Reds Insider: Here's something to debate II

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Here's something to debate II

Given the absence of Reds news, I thought I'd start another debate. As Josh Beckett continues to dominate in the postseason, remember Boston gave up Hanley Ramirez to get him.

So would you give up Jay Bruce and say, Johnny Cueto, to get a Beckett type? Poster Jeff suggested trading Bruce and Josh Hamilton. If you could get Beckett, wouldn't you? I don't think there are any Becketts out there. But the point is you've got to give up a lot to get a lot. Giving up Ramirez was a huge risk. Beckett had a plus-5.00 ERA last year and Ramirez was rookie of the year. But it worked out -- for both teams.

50 Comments:

at 7:08 PM

Anonymous said...

Its the kind of trade that is good for a team if it 'puts you over the top' in terms of playoff potential.

For a team like the Reds that's still building, the most valuable type of player is a young one who will be under the Reds' control for several years, and at reasonable price.

Given payroll limitations, it should be easier for the Reds to win by emulating the Rockies, Diamondbacks, Indians or Brewers in developing young stars than to bundle our best prospects for established stars in Red Sox fashion.

at 7:27 PM

Dan H said...

I'd do it but not with Bruce. I feel Bruce has more upside to him than Hamilton. It would hurt to give up Hamilton but to improve the pitching you must. Hamilton and Cueto for maybe Santana. Any updates on the injured Reds-Griffey, Dunn, Freel etc.?

at 7:41 PM

Anonymous said...

You have to give something to get something. It also takes 2 to tango.

Having said that, Bruce and Cueto should be untouchable. I would trade Homer and/or Votto. I think these 2 are highly overrated and could net a quality big league starter. Votto can't hit righties (more fit for a platoon role) and Homer is slightly above average and doesn't have a good work ethic.

at 7:55 PM

KyleWest said...

Good topic, John. I wouldn't trade Bruce given his age, but I would consider moving Votto or Hamilton. The problem is, say Beckett blew his shoulder out in June of 06 and was never the same? It would be considered the worst trade in history. Trading young, superstar caliber position guys for starting pitching can be risky business.

at 8:38 PM

Phill said...

I wouldn't give up two prospects for Josh Beckett.

Giving up Hanley may have been a tough decision but really they can literally afford it. If Beckett turns out to stink then they lost a good young short stop but that doesn't really set them back at all. If a team like the Reds gives up huge prospects for a guy who then turns to fail they are probably getting wrecked for much more than just a season. The negative seems much worse than what the positive could be, at least in my eyes.

I also don't believe the fans have any trust that Wayne Krivsky could make this type of trade and not have it backfire.

at 8:46 PM

Anonymous said...

Trading Hamilton, Votto, Bruce or
Cueto would be a panic move. The
risk is that they get another
Milton in return. All the Reds
need is the patience to allow
pitchers to develop and a few
ordinary trades. I don't see any
lineup in the playoffs which is superior to the Reds.

at 9:00 PM

Anonymous said...

No. You can do that when you have the money that Boston has to go out and buy your players. The reds can't afford to trade top young talent because they can't replace them.

at 9:10 PM

Anonymous said...

we could afford to give up bruce and hamilton for a beckett type if there is one out there...we have a pleothra of options for outfield and votto could play out there as well if need be.

Its not everyday that you could get a beckett type and one more quality starter and something to fill up the holes in the bullpen would be great as well.

It would be interesting to test the water and see what these "prospects" could get us

at 9:55 PM

cincikid said...

You have to remember that the Red Sox are a major market team that doesn't have to totally rely on home grown players to make a push. They have free agents vying for their attention. If Krivsky and the Reds had the money and resources of Fenway nostalgia then I'd go for a trade like that. It's not too often that the Reds have prospects of Bruce, Hamilton, Votto high ceiling position player talent. And we all know how often we have home grown talent like Cueto, Bailey high ceiling pitching talent. Heck, the Red Sox have the likes of Ellsbury, Papelbon, Lester. They can afford high risk trades. WE CAN'T!! The only pitchers that I would agree on giving up prospects for is the likes of Johan Santana or Brandon Webb. And we all know what we would have to do to keep either. P-A-Y B-I-G!!!!

at 10:05 PM

Anonymous said...

Since you asked, let me suggest this wich might even be doable. I would trade Encarnacion, Coffey, Cueto and another, lower level prospect (Daryl Thompson or Matt Maloney) to the Twins for Johann Santana. Keep in mind, Krivsky negotiated Santana's current contract, so it is known they have a positive relationship. Santana has said he would accept a trade to a contending team. If he can be led to believe Baker will make the Reds contenders and likes the idea of working with Krivsky again, this could be a near-fetched idea.

But the key is how much should you be willing to part with. I would not give up BOTH Bruce AND Cueto. I would sooner trade Cueto than Bruce or Votto, since pitching prospects can go down in flames so much faster than hitters. But the biggest key to trades is what the teams get up front. The Twins need a third baseman, the Reds need a starter

at 10:11 PM

rpa said...

if you can guarantee me that i'm getting josh beckett and not eric milton... yes, i'd gladly trade bruce and cueto for a GUARANTEED #1 pitcher. unfortunately, there are no guarantees.

besides, you'd have to assume the reds would be able to re-sign the player they get in the trade. they can trade for dontrelle willis... will it do us any good when he's pitching for the dodgers or mets in 2009?

in this market, the reds are going to just have to hope that johnny cueto IS josh beckett... that way, we can keep him for 4 or 5 years before he winds up pitching in a decent ballpark for a team with more money.

until the reds move back the fences in this godawful ballpark, they are not going to be able to sign/retain anyone who would be considered a #1 pitcher (with the exception of harang, who somehow seems able to handle this park for reasons i can't figure out).

at 10:15 PM

JerBear said...

Something you didn't mention John is that the Red Sox also got Mike Lowell. I think it'd be kind of crazy even for Boston to make that trade if it was just for one pitcher.

If Jay Bruce is comparable to Ken Griffey Jr. as a youngster, which the Reds Triple A coach said, then I wouldn't trade him for anyone.

But if he was just considered a very good prospect, I'd maybe trade him along with one other good prospect for someone like Johan Santana.

But in the end the Reds and the Red Sox are so not comparable in my opinion as far as building organizations.

Boston could take that risk of trading Hanley Ramirez and some pitching prospects.

The Reds are so starved for prospects that I think Krivsky wouldn't risk his career by trading the likes of Bruce, Cueto, Hamilton, Bailey, for even someone proven.

They finally have talent...now they just need to get them to the Majors and start playing them!

at 10:33 PM

JerBear said...

I think it's interesting that Beckett had a 5.00 ERA his first year in Boston.

He was probably getting quite a bit of criticism last year, but he obviously turned it around.

For some reason I also wouldn't mind trading Votto and/or Encarnacion if you could get some major pitching talent for them.

I wouldn't trade Bruce, Hamilton, Bailey, or Cueto at any price.

at 12:26 AM

Mr. Redlegs said...

Uh, the question isn't about the Beckett, but a Beckett type, meaning a lights-out, no-doubt, bona fide No. 1 starter.

That list is short: Webb, Peavy, Santana, Escobar who would fit the criteria of established yet young starters.

If Webb was offered, and being the type of pitcher he is and also being a regional kid, the Reds would have to take a very serious look at such a deal.

Otherwise, nah. Patience.

at 2:29 AM

Anonymous said...

I don't care how you slice it, Boston has competent GM/Ownership in place, Cincinnati DOES NOT.

The fact is, we couldn't even get a player of Hanley Ramirez's pedigree.

Trading any one of Votto, Bruce, or Hamilton at this point would be stupid, not least BECAUSE there are no Becketts out there.

We blew it with the manager, and we'll blow it with A-Rod too.

We could have had A-Rod and Torre here in 2008.

Imagine A-Rod at 3rd, Keppinger at Short, Phillips at 2nd, Votto at 1st, Dunn in left, Hamilton in center, Bruce in Right Field, and hopper and encarnacion and freel on the bench...

Then imagine we could actually sign some Japanese and Dominican Republic pitching talent--which is a bigger pipe dream than landing A-Rod ever could be.

What a shame we're stuck with Dusty "The Clear Supporter" Baker, that we were in such a hurry to hire him (no other MLB team was rushing) that we couldn't have at least TALKED with Torre.

Go buy A-Rod, Castellini. Just do it. Do something right for a change, will you?

And trade Junior for a free-agent starter. And send Krivsky with him as a "special bonus twofer"

at 2:55 AM

Phill said...

Ah it's nice that you have Keppinger penciled in as the starting short stop so I know not to bother taking anything else you say seriously.

How has the Dusty signing been blown? How is it before the PRE-season even starts, hell hours after the POST-season ended he's already been bad?

Plus wouldn't it make more sense with Edwin at 3rd and A-Rod at shortstop? and then you have Keppinger on the bench but hey he had a wicked hot month at the end of a losing season so I guess he should be the starting short stop...

at 3:50 AM

Marie830 said...

Beckett was 26 when the Red Sox traded for him. So the trade made since. They also got Mike Lowell in the deal and had to throw in some other good prospects. So it's hard to say that they traded Ramirez for Beckett.
Still, Webb and Santana are 29, while Peavy is only 27, but I am not sure that Peavy has as dominant of a future as Beckett. He did blow the playoff game against the Rockies this year, and was rocked in his two other playoff games.
So I just don't think that there is a guy like Beckett out there now. However, if through magic, the Reds could trade Bruce for Beckett when he was 26, I'd say do it.

As for A'Rod, the guy as never even played in a World Seires game. He is a loser! Every team he leaves does better after he leaves, and every team he goes to does worse. If he couldn't lead the Yankees to the World Series, how can we expect him to lead the Reds.

at 7:43 AM

Anonymous said...

We are not the Boston Red Sox and really cant afford to give up players like Josh Hamilton at this point in time. What happens if Griffey gets hurt and Dunn has a bad year?

Dan H for you to suggest that Bruce has more upside than Hamilton is ridiculous. We have no idea how Bruce would do at the major league level. Hamilton is already one of this leagues best defensive center fielders and can hit the hide off the ball.

Maybe Bob will spend a little bit more money

at 8:53 AM

Anonymous said...

Hamilton is an OK defensive centerfielder. He is not one of the league's best. He's got one of the league's best arms. He's got adequate range. He just looks so much better than he is because Reds fans are used to watching Griffey in center.

at 9:04 AM

Anonymous said...

"Prospects" (cont'd.)

"...Parity is coming to major league baseball in a way nobody could have predicted ten years ago, meaning it's entirely possible that a 90 loss team this year (like the Reds) could be a 90 win team next year (here's hoping) - so let's think about where these guys fit in on a club chasing an NL pennant. Keeping Votto would likely mean declining Scott Hatteberg's option, which is fine, but how does Jay Bruce get ABs on a 2008 Reds squad that boasts three starting outfielders with 40 HR, 100 RBI ability? Is he a better bet to hit for average and drive in runs having never faced major league pitching than Adam Dunn? Josh Hamilton? Ken Griffey? So the question is, how do the Reds maximize Jay Bruce's value next year in pursuit of an NL pennant - as a fourth outfielder or as an asset to be cashed in to upgrade the pitching staff? That could go either way, but one thing we know for sure is that the Reds pitching staff is nowhere near worthy of a championship-caliber club in its current state..."

at 9:26 AM

Anonymous said...

OK..here you go:

Encarnacion, AGon and Votto for Bedard. Take the money you are saving from Milton and sign Bedard long term.

Phillips to SS, Cantu/Keppinger/Freel to 3B and Keppinger/Freel to 2B. I'm pretty sure we can find a reasonable 2B or 3B if we have to for a lot less than it would cost for a #1/#2 starter.

The Orioles have been trying to move Tejada and now they can rebuild with some offense. Their pitching would still be decent and they could get some serious prospects for Tejada.

Harang
Bedard
Arroyo
Bailey
Belisle/Elizardo/Shearn/Cueto

Thoughts?

at 9:58 AM

Anonymous said...

I do not believe that anyone would be willing to trade the type of pitcher that it should take for the Reds to trade a Jay Bruce. But knowing the incompetence of the Reds GM, it is possible that the Reds will trade him and wind up with something like Majewski and Bray.

If you could get a Brandon Webb for Johnny Cueto or Joey Votto or both or Josh Hamiltion, you do it in an instant. But that is not going to happen.

I forget, why is it that the Reds would not be interested in Dontrel Willis? He should be affordable and a change of scenery is all he needs.

at 10:16 AM

Unknown said...

Interesting topic, but why are people ready to give away a core of potential superstars to get one starter. You have Harang, Arroyo, and Bailey penciled in at 1,2,3. Therefore you need a 4 and 5. Cueto is on his way. The bullpen needs help no doubt about that. Hamilton is potentially a 40 HR 100 RBI guy, and due to his past and injury record you would never get anything close to a beckett for him. The reds bigger problems are connected. They have 4 outfielders ready to start. Obviously 3 spots available. And they need to add pitching somewhere. So obviously someone has to go to get something. You get your pitcher(s) and you uncrowd the outfield. I trade EE, Votto, and a prospect to get what you want. You cant trade Jr because he can veto any deal you make. Dunn is a one year 13 million dollar man. Bruce has a higher ceiling than any red is recent history. And Hamilton might be the best player of them all. You move Dunn to first(he is awful in left field no matter how hard he works) and let the other 3 patrol the outfield. This way you get to keep Dunn, let your youngsters to continue to develop at the major league level, and you get to watch JR get to 600. Oh and just while we are on the topic I would also package Gonzo in the deal, move BP to short, allow Cantu to play second, have open season for third, and open up my pocket book for Jorge Posada to be my catcher. Go Redlegs!

at 10:31 AM

Rob Dicken said...

I would trade Homer and/or Votto. I think these 2 are highly overrated and could net a quality big league starter.

How is Homer Bailey "overrated?" He just turned 21 years old and hasn't even pitched a full season in the Major Leagues yet! Most pitchers don't even make it into the Majors until 25-26 years old at the earliest. Greg Maddux was rocked his first year in the Majors, and look at him now...Future Hall of Famer.

It's amazing how people can say someone is "overrated" by how they pitched in less than 1/10th of a season and being so young. Get with the program, man...seriously!

Votto is the same exact thing...he's young. And he produced very well at the end of the season when brought up, and played surprisingly good defense. He is expendable, because first basement are a dime a dozen in the major leagues. So, I will give you the benefit of the doubt there.

at 10:36 AM

Anonymous said...

Good lord why would you want A-Rod here? Have you not noticed he's all about A-Rod? You think Griffey is a bit of a Prima Donna? A-Rod would cause people to violently become ill with his prissiness and gloating about himself.

And remember, Scott Boras would be in the front row with his "Proud Father/Mother wannabe of the Rod" sweatshirt yelling at anyone making fun of him. Or Boras would be the captain of the cheerleading squad dating the starting quarterback kind of thing going on.

I heard he places mirrors throughout the dugout and around third base to wink and blow kisses at himself.

Sure I know what he provides with the bat,but really has he lead any "team" he has played on anywhere of late? And no he wasn't the reason the Yanks came back this year. That was a total "team" effort.

at 10:42 AM

Chris at Redleg Nation said...

The deal wasn't exactly Hanley for Beckett:

Acquired 3B-R Mike Lowell and RHPs Josh Beckett and Guillermo Mota from the Marlins for SS-B Hanley Ramirez and RHPs Anibal Sanchez, Jesus Delgado, and Harvey Garcia.

It should be remembered, though, that Lowell was considered to be washed up at the time, and there were significant questions about Beckett's health.

The bigger point is that as of the time this trade went down, Hanley Ramirez was not comparable to the prospect Jay Bruce is right now. He'd gone from being Boston's #1 prospect (per BA) in '04, and Prospectus' #23 overall in '05 to well down the charts. He was seen as a talented, but fading prospect. Bruce seems to be the consensus top prospect in baseball right now.

Short answer: Don't trade him.

at 10:47 AM

Chris at Redleg Nation said...

As for A'Rod, the guy as never even played in a World Seires game. He is a loser! Every team he leaves does better after he leaves, and every team he goes to does worse.

Never let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

Seattle w/ ARod: 2 divisions, 1 WC, 4 winning seasons in 6 years. Seattle w/o ARod: 1 division (2001), 0 WC, 4 winning seasons in 7 years.

Dallas w/ ARod: 0 titles or winning seasons in 3 years.
Dallas w/o ARod: 0 titles, 1 winning season in 4 years.

Yankees w/ ARod: 3 divisions, 1 WC in 4 years.

at 12:56 PM

Jim said...

A team like the Red Sox who has a lot of financial backing can take risks like that. If Beckett hadn't worked out, it would not have set them back that far. They just sign a few high dollar free agents and make a few trades and they're ok.

The Reds though on the other hand, would be putting all of their eggs in one basket by making such a trade. The Reds have to be able to develop from within, and trading away such big parts of their future for one veteran is just too risky and could set them back years if that one player didn't work out.

at 1:38 PM

Anonymous said...

Chris @ Redlegs...good point but if you notice if he is not surrounded by great players like he was in Seattle and New York,he's just a great player putting up great numbers without raising the team to the playoffs.

I don't think he has proven to be diffrence maker,a guy who raise the level of the players around him. He's a great player no doubt,but he's not a difference maker.

If he goes somewhere and becomes the main reason the team makes it through the world series and win, then I'll change my tune. Unil then,he's just another P.R. hpey bore of Scott Boras.

at 1:58 PM

Marie830 said...

Chris at Reddlegs,

This is what I was referring to

Seattle in 2000, last year with A-Rod. were 91-71, their best year ever. The next year, without him they won 116 games, then won 93 the next two years. Clearly they got better when he left.

Texas in the three years with A-Rod 2001-2003, won 71, 72, and 73 games. They had won 95 just one year before getting him. Then in 2004, the first year without him, they win 89. Clearly they got worse when he arrived, and better when he left.

NY had just been to the World Series the year before getting A-Rod, and had been there 5 out of the last 6 years. They have not been there with him, and the last two years have yet to get out of the first round of Playoffs. Clearly better before, worse with him.

those are facts.

at 2:08 PM

Anonymous said...

Don't trade any of our top-line youth for anybody. Let Wayne continue to find gems like Phillips, Hamilton & Burton. We can expect him to repeat that magic again, and hopefully it will be on the pitching or catching side. Don't ask him to make major trades because they're risky for any GM and he has not shown a talent in acquiring talent that way. Please draft amatuer pitchers according to their talent and not their signability. I can't believe so many people are willing to trade Votto let alone the other two youngsters. Votto showed me a lot against teams fighting for playoff berths. He actually cuts down his already short swing with 2 strikes and drives tough pitches over the infielder's heads. Plus he has very good speed, a rarity at 1B. He is a batting title waiting to happen with a professional hitter's approach already. Trade Junior, who I like alot but he is near the end may have extra value because of 600th HR comming up soon.

at 3:07 PM

Anonymous said...

Bruce projects to be a much better ballplayer than Hanley Ramirez.

Hamilton will always be plagued by injuries and be lucky to play over 100 games in a season.

at 3:10 PM

JerBear said...

That's still amazing to me that Seattle won 114 games that year. Without Arod or Jr. also.

It somewhat pains me to say this, but Seattle also had Second Baseman who used to play for the Reds who I've heard many people think was on the juice during those years!

One thing the Reds I think still need to consider a little more is defense in the outfield. Better pitching would help of course make it easier for the outfielders to play defense, but if we go into next year with Griffey and Dunn in the outfield we are once again going to have very little speed in the corner outfield spots.

Watching the World Series reminded me of how important outfield defense is when watching Coco Crisp and that Ellsbury kid make several nice plays going back on balls and at the wall.

Hamilton could become a great Centerfielder, but I think he was kind of learning on the job last year. He has the great arm so he's probably more suited for right field, but with Griff and Dunn the Reds are stuck in their outfield formation.

at 3:19 PM

Anonymous said...

note to 12:38 anon and Marie. Your analogies of A-Rod's team's performances kind of reminds me of someone on the Reds roster.

at 4:12 PM

Anonymous said...

Chevy,
You must be thinking of ryan freel. Because we all know how you favor and desire one Ken Griffey Jr.!

at 5:11 PM

Anonymous said...

Stick with your young players.

The same ppl who blasted the reds for the neglected farm system are clamoring to trade away encarnacion, the top prospect in baseball, votto, and cueto. count em, FOUR potentially great players that we have for cheap right now. why sign big contracts sooner than nneeded when the talent is here at home? griffey is gone after this year so why thin out the outfield in haste, and ruin a dunn-hamilton-bruce trio in 2008 with a super sub like keppinger or hopper. hell, with the history of griff and hamilton who says they won't miss time?

anon 24/7

at 5:11 PM

Anonymous said...

First of all, to the guy insisting the Reds sign A-Rod now----yes, it would be nice to have him around and adding some extra power in the line-up. Except for these not-so minor points:

----Scott "Podex Perfectus" (learn your Latin) Boras will demand a minimum $30 million. And that would just be for the negotiating rights, if he has his way! The Reds would only be able to afford to fill out the rest of the team with the Dayton roster.

----Personality-wise, A-Rod is not the monster he's portrayed to be. He's not difficult to work with, his teammates always seem to like him. He prefers to keep to himself outside of the stadium and doesn't bother with the press much. This is fine. The problem is, he has no interest in being a leader. He would like to win, but if it doesn't happen, he'll be just as satisfied playing his own game.

----Scott Boras will never let him play for a team in a low-profile market. Rodriguez would thrive in places like Cincinnati, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh or Kansas City. Low pressure, few expectations. Even without being a leader, he would have a positive influence on the rest of the team just by his approach to the game. But it won't happen. Boras will try to fix it so that A-Rod gets a share of the TV revenues anytime his team is on a nationally televised game. And the Reds, Rays, Pirates and Royals got a total of about 7 games televised nationally last year combined.

----A-Rod has no loyalty. When all is said and done, Boras calls the shots and A-Rod follows, whether it's good for him or not. Boras told him to sign with the Rangers rather than stay in Seatle because the Rangers agreed to Boras' demand that they market A-Rod separately from the rest of the team. When the Rangers weren't going anywhere, Boras demanded a trade and set off the bidding war between the Red Sox and Yankees. They had a done deal with the Red Sox till Boras said it wasn't good enough. A-Rod never expressed an opinion either way. Now, Boras tells him to opt out from the Yankees, he does with no question. Rodriguez is letting someone else control his career. This doesn't bother him at all. So obviously, loyalty is not high on his list of priorities.

at 7:59 PM

Anonymous said...

I like the Bedard deal. Dunn and Votto or Cueto (not both) for Bedard. Or you could expand the deal if the O's won't take on the difference in salary. This is of course assuming Dunn would be willing to waive his no trade clause. If it's anyone other than Dunn, Griffey (I'm sure that won't happen), Votto, Cueto I don't do it.

Hamilton and Bruce IMO are both young, cheap and more complete than the above listed. Votto is good as well but he is easier to replace (Hatteberg short term, 1B long term is easier to fill), has value to Baltimore because he plays 1B (who desperately wanna fill that position) and again isn't as good as Bruce/Hamilton.

If you can then deal Griffey, you can play your youth in the of full time. Hamilton LF, Hopper CF, Bruce RF.

If the moeny is an issue you could include Gonzo and the other prospect of Votto/Cueto which wasn't initially selected and accept Tejada. Tejada isn't what he once was defensively but neither is Gonzo and offensively even though Tejada isn't what he once was he is still superior to Gonzo.

C - Ross/Valentin
1B - Hatteberg/Keppinger/Cantu
2B - BP
SS - Tejada
3B - EE
LF - Hamilton
CF - Hopper/Freel
RF - Bruce

Harang
Bedard
Arroyo
Bailey
Belisle

Then sign Francisco Cordero to close games. Pen looks like so.

Salmon RHP
Coutlangus LHP
Weathers RHP
Bray LHP
Burton RHP (Set-Up)
Cordero RHP (Closer)

Not bad!!!

at 9:27 PM

Anonymous said...

VOTTO AND BRUCE ARE UNTOUCHABLES. WHO DO YOU EXPECT TO FILL THE VOID ONCE DUNN AND GRIFFEY ARE GONE? THEY CAN'T PLAY FOREVER and VOTTO AND BRUCE WILL BOTH BE BETTER PLAYERS THAN THE LATTERS. IF ANYONE IS TRADED IT IS JOSH HAMILTON FOR JOHAN SANTANA, ONE FOR ONE, JUST LIKE RAMIREZ FOR BECKETT.

at 9:59 PM

Anonymous said...

I look at some of these postings about trading Dunn, Griffey and Votto, picking up Tejada (isn't he getting paid twice what Gonzales is? More than Dunn at any rate) and Bedard (he's not that good, is he?), Santana for Hamilton in a one-for-one trade "just like Ramirrez-Beckett" (didn't someone already point out that wasn't so?).

I am so glad Wayne Krivsky is the GM and not any of these HACKS who make Jim Bowden's compulsive, vaguely homoerotically- motivated trades seem almost sensible in comparison

at 10:27 PM

Anonymous said...

Edwin Encarnacion, Todd Coffey, Johnny Cueto and Daryl Thompson to Minnesota for Johan Santana

Mike Stanton and Elizardo Ramirez to Baltimore for Chad Bradford

Roster

Harrang
Arroyo
Santana
Bailey
Belisle

Weathers
Burton
Shearn
Bradford
McBeth
Bray
Coutlangus

Ross
Votto
Phillips
Keppinger
Gonzales
Griffey
Hamilton
Dunn

Valentin
Freel
Cantu
Hopper
Coats

This seems a bit more realistic than most other fantasy rosters we see here. This is a roster the Reds might actually pay for

at 10:43 PM

Anonymous said...

Bedard from Baltimore? It could happen. Man people think this front office is clueless ought to check into the O's front office. Thank the stars Peter A. isn't the Reds owner. We would all be beggin for Uncle Cral back!

at 11:24 PM

Rob Dicken said...

IF ANYONE IS TRADED IT IS JOSH HAMILTON FOR JOHAN SANTANA, ONE FOR ONE, JUST LIKE RAMIREZ FOR BECKETT.

You obviously didn't read the responses to the article. It was Beckett and Lowell for Ramirez and 2 minor leaguers.

Josh Hamilton would not trade for Johan Santana alone...in fact, you would probably have to trade your whole middle lineup to get Johan Santana.

at 1:40 AM

Anonymous said...

John, I've thought all along that the Reds are going to have to give up something in order to get something. In my mind that means a younger up and coming talent. I won't even try to debate who that should be.

John, I noticed that Carlos Silva filed for free agency. His numbers won't blow you away but he will pitch 200 innings, has a better than .500 record for his career and has a solid strike out to BB percentage. His ERA could be a little better but pitching in the NL might help his numbers some. What are your thoughts?

at 9:59 AM

Anonymous said...

Since everyone wants to make trades why not these:
Freel for Webb
Griffey for Beckett
Coffey & Stanton for Nathan
Hatteburg for Peavy
and while I'm at it, I think that I will trade David Ross for Ivan Rodriquez and a player to named later.
Why trade anybody any good? Krivsky should make these deals right away.

at 1:13 PM

Anonymous said...

Reds fans would regret the day either Votto or Bruce are traded away, leaving us with strikeout king Dunn and 38 year old Griffey who will definitely be on the disabled list again in 2008. Yeah, go on Reds fans, keep showing your ignorant GM wannabe trades involving Votto and Bruce and Tampa Bay Devil Rays here we come!

at 1:31 PM

Anonymous said...

Better yet..let's trade Josh Hamilton for Giants middle reliever Vinnie Chulk and Votto and Bruce for two middle relievers that can't find the strike zone, a la Bray and Majewski. Pittsburgh Pirates here we come!

at 4:22 PM

Unknown said...

It's the kind of trade that can win you a pennant someday. However, the Reds can't afford to pay a player of Josh Beckett's ability the going market rate. The only way the Reds get a Josh Beckett type would be trading for him during his cheap years and trading him away before free agency.

at 6:16 PM

Branden Russell said...

There most certainly is a Beckett type player out there. His name is Johan Santana. Yes Johan is a free agent after this season so the Reds could demand they lock him up before the trade is final. With many itriguing players to offer, it would be the question of who Minnesota would want. Also Krivsky is a former employee.

at 12:30 AM

Anonymous said...

"I look at some of these postings about trading Dunn, Griffey and Votto, picking up Tejada (isn't he getting paid twice what Gonzales is? More than Dunn at any rate) and Bedard (he's not that good, is he?), Santana for Hamilton in a one-for-one trade "just like Ramirrez-Beckett" (didn't someone already point out that wasn't so?).

I am so glad Wayne Krivsky is the GM and not any of these HACKS who make Jim Bowden's compulsive, vaguely homoerotically- motivated trades seem almost sensible in comparison"

If you don't know how good Bedard is and you don't understand the concept of dealing Dunn's money and Gonzo's money for Tejada's money. Then perhaps you should just keep your thoughts relegated to what you do know.

The deal may very well be a tad unrealistic simply because of the "names" involved but the idea's behind it have merit and actually make sense.

Now Hamilton for Santana has absolutely no possible way of ever happening, I'll give you that. That guy must call the banana phone often. He should call himself "Adam from Milwaukee"!

The Dunn and Cueto or Votto for Bedard (and perhaps a low level minor leaguer or 2) makes alot of sense. #1 To get something you must give up something. #2 Deal from a source of strength, in this case the OF. #3 Bedard although has had some injuries of concern is as good a LHP there is (Santana aside) in the game when he is on. #4 Bedard made less than 5 Mill this past season, although that will likely increase with arbitration both this winter and next (He becomes a FA after '09) unless he is signed long term.

I believe the O's would heavily consider it at the very least. in fact it's possible it might not take Dunn to get it done. However my thought process is Dunn is more expensive (obviously), is older, and less an all around player as Hamilton and Bruce who could man the corners if Dunn and Griffey were dealt. That enables us to keep Hopper/Freel in CF who are the only semi-legitimate leadoff options we have at this point.

This move improves the starting pitching, the defense and without as much of a dropoff in offensive production as some would have you believe. All at a less prohibitive cost. Which in turn allows the Reds to turn that money around to addressing the bullpen.

Heck in fact Dunn for Bedard and the O's tossing in the other player might actually work, Baltimore is dying for a young slugging star to hit behind Markakis.

The only reason I even brought up Tejada is if the O's don't wanna take on that excess money from Dunn, you could offset all costs because Dunn and Tejada's money is close as is Gonzo's and Bedard. Tejada is set to earn 32 mill over the next 2 years, which is about 16 million per (don't know the exact breakdown).

If you sign Dunn to a LTC right now how much would he get over the next 2 years? 26-30 million range IMO. Plus Tejada is a very good RH hitter which we sorely need with Votto, Bruce, Hamilton, Griffey etc. all being LH's.

I would rather the O's keep Tejada but I think they could make it work if it meant getting Bedard as part of the package.

One other thought as an aside. A lot of people (George Grande is one) feel you need HR hitter's in GABP a park somewhat notorious for giving up HR's. This is the most foolish idea I have ever heard. Why would you have to have homerun hitters when the park makes homerun hitters out of guys who are not?

So with that thought in mind, who really thinks we desperately need Dunn for our offense to work? Sure that's not Dunn's only skill but it's certainly his most marketable one. He's also a good baserunner for his size and he has an outstanding eye at the plate.

But when you have his bat control which was better this year but still not where it should be to be considered good or better, then you have no where to go but down IMO. So deal him while he is likely at the highest value he will ever be at.

Previous Posts

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Here's something to debate II

50 Comments: