Royals interested in Bruce?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Baseball players get sore. Young or not.

But awesome speculation.

---

Lighten up, Francis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Zach Buchanan ‏@ZachENQ 5h5 hours ago
Been told Winker was just sore. Stand down, call-up welcoming party.

---

Damnit, ordered the cake for Winker and everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rojo

They're absolutely unafraid to move prospects for needs.

And look at how badly it's turned out.

---

Popular take, I see.

They keep their Grade A guys, as they should.

I'm totally blind on this one so answer this.

Who are the top 3 best prospects/most productive (young) guys the Giants have traded away in the past 6 years? Duvall is in the convo I bet.

Or is it they are unafraid to move, umm let's say "poor", prospects?

Keep him.

None of these guys people are mentioning are anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kaldaniels

Popular take, I see.

They keep their Grade A guys, as they should.

I'm totally blind on this one so answer this.

Who are the top 3 best prospects/most productive (young) guys the Giants have traded away in the past 6 years? Duvall is in the convo I bet.

Or is it they are unafraid to move, umm let's say "poor", prospects?

---

I think I just saw somewhere that the Giants have the most homegrown talent on their roster of any MLB team. That might need to be fact-checked, but I want to say that's accurate. Which means they know which of their guys to keep and which to deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghosts of 1990

Keep him.

None of these guys people are mentioning are anything.

---

Good thing the Reds didn't see Jay Bruce as nothing when he was a prospect and held on to him.

I always get a kick out of this mindset that prospects are worthless because they have never done it at the major league level. Jay Bruce was a prospect. Joey Votto was a prospect. Miguel Cabrera was a prospect. And so on and so forth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benihana

Jay Bruce for Lucius Fox could be interesting for both sides.

---

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...tbegins2-2.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedTeamGo!

Good thing the Reds didn't see Jay Bruce as nothing when he was a prospect and held on to him.

I always get a kick out of this mindset that prospects are worthless because they have never done it at the major league level. Jay Bruce was a prospect. Joey Votto was a prospect. Miguel Cabrera was a prospect. And so on and so forth.

---

I always get a kick out of the mindset that players older than 28 are past it and should be traded in for completely unproven prospects just because they cost money.

I mean, might as well get rid of the proven commodity and take a gamble on guys that don't even have his kind of upside, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cannon

I always get a kick out of the mindset that players older than 28 are past it and should be traded in for completely unproven prospects just because they cost money.

I mean, might as well get rid of the proven commodity and take a gamble on guys that don't even have his kind of upside, right?

---

http://boingboing.net/filesroot/logan.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cannon

I always get a kick out of the mindset that players older than 28 are past it and should be traded in for completely unproven prospects just because they cost money.

I mean, might as well get rid of the proven commodity and take a gamble on guys that don't even have his kind of upside, right?

---

Pick any 10 HoF hitters not suspected of juicing. Go to their B-R page and see how many times they led the league in whatever category before and after age 30. I'll give you a hint: it's a huge drop off after 30. And that's HoF players. Non-HoF players that had that kind of success after age 30 are even fewer and farther between.

So no, it's not unreasonable to think that trading players after their age 28 or 29 seasons is a good thing. And you never, ever want to sign a player for his age 30+ years for the production he gave you in his 20s. Not saying they can't be productive, just don't pay them like the league leaders they were 5 years previous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by '69 & Vine

Bruce had a mechanical change to his swing before the season that simplified and quickened the bat to the ball. He is finally being more selective at the plate. He's hitting the ball harder than ever, more line drives and power to all fields. Could he go into a slump, of course. Likely to be a trainwreck, no. There are a ton of Bruce fans, Phillips fans, and Votto fans that show up and keep the business afloat. Some of you keep beating the drum but gloss over the numbers. .

---

There is numerous problems with keeping Bruce beyond this year.
1. Winker and Duvall are candidates for full time jobs.. in the future, maybe Ervin and others. Bruce would tie down an OF spot and not be part of the future.
2. It's questionable whether Bruce can play good defense over the next 3-4 years.. And questionable whether he would continue to hit.
3. If he had a knee injury that impacted him for 2 years (one theory), too risky it might flare up again, as early as the second half of this year (as last year)
4. A lot of risk for minimal gain.
5. Bruce's salary could be used to reinforce the bullpen/pitching staf. Supposedly they only had 2 million to spend this season on adding pitching, and it went to Simon..
6. Bruce is hitting well this year, but the Reds were only projected to draw 1.8 million fans this year, that's a pretty big dropoff from last year.. the Reds stink. A few stars on a 90-100 loss team are not going to sell tickets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benihana

Jay Bruce for Lucius Fox could be interesting for both sides, assuming the Reds believed he could stick st SS. I'd even add Strailey if they added Bickford.

If the Reds pulled that off, they should target nothing but OF going forward, both in trade returns for Cozart/Bailey and in next year's draft.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CySeymour

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...tbegins2-2.jpg

---

I was totally going to post something about Batman. I feel robbed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cannon

I always get a kick out of the mindset that players older than 28 are past it and should be traded in for completely unproven prospects just because they cost money.

I mean, might as well get rid of the proven commodity and take a gamble on guys that don't even have his kind of upside, right?

---

Great. Has nothing to do with what I was talking about, but, great!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WrongVerb

Pick any 10 HoF hitters not suspected of juicing. Go to their B-R page and see how many times they led the league in whatever category before and after age 30. I'll give you a hint: it's a huge drop off after 30. And that's HoF players. Non-HoF players that had that kind of success after age 30 are even fewer and farther between.

So no, it's not unreasonable to think that trading players after their age 28 or 29 seasons is a good thing. And you never, ever want to sign a player for his age 30+ years for the production he gave you in his 20s. Not saying they can't be productive, just don't pay them like the league leaders they were 5 years previous.

---

Coincidentally, the PED erea lines up with better legal supplements, year round training, and healthier lifestyles. So it's hard to say a player is DOOMED after age 28. Ben Zobrist is 35. CoCo Crisp is approaching infinity. Ortiz has never been suspended, and if he did use PED's it was years ago.

30 isn't a death sentence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TRF

Coincidentally, the PED erea lines up with better legal supplements, year round training, and healthier lifestyles. So it's hard to say a player is DOOMED after age 28. Ben Zobrist is 35. CoCo Crisp is approaching infinity. Ortiz has never been suspended, and if he did use PED's it was years ago.

30 isn't a death sentence.

---

Amphetamines certainly helped sustain players later in their careers. Also, I wasn't suggesting that players couldn't be productive in their 30s. Just that you're not going to see the type of production from a player in his 30s that they gave in their 20s, and teams often pay them like they will. It's actually a market inefficiency for big market clubs as that's where these players tend to wind up.