Rumor: Yankees interested in trading for Castillo.

[M2]

16.5 fWAR though. Fangraphs has his 2013 as a 4 win season alone. I’m guessing Bref docks him some credit for the Reds defense being really good most of his career.

bWAR docks him for being actually bad. fWAR creates an alternate universe in which his pitching could have been better except it wasn't. I've got this signature for a reason.

[757690]

Yup.

That December '18 trade was an acknowledgement of a bad/failed organizational plan, and the need to accelerate the process of adding actual productive MLB players to the roster.

It was possible to accelerate the process of adding actual productive MLB players to the roster in way that accually added productive MLB players to the roster.

The concept was good. The execution of the concept, not so much.

[CaiGuy]

Simply cutting Bailey would not have freed up enough $$$, and would have seriously hampered efforts to add major league talent to the Reds roster for '19.

Moral of this story: No matter the state of a rebuild, do NOT allow four calendar years (Dec '14 -Dec "18) to pass without adding actual starting caliber MLB talent. For as much as the Astros were hammered for tanking, the Astros began adding MLB talent after their '13 season - Their rebuild began after the '11 deadline for reference.

The deal was basically salary neutral, and they ended cutting Kemp (the salary ballast that the Reds took on in return for Bailey) anyways.

I am saying that with the full admittance that I liked the deal at the time, and was all for it. But hindsight is 20/20.

[Rojo Rijo]

It really wasn't that bad of a deal. Alex Wood had just turned in a ERA+ season of 105 and the year before that was an All Star with a 152 ERA+.

This part of the deal is far too often overlooked. The Reds acquired a SP who 15 months earlier had a season where he went 16-3 with a 2.72 ERA and an 8.9 K9, 2.2 BB9, and a 1.05 WHIP.

The Reds can't be criticized as there is no way they could've known he was going to injure his back in ST. The same situation applied to the one year deal for that A-hole Ryan Madson.

[JFLegal]

It really wasn't that bad of a deal. Alex Wood had just turned in a ERA+ season of 105 and the year before that was an All Star with a 152 ERA+.

This part of the deal is far too often overlooked. The Reds acquired a SP who 15 months earlier had a season where he went 16-3 with a 2.72 ERA and an 8.9 K9, 2.2 BB9, and a 1.05 WHIP.

The Reds can't be criticized as there is no way they could've known he was going to injure his back in ST. The same situation applied to the one year deal for that A-hole Ryan Madson.

true, but alex wood already had the (correct) reputation of being fragile as hell even before the reds traded for him. you have to factor things like that in when trading for players. can't just ignore their injury history. wasn't like wood's back injury came out of the blue. he just re-injured an ailment he had been dealing with for quite some time.

[757690]

It really wasn't that bad of a deal. Alex Wood had just turned in a ERA+ season of 105 and the year before that was an All Star with a 152 ERA+.

This part of the deal is far too often overlooked. The Reds acquired a SP who 15 months earlier had a season where he went 16-3 with a 2.72 ERA and an 8.9 K9, 2.2 BB9, and a 1.05 WHIP.

The Reds can't be criticized as there is no way they could've known he was going to injure his back in ST. The same situation applied to the one year deal for that A-hole Ryan Madson.

At the time, almost no one objected to it. It made sense in theory.

However, many here have stated they would do the trade again knowing everything we know now. That would include knowing that Wood would get hurt. I think that is a difficult stance to defend.

[HammerTime]

At the time, almost no one objected to it. It made sense in theory.

However, many here have stated they would do the trade again knowing everything we know now. That would include knowing that Wood would get hurt. I think that is a difficult stance to defend.

I don't think you can account for in Ws and Ls or any stats the addition by subtraction of Homer Bailey.

[Rojo Rijo]

true, but alex wood already had the (correct) reputation of being fragile as hell even before the reds traded for him. you have to factor things like that in when trading for players. can't just ignore their injury history. wasn't like wood's back injury came out of the blue. he just re-injured an ailment he had been dealing with for quite some time.

Wood was surplus for LA. I'm not sure if he had back problems prior to the ST injury but yes I'm sure his ability/inability to stay healthy was considered. Still I feel like this deal is way too often discussed and Woods value is not taken into account appropriately.

[REDREAD]

At the time, almost no one objected to it. It made sense in theory.

However, many here have stated they would do the trade again knowing everything we know now. That would include knowing that Wood would get hurt. I think that is a difficult stance to defend.

Yes, the only defense of the Puig-Homer trade is that Puig went to Cleveland as part of the package for Bauer. When people make arguments like that, it's a bad trade.

I think the Bauer deal gets done without Puig. Maybe the Reds have to send another prospect to Cleveland, but Puig was not the main target the Indians had in mind. The Indians probably didn't want to take on his salary. But of course, no way to prove that.

[Ron Madden]

Cleveland needed an outfielder for a run in the playoffs, their offense sucked

[RedTeamGo!]

Yes, the only defense of the Puig-Homer trade is that Puig went to Cleveland as part of the package for Bauer. When people make arguments like that, it's a bad trade.

I think the Bauer deal gets done without Puig. Maybe the Reds have to send another prospect to Cleveland, but Puig was not the main target the Indians had in mind. The Indians probably didn't want to take on his salary. But of course, no way to prove that.

Puig was a big part of the deal to get Bauer. Cleveland desperately needed a middle of the order OF bat.

[757690]

Puig was a big part of the deal to get Bauer. Cleveland desperately needed a middle of the order OF bat.

That is true. However, Puig wasn’t very special in 2019. Ervin was just as good, maybe better. If the Reds hadn’t made that trade, they likely would have signed some mediocre OF, and been able to trade him for Bauer.

[RedTeamGo!]

That is true. However, Puig wasn’t very special in 2019. Ervin was just as good, maybe better. If the Reds hadn’t made that trade, they likely would have signed some mediocre OF, and been able to trade him for Bauer.

I don’t know, I live in Cleveland and remember Francona talking about Puig after they got him. He loved Puig. I fully agree Puig wasn’t good in 2019.

[JFLegal]

oh here we go again. listen, those of you that believe puig was a "big part" of the bauer trade are not going to change the minds of those of us that think that's complete nonsense, and vice versa. i posit we should agree to disagree on this one, or we'll just be going round and round all over again making the same points we did last time this was broached, with no hopes of either side convincing the opposing side they are right.

[M2]

If the Reds manage to win something in the immediate future (divisions, playoff series), then this:



and this:



were seminal events in putting them on that road to those victories.