Royals interested in Bruce?

[Rojo Rijo]

Exactly. If teams aren't willing to give up value to get the biggest FA bat available today then we'll let him walk and take the draft pick. Or maybe their contending division rivals might be interested in Bruce. Don't let the Reds become synonymous with "pushovers at the negotiating table".

If he's not traded they'll pick up his 13m TO and discuss deals at the WM and next summer

[REDREAD]

Then they can't have him. Seriously. If they want him, they need to pay, but no more settling in deals for the Reds.

That's a bit too extreme.
Now I am not saying Cleveland would do these deals, but how about:

Jose Ramerez for Bruce would be a good trade for both teams. Raemerez is blocked with Lindor and Kipnis in the middle infield.

Chang and Erik Gonzales are promising young infielders in the minors.
Lots of interesting young pitchers too..

I am not a prospect Guru by any means, but I think a smart scouting team could pry away a future major leaguer out of the Indians farm that is not named Frazier or Zimmer.

I agree that we shouldn't give Bruce away at this point, but there's some middle ground.

[Cannon]

Just out of curiosity, for those that are pro-trading Bruce. What benefit is there to the Reds in getting a 'future major leaguer' or average prospect/player back in return for Bruce? We've already got plenty of 'AAAA' caliber players or utility/4th outfielder types. I don't see any sense in moving a guy that will probably be a very productive bat for at least the forseeable future for bit pieces or role players. Again, at that point you may as well gamble on the compensation pick and try to hit a home-run prospect there.

[Z-Fly]

Just out of curiosity, for those that are pro-trading Bruce. What benefit is there to the Reds in getting a 'future major leaguer' or average prospect/player back in return for Bruce? We've already got plenty of 'AAAA' caliber players or utility/4th outfielder types. I don't see any sense in moving a guy that will probably be a very productive bat for at least the forseeable future for bit pieces or role players. Again, at that point you may as well gamble on the compensation pick and try to hit a home-run prospect there.

Let's not forget, the $20+ish million he is owed, is worth something too.

[Tom Servo]

Mark Sheldon ‏@m_sheldon 7m7 minutes ago
Market still early-ish. Envision would net an org's prospect ranked in their 10-20 range...not a top 10



I think Sheldon is kind of a dummy. 10-20 for teams is fodder and lottery tickets.

[WrongVerb]

Mark Sheldon ‏@m_sheldon 7m7 minutes ago
Market still early-ish. Envision would net an org's prospect ranked in their 10-20 range...not a top 10



I think Sheldon is kind of a dummy. 10-20 for teams is fodder and lottery tickets.

Yeah. 5-15 would be better. A 10-20 guy in the Reds org would be someone like YRod.

[Cannon]

Let's not forget, the $20+ish million he is owed, is worth something too.

To whom? A lot of people are claiming the Reds would have to assume some or most of his salary to move him in the first place (which again, seems ridiculous for a bat of his caliber).

But even if we look at the money who are we spending that money on if we free it up? Or is it just a cash grab for management? It really doesn't benefit this team in any way to trade Bruce for anything less than a big time prospect, even if we have to add a bit to the package.

[Alabama]

Just out of curiosity, for those that are pro-trading Bruce. What benefit is there to the Reds in getting a 'future major leaguer' or average prospect/player back in return for Bruce? We've already got plenty of 'AAAA' caliber players or utility/4th outfielder types. I don't see any sense in moving a guy that will probably be a very productive bat for at least the forseeable future for bit pieces or role players. Again, at that point you may as well gamble on the compensation pick and try to hit a home-run prospect there.

Yep, we have plenty of bench players now, that is for sure.

[Bourgeois Zee]

Yeah. 5-15 would be better. A 10-20 guy in the Reds org would be someone like YRod.

The Reds' prospects 11 - 20 according to mlb:

Tyler Mahle
Rookie Davis
Yorman Rodriguez
Eric Jagielo
Sal Romano
Scott Schebler
Blake Trahan
Antonio Santillan
Taylor Sparks
Zack Weiss

And that's in a "good" system.

I'd want more, personally.

[Z-Fly]

To whom? A lot of people are claiming the Reds would have to assume some or most of his salary to move him in the first place (which again, seems ridiculous for a bat of his caliber).

But even if we look at the money who are we spending that money on if we free it up? Or is it just a cash grab for management? It really doesn't benefit this team in any way to trade Bruce for anything less than a big time prospect, even if we have to add a bit to the package.

From what I understand, they are stashing any extra money away for when they are competitive again.

[MikeS21]

There is no way the segment of Reds fandom who wants Bruce traded will be satisfied. Either the return will be ill-fitting or underwhelming (there is no way the Tribe trades either Frazier or Zimmer--they will sooner promote them than trade them), or the Reds will walk away (and we will hear the tired "Uncle Walt is asleep at the wheel again" meme all summer.)

Agreed. It has already developed into a no-win situation. There is NO realistic deal out there that will satisfy all the folks who are dreaming of a big pay out in return for Bruce in a trade. If I am an opposing GM, I still see Jay Bruce as a guy who will give you two sets of two week hot streaks per season surrounded by weeks of futility. I see 2016 as a career year - not some new improved Jay Bruce. I fully expect next year to be a fall back year for Bruce, and I'm not giving up any prospect that has a chance to be an average or better player.

The best thing to do is to let Bruce finish the season, pray he doesn't accept the qualifying offer, and then take your extra draft pick.

[WrongVerb]

From what I understand, they are stashing any extra money away for when they are competitive again.

[Tom Servo]

I see 2016 as a career year - not some new improved Jay Bruce.

I don't think many see a 'new and improved Jay Bruce', they see the old, pre-injury Jay Bruce.

And if it IS a career year, isn't that all the more reason to trade for him since he's not locked up long term?

[Big Klu]

Agreed. It has already developed into a no-win situation. There is NO realistic deal out there that will satisfy all the folks who are dreaming of a big pay out in return for Bruce in a trade. If I am an opposing GM, I still see Jay Bruce as a guy who will give you two sets of two week hot streaks per season surrounded by weeks of futility. I see 2016 as a career year - not some new improved Jay Bruce. I fully expect next year to be a fall back year for Bruce, and I'm not giving up any prospect that has a chance to be an average or better player.

The best thing to do is to let Bruce finish the season, pray he doesn't accept the qualifying offer, and then take your extra draft pick.

Agreed, except I would pick up the option and try again next year (or maybe negotiate in good faith with him for a team-friendly extension).

[WrongVerb]

I don't think many see a 'new and improved Jay Bruce', they see the old, pre-injury Jay Bruce.

And if it IS a career year, isn't that all the more reason to trade for him since he's not locked up long term?

I do see something different about him this year. He looks like he's stopped doing the things that got him into his awful streaks. But even so, that doesn't mean he's not going to start his offensive decline soon. The only way keeping Bruce makes sense past next year is if the NL gets a DH (possible) and the LTC is on the smaller side in terms of years and dollars. That said, I'm probably 60/40 in favor of trading him, and I'm not in the camp that's demanding a top 50 prospect.