Royals interested in Bruce?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wheels

I've learned that, over the last couple of years, what I think a player is worth in trade and what the Reds will settle for are usually two vastly different things.

---

And yet what the Reds have gotten in trades usually has been a win in the Reds column. Also, most of the time after the dust settles most find out the Reds did really good.

I remember the Cueto deal was panned by many when it first went down. I think most would do it again and again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kc61

Hard to see the Reds getting three real prospects for Bruce. Plus the salary relief the Reds obviously want.

The best way to approach this deal is that the Reds must get full salary relief (no Reds contribution) and one top 100 or better type prospect. Plus more, but not expecting the "more" to be too valuable.

---

If I'm the Reds I'm not asking for salary relief. I agree to pay his 2016 salary. I want young talent in return.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulrichjr

And yet what the Reds have gotten in trades usually has been a win in the Reds column. Also, most of the time after the dust settles most find out the Reds did really good.

I remember the Cueto deal was panned by many when it first went down. I think most would do it again and again.

---

I wouldn't say most of the time. The Frazier deal sure doesn't look too good. Nor does the Chapman deal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wheels

I've learned that, over the last couple of years, what I think a player is worth in trade and what the Reds will settle for are usually two vastly different things.

---

Depends on the trade though. They did very well in the Cueto and Leake trades during the 2015 season. Then crapped the bed this offseason with the Frazier and Chapman trades.

I guess 2-for-4 ain't bad. Batting .500.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

If I'm the Reds I'm not asking for salary relief. I agree to pay his 2016 salary. I want young talent in return.

---

Agreed. The Reds committed to paying Bruce's salary for the season, no reason not to send that much cash to the team Bruce is traded to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chuckie

Depends on the trade though. They did very well in the Cueto and Leake trades during the 2015 season. Then crapped the bed this offseason with the Frazier and Chapman trades.

I guess 2-for-4 ain't bad. Batting .500.

---

Jury is still out with Frazier trade, although I would have preferred the package sent to LA. But Peraza looks like the real deal and Schebler hasn't failed enough in the majors to call him a bust yet. Wish the Reds would have kept Montas though, for sure.

Rookie Davis better win the Cy Young, though, or the Chapman trade will be a huge bust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

I wouldn't say most of the time. The Frazier deal sure doesn't look too good. Nor does the Chapman deal

---

Cueto
Leake
Simon
Latos
Frazier - have you seen what he is doing? Don't just stare at th HR total

For those too lazy to look it up, Todd Frazier is currently rockin' a 201/302/449 triple slash line with a 104 OPS+

In other words - he is hitting poorly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedTeamGo!

For those too lazy to look it up, Todd Frazier is currently rockin' a 201/302/449 triple slash line with a 104 OPS+

In other words - he is hitting poorly.

---

He has 5 doubles on the year, hasn't hit one in over a month.

Kind of blows up the "Just keep him until the trade deadline to rebuild his value from last year's second half!" argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kc61

The best way to approach this deal is that the Reds must get full salary relief (no Reds contribution) and one top 100 or better type prospect. Plus more, but not expecting the "more" to be too valuable.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

If I'm the Reds I'm not asking for salary relief. I agree to pay his 2016 salary. I want young talent in return.

---

The money is just another bargaining chip, but I agree with Sea Ray, the team should be willing to put it on the table. True, there's no point in the Reds picking up the tab if it doesn't improve the return. But some potential trading partners might be willing to give up talent but are hard-pressed budget-wise and simply can't make the trade at full cash fare. And sometimes kicking in money on the deal is for the specific purpose of buying/upgrading a prospect. Won't hurt my feelings if the Reds do exactly that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

He has 5 doubles on the year, hasn't hit one in over a month.

Kind of blows up the "Just keep him until the trade deadline to rebuild his value from last year's second half!" argument.

---

I don't think Todd's ever left the derby. All he can seem to hit are HRs

I am unclear: are the Royals interested in Bruce?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rojo Rijo

I don't think Todd's ever left the derby. All he can seem to hit are HRs

---

I actually laughed out loud. Was this post inspired by The Hangover squeal?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rojo Rijo

I don't think Todd's ever left the derby. All he can seem to hit are HRs

---

It does seem that way. In 146 games (622 plate appearances) since the 2015 ASB/HR Derby, Todd has hit 31 HRs, but is slashing just .210/.288/.419

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Z-Fly

I actually laughed out loud. Was this post inspired by The Hangover squeal?

---

My hangover squeal is usually "UUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOOOWWWWWOOOOOUUUHHHHHHH" :beerme: