talks with the Blue Jays about Eric Hinske. It would mean he hasn't traded for Eric Hinske at this very moment, which is information we already possess.

Now I don't blame DanO for making sure that everything he says amounts to nothing, it's a virus that's run rampant through our entire society, but it does mean I don't have to put stock in a single word he says.