This was said about Votto and Cueto around 2009. They were involved in nearly every trade proposal on this board.Originally Posted by M2
My bigger point is that the Reds right now are in bad shape, imo. One year fixes are a fool’s errand with this roster and even more unwise considering how shallow the farm is.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
I’d rather go the free agency route and give Didi an extra year to win the bidding.
Lindor presents an issue - he’s a superstar talent and I guess you have to trade India (and more) for him. But he’s also got a salary near $20 million and I don’t see a deal there.
One year of Story? I wouldn’t want to include any of my best prospects in that deal. He’s only going to walk in a year. I’d rather sign a free agent.
Last edited by Kc61; 11-30-2020 at 10:48 PM.
I seem to remember the Reds trading future Cy Young winner Zack Stewart in those days and it working out all right. And Downs/Gray are not a modern Votto/Cueto. Be happy they're part of what ultimately turned in Trevor Bauer.
And hoarding prospects because the farm is no great shakes seems like a really bad idea. Pick a few winners and spin the others into usable talent.
Last edited by M2; 11-30-2020 at 10:50 PM.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Routinely trading very good prospects for expensive one-year veterans is a worse idea.
Right now, the Reds problem is a lack of inexpensive, developed talent in the big leagues. Too many core guys are expensive veterans, mostly store bought. Smaller markets need a flow of young, cheap talent to the bigs.
Once in awhile - like the Bauer deal - you trade prospects for a one-year vet. The value was too compelling, and Trammel was expendable. But it’s not a great way to build.
Last edited by Kc61; 11-30-2020 at 11:12 PM.
At maximal efficiency, you should always be trading off a portion of your top 10 prospects. Most of them amount to nothing. The key is separating the keepers from the trade bait.
So let's double down on the problem (underwhelming talent coming from the minors)? That seems backwards to me. If you want to argue the Reds shouldn't trade certain prospects because you want them long-term, that's fine. If you want to argue they shouldn't trade any prospects, I can't get behind that. For instance, if Jonathan India goes out the door and All-Star SS comes back in return, I'm going to be 100% fine with that.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
I am all for trading prospects most of the time. But not right now for the Reds, they need all the young, controllable talent possible.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
I'm not for keeping prospects about whom I'm lukewarm at best. When they start producing a better class of prospects, I'll start getting miserly about keeping it. With this crew, pick a few favorites and declare open season on the rest of them. If what the Reds want is young, controllable talent that can make a difference on the field, they're most likely going to need to trade for someone else's prospects.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
Crumbley (12-01-2020),RiverRat13 (12-01-2020),Rojo Rijo (12-02-2020)
I’m not against trading prospects for controllable, affordable talent, like in the Sonny Gray deal. Or when you have a wealth in the minors, like the Padres do. Or even occasionally - as with Bauer - for a one-year player who is compelling value.
But as a regular matter, trading kids for one year vet players is a mistake. It’s unsustainable financially to trade cheap for expensive. And it gets you nowhere. You add a Trevor Story but subtract a Trevor Bauer. It’s a zero sum game.
You can’t always predict which good prospects will pan out. I’d tend to keep them except in the kinds of situations I’ve outlined. The game of churning prospects for one-year vets is likely to have a big failure rate and great future cost.
Last edited by Kc61; 11-30-2020 at 11:40 PM.
The Reds are in a real meh in between state and they need to make some moves one away or another or they’re just going to keep spinning their wheels.
They have a decent farm, but nothing special to any real degree that’s gonna set the world on fire and lead them to the World Series in the next 5 years off the strength of their young prospect core or anything.
Meanwhile, they have a decent team, but one that probably wins like 85 games in a best case scenario.
They need to pick a direction and go with it, just continuing to be in just decent shape top to bottom as an organization isn’t going to cut it. And I’d much rather see them ship off some lesser prospects and actually try to win some games than to burn it down and win Best Minor League System awards from Baseball America.
Just my thoughts on the matter.
757690 (11-30-2020),Edd Roush (12-01-2020),HammerTime (12-01-2020),M2 (11-30-2020),marcshoe (11-30-2020),RedTeamGo! (12-01-2020),RiverRat13 (12-01-2020),savafan (12-01-2020)
again, here is the list of small-market teams that trade top prospects for 1-year rentals and are successful:
did you catch that? the beginning and the end of the list includes zero teams.
the reds need to focus on being more like the rays & indians and less like ... whatever the hell they are.
Last edited by JFLegal; 11-30-2020 at 11:56 PM.
Kc61 (12-01-2020)
If we're gonna start trading our big prospects for shortstops I'd much rather target Xander Bogaerts (he has no trade rights though) or Trea Turner. They're just as good, they're playing for last place teams, and Boston and Washington both have terrible farms.
Go big and lock the position up.
Last edited by podgejeff_; 12-01-2020 at 12:33 AM.
that's disingenuous as hell to suggest that downs/jeter had anything to do with the reds getting trevor bauer. yes, puig was a throw-in as part of the deal, but the real trade there was basically taylor trammell for trevor bauer straight up (from the reds' perspective; it was a 3-team deal as we all know). either you already know this and are intentionally being obtuse, or you need to brush up on your facts.
What's a top prospect? Seriously. What's the definition you're using on that? Because if it's anybody on your team's top 10 list, keeping them all is a terrible idea. You're closer to building a comedy routine than a baseball team if you go that route. If it's anybody inside a top 100 list, that's still not a great standard. Jose Peraza made top 100 lists and he sucks. Robert Stephenson and Cody Reed made top 100 lists.
So you're going to have to tell who these top prospects are. Feel free to name the current untouchables. I might even agree provided it's not a long list.
I'm not a system player. I am a system.
My only real untouchables or close to it would be Senzel, if for no other reason than I don’t think any team will give up enough for him at this point versus what he could be worth in the lineup, and Greene who I think will be a phenom with his talent and tools combined with our pitching system.
Anybody else goes in the right deal.
I agree with you on the Reds. They are in bad shape. Roster clogged with expensive position players, yet still poor defense and offense on the team level. They still have 2 good SP vets, a few interesting young pitchers, but far away from being a serious contender.
I am guessing the Reds just tread water this winter, no big signings. I hope I am wrong. I think their hands are tied for the next 2-3 years. They have a lot of big contracts on their roster that would be difficult or impossible to trade.
[Phil ] Castellini celebrated the team's farm system and noted the team had promising prospects who would one day be great Reds -- and then joke then they'd be ex-Reds, saying "of course we're going to lose them". #SellTheTeamBob
Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote