Reds Insider: Bedard deal not dead

Saturday, December 8, 2007

Bedard deal not dead

Just finished my Sunday Insider for the paper. Here's the cliff notes version: The Reds still think they can get a deal done for Erik Bedard. They're not going to give up Jay Bruce to get one done, however.

That would mean Homer Bailey would likely be in the package. I'm guessing here but I think it would take Bailey, Joey Votto and a top prospect to get the deal done.

Would you make that trade? I think Bailey could develop into a No. 1 or 2 type. But Bedard's already there and he's left-handed.

And, by the way, they're still counting the numbers from Redsfest, but attendance is going to be over 20,000 -- a record.

123 Comments:

at 7:05 PM

JS said...

No...I don't do that trade. I don't think Bedard is worth those two.

at 7:12 PM

Dave from Louisville said...

For me I think you have to do a couple things before the season starts if you are going to trade Bailey and Votto.
First, I think Bedard needs to be signed for an extention of at least 2 more years which he would be in our control through 2011. Second, I think they need to trade for or sign via FA a 4th solid SP - Prior, Silva, Hernandez, or Tomko type.

I would much rather trade Hamilton than Votto.

The real question is "Do you believe they can win the division THIS YEAR?"

at 7:28 PM

Anonymous said...

the reds have votto and bailey at a low price for the next couple of years, while bedard's salary is about to escalate. This and the fact that the orioles want a third top prospect as well should mean no deal for the reds.

at 7:30 PM

Anonymous said...

You can only do that trade if you sign Bedard for a few more years. If you do it for a guy that will leave in 2 years Krivsky should be fired.

at 7:32 PM

Anonymous said...

I would trade Hamilton but not Votto. If you give up Bailey, you still have Cueto and from what I hear scout like him better than Bailey.

at 7:40 PM

Unknown said...

I too would give up Hamilton over Votto. I would have no problem letting go of Bailey in this deal.

at 7:43 PM

Don said...

John, are you suggesting that a deal for Bedard might be imminent?

at 7:46 PM

Anonymous said...

No...I dont make that trade. You would still have only four starters. The only way it makes sense if getting him to sign a longer term contract and using only position players.

My wife, who is a big Reds fan herself, has stated that if they trade Bailey then she is going to give up on the Reds and start following another team. I feel the same way. The Reds have been trying for years to get some homegrown talent and then they just start giviing it away. Where we live it is about the same distance to Atlanta plus there is TBS. I might become a Braves fan.

at 7:48 PM

redfuture said...

Bedard probably has a better chance at a good year than either Bailey or Votto individualy. However he is only one man, so he can only have ONE good year per season. While the chances of both Bailey & Votto having very good years in 2008 are not as high, it is possible. Then you have 2x for 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013... Bedard is only one man, don't give up the family farm for him.

at 8:08 PM

Anonymous said...

I would give up bailey for Bedard but Votto too is a hot stove hot potatoe. If Cueto is the real deal and they feel he is ready in 2008, I would make that deal. Harang/Bedard/ and Arroyo can compete with any top 3 in MLB. A dominant lefty is unhittable, and it doenst matter who the opposing team is. A lefty bullpen arm would make the bullpen top ten, maybe top 5 in MLB. Hatteberg and Keppinger at first would keep the starting 8 capable.. I do the deal.....reluctantly. Win now, baby.

john- I remember from my fantasy league Bedard was as dominant as any lefty since maybe Randy Johnson. harang and Bedard could finish 1-2 in the league in K's. What was his injury in september and is that an issue now?

at 8:10 PM

Unknown said...

John

I've seen reports that the Reds might have some interest in Mike Cameron. Do you think this has any credibility? If so, do you think a Bailey/Hamilton package would be enough to land Bedard?

at 8:10 PM

Anonymous said...

That's an interesting questions. But my question back is if you might ship out Votto, why did they release Cantu????

at 8:12 PM

Anonymous said...

Fedupred--as somene who lives MUCH closer to Atlanta than Cincinnati I want to say that, while I understand your frustration with the reds (and potentially even giving up on them), ANY idea that you even COULD become an ATLANTA fan might suggest that you arent much of a reds fan to begin with. Thats like going from the Red Sox to the yankees. So essentially, good riddance

at 8:15 PM

cincikid said...

Get it done. No way the Reds can compete unless they take a chance and trade some future for now. The division may never agian be up for the taking like it has in the last couple seasons. Bailey will be missed but has had some issues with control. Votto has had issues with his defense, and lets face it. In GABP your defense is everybit, if not more, important than your bat. And another prospect. Probably Todd Frazier or Maloney. Right now they are just chips that can help us win, now. Harang, Bedard, Arroyo, Belisle, ? . Grab a free agent. I.E. Silva, Lohse, Jennings, Colon, Fogg, Clement, or let Livingston see if he can continue to impress.

FEDUPRED,
If you can jump ship to a team like the Braves, you probably wasn't a fulltime Reds fan to begin with. And if you let your wife decide what team you are loyal too then sir, you have more problems than trying to figure out wether to watch TBS or FSN Ohio.

at 8:33 PM

maus said...

I'd pull the trigger on the following conditions

- the Reds are pretty sure that Hamilton isn't going to back slide. If that's the case, he has already proven more than Votto.

-The top prospect obviously can't be Bruce or Cueto.

- Bedard gets extended for a couple of years.

- Jr. or Dunn will play first base and we extend both of them (yes, I said both)

If all of those things can happen I'd pull the trigger right now. Main reason -- timing. We all agree that you need pitching to win. Harang age=29, Arroyo 30, Cordero 32. If we wait until Bailey and Cueto mature the other guys are going to be on the down hill side of their career. Bedard at 28 and a lefty is a perfect fit! If Jr. or Dunn can play first -- imagine the lineup

Hamilton
Phillips
Jr
EE
Dunn
AGon
Bruce
Ross (I'd love to pick up somebody here)

NL records set if everyone stays healthy -- HR's, Runs and yes, K's.

starters
Harang
Bedard
(best 1-2 punch in the league -- guys will be striking out so much against those 2 they'll be swinging at anything Bronson throws)
Arroyo
Cueto (yeah, with our offense and all the wins we'll get from our 1-2 we can afford to let him make mistakes in the majors)
Belisle/Livingston/Tomko/Wells (personnally I would have loved to see them go after Wakefield - already signed with Boston -- but can you image a hitter facing Wake and then our 1-2?)

Bullpen - may need another lefty
Bray (breakout year this year)
Burton
Weathers
Cordero
McBeth
Salmon
Coutlangus

Bench -- flexible, balanced, quality
Kepp
Hopper
Freel
Valentin
Hatteberg
Dickerson

I GUARANTEE these guys win a weak central. Once they get into the playoffs, I think our pitching will get us at least TO the WS.

Wow -- where do I sign up for season tickets?

at 8:37 PM

Anonymous said...

Keep Bailey. I want to see Homer in the rotation for a full season before he becomes trade bait. Bedard would be nice (Or so I'm told). All i know is his record and reputation. I didn't watch too many Baltimore games last year. Did you?

at 8:37 PM

maus said...

"And if you let your wife decide what team you are loyal too then sir, you have more problems than trying to figure out wether to watch TBS or FSN Ohio."

Yeah, like avoiding the beer can about to be dropped on your head!

at 8:38 PM

Anonymous said...

Don't make the trade. Bailey's the first decent Reds home grown pitching talent since....Mario Soto. Package it any other way - but without Cueto, Bailey, Votto, Stubbs or Bruce.

at 8:41 PM

Anonymous said...

If Bedard will agree to a contract extension,I would trade Bailey, Votto and any prospect not named Bruce or Cueto for Bedard. I have seen him pitch many times and he is that good. Until Homer shows the comittment and ability to develop other pitches besides his slower than advertised flat non moving fastball, I think he is expendable. Bruce and Cueto are untouchables. A scout I know says Bailey is ordinary, Cueto is special.

at 8:45 PM

maus said...

The Detroit-Tampa trade nixed any attempts to try to steal starting pitching without giving up top notch PITCHING prospects. To get someone like Bedard, Bailey or Cueto will have to be in the deal.

at 8:46 PM

Anonymous said...

Do the deal. Bailey is still a couple of years away from being the pitcher we want him to be. Bedard is there right now. I'm not sure I care whether we throw Votto or Hamilton into the deal. An extension for Bedard is a must.

at 9:19 PM

Anonymous said...

I would trade Hamilton before Votto, especially with Cantu now gone and only if you believe the Reds can win it all with Bedard this year.

at 10:05 PM

docproc said...

Yep, I'd make that trade--as long as Bruce and Cueto aren't involved.

at 10:06 PM

Grizzlyfox said...

John--just wanted to know your source, I'm assuming it wasn't Krivdawg.

at 10:32 PM

Dave from Louisville said...

John - Do you make the trade?

at 11:09 PM

big rich said...

John,

Would Wayne consider trading Bruce in a package for Dan Haren and Joe Blanton ?

at 11:10 PM

Anonymous said...

Trading Votto would be a huge mistake. The guy is a natural, destined for stardom. He was the Reds' best player down the stretch last year. I would give Baltimore Dunn, Hatteberg and Hamilton for Bedard. The money this trade would free up would allow the Reds to pursue Carlos "Hi Ho" Silva and open an outfield spot for Jay Bruce. The future is now, and Dunn, Hatteberg and Hamilton are sooooooooooo 2 minutes ago!

at 11:34 PM

Joe Farfsing said...

Anyone who says don't make the deal is delusional. I thought the name of the game was to try to win, not to have Baseball America's #1 rated minor league system. Trading a prospect, a pitching prospect at that, for a proven quantity such as Bedard is a good deal even if it takes Votto and another prospect as well. It IS funny on how soon people got divided on Bailey BTW. Last year he was going to be Nolan Ryan. He blows through several levels of minors, makes a handfull of non-descript starts with the Reds while pitching with a muscle strain and all of a sudden half of the fanbase believes he's Brien Taylor. I think he's going to be a really good pitcher for somebody and if we can get a top of the rotation pitcher, I'm fine with him being an ace elsewhere.

at 11:41 PM

John Fay said...

I make the trade. And if I reveal the source, they won't be a source any longer. But it is someone who would know.

at 11:51 PM

Anonymous said...

This is asinine. Evryone's convinced Cueto is ready now, Bailey (at 21) is washed up and Votto and Hamilton were never really all that good. Not a chance in hell do I make this deal. What I would do is send Cueto, Encarnacion and Stubbs and see if they'll take Coffey as well. EE is arbitration eligable next year. If he has his real breakout year next season the way Philips did this year, the budget will skyrocket even more. Bedard has to be locked in to a long term deal for this trade to happen and only after they've gone thru evry muscle structure in his arm and gotten 162 doctors to confirm he's solid as a rock. It would be stupid to mortgage the immediate future otherwise.

at 11:57 PM

Chris at Redleg Nation said...

What does "and a top prospect" mean?

You've ruled out #1 (Bruce). Bailey and Votto are #2-3. So who else is "top"?

I'm fine with trading prospects, provided the Reds have suddenly become the type of organization who can afford Bedard. I don't know that I'd give up 3 of my top 4-5 prospects for a guy who's never pitched 200 innings in a season, though.

(Has anyone explained how Bedard's strikeout rates jumped from 7.9 per 9 IP to 10.9 last year? That's probably something we should know.)

(I was just surprised to see how nicely they're actually set up to add another contract - neither Harang nor Bronson's raises kick in until '09, by which time Junior and maybe Dunn will be off the books).

at 12:02 AM

Unknown said...

I don't like this trade. If the Reds do make this it would obviously make them a better team right now...but in the long term, I have a feeling this will bite them in the butt if Bailey, Votto, and another top prospect are dealt.

at 12:27 AM

Anonymous said...

Just curious...how many of you have seen Bedard pitch? Third in strikeouts while missing almost two months? Injury was not pitching related but the club shut him down.

This guy made the best offenses in the AL look silly! With just a little run support he could be a 25 game winner!

Some of you want to be so picky about who has to go....a pitcher like Bedard only comes along so often! He is exactly what will get us into the play-offs.

Get a grip folks...a lot of other teams would love to get this guy!!!

at 12:28 AM

Unknown said...

I'm an O's fan, and I found this linked through another website. You would be crazy to not take Bedard, even for two years, if you think you can contend. Here's why: He would of won the Cy Young if he had pitched in September. He was leading the league in strikeouts, and had his bullpen blow AT LEAST 5 wins for him (there may be more, I cannot recall the exact number). He is a tad truculent with the media however, which never gets mentioned. I have no idea how that equates into his clubhouse value, but I know the reporters in Baltimore all hate his guts. I know Votto and Homer Bailey PLUS something may seem like a high price tag, but from my perspective I'd much rather have Matt Kemp and my mother's bridge team if Bedard goes. Cheers from baseball purgatory...

at 12:50 AM

Anonymous said...

If you wouldn't do a Bailey, Hamilton and maybe a Frazier or Stubbs for Bedard you either don't know how good Bedard is, you don't understand that pitching in the name of the games in baseball and while Homer is a TREMENDOUS PROSPECT Erik Bedard is PROVEN and would be a CY YOUNG candidate for the Reds to complimet out other CY YOUNG candidate in Aaron Harang. Harang, Bedard, Arroyo, Lieber(or a free agent signing like that, and Belisle or maybe Cueto would be a very, very solid rotation that might be the best in the NL Central. We have not played in the playoffs in 12 years, it's time to stop that streak and Erik Bedard may very well do that. If the Reds are really serious about this they need to try and get this done ASAP. This city has a chance to be ELECTRIC throughout the summer if the Reds get Erik Bedard. GET IT DONE WAYNE!

at 1:01 AM

Unknown said...

I'm one of those "bird in the hand" guys when it comes to Reds prospects, particularly pitchers.

If we can get Bedard in a deal for Bailey, I pull the trigger before Baltimore has time to change their minds.

Bailey MIGHT blossom. He might not. For some reason, Chris Gruler (whom we took over some guy named Kazmir) and Dustin Mosely keep leaving a bad taste in my mouth. We KNOW what Bedard can do.

As far as it being a foregone conclusion that Bedard would leave first chance he got because a) he wouldn't want to stay or b) because the Reds wouldn't be able to afford him....who says on either front?

If the Reds are competitive when his contract expires, he might just want to hang around. Cincy aint a bad baseball town. And by then, the Reds will always be able to shed Dunn's contract if they choose, and Junior's will probably be close to up as well. And if we're playing winning ball, the team's making more money, maybe the payroll goes up. So there's no hard and fast rule that Bedard would be unaffordable in 2009 or 2010.

Votto's a nice player, but from what I read, he's projected to be a 20-homer guy with a nice average. Sounds kinda like Sean Casey, and frankly, have we missed him much? Where is he now? Can't we get that production at first from someone else?

I think you shy away from giving up Bailey AND Cueto, But Bailey and Encarnacion +1, Bailey and Hamilton +1, heck yeah, I make that deal.

at 2:03 AM

Gerard Milewski said...

Votto is every mediocre 1B that the Reds have had since Benzinger, stat-wise. I'd rather keep very inexpensive and reliable Hatteberg and trade Votto for some pitching. I would, however, rather include an outfielder than a second starter.

at 2:50 AM

Wacky Dan said...

I say we can win now and not give up so much. I don't like the trade. It's selling the farm for a years crop. It's stupid.

at 3:00 AM

Mr. Redlegs said...

When did Bedard become freaking Sandy Koufax and warrant that kind of player outlay?

He's had one good year, one mediocre year and two also-rans.

He's always got some ailment.

He's a classic six-inning pitcher, having averaged above six just once.

He throws 102 pitches per outing in those six innings.

He's allowed 903 baserunners in just 658 career innings.

But you're willing to give up anyone and anything but Bruce? For a guy who can (and likely will) walk in two years?

And oh, this little disclaimer: HE'S NOT SIGNING AN EXTENSION. That's not a condition of the trade. His agent has made it clear they want to hit the open market.

If Bedard was the missing piece to the Reds have a shot at the World Series, then you make the deal. But they're missing several parts and Bedard alone is not the difference.

at 4:01 AM

Anonymous said...

It amazes me that how in Cincinnati with both the media and the fans "out of sight = out of mind."
At the beginning of last year EVERYBODY loved Ryan Freel - the common man's "Charlie Hustle". And now he's an after-thought.

And because Josh Hamilton missed time, esp. at the end of the season, suddenly everyone wants to "fire up the Taureg" to drive him out of town in the first trade.

How did Hamilton go from "Boy Wonder" to expendable poker chip so bloddy fast??! I read another comment stating Votto was "a natural, destined for stardom..." For Criminy Christmas 6 months ago we were calling Hamilton THE Natural - as in Roy Hobbs."
These posts reflect the stone cold fact that the baseball I.Q. in this town has gone down in the same fashion the murder rate has gone up - expodentially.

Hamilton can give you a high average hitter who hits for power, can steal bases, and has the best arm on the team. He's a freak of nature - a bonefied likely super, superstar. He's given us more than a glimpse of his potential to be the complete ballplayer.

And everybody's more than willing to chuck him aside in favor of a guy (Votto) who had a nice September but is one dimensional. This town drives me nuts. Hoefully Krivsky doesn't suffer from the same short term memory los that apparently so many of you do. Hamilton can be - in football terminology - a franchise player for years to come. Give him a chance to truly blossem.

at 8:16 AM

Anonymous said...

MAKE THE TRADE! It all boils down to one thing: Bailey has a CHANCE to be good; Bedard is good now. It's a no-brainer; let's go for it this year instead of hanging on to prospect. I am sick of losing records.

at 8:29 AM

Anonymous said...

We were told to be patient the last 7 years. In the beginning there was no reason to be patient after watching flawed drafting & develpmental strategies that produced damaged arms before they could even reach AA ball. Now that its all working & producing we are supposed to stop being patient? No, NO, NO-OO. Its true that Bedard has a better chance for a good year in 2008 than Bailey or Cueto individually. But taken as a pair, I feel that at least one of them will step up to match Bedard's career average year. Plus there is the chance, though remote, that both of them step up. Bedard has never pitched 200 innings yet! He ended last year with hamstring and then oblique injuries. He'll be 29 already for the season. Cueto & Bailey will only be 22.

at 8:51 AM

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the Reds are willing to trade Bailey partly because of his approach to the game. He seems to march to his own drummer and perhaps is relying too much on natural ability and not worrying about refining that ability.

I'd trade Votto before I would Hamilton because of defense. Josh plays a much better centerfield than Joey plays first base. Their offense may be similar, although Josh has more power and is a far better runner. Plus, it's easier to find fill ins at first base than it is centerfield.

As for a third prospect to include, how 'bout Juan Francisco? He's a legit prospect, but the Reds have a log jam in the minors at third base.

at 9:03 AM

Anonymous said...

Baltimore Micheal brings up a pretty good point. The Reds are competing against some heavy hitters in the attempt to get Bedard. My thinking is the Os'(if they are smart) will hold out for Bruce and others. I would be surprised if the Reds can pull it off.

As far as being #1 in the Basebal America Top Minor Leauge System, what's wrong with that? If the Reds can get near the top and stay consistent I would wager that there would be an extended period of winning. We simply cannot afford to cash all the chips in at once expect to stay competitive.

Isn't this one of the more exciting off-seasons we have had in awhile? Imagine if Carl Lindner where still here,there would probably be nothing but the sound of crickets in the front office!
Woody

at 9:26 AM

TravisG said...

I would trade Bailey, Votto and someone from the Frazier/Stubbs tier of prospects for Erik Bedard, for all the reasons stated upthread.

Our front three starters, complimented by one of those veteran retreads at the back end, would give the Reds one of the top rotations in the NL this season. They would not be taking away from any of the team's current strengths by trading Bailey or Votto, which is important, and the bullpen is already much improved.

Even if Bedard gives us two quality seasons, and hopefully pushes the Reds deep into the playoffs, before leaving as a Type A free agent, the Reds would pick up additional draft picks. I'd take that for Homer Bailey.

at 9:26 AM

Anonymous said...

You know, if I remember correctly, 20 years or so ago the reds traded for a Lefthander who became a 20 game winner the next year and helped the reds win the World Series in 90. His name? Danny Jackson.
If Bedard can do the same, I say trade for him. And throw in Freel for a few Fungo bats while you are at it. He said he likes Vanilla Ice? Geez

-Philmann

at 10:17 AM

Anonymous said...

Why is Hamilton the first guy that everyone's ready to deal? This guy can single handedly carry a team as he did for parts of the season last year. And that was without playing ball at any level for what, 3-4 years? I would hate to see Bailey or Votto go, but I really think Hamilton would be the guy that Red fans regret seeing play for another team if this trade were to happen.
If we can lock up Bedard, I would make the trade. I don't know who the other top prospect would be, but I would not include Hamilton or Bruce with Bailey and Votto.

at 10:26 AM

Anonymous said...

As a fan from Baltimore and knowing who Bedard is I would say the fans and media will wind up HATING this man. He is cold to the media and is known to want to play for a winner. If he trades Homer Bailey and Votto plus a top prospect he has been bamboozled by a man I like to call Andy MacFailure.
I am a Reds fan and believe that Krivsky should be fired anyway for trading Lopez and Kearns to the Nats for a sore arm and a mediocre lefty in Bill Bray.
Good luck Reds!

at 10:45 AM

Anonymous said...

Votto has the chance to blow Sean Casey's numbers out of the water. Votto's a guy who will likely average 25-30 homers, 40+ doubles, 15-20 steals, and 100 rbis.

Hamilton is injury prone and a bad night away from being back in rehab and out of the league.

Let someone else take that chance if they are willing.

at 11:19 AM

Anonymous said...

i would make the trade, bedard will be better in the weak national league than american and he was almost a cy young winner there
they should also look at getting someone like cliff lee or sowers... look for another arroyo whos ok in the AL but whos game is better suited for the NL.

at 11:20 AM

Anonymous said...

Jon, what trade would you make?

I assume Bailey, then who and who?

at 11:24 AM

Anonymous said...

A bird in the hand for two in the bush. It would be a real crap shoot, with the real unknown the unrealized potential of Bailey and Votto. If they turn into superstars, we'll live to regret the deal for years to come.

at 11:28 AM

Anonymous said...

No please don't trade any of the
young guys. They are all in their
early to mid 20's and keep them
together and you could really
have something in a couple of years. Will Griffey and Dunn be here after 2008? Then what would
you have if you trade young talent
for a pitcher who going to demand big money after 2009. 2008 should
be the year of transition. Who
would have thought that the Rockies
would have got to the WS last year?

at 11:50 AM

Anonymous said...

I've been dreaming about the Reds trading for Bedard since the summer. He would completely turn this team from a decent team that could do well, to a team that should win the central. Why are Reds fans so loathe to trade Bailey and Votto. Sure they're good, but we're talking about one of the proven best pitchers in the league right now. Coupling him with Harang gives you possibly the best 1-2 punch in the MLB. Maybe only the Red Sox and Tigers would have better.
And it makes perfect sense to trade Votto (even though I love the guy.) You can finally move Dunn to first, open a spot for Bruce in the outfield and not have to worry about fielding problems in the outfield anymore. Besides having a crazy rotation, we'd also have one of the most potent offenses around as usual (if Bruce is what we think he is and Hamilton keeps up the numbers.) The only two positions that I would consider a bit sub-par offensively would be shortstop and catcher, but hopefully Valentin is continuing to improve and I would like to see Keppinger eventually take over at shortstop, that guy has a lot of promise.
Overall if this deal were made I would be more excited for the season than I have been since Griffey came.

at 11:52 AM

Anonymous said...

The deal is a good one if we can extend Bedard through 2011. If you move Hamilton, Baily and another top 10 guy we should be ahead.

One of the LH bats needs to go anyway and if we can convince Cameron to come back then there is a stop gap.

Add Bedard but subtract Bailey and we still have a huge hole in the 4 spot. I like Leiber. He can be solid.

at 12:31 PM

Anonymous said...

Anyone who thinks the Reds can compete without making some sort of trade for a starter is delirious. As it stands now, Bailey (who was up and down last year) is your No. 3. And Matt Belisle and his ERA over 5 is your No. 4. Then who knows who the No. 5 guy is. Livingston is hurt. Elizardo Ramirez is a minor league free agent. The front office will want to take its time with Cueto.

Those are some pretty weak options.

John:
Does Richie Gardner get a shot at the rotation?

Also, at one point there was talk Bray could be made into a starter. Is that out because of his injuries last year?

Any word on EZ Ramirez and who is pursuing him? Are the Reds?

at 12:40 PM

flard said...

I could never be a GM, I get too attached to the players.

I wouldn't trade Hamilton, he could be truly great. I wouldn't trade Bailey or Cueto, they're young, they're talented, and they're ours for some time (no free agency for years).

at 12:56 PM

Anonymous said...

I've read a lot (and we're not talking fan comments on this blog) on this possible deal and thought about it and I think the Reds have to make this deal if that third prospect isn't Cueto or someone on their team now. Here's why:

1) Bird in hand argument
2) Bailey right now has an above average fastball and an average to below average changeup and a below average curve. That projects out to a No. 4 or 5 starter. He may improve, but his ceiling is Bedard basically. A right-handed version. Which makes Bedard staright up better than Bailey if Bailey hits his ceiling. Which is a big if.
3) So going by that Bailey this year is probably at best a three or four starter. But right now he's essentially the Reds No. 3. If you want to win now, you've realistically got to upgrade.
4) The whole argument that this is the first homegrown pitcher in a long time for the Reds got me thinking. Well, doesn't that tell you something? The Reds aren't good at developing pitching. The last good pitcher the Reds developed was Tom Browning. Yikes. So to me that means you logically deal Bailey if you can because you know you aren't good at developing pitchers.
5) This team MUST get another starter of at least the equivlant of Arroyo to compete for the Central. If you wait on Bailey and Cueto you've wasted a couple of years where Griffey gets older and you've only got Cordero three years.

at 1:53 PM

John said...

Bedard finished the season on the 60-day DL. Now the Orioles are looking to trade a guy who was poised to break their franchise K record? I'm suspicious.

at 2:09 PM

Anonymous said...

Orioles are trying to create a trading frenzy for Bedard. Cards are now rumored to have included their Bruce-like prospect (Colby Rasmus) in a package for him. Looks to me like they're trying to get three $20 bills for a $50 bill. Don't do it. Remember the last time the Cards traded for a LH stud pitcher? Hmmm. Danny Haren, Daric Barton (a now 21 year old version of Votto), Kiko Colero (an effective middle reliever) for Mark Mulder in 2004. Mark gave them only that one year while Haren...well you know the rest. Let's not have the Reds go down that road.

at 4:02 PM

Anonymous said...

To Jeff from Baltimore: The Reds traded three overated guys for over overrated guys. In the end the Reds did get the best of the deal because bray is the best among the whole group. Kearns would of been benched or traded this year anyway because of Hamilton and/or Bruce. He is no better than the #5 outfielder if he was with the Reds right now.

The 90 Reds had 3 top notch pitchers (Jackson, Rijo, Browning) and this trade would get the Reds 3 too. I would do this knowing Cueto is coming up this year or there is another pitcher the Reds are willing to sign to be a #4. Belisle is no better than #5 if that.

Adrian

at 4:21 PM

Don said...

Excellent points, Mikec.

at 5:17 PM

Anonymous said...

Calm down everyone! Think REAL hard before you make this trade Krivsky. Bedard is not the kind of ACE pitcher you give up several of your top prospects for.Most of you seem to worry about Hamilton and his injuries and yet you give Bedard a pass on his. This potential deal smells! I see shades of Mark Mulder,only with a really bad attitude. Just what this team does not need. You DON'T trade Baily, Votto, Hamilton, etc for a guy with a very questionable health history that you will be lucky to have for two years. I still remember getting a good young pitcher from Baltimore many years ago (Milt Pappas) for an old outfielder named Frank Robinson. We all know how well that worked out. I really wonder about Krivsky making a big trade after the reaming he got from the Nationals. I'd think REAL hard before I make a trade for Bedard.
If it does get done for all of the players being discussed, I bet it will come back to bite the Reds on the butt! Please management, Think real hard before you give up the future for one or two very iffy seasons. Just my opinion. Have a great day everyone! Rocco

at 5:44 PM

Anonymous said...

"Keep Bailey. I want to see Homer in the rotation for a full season before he becomes trade bait."

That is the thing you (and a lot of people on this board) don't understand. If Bailey tanks (or if he is just average)-he isn't very good tradebait. If he does really well, we dont' trade him.

This is about hedging bets, Bailey (and Votto and Hamilton)'s best trade value COULD be the present-we just don't know how good they will be. Bedard, well we do know him to be great.

The Reds are obviously more confident about Bruce, which makes sense-he has been described in those regards.

at 6:35 PM

Anonymous said...

Ah once again people claim Krivsky got reamed in the big Nationals trade. Look at the numbers people... Not one person the Reds gave up is worth anything. None would be starting for the Reds next year. Every player that replaced those players is better and cheaper. And Bray and Majewski haven't been healthy. If only for a purely cost cutting move that was a good deal for the Reds.

at 7:13 PM

Anonymous said...

John, do you think the Reds have a chance for Haren?? He's even more proven than Bedard but he may cost more prospects...what do you think that would take?

at 7:14 PM

Anonymous said...

Make the deal. Bailey has a lot of POTENTIAL. That is the key word. Paul Wilson and Steve Trachel were once untouchable pitchers in the Mets organization. Wouldn't you trade one of them for Bedard now? It isn't like the Reds are trading for a 34 year old here. This is a young, legit starter. That would give the Reds one of the best sets of front three SPs in the NL. Put Belisle in at 4 and Cueto at 5, or if Cueto isn't ready, sign a Lieber-type as a number five to a one year deal.
As for Votto, I would much rather hang on to him and trade Hamilton instead....but if I had to, then yeah.
Just go out and find one more arm for the pen.
All you have to do is make the playoffs (in that division, it is not that hard) and with those three you stand as good a shot as anyone else in the NL.

at 7:35 PM

j. dorn said...

I would not make this trade. And its not that I don't want to win now, or not that I don't think Bedard is a good pitcher, I just hate the thought of trading a good chuck of our future for not a real sure bet at a World Series this year. With that said, I am not 100% against the deal, but here is why I wouldn't want to do it.

As we have been drafting these top players for the purpose of having a very strong group of players that would eventually lead us to the playoffs and hopefully a championship, I hate to see most of it go away. I tend to agree with some that have said Bedard is not a "True" ace. Yes he is a very strong pitcher, but i just dont know about trading all that for him. Bailey should signs of dominance last year (game in Oakland) and I wouldnt give up on him. Bedard being hurt last year doesnt sit very well either.

I might be the only one to say this, but I can wait another year or even two (hopefully not two) for a good winning club, with the players we have brought up, which is what we were all hoping for when we drafted them. I just dont think its worth trading a lot of our excellent young talent for a pitcher, who yes is proven, but might not be here long. I agree it might come back to bite us in the butt. I too am frustrated with the losing, but we are so close with the young guys we have, I would just hate to see it all thrown away just for this year, which is no guarantee.

at 7:41 PM

Anonymous said...

Quite honestly I think we're barking up the wrong tree. Bedard is very good, no doubt about that, but we would be better off trading for Lincecum. He's younger, got more giddy-up, and doesn't hit free agency for 5 years.

No way San Fran would turn down Bailey and Hamilton.

at 8:34 PM

Anonymous said...

Do it if you can unload some fringe type talent. I would be scared to give up tons of young talent especially arms (that are cheap) when you know Cincy is a small town team with a small budget an can't hang with the big boys when it comes to $$$'s.

I would talk up and flip Hamilton (based on his history and the fact he cost the org. only $50,000) and package some talent (Edwin Encarnacion) spread throughout the majors & minors. Not all major league ready since we need the guys to compete in the near future(like the Rockies).

This trade could very well set the Reds back to mediocrity for years if you unload all the cheap talented major league ready palyers you have.

Fun to read about but if this happens and too much is given up the Reds are screwed for years!!!

at 9:04 PM

Rob Dicken said...

Anyone that says not to trade for Bedard, literally must like watching the Reds fail year-in and year-out.

Anyone that says to not trade any of our pitching for BETTER pitching, is completely asinine! I've seen posts mentioning to trade position players for a 15-16 game winner and 200 K pitcher for a TERRIBLE Baltimore team last year...want to know why that would NEVER happen? The only General Manager that would accept a trade of all infielders and outfielders for an All-Star/Cy Young caliber pitcher, is Jim Bowden. Jim Bowden doesn't work in Baltimore, folks. So face reality on this...you have to give up POTENTIAL to get quality.

The Reds and Reds fans want to win NOW! Why would you seriously want to be a crummy team because you have guys that have POTENTIAL to be good in the future? We have lived on being 2-3 years away for the past 17 years. I am sick and tired of hearing and dealing with that crap!

Anyone in this city or around the country that considers themselves a Reds fan, that would think about deflecting to another team because of trading Bailey, weren't Reds fans to the begin with. Homer Bailey has the POTENTIAL to be good, and so does Joey Votto. But they do not have a full season under their belts. We can't judge late season success for rookies, because they are usually facing rookies then as well (September call-ups).

Erik Bedard is getting better every year, and he's a DOMINANT lefty. Those are very hard to come by. If the Reds have the chance to take this deal and don't, then THEY are stupid.

This isn't like signing Eric Milton folks. This guy is Cy Young material, and a 20 game winner if he is on a good team. It would literally be a tough debate for Dusty Baker and Co. to decide where to put Bedard in the rotation...either in front of Harang, or right behind Harang.

at 9:32 PM

Anonymous said...

I've been digesting the trade rumours for days now, and have come to the conclusion that I do the trade. Bedard will be playing for his big free agency pay day come 2009, so he has incentive to compete over then next two years. Plus, he will have Harang to compete against, stats wise. Having two premier pitchers trying to out pitch the other would be a sight to behold.
I trade Bailey and either Hamilton or a two-person combo of Votto, Dickerson, Francisco, etc.. Not Bruce, Cueto, or any other top pitcher prospects (e.g., Maloney, Roenicke, etc..). I would hate to part with Votto or Hamilton, but we have the luxury to let either go...especially to the AL, where they can't hurt us in 'payback'. As for Bailey, I think his stuff is electric enough, but I was dishearened to find out that he didn't work out for the whole month of November, but rather was hunting the whole time. Baseball is a priveledge, his skills are a priveledge, and the short time a baseball player has must be cherished. If I ever had the skills of Bailey, I would be honing my skills everyday trying to compete for a world championship. With this attitude, he needs to move to another organization where he has incentive to perform three years from now. We have christened him the next coming of Nolan Ryan, and I think his ego is too big for this town. If he can't put in the work to make himself one of the top pitchers in the league now, then he won't be. We don't want a potential star pitcher, we need one to pitch once a week now.

at 9:48 PM

Anonymous said...

If they could somehow entice the Orioles with a package that didn't include Bailey, I think it is definitley worth it. I know how good Bedard is, but I think after Bailey gets this next full season under his belt, he could turn into a legitimate ace, while Bedard has only 2 years until free agency and and the Reds will have to spend a Kings Ransom to re-sign him. Perhaps removing Homer Bailey and inserting Matt Maloney, another very promising SP prospect and left handed, as well as including third baseman Edwin Encarnacion and young reliever Bill Bray, who could both plug into the Orioles bullpen nicely, and if he stays healthy could make a solid #3-4 starter eventually.

I would do Votto-Maloney-Bray-Encarnacion over Votto/Bailey/prospect... Dunno if the Orioles would, be it's and interesting package for a rebuilding team as the O's.

at 10:03 PM

Unknown said...

Im with you Anon 7:41. Lincecum makes more sense to me. The Giants are debating on whether to trade him straight up for Alex Rios. Its no secret the Giants are looking for offense and we can easily match that offer. However I am not with you on the offer them Bailey thing. What purpose does that serve? Bailey could easily be what Lincecum is in a few short years. So basically you just have given the Giants Hamilton for nothing. I package up some of our offensive talent and get Lincecum over here. He is younger and is a stud. Therefore he is going to be cheap and under our control for much longer. Bedard's injury history and desire to test the FA market scare me.

In my dream world we package Hamilton and EE along with a prospect to get Lincecum. Then blockbuster Baltimore with Bailey and Votto to get Bedard. Sign him to an extension. To free up some capital I trade Arroyo to the Dodgers for Matt Kemp along with some C prospects. Move Dunner to first and now you have and outfield of Jr, Kemp, and Bruce along with a starting rotation of Harang, Bedard, Lincecum, Cueto, and Belisle. Now that is a bright future. A man can dream

Go Reds!

at 10:07 PM

Anonymous said...

it's kind of like the question, would you trade a guy with Cy Young potential for Cy Young? Everyone says that Bailey has #1 talent. Why not trade him for a guy who is already an established #1?

at 11:33 PM

Anonymous said...

Suppose the trade never goes thru. Suppose Krivsky demands as a condition of the trade, Bedard must sign a long-term contract, but Bedard and his people refuse, so the Reds break off the talks. Do we blame Krivsky for not getting the deal done? Or do we realize Bedard isn't in it for anything more than money? Or suppose we do end up with Bedard, but he only does an adequate job for a year and misses time with injuries before leaving as a free agent----while Bailey and Votto spend 6 years in Baltimore racking up Hall of Fame numbers (but at least no championships {hey, it's the O's----I'm not totally delusional}). You'll all be complaining this time next year about another rotten trade and how they never should have traded Bailey and Votto. MARK MY WORDS

at 12:16 AM

Anonymous said...

I would not trade bailey, votto and a third prospect for bedard. you dont build pitching by getting rid of pitching, especially prospects like bailey or cueto. the reds could easily afford to trade any combination of hamilton, votto, freel, keppinger, hopper. you can afford to lose a couple of these guys. the reds un willingness to lose bruce tells me dunn or griffey wont be here after next year. i would let the kids pitch - with cordero in there, now you can back up the bullpen and it sets up much better, and you can let your starters just get thru the 6th - rotation of harang, ayyro, belise, bailey and cueto works for me, and they have shearn and this maloney kid too.

dont give up the ranch for bedard - but he is left handed, and that would be a nice addtion if you dont have to sacrifice the future to get him.

at 12:18 AM

Anonymous said...

at 8:17 AM

Anonymous said...

Come on people. This is a NO brainer. If you have Harang with 15-17 wins, Bedard with 15-17 wins, and Arroyo with 12-14 wins, plus a real closer, you have just added about 15-20 wins to this team per year. I agree, we need to sign Bedard long-term, but come on, who is Bailey. We don't know what this guy is going to be. He proved last year he is not ready, and his velocity has dropped from 96-97 to 93-94. I take proven players over prospects any day. Let's win now!!! I don't care if Bailey was homegrown--if Bailey begot Bedard, which gets us in the playoffs, then I say "great job" Reds organization for using a chip like him to get us there.

at 9:04 AM

Anonymous said...

Wow, hot topic! I would not include Votto in this deal. The way he hit in his debut was impressive, and he's just the type of prospect this franchise always says it has to develop. In a year, it's possible this team will be without Griffey, Dunn and Hatteberg. We're going to need the sticks of Votto, Hamilton and Bruce. Won't anyone take Griffey off our hands?

at 9:11 AM

Anonymous said...

Chuck,

Maybe we can trade Norris Hopper straight-up for C.C. Sabathia?

at 9:26 AM

Unknown said...

Greeeeeeedy!!!! I'm as hungry as the next Reds fan, but seriously, people - think past the tips of your noses! Bedard's a stud, sure (well, for a guy who cracks the 180 inning mark, that is)...but Votto is a middle of the lineup hitter for a decade and Bailey is the same pitcher with more innings for an additional 3 years (he's 4 years younger, we'll say it takes him a year to get his sea legs). Not to mention Hamilton - why trade 3 eventual stars for one current good pitcher? Take a 2nd place this year, possibly a win, and then win the division 7/10 years, to go with a Series win and maybe more than one appearance...you don't think the Braves who stunk for 20 years (70s, 80s) gave up and traded the farm for a few starters back when Pendelton, Jones, Justice, Smoltz, Glavine, and Avery were developing, do you? (note: Maddux was aqcuired via trade). Stick to the plan, don't mortgage the future for one year.

at 9:58 AM

Anonymous said...

I make this trade, and here's how I fill the Votto hole (thinking way outside the box here)...Trade Votto, Bailey and a prospect not named Bruce or Cueto. Move Dunn to first and sign Bonds. He and Griffey are friends, and he should come relatively cheap ($5-7 million for the year). He's a better left fielder than Dunn and he would provide a huge bat in the middle of the line up. a 3-4-5 of Dunn, Griffey and Bonds would be as potent as any in baseball. You'd have a top 3 rotation that could pitch against pretty much any staff in the National League, and a closer to finish the job. I know it will never happen, but I'd do it in a heartbeat.

at 12:12 PM

Anonymous said...

Do the trade! Harang, Bedard, Arroyo.. sounds like division champs to me.. I find it quite hilarious how some people don't want to give up something to get something.. I would package bailey, votto, and another prospect in a heartbeat.. Griffey wont be here after next year so bruce will have to play in 09.. Lets do a deal for once instead of "building for the future" all the time. Lets win and win now!! If we win 85 to 90 games, i promise you that we will be division champs!

at 12:29 PM

JDGood said...

come haz, are you serious?

at 12:50 PM

Anonymous said...

John, I say make this trade but try to get it done without giving up Votto. Keep Bruce and Cueto no matter what but I think Hamilton and Bailey should be expendable, especially if it brings in a proven rotation guy - and get this, he's left-handed which we lack desperately.

I like Bailey but I'm concerned that he throws so many pitches. He throws a lot of balls and if you look at his minor league numbers it's obvious he throws a lot of pitches per inning. This is my first concern with Bailey. If he gets control over all his pitches then yes he'll be a good one but who knows if he'll ever obtain the status that Bedard has now. This deal gives us the starter we need plus the added bonus of a left-hander too.

Now with that being said I think you have to discuss an extension as part of the deal - we'll have more money after this year to spend and I'm sure that's why Cordero's contract was structured the way it was; less money this year, more the next 3 years. This deal makes us competitive this year and not 2-3 years down the road (if our youthful pitchers work out - Big IF).

at 12:55 PM

Anonymous said...

I am serious. Think about it, With a line up looking like this:

Phillips
Hamilton
Griffey
Bonds
Dunn
Encarnacion
Ross
Gonzalez

You'd have Freel to be super sub and be able to rest each of those guys in the OF fairly regularly keeping all of them healthy. Bonds holds onto his slot for 1 maybe 2 years tops and Bruce comes in ready to play.

The rotation would be
Harang
Bedard
Arroyo
Belisle
Cueto (might as well bring him up because that line up will score runs for him)

The bullpen has

Cordero as the closer
Weathers
Bray
Burton
Stanton
Majewski

Bench is

Freel
Hopper
Kepplinger
Hatteburg
Castro

That team would easily win the Central.

at 1:48 PM

Rob Dicken said...

Some of the people here amaze me!

All I keep hearing is that we can't trade these guys because they "may" be good in the future. Guys...gals...I have been looking to the future for 17 years and we've always been "2-3 years away". I'm sick of it! I want to win NOW and in the FUTURE as well! The fact of the matter is this...if you trade Homer Bailey or Johnny Cueto, you will at least have one or the other and will have gained an arm to win you 15-20 games per season! How is that a bad deal? I'd get rid of Joey Votto in a heart beat, because 1st basemen are a dime-a-dozen. ANYONE can play first base! I don't know about you guys...but keeping Keppinger and Hatteberg there full time sounds like a pretty darn good deal to me!

Then we have this goof (Haz) above asking for the Reds to sign Bonds. Someone obviously doesn't read the news...the guy is up for charges of lying under oath in a federal court for steroid use. Let's not tarnish the Reds ballclub more than it already is with 7-8 straight losing seasons.

at 1:50 PM

Anonymous said...

Dave said "Stick to the plan"

Yes because the plan has been working so well latley. 12 years and counting, no playoffs.

at 1:54 PM

Hugh D. Pohl said...

I'd do it. Pitching prospects are notoriously difficult to predict and you have to give up something to get something. Votto may turn out to be good but he is one dimensional.Porbably more Hal Morris than Sean Casey as a PEAK. Not bad but again you can't get Bedard for free. Hamilton I would keep and Bruce should not be in the deal. Prospects like Maloney we should not worry about throwing in.

Although Mr. Redlegs take surprises me. I guess I justs don't think bailey is anywhere near a sure thing. Could end up a Rob Bell or Jack Armstrong, Pat Pacillo.

at 2:12 PM

Anonymous said...

Haz you crack me up. That might be the worst fielding outfield in the history of baseball.

A better idea would be to stick Adam Dunn at catcher to get an extra outfielder into the mix...

at 2:40 PM

Anonymous said...

It's nice to have some other voices of reason around like Dave, Chuck, and Jon. Bailey & Cueto are not not your ordinary run-of-the mill pitching prospects. If a trade absolutely must be made for Bedard I am willing to package Mejewski, Coffey, Gardner, Livingston and Dickerson for him. Take it or leave it.

at 3:27 PM

Anonymous said...

redfuture, Gardner is the only one in that group who would even have a little bit of trade value.
That group of players wouldn't even land you Noah Lowery

at 3:37 PM

Anonymous said...

redfuture - They would'nt even return your call for that package. Glad you aren't calling the shots!!!

at 3:38 PM

Anonymous said...

all i hear is this-

bailey may very well blossom into a #1

bedard has never pitched 200 innings

lets play for the future

the reds aren't one player away

1.by the time bailey becomes a #1 in 2 seasons minimum, we don't have griff(contrary to shortsighted belief, one of the 20 best players in the league btw)

-maybe no dunn(we seen where that potent offense went without feared proven major league talent last sept.)

-arroyo and harang will be in the back end of their coupon contracts

-bp will probably getting paid handsomely by then

2. we dont need innings eaters. we need quality innings. the idea is, better 'pen, less innings. yes he's had injuries but not all arm related and less wear and tear aint always a bad thing. if you can get him to sign a one yr extension, its most worth it for bailey and votto, a FIRST BASEMAN. everyone raves over hatty on this blog. he makes 1.75 mil as i recall.

3. as aformentioned, the 2010 reds will look drastically different from the 08 reds whether we trade off bailey and votto/hamilton or not. you can look at every player on the roster except harang, bp and cordero and wonder if they will be around then. no coincidence all three are considered the best in their roles on the team (rotation, position play, bullpen). hence, if you aren't the best TODAY, you are expendable.

4.

bruce
hatte/kepp
griff
phillips
dunn
eddie
gonzo
ross(he cant possibly be worse)

harang
bedard
arroyo(4.03 era, 1.29 whip last 4
yrs, IDENTICAL to harang. ppl forget this guy had a 3.29 era in 240 innings in 06 with miserable run support. doesnt smell flukish to me)
belisle-currently our biggest ? mark
cueto-the reason we can afford to lose bailey. he's at least as promising and probably more thirsty/ml ready

bailey is carefree texas dunn with bp confidence. not an ideal combo

mcbeth, salmon, or majik will straighten it out nxt yr. its baseball, thats how things happen. someone will dissapoint, but at least we have high heat, live arms to choose from. and not of the todd coffey paper mache psyche type.

add one or 2 of those to bray, burton, stormy and cordero. how is this team not as good as a light hitting arizona with less top end pitching

colorado, who doesn't even have one harang, led alone 2. you think the reds are winnin it all against loaded cupboards in boston/detroit without co-aces? ask the rockies

a raking philly squad with more pitching ?s now than we had LAST SEASON

cubs vs reds

lineup-tie(to be fair, i actually think the reds is better)

bullpen-tie(cubs, better middle, reds, better back end)

rotation-zambrano isnt harang, hence his propensity to lose to him

lilly or no other cub is bedard, and in a fair comparison, lilly is mentally fragile, see 07 playoffs. arroyo is not, see 04 playoffs.

hill is solid but id take arroyo there.

marquis is belisle.

marshall and cueto are both young question marks.

bedard for bailey and votto, third lesser prospect. DO IT.

anon 24 7

at 3:47 PM

Anonymous said...

redfuture do you honestly think a package of "Majewski, Coffey, Gardner, Livingston and Dickerson" is going to get you anything at all? If we don't want them, why in the world would anyone else? You have to give up big names to get big names, it’s that simple. I'm not saying I am for the trade, but most teams want starting pitchers and few have them. It's all about supply and demand, the asking price is high, trading average to far below average to scary bad relievers is going to get you NOTHING.

at 3:49 PM

Anonymous said...

Goof?

Alright, if you say so...

As for worst fielding OF in history? So you're saying Dunn is better than Bonds? Really?

I know the Reds would never sign Bonds which I originally stated, but I do think that line up would win a lot of games.

As for tarnishing the Reds image, I'd say Pete Rose and Marge Schott have done a pretty good job of that already, lets not forget our history.

at 3:55 PM

Anonymous said...

I think honestly you should trade Bailey, Votto (who I really like)and Edwin Encarnocion for Beddard but hey to get quality you have to give up quality(Edwin to me is not all that great. But are you guys crazy, trade Hamilton no he had 19 HRs this year with limited playing time plus his story is great and if he had played a full season he would have won rookie of the year.Untouchables:Hamilton, Cueto, and Jay Bruce. There is enough in that deal to send Beddard A.K.A. Helper to get us back to th promise land the playoffs GO REDS!!! YOU CAN DO IT KRIVSKY

at 4:03 PM

Rob Dicken said...

Hey that's the spirit "redfuture!" Let's not make the trade because we MAY compete for the division in 3-4 years time.

No sense in competing now, right?

at 4:10 PM

Mr. Redlegs said...

Well, Redsfuture, when you have about 11 teams bidding for Bedard, it's quite probable that your take-it-or-leave-it declaration of spare parts will be left out for tomorrow's trash.

Haz, how's the view up there? You're totally high.

Here's the thing about Rob Bell, Jack Armstrong and Pat Pacillo: They weren't among the top 5 pitching prospects in all of baseball.

at 4:12 PM

Joe Farfsing said...

redfuture, maybe they'll also take rolando roomes, herm winningham, glenn bragg and more crappy players. Can we still trade Willie Greene? Seriously people, don't be stupid. Bailey MAY be great, Hamilton MAY be great, Votto MAY be great. They're called prospects for a reason, otherwise they'd be called 'sure things'. The idea is for an organization to try to win championships, not to have Baseball America credit you with the best farm system. At times it takes shrewd moves to win. A trade is made theoretically to help both clubs. Trading Majewski, Coffey, Dickerson, Gardner etc. for Bedard is like trying to give someone 4 nice shiny quarters for his ragged 10 dollar bill. Larry Macphail and Peter Angelos aren't idiots, they know Bedard can help put Reds in position to seriously contend and they want SERIOUS players in return to help them contend in the near future.

at 4:26 PM

Rob Dicken said...

As for tarnishing the Reds image, I'd say Pete Rose and Marge Schott have done a pretty good job of that already, lets not forget our history.

Why? Because Pete gambled and bet on his own team to win? That can be the ONLY reason, because Pete is by far one of the BEST players to ever play the game of baseball, and didn't cheat to do it. Everyone with baseball common sense knows that. He hasn't tarnished anything with the Reds ball club.

And despite your belief about Marge Schott, when she was owner, she put forth the money to have winning ballclubs (ie. '95 Reds having the second highest payroll in baseball next to the Yankees and had a decent playoff run). If a senile old woman talking about Nazis tarnished the Reds name, just like Pete Rose, it would highly surprise me and many other people as well, because the city of Cincinnati and MANY other baseball fans think highly of Pete in regards to a baseball aspect. The Reds name is tarnished because of so many consecutive losing seasons, bar none. Adding Bonds, who has BY FAR done worse than Pete Rose (who didn't cheat to earn his record) would make the city of Cincinnati frown on its ball club, let alone the rest of the country. If you want to see Bonds, go to Oakland...because that's more than likely where he's going.

at 4:35 PM

Anonymous said...

Have we forgotten, Jack Armstrong helped lead the Reds to the series in 90 and started the All-Star game. I will concede Pacillo and Bell. But Bell wasn't our fault. Bowden got him from the Braves.

What Barry Bonds did is 1000 times worse than what Rose did. Rose's gambling only hurt himself. The steroid losers have totally screwed up the integrity of the game itself. We have some 20 years of false stats. Pete Rose played the game clean, just like Aaron, Robinson, Ripken, Clemente, Perez and any other Hall of Famer from Rose's era. No one gave Rose anything----he earned it. If you don't recognize that, you are not a real Reds fan.

Why isn't anyone talking about trading Cueto? Bailey is ready now. Cueto is not. If he's so great, he should bring the same value that Bailey does

at 4:38 PM

Anonymous said...

I love redsfuture trade theory-the more crap you pile up the more valuable it becomes!

at 4:41 PM

Anonymous said...

HAZ signing Bonds is one of the dumbest moves the Reds could make and would waste 5-7 mil.

First of all he is going to be 43

Second, he WAS a great outfielder, now he is 43, on his 4th pair of knees, and has to take every 3 days off. (by the way his FP was the same as Dunn this year so it would not be an improvement)

Third why would we want to bring a media storm and HUGE distraction to our ballclub. All summer he will be going in and out of court as his legal trouble goes on.

at 5:10 PM

Anonymous said...

Rob,

If you really believe Pete only bet on the Reds to win then I've got a large piece of ocean front property to sell you...IN KANSAS. Secondly, even on the on and one billionth of a percent chance that is all he did, don't you think by him only betting on certain games and not all he was as good as telling bookies that certain days he is going to lose?

Marge tarnished the Reds, period, end of story. Only Cincinnatians refuse to see that. She made the team a laughing stock outside the city of Cincinnati and if they hadn't pulled that miracle win in '90 would you still think so highly of her? I bet not.

You guys have a wonderful day.

at 8:00 PM

reaganspad said...

9 Wins. 9 Stinking Wins is the difference between Bedard and Bailey.

Does anyone on this board REALLY think that Bailey cannot win 13 games for the Reds in 2008's 180 innings he will pitch?

So if he does... he is Bedard.

Is there ANYONE on this board who does not think that Votto can sleepwalk to the 82 RBI's we got from 1B (for 80% of) last year.

Votto's 24 RBI's in Sept were HUGE for a team starved for clutch hitting. And his power versus Hatte, Connine and Cantu is not comparable.

And here is the big rub. You trade Votto and Hamilton and you lose your 2 best Left handed hitters versus lefthanded pitching.

Votto and Hamilton both know where left field is and both use it, have power for oppage and do not see that silly shift.

Sign Jason Jennings and play this team until June, then make your best deal.

Dunn and Griffey can both be traded at that time and it will be the right to to access where this team is.

There is a Very good chance that the bullpen is lights out, the team rakes like the Brewers and is fully in the race in June. Buy an arm then.

There is also a good chance that Bailey and Belisle both have 7 wins by then as they continue to develop into good Major League pitchers. 13 wins each from both of them and you have 2 Bedards

at 9:27 PM

Anonymous said...

Hey John- have you heard any updates on this deal?

I would take Votto and Cueto off the shelf. I would only trade Jay Bruce and three low level minor leaguers OR Homer Bailey, Josh Hamilton and two minor leaguers for Bedard. Bedard is not worth Bailey, Votto and Hamilton.

at 10:01 PM

Anonymous said...

Guys! The trade of our 40-man roster scrubs for Bedard was supposed to be a joke, but its only a bit more laughable than the one the Orioles would like to pull on the Reds.

at 10:12 PM

John Fay said...

I wouldn't be surprised if the Orioles wait to see what happens with Santana or Haren.

at 12:30 AM

Anonymous said...

John, I was thinking the same thing that the Santana deal would have to go down first and everything else would fall in line after that.

I personally think the longer it takes the better off the Reds will be in the deal. As in I don't think we'll give up as much later then we will have to now. Outside of the Rays no-one else in baseball has the minor league talent the Reds do right now but that doesn't mean we have to give too much of it away.

Thanks for the updates as always John!!

at 1:10 AM

Rob Dicken said...

If you really believe Pete only bet on the Reds to win then I've got a large piece of ocean front property to sell you...IN KANSAS. Secondly, even on the on and one billionth of a percent chance that is all he did, don't you think by him only betting on certain games and not all he was as good as telling bookies that certain days he is going to lose?

Do you have SUBSTANTIAL proof that Pete bet on other games or any of the other claims you are making? NOPE! Leave the accusations at the door. We're talking about Pete Rose the PLAYER here and not the MANAGER. Pete Rose didn't get his career numbers and become one of the greatest players in the game by cheating. Isn't that the argument here? If we're arguing that Pete bet on baseball, we all know he did, so it's a moot point and doesn't need to be argued. The point is that Pete Rose played baseball FAIRLY and didn't cheat to PLAY.

End of discussion about that...oh...and by the way, you're a moron to even compare betting in baseball to using steroids. Go back to SanFransissyco.

Marge tarnished the Reds, period, end of story. Only Cincinnatians refuse to see that. She made the team a laughing stock outside the city of Cincinnati and if they hadn't pulled that miracle win in '90 would you still think so highly of her? I bet not.

I just gave proof that she paid to have winnings teams. So far you are stating pure opinion that she tarnished the Reds and are not providing any proof. She was an owner that paid to win, bar none. Nothing more than that.

Sounds to me that someone's crying like a little baby because SanFran lost a steroid using, under-oath lying, soon to go to jail a-hole. Get over it. You should be glad your city had Willie McCovey and Willie Mays. They played the game fairly and didn't cheat. They are the REAL heroes of that city.

End of discussion about Bonds, Pete Rose, and Marge Schott. You continue to prove exactly why you should NOT post on this blog by your purely idiotic opinions that provide no substantial proof or backing. Don't bombard John or the readers here with your asinine behavior and negativity.

Oh, also...we don't need to compare Homer Bailey to Erik Bedard in numbers. Homer Bailey had a 5.00+ ERA, Bedard had a 3.16 ERA and pitched all season long. Bedard won 13 games, but played on just as bad of a team as the Reds. This isn't comparable, folks! Erik Bedard also had one of the worst bullpens in the Major Leagues aside from the Reds to back him up and didn't have much run support.

at 8:22 AM

Anonymous said...

reganspad:

13 wins by Bedard would be the equivlant of 18 for the Reds. You're talking 13 wins and a 3.17 ERA pitching in the AL East against the Yankees and Red Sox All-Star teams. Look what happened to Bronson's ERA when he left that division. Bedard's would be under 3. Plus he wouldn't get tagged with hardluck 2-0 or 2-1 losses because he'd have a team better than the Orioles behind him.

at 10:17 AM

Anonymous said...

LMAO....

Rob, I'm done with this, but let me just say, are you basing your opinion of Pete Rose on his honest answers to date? I mean, it only took him 12 years to admit he bet on baseball. How long until he admits the real truth?

I'm not a SF fan, never have been. I've been a Reds fan for over 30 years. Name calling is childish, but if it makes you feel better go for it.

BTW, I take it you believe no Red has ever used 'roids or HGH? I live in the real world. Bonds is no different than the huge number of players that used performance enhancing drugs, well only in that he's better than all of the others which is why he's getting hammered specifically.

You ask me to prove things, how about you prove Bonds knowingly used roids? Oh wait there are only accusations. Again, call me names, defend Schott and Rose all you want. I'm done arguing with someone with the intellect of a third grader.

Have a nice day and Go REDS!!!!

at 10:18 AM

Anonymous said...

Hey reganspad, mikec is right. The most important stat in starting pitching is E.R.A. and innings pitched. Last year Bedard averaged 6.5 Innings Per Start and gave up 2.28 Runs Per Start. By comparison the last two years Aaron Harang
Bedard
2007
6.5 Innings per start
2.28 Runs per start
2006
5.95 Innings per start
2.48 Runs per start

Harang
2007
6.8 Innings per start
2.82 Runs per start
2006
6.7 Innings per start
2.8 Runs per start

Statistically he is almost identical to Harang. And he had those stats going against the Yankees and Red Sox, we have the Brewers and Cubs at the top of our division.

at 10:36 AM

reaganspad said...

mikec
I agree that the guy is a decent pitcher. 3 starts vs NYY, and 2 vs Bos, but also 3 against the Rays.

He is just not worth 3 of our top prospects today.
We cannot build a Cleveland, Arizona, Oakland model by trading 3 starters for 1 player.

I do not want to lose Votto, but I would part with him and lesser players in a package.

Look at Bedards 2004 stats:

2004 Orioles 6 10 4.59
H R HR W SO
137.1 149 83 70 13 7 71 121

those look like Bailey numbers to me. let Bailey mature and keep our other studs

at 11:16 AM

Anonymous said...

John,

I know this will never happen because of his salary, but if we are going to give up 3 good to great prospects for a SP, why not go for Santana? There's no disputing that he's a better pitcher than Bedard, he's also young (28 I believe) and clearly the better pitcher.

We'd keep Votto because they have Morneau, but a package like Hamilton, Encarnacion and Bailey plus another minor leaguer not named Bruce or Cueto would be similar to what the Red Sox are offering.

at 11:17 AM

reaganspad said...

VA
I do not argue that Bedard is good, I am looking at 3 years from now when Bailey is in year 4 (200 innings, sub 4 ERA, 15 wins with Strike Out Stuff) and develops into what Bedard is today.

If that happens, and Votto continues to top 315 with 90-100 RBI's, which is why they moved him from catcher...his sweet swing

and Hamilton has 3 years of300/30/30, Bedard becomes Milt Papas versus Steve Carlton

That is the issue I have. I trade ONE of those guys, Votto.

at 11:59 AM

Anonymous said...

reganspad
The Problem I have with your theory is you are assuming Bailey is as good as we hope. We know what Bedard is, he has proven that, Bailey is a big if. If he has a bad year this year then his trade value goes to nothing. I say why take a chance when we have a for sure thing. Again I would trade Bailey, Hamilton, and someone else not named Bruce or Votto. So I don't think Baltimore takes the deal anyway.

at 3:21 PM

Rob Dicken said...

Rob, I'm done with this, but let me just say, are you basing your opinion of Pete Rose on his honest answers to date? I mean, it only took him 12 years to admit he bet on baseball. How long until he admits the real truth?

Again, are we debating him cheating to earn his record? Or are we debating he bet on baseball? I'm not sure I understand your reasoning, or it's quite possible you're just too stubborn or an ignoramus and didn't read my previous post.

POINT BLANK, Pete Rose didn't cheat to play baseball. Bonds did...you don't peak at a professional sport at 40 years old, unless you're playing Golf or Bowling. That's not an accusation, that's the truth, whether you want to face it or not.

I'm not a SF fan, never have been. I've been a Reds fan for over 30 years. Name calling is childish, but if it makes you feel better go for it.

Doesn't sound like it. Sounds to me you are quick to defend Bonds and compare Pete Rose to him, which is probably the DUMBEST thing I have ever seen!

If you seriously think that Bonds using 'roids is comparable to Rose betting on baseball then you don't "live in reality." You obviously live in a clouded little world, because anyone here could see that a chemically enhanced human being breaking a career homerun record is not in comparison to a man betting on baseball and breaking the career all-time hit record! This is common sense...something you seem to be lacking.

BTW, I take it you believe no Red has ever used 'roids or HGH?

I never said that. I can pretty much go through the last 10-15 years and pick out who's done 'roids/HGH and who hasn't. I'm sure a lot of people here could.

I live in the real world.

Based on your comments here...I would have to lean towards 'NO' on that one.

Bonds is no different than the huge number of players that used performance enhancing drugs, well only in that he's better than all of the others which is why he's getting hammered specifically.

Get your head out of your rear-end, man, seriously! Barry Bonds hit 500 of his 700 homeruns within the last 10 years of his career. Barry Bonds is a good player, but he wouldn't have gotten to where he is right now without the 'roids. He would still be a Hall of Fame player with 500 homers, but he wouldn't have almost 800. He gets hammered specifically because he cheated to break a record that a man (Hank Aaron) played 25 years 'roid and HGH free to break/create!

You ask me to prove things, how about you prove Bonds knowingly used roids? Oh wait there are only accusations.

The guy is indicted! He's on trial for lying under oath! Not only has he cheated, but the guy is a liar, and is also a COMPLETE a-hole to the public (fans and media).

Accusations? Again, pull your head from your rectal cavity!

Again, call me names, defend Schott and Rose all you want. I'm done arguing with someone with the intellect of a third grader.

I don't believe I ever called you a name. But I can if you want me to.

If anyone has the intellect of a third grader, its you. So far you have rant and raved and provided ABSOLUTELY ZERO evidence to back-up your opinions. And most of your opinions have stretched far beyond the truth, anyway, so what would be the point?

Have a nice day and Go REDS!!!!

If only you were a TRUE Reds fan...I feel sorry for you dude. But good luck trying to find that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow in ol' SanFransissyco!

But I do agree...GO REDS!!

at 4:56 PM

reaganspad said...

VA,
The problem with your theory is that we know how good Hamilton is, too good to be a throw in on this deal.
build the team around BP and Hamilton.

Bailey is fine, throws easy gas and has a great hook. I know what we have...10-12 wins in 2008 and improves from there for about 10 years with the Reds.

Votto, Gardiner and a couple of A or AA guys I make the Bedard trade.

Bailey and Hamilton... No Way

at 11:50 PM

Anonymous said...

Rob,

I tried to leave, but you pulled me back in...

My claim wasn't that Rose cheated to be a better ball player, far from it, my point was that Pete Rose tarnished the image of the Cincinnati Reds. Period...End of Sentence. It's indisputable what he did. It may have taken him 12 years to admit it, and even then his motives are far from pure (i.e., he wanted to get into the Hall before going up against the Veterans committee which he'll never get voted in by them). You say roids are worse than betting on the game. Go into a clubhouse and find the ONE rule that is posted in every single clubhouse. DO NOT BET ON BASEBALL! Pete did, and he embarrassed the Cincinnati Reds in doing so. He, just like Bonds, feels he is above the law, and while your ready to give Pete a pass, I'm not.

What Pete did as a player was remarkable in his intensity, it still doesn't remove the fact that he bet on the one thing he wasn't allowed to. Not as a rookie or young kid, but as a guy that played the game for over 20 years and was a Manager. He should have had better judgement.

I've never condoned what Bonds did, I just don't think he should be singled out as many people do.

Oh and since you are so fond of taking my posts and specifically directing comments at each one...

You in fact did call me a name in your first post...

Then we have this goof (Haz) above asking for the Reds to sign Bonds.

Now, I am not sure, but I'm pretty sure that's name calling. Please correct me if I'm wrong, seeing as I don't use facts to back up my point.

Go back and read my initial post, I said the Bonds trade would never happen, i.e., it was just a wild idea (my comment was thinking way outside the box) thrown out on a message board. I'm sorry if I didn't rehash the same old yes we should trade for Bedard or No we shouldn't because Baily might be great someday argument because wow that makes for some thrilling message board posting. I can't even believe I'm responding to you, but when you throw out innacurate statement after innacurate statement out, I'm forced to respond.

at 1:43 PM

Anonymous said...

John,

Does the Tejada trade change the talks between the Reds and Orioles? It makes it seem as if the Orioles are now in full rebuilding mode and what better way to do that than to get a couple of great prospects from the Reds. Is there anything new happening on this?

Previous Posts

Saturday, December 8, 2007

Bedard deal not dead

123 Comments: