Hoping to change my username to 75769024
REDREAD (01-27-2021)
I've seen plenty of evidence (cites, articles) on one side, and plenty of speculation on the other.
If you think that I have missed a post or several, give me a post number - I'm happy to go re-read and be persuaded. I've been wrong plenty of times in my life, and I will be wrong plenty more. I enjoy having my mind changed - it means that there was a good conversation. I also like - love, actually - rampant speculation ("maybe the Padres didn't want Bauer"). Speculation can be explored, and then confirmed or rejected.
What I will respond to, however, is being fed extraordinary claims as if they were facts ("Contending team trades for new cleanup hitter in the middle of the pennant race, but trust me - they really thought he was a jabroni"), and then having my interlocutors tell me to "move on" when called on to defend the extraordinary claim.
Revering4Blue (01-26-2021),Ron Madden (01-26-2021)
Post #334 sums it up rather well.
You keep arguing that the Tribe wanted Puig. No one is disputing that. What you cite reveals that the Tribe wanted Puig. But nothing reveals that the Tribe would have refused to deal Bauer unless Puig was coming back.
It’s hard for me to believe that the Tribe, who was trying to dump Bauer after he threw the ball into centerfield when Francona pulled him, would refuse to make the trade without a 1 win OF making $10M included in the deal. Even if the Tribe really wanted Puig, I am confident the Reds could have worked something out to get Bauer.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
REDREAD (01-27-2021)
OK, I'll play. Here is the relevant part of post 334:
First, that is speculation, not "evidence." Speculation is great - it's 95% of the traffic of this board, maybe more.
But let's tease that out. If the Reds "could have" worked out a different trade, what were they going to give up? As I've shown through a half dozen cites (and can add many more), the Indians were interested in a right-handed power hitting outfielder who could slot into the cleanup spot. The names I've seen in this thread are Ervin (no) and Suarez, Greene and Lodolo (all also no). Have another proposal that the Indians would have accepted over competing offers?
As for facts, you keep coming back to the idea that the Indians were hellbent to trade Bauer after the center-field incident on July 28. But Bauer was heavily, heavily on the trade block months before then. Google "Bauer," "trade" and "2019," and you will see rumors tying him to the Yankees, Phillies, the Astros, yes - the Padres, and just about every other team in MLB. Here's a link from mid-June, which I pulled for novelty - it mentions the Rays (!):
https://www.fanduel.com/theduel/post...r-01ddgp3hfcv7
Now, writer speculation is easy. But certainly trading Bauer was well-, well-discussed, and the Indians ended up getting a haul, so it's hard to argue that they dealt Bauer only under duress.
Revering4Blue (01-26-2021)
If you think the Indians wouldn’t have traded Bauer to the Reds with Hunter Greene or Suarez (!) in place of Yasiel Puig’s mediocre 2 month of team control having ass, [you're wrong].
REDREAD (01-27-2021)
I kind of read that as those players wouldn’t have been available. For starters Lodolo was not available to be traded because he was just drafted. The Indians had a superior 3B and the reds would have never offered him anyways. Greene, I dunno what his point on that one is. Although the Indians have had a few Greene types (major hype, no results, major injury), but yeah I think they would have taken Greene for Bauer. But the fact remains: the Indians needed an OF middle of the order bat and they traded for one. That is a fact. The rest of this stuff is speculation.
What would you say.....ya do here?
Revering4Blue (01-26-2021)
The other side has no evidence to back it up either. It’s all conjecture too. I pointed that out.
Nowhere is there any evidence that shows that the Indians would have never made that trade without Puig.
The other side has evidence that the Indians wanted Puig. That proves nothing. I am sure they wanted Suarez and Castillo too. The fact that they wanted a 1 WAR player making $10M doesn’t prove that they needed that players to make the trade.
The point, which many others have made, is that all of this is speculation, and none of know if Puig was needed to make the Bauer trade. I think there is plenty of evidence on both sides to make each speculation plausible.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
kaldaniels (01-26-2021),REDREAD (01-27-2021)
That’s fair and correct.
I have no problem acknowledging this is all speculation. I think the Reds could have gotten Bauer in a deal that didn’t contain Puig - speculation. Backburner thinks the only way the Reds got Bauer was because they had Puig and included him in the deal - speculation.
The Reds traded Puig and others for Bauer - fact.
And to be clear to anyone - even though I used the phrase “I’m sure”....of course it is technically speculation but I would hope that is inferred.
REDREAD (01-27-2021),Wonderful Monds (01-26-2021)
You keep throwing his half season WAR out there like it’s evidence of anything. Puig was having a down year but was heating up in June and July. OPS by month:
April: .580
May: .737
June: .950
July: .868
He was a completely different hitter after May. The exact kind of hitter the Indians needed for their playoff run, and that’s probably why they IMMEDIATELY batted him clean-up.
What would you say.....ya do here?
Old school 1983 (01-26-2021)
The fact that Bauer was on the trade blocks months before the trade only makes your argument weaker. it lowers any leverage that they may have had in the deal. And they didn’t get a haul. Pretty much everyone thinks the Tribe made a poor deal with that trade.
As for who the Reds could have traded instead? First, my point was that it’s likely Puig was included in the deal to make the money work. It makes sense that the Reds could only have afforded to take on Bauer by sending a big contract back. Sending Puig made sense, because the Reds were trying to trade him anyway. If they never had acquired Puig, they never would have needed to send off his contract.
But if you don’t agree on that, here is a very obvious answer. The Reds could have traded some prospects to whatever team had Puig, likely the Dodgers, then sent him to the Tribe, the same way they did with Trammell and Reyes. Or trade some more prospects to the Padres and gotten Hunter Renfroe back as well, and traded him to the Tribe. I am guessing the Tribe would have liked him even more.
And guess what, at the trade deadline of 2019, the Reds wouldn’t have had to trade prospects nearly as good as Josiah Gray or Jeter Downs to get Puig or Renfroe.
It really doesn’t take much thought to think of many possible scenarios in which the Reds could have come up with some way to get Bauer without Puig.
Last edited by 757690; 01-26-2021 at 10:31 AM.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
REDREAD (01-27-2021)
Good gravy I hope the Reds sign or trade for a SS today so we can move on from this debate!!
What would you say.....ya do here?
HammerTime (01-26-2021),HokieRed (01-26-2021),Old school 1983 (01-26-2021),Revering4Blue (01-26-2021),Rojo Rijo (01-26-2021),Roy Tucker (01-26-2021),Tuff Nut (01-26-2021)
i'm telling you man, i tried pages ago. there is zero chance anyone is changing anyone else's mind on this issue. moving on is the best way to go.
but of course people are going to be making circular arguments for another 2 months on this topic. and zero minds will be changed.
HokieRed (01-26-2021),RedTeamGo! (01-26-2021),Revering4Blue (01-26-2021),RiverRat13 (01-26-2021),Ron Madden (01-26-2021),The Operator (01-26-2021)
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. |