Really would have no problem if Bruce goes sooner rather than later, but Cozart is the one I would be trying to unload as soon as humanly possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
Printable View
Really would have no problem if Bruce goes sooner rather than later, but Cozart is the one I would be trying to unload as soon as humanly possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
I really don't think anybody is buying into Cozart the hitter. The book is out on him. He's a bad hitter. His age type and career profile is what teams are going to look at. He's going to be viewed as a second division starter or a fill in.Quote:
Originally Posted by reds44
No team is going to offer a worthwhile prospect for him until they are desperate enough that they need such a piece. Will take an injury from their existing SS, or a grand under performance from the incumbent. I don't think we are sitting on a ticking time bomb before he turns back into a pumpkin. He is what he is, and I feel pretty comfortable that he is being held unless a real offer comes in on him.
Why would you hold onto him? They've moved Peraza to SS for a reason. Phillips is here as long as he wants to be. I'm not asking for some great package in return, just any sort of fringe prospect with real value. I'd take another Duvall type for him.
There's literally no reason to not move him.
So as not to give him away unless you actually get something you need. I don't get trading him for literally anything if it doesn't produce a meaningful asset back. He's a reasonable major league player that isn't tied to a hindering contract.Quote:
Originally Posted by reds44
Consensus around here is that his market value is approximately that of a JJ Hoover highlight tape circa 2013-2015.
At this point, is Jay's salary really a hindrance on the club? Hang on, hear me out. Most of the posts I've seen here are suggesting dealing Bruce for payroll relief in exchange for a mediocre OF prospect and a middling bullpen arm. Isn't this club shorthanded in terms of OF depth? We've got Winker...and? If Jay's defense is as bad as the numbers suggest (and I don't think it IS as bad as they seem to indicate), then a move to LF would alleviate that concern. His bat is certainly more valuable than any middling prospect's would be. He's not old (29).
My point is that if salary relief is the main concern...shouldn't we look at the team payroll? We're currently 25th out of 30 teams. Why the immediate need/desire to cut payroll more? Does anybody honestly think that if we dealt Bruce that the Reds would use that money to improve the club's roster? No, they'd pocket the savings and hold onto it until they needed it further down the road IMO. With a club full of kids, the payroll won't be an issue. Is there anybody on the club due for a raise? I guess I'm just not understanding the fan-motivation to reduce payroll.
All that being said, if the Reds can get a good return on Jay (or Cozart) and it improves the club either now or in the future...great. I'm game. But to deal him off for spare parts and a lottery ticket just to cut costs? No. There's no need. The Reds payroll is NOT overextended.
Yeah...unless we're getting a decent return there's no need to move Bruce or Cozart to be honest.
I'm guessing the problem is that acquiring teams want the Reds to pay some of Bruce's salary. I think he's at $12.5MM right now, pro rated over the season.Quote:
Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_
The Reds probably don't "need" to dump Bruce's salary immediately. But they may be unwilling to trade him yet remain on the hook for some of that salary.
Which leads us to the trade deadline when the remaining portion of his salary should be small enough so a deal can be made.
Don't you guys realize how many Blake Woods the Reds could pay with Bruce's salary? If they get rid of him, they might even be able to sign Badenhof!
Well supposedly at spring training, the Reds were willing to eat 8 or 8.5 million of Bruce's salary.. I Can't remember the exact number.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kc61
I imagine that offer is still on the table for the right prospect.
...or a Jay Bruce, who's not even playing at replacement level (-0.3 WAR in 2016, so far, and -0.6 WAR since 2014), while getting paid 12 times a higher annual salary than Badenhop. Funny how it's all about winning with fans, until they're losing, and they simply cannot face reality. If we're going to tank, I'd prefer to tank with something other than sub-replacement level players who are getting paid like they're still All Stars. Or we could stop worshiping players' performance past and look at what they are doing in the here and now, and stop pretending that this is 2013 Jay Bruce (or that his knees are going to get in a time machine and go back to before the 2014 season).Quote:
Originally Posted by marcshoe
I know this is a game and one we all love, but at some point it's a business and decisions have to be made. And the Reds have made it clear, he's not going to LF or 1B (and obviously cannot DH, unless it's interleague play), so you're stuck with a sinkhole in right (a sinkhole that is literally dragging down the rest of his game and making him less appealing an option than the average replacement level player at his position). That is the reality of the situation, and if that is the reality of the situation I prefer facing it, excising the problem, and moving on, instead of hoping and dreaming that this will change. I noted this before. As a fan, and as someone who watched Jay come up through the system, I understand. I did the same thing with my favorite player after 1982, and it took until after his career was over to admit that I lied to myself about his abilities the last several years of his career. There are far too many Jay Bruce fans on this board doing the same exact thing. Yes, he's 'only' 29. Unfortunately, he's a 29 year old DH playing right field.
Maybe what Bruce's salary pro-rates to, but I recently read that the Reds owe him 8 mil and some change at this point.
The Royals are also eyeing Markakis, ice-cold, no pwer, and making the same as Bruce.
Or this:
https://redlegnation.com/2016/05/20/...for-jay-bruce/
:evil:
Although imagine this blueprint for 2018: Bruce in RF, Jesse Winker in LF, Adam Duvall at 3B (his natural position), Eugenio Suarez at SS (his natural position) and Jose Peraza at 2B. Or something like that, maybe switch Peraza and Suarez. That’s a bargain-basement plan and not without flaws. But it’s a plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by '69 & Vine
And it includes keeping Jay Bruce around from 2018-20. Say, at $43 million for 3 years.
I wouldn't have a problem with that. It also means we have a chance to be decent next year. It also just reiterates why we shouldn't have traded Frazier since a 2017 team with Frazier and Bruce could have a real shot and the only future sacrifice is Peraza > Blandino, which isn't much of a dropoff IMO.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Good lord, that's sheer insanity to offer Bruce an extension.Quote:
Originally Posted by '69 & Vine
How about this, don't pick up Bruce's option. Wait him out. Unless he maintains this 800+ OPS for an entire year (which I doubt), he will be available at a bargain basement price in the spring, for a one year contract.
If Bruce has another 720 OPS season, he's a 4th OF and the market will pay him as such.
One of the smartest things the Reds did was not to give Bruce that "lifetime contract" that he wanted maybe 4-5 years ago. It sure was tempting then. Thank God the Reds didn't do it.