Reds Insider: Kuroda ripple effects

Monday, December 17, 2007

Kuroda ripple effects

The Los Angeles Dodgers officially introduced Japanese right-hander Hiroki Kuroda Sunday. Signing Kuroda to a three-year, $35.5 million deal probably removes the Dodgers from the Erik Bedard chase.

But it may mean the Seattle Mariners, who hoped to get Kuroda, go after Bedard. The Dodgers were reportedly interested in the Oakland right-hander Joe Blanton. So the Reds may be in better shape as far as trades.

The Reds weren't ready to jump into the competition for top Japanese talent.

"Some of the other clubs are in better position as far as scouting," Wayne Krivsky said last week. "We're talked to some agents. We've scouted some players off video. (Japan) is an area we're trying to make in roads in."

Kuroda, 32, was 12-8 with 3.65 ERA for the Hiroshima Toyo Carp last season. That shows how valuable starting pitching is on the open market.

77 Comments:

at 3:39 PM

Anonymous said...

John: You recently quoted a Reds source as saying a Bedard deal had a 75% probability of getting done. More recently that dropped to 50-50. What does your source think now?

at 3:42 PM

John Fay said...

I think they still have a decent chance. But if Baltimore continues to insist on Bruce, it's not going to happen.

at 3:52 PM

Unknown said...

What kind of numbers would Blanton project coming to the NL, under a 3.5 era?

at 3:55 PM

Anonymous said...

If we were to acquire Blanton what kind of numbers do you think he could put up, 200+ innings and close to a 3.50 ERA?

at 4:12 PM

Don said...

Sounds like the key issue then is how dead set are the O's that Bruce be included. If Baltimore is as determined that Bruce be included as the Reds are that he not be included, there will be no deal.

at 4:23 PM

Gweedoh said...

John- why do you think the Reds are so insistent on not including Bruce?

Considering the glut of outfielders (Dunn, Jr., Freel, Hamilton, possibly Votto), I would much rather give up Bruce than Bailey or Cueto, especially if it means getting a proven ace.

at 4:33 PM

Anonymous said...

I understand where Bedard is a good 28 yr old left hander. But to give up Bruce and Bailey seems a lot for one guy.

I still rather see Cueto and Bailey in the majors this season and the Reds pick up a cheaper #3 level pitcher instead of another #1-2 type. I rather do it liket he Braves of old and bring the young guys up and see what they got for the whole season. It sounds like Cueto is good enough to be a #5 for most of the season, while Bailey can fill in for the #4. I wouldn't start Belisle, as he has always seemed to be a better set up man. Get another inning eater with a 4-4.5 era and lets move on.

Adrian

at 4:40 PM

Z-train said...

John why don't they try to get Joe Blanton?

at 4:49 PM

John Fay said...

the fact that they won't give up Bruce says how much they think of him. Nobody has told that they're after Blanton, but it serves yo reason they are.

at 5:02 PM

Jterp said...

So, when Bedard goes to the Mariners and Blanton goes to the Indians (or elsewhere) then what? The price is high for Bedard, but without him, we were a 5th place team. I don't think Cordero will be catapulting us 4 spots all by himself. Blanton wouldn't do it either.

at 5:03 PM

Anonymous said...

But, John, even if Bruce would turn out to be the best thing since sliced bread and bat .300+ with 40+ home runs and 120+ RBIs I would still think Bedard is the better guy to have. The Reds have had plenty of hitting for as long as people can remember and with Dunn, Phillips and Griffey that won't change. What we need and always have needed is pitching. Heck, if I had to chose between A-Rod and Bedard, I'd take Bedard in an instant.

at 5:06 PM

Anonymous said...

John,

What do you think it would take to pry Kazmir from TB?

at 5:19 PM

Anonymous said...

John,

assuming the reds get bedard without giving up bruce, how many holes do you think remain on this reds team? cueto may be our #5 and surely a majewski/mcbeth will step up. dusty and an improved mindset can account for a few wins, as well as no louisville tryout in sept. if the reds are in a pennant race.

anon 24/7

at 5:22 PM

Unknown said...

These are not the only possible names to acquire!

I want Jonathan Sanchez of SF... I think he'd come relatively cheaply, but he shows a lot of promise. I love his high K rate.

He's also be under the Reds "control" for more years than Bedard. That's a BIG deal to a team like the Reds.

at 5:35 PM

John Fay said...

It would take more than the Reds have to get Kazmir from the Rays. They should of drafted him instead of Gruler.

Dan is right: there are other guys other there besides Bedard and Blanton. But we know they're trying to get Bedard, and Blanton fits the bill for what they want.

at 5:39 PM

reaganspad said...

Seriously bigredmachine, if Bruce hit 300 with 40 HRs and 100 RBI's, you would rather have Bedard?
in the name of Gary Nolan and Jack Billingham, seriously....
You need to go study your namesake team and see how they got it done. Trading for Tom Seaver did not put us over the top...

at 5:47 PM

AndrewHSmith7000 said...

I agree with Josh: I don't care what kind of numbers Bruce could put up, the Reds need starting pitching more than another productive hitter. If they trade Bruce (& a prospect) for Bedard, the '08 team improves, and in '09 the rotation could be Harang, Bedard, Arroyo, Bailey and Cueto. That would win a lot of game, even if Jr., Dunn and Bruce are gone at that point.

at 5:57 PM

Anonymous said...

I have to agree with bigredmachine, even if Bruce turned out to be an MVP candidate and had 162 RBI (1 a game) we would still be a .500 ball club. We are more than a run worse than the rest of the national league the last few years. Our ERA as a staff compared to our run production is more than 1 run, so hitting is not our problem. PITCHING is what we have needed and what we still will need. It would be great if both of our prospects worked out, but history shows only 1 of 5 prospects for any club ever make a contribution to the big league team. Why do we insist on WAITING to see what our prospects will do, instead of making the deal, getting a proven solid pitcher, and developing other prospects (Stubbs) along the way. It is a situation we keep getting into in Cincy, big expectations for prospects and waiting a few years just to find out we were wrong. Getting more prospects, enduring more loosing and team ERA's in the 5.00 area, and finding out they don't pan out (Larson - Kearns). It is time to change the status quo in Cincy (you to Paul Brown) and start to make the tough decisions that need making....

at 6:08 PM

Anonymous said...

Just to add a little more.... Lets assume the Reds don't make the deal because of the request for Bruce. And, (I hope not) we sign a #4 guy like Silva or Loshe (a #3 is not out there this year), and we go to camp with that. Then we have a rotation of AH, BA, Belisle, Silva, and Bailey, with Cueto in the pen. Votto is at 1st (.255 avg 40 RBI), Griffey is injured and Hopper is struggling so Bruce comes up to split time and finds the majors are not the minors (.240 avg 32 RBI .285 obp) and we have a team era of 5.15.... What do we have then, a team that finishes 75 and 87 with pitching looking average at best, prospects who don't contribute and have lost their trade value, and are only few real all star candidates looking at the FA market to get here quick so they can get paid and win somewhere else. What kind of trade or signing can we make then??? No pitcher in the world would want to come here....

at 6:12 PM

Anonymous said...

Jay, has anyone mentioned Mark Prior? I know he has a history with Dusty and he shouldn't cost much either. What about Bartolo Colon as well?

at 6:14 PM

Anonymous said...

John: there was a report that maybe the tigers are willing to part with Dontrell Willis. Maybe the Reds and Dusty still have a chance to get him. Have you heard anything about that?

at 7:04 PM

Ron said...

Why is Gonzalez not mentioned in the discussions of possible trades? Didn't Baltimore lose their shortstop?
What is happening with regard to negotiations with Guadardo and Milton? If Milton is finally healthy and cheap, he might be a fit for the five spot if nothing else develops.
If I'm Krivsky, I think I might take my chances in signing Prior cheap with incentives, signing Milton cheap to a minor league contract with an invitation, and look at Belisle, Cueto, Bailey, Livingston, Prior, Murphy, and Milton in the spring. Stay competitive through the first two to three months, see where things are shaking out, and then make my deal with the advantage of knowing better where Votto and Bruce fit, and the possibility of using Dunn as a deal maker.

at 7:14 PM

John Fay said...

Gonzalez isn't mentioned because the Orioles and A's and looking for young, cheap talent.

Milton didn't have surgery until June 8. Tommy John takes 12 to 14 months to comes back from.

at 7:20 PM

Jterp said...

Billy Beane said recently: "You're either rebuilding for something special, or you're on the verge of something special. To be in between is foolish."

I think the Reds need to take this to heart. Without Bedard, we are in between. If we wait for Bailey, Cueto, Votto, and Bruce to come around to be stars, by that time Griffey, Dunn, and others will be gone, and we'll be right back where we started. This game is about timing, and with the current state of the NL Central, there's no better time to pounce than now.

at 7:20 PM

docproc said...

Two things I believe firmly:

--We should do almost everything we can to obtain hard-throwing, left-handed, relatively young Bedard.

--"Everything we can" should not include Bruce or Cueto.

Within those parameters, here's hoping we can get it done.

at 7:21 PM

Anonymous said...

John,
Krivsky never actually said that Bruce is untouchable right? In fact, didn't he say the opposite? I'm hoping he's just playing it close to the vest and trying to swing a deal without Bruce, but if he has no other options he would trade Bruce.
I should also note that I find it maddening that Cincy fans are so tied to their prospects while they're in the minors, but once they play a single game everyone loses interest. Weren't we raving about Brandon Claussen solving all our problems not too long ago, or was it Brandon Larson, or even Homer Bailey. Of course now that Bailey has pitched a few games and not pitched a perfect game he's definitely trade material.
As firefly said, now is the time to take a risk, we've been wallowing in mediocrity for long enough.

at 7:25 PM

reaganspad said...

firefly, how do you project Votto "is at 1st (.255 avg 40 RBI)"

That makes no sense. He did just fine versus Zambrano in Sept, has a quick bat and uses all fields with power.

He faced the Mets, Brews twice, Cubs twice, StL, SF and Houston and hit 321 with 17 RBI's.

at 7:58 PM

Anonymous said...

Jeez, Firefly. Way to think of the worst case scenario. Hey, I'm a lifelong Reds fan and a Democrat and often find the world is rather bleak----but at least some imagined hope gets me thru the day!

I like to imagine the Reds 80-82 record next year will be just good enough to win the NL Central (it's happened before), evryone brings their A game and wins the playoffs then sweeps the Red Sox in the series, creating an embarrassment for Bud Selig and his ridiculous wild card playoff format. Imagine if a first place team with a losing record defeats a second place team in the world series! If people are going to accept second place world champions (both Marlins teams, the Angels), they have no right to complain about a champion with a losing record.

But, I digress. This is the kind of hope that amuses me during the off-season. I never sit around imagining the worst case scenario unless I'm also imagining something good coming out of it. Losing record= Dick Pole gets fired. Otherwise, all I'm doing is sitting around being miserable

at 8:12 PM

Anonymous said...

Rainouts can change schedules and tired arms (let alone injuries) can mess it up, but a rotation where the best pitcher with 4 days of rest always starts yields 37, 34, 34, 30, & 27 for each spot respectively. So Harang can get 10 more starts than the #5. I think their best option is to sign a Lieber, Colon, or Tomko to provide competition for that 5th spot and be the long man otherwise. I'm comfortable with AH, BA, MB, HB & JC performing the chores with a bullpen that makes it a 6 or 7 inning ballgame.

at 8:21 PM

Mr. Redlegs said...

Are you people insane?

Play for now? Give up the No. 1 prospect in all of baseball? For a guy who can (and will) bolt after 2009?

Think about it: When was the last time the Reds had this much young talent on the verge? When was the last time they had the No. 1 prospect in the game?

And you want to give up the few pieces this organization has developed in 20 years for a pitcher who has never thrown 200 innings, who has a history of injuries, who has turned down a $17 million a year extension already?

Because of 2008?

Tell us: What does Bedard guarantee? He's been hurt five of the past six years. Yet you chirp about prospects with no guarantee. Obviously you don't follow this organization very well. The scouting, development and drafting under the penny pinching of the Schott and Lindner ownerships. The Reds have gone from one of the bottom minor league systems to one of the 10 best in the past three years.

But now you want to toss away the best prospects in a generation for the hope and prayer of winning now. This instant. Right away. For Bedard.

Effing insane.

at 8:49 PM

Anonymous said...

redlegs,

who would you give for bedard?

24 7

at 9:04 PM

Anonymous said...

The comment that really jumps out at me is "Some of the other clubs are in better position as far as scouting. Japan is an area we're trying to make roads in."

My question is . . . what the hell is taking us so long to scout Japan? It's not like this is an unknown entity and the last time I traveled there, they still accepted a U.S. passport. Time for the front office to wake up and scout the talent!

I weep for the future . . .

at 9:11 PM

Scott Evans said...

Mr Redlegs,

Yes as a season ticket holder I want the Reds to do what they can to win now, even if it means giving up the "next big thing".

Also, I think everyone's critique of Marge is unfair. She brought us 2 division titles(3 if you count the strike year), a NL Championship, and a World Series. The Reds had 8 winning seasons in the years she controled the club, finishing second in the Reds division 5 times. Would I trade those results for what we have had since 99? Absolutely.

at 9:14 PM

Jterp said...

In '99 the Cards had the numbers 1 and 2 prospects in the game (can you imagine!?) Their names were JD Drew and Rick Ankiel. Not exactly scrubs, but it wasn't Drew and Ankiel that won them the World Series 2 years ago, was it?

Between '98 and '04 the Devil Rays had 5 DIFFERENT players appear in BA's top 6: Matt White, Josh Hamilton, Rocco Baldelli, BJ Upton, and Delmon Young. They still haven't finished out of last place... ever.

at 9:24 PM

Dave from Louisville said...

John,

Do you think that Bailey, Votto, and Hamilton has been offered for Bedard or is that largely speculation? Do you think Baltimore would prefer a package like that or more of a 6 for 1 deal, like the A's got for Haren?

This the most exciting off season in a LONG time. Regardless if the trade happens or not, next year is looking like alot of fun.

at 10:00 PM

Anonymous said...

John: ESPN reports that the Astros have made an offer to Mark Prior - an incentive laced one year deal. Why haven't the Reds done the same, maybe a two year offer. I think it would be a much better idea to stay with Bailey and bring up Cueto if Prior can't go. I look to the Braves of the 90's and say stick with our young good talent rather than giving up the future.

at 10:14 PM

Anonymous said...

I agree with Mr. Redlegs about Bruce, but I would still like to see the Reds acquire him. He's not worth trading away Bruce, but any other combo, maybe. If they don't get him, then they don't get him. Life will go on and the Reds may or may not contend next season. With the prospects they have waitng, they will contend sooner rather than latr.

at 10:50 PM

Gweedoh said...

Mr. Redlegs- I agree that Bedard isn't much more of a gaurantee than our top prospects, but you're point that we shouldn't trade away our prospects just because it's been a while since we've them doesn't really float.

Lemme think of a comparison...

...it's kind of like saying that you shouldn't invest your money in a house because it took so long to earn the money. Not that Bedard is a house. Haren might have been a house. Then again, Bruce and Bailey are penthouse New York apartments. Anyways, I think you get my point. The logic is lacking.

at 11:54 PM

maus said...

I have been saying it in this and the other blog for 2 weeks like others have reiterated here....

It's all about timing. Bruce and Cueto won't STRAT to make a REAL contribution until '09. They'll come into their own in '10, but by that time Harrang, Arroyo, and Cordero will be on the downside of their careers. It would be unbelievable if we could get them to accept Bruce and Votto and one other lower end prospect (not Bailey, Cueto or Maloney). Put Jr. at first. Icing on the cake -- if there is any way we can extend Bedard.

Redlegs -- comparing Bruce's track record (50 games @ AAA) with Bedard's (4 year MLB era of 3.83 - translating to 3.40 in NL with K's and GO to boot) -- get real!

I'd say Bruce has a 70% chance of being a Carlos Lee (.305, 32, 119), good but we have plenty of outfielders already. Bedard has a 90% chance of being like Steve Carlton. IMHO he's the second best lefty in the MLB today.

Let's get it done!

at 12:12 AM

Mr. Redlegs said...

The logic isn't lacking. Look at the playoff teams since 2000 and see how many of those teams were built on their farm systems.

But some of you want to give away the house, like Christmas candies, for one player and a two-shot opp at winning for now. Because you're impatient. Because you're greedy. Because there just can't be any other pitchers out there who can help this club--at a much, much less cost.

Here's the difference in the Cardinals and Devil Rays: they had people coming through their systems they could afford to trade away. But look where the Cardinals are now. Dry as a bone. No flexibility.

Just because the Reds have Bailey, Votto, Cueto and Bruce doesn't mean their system is suddenly loaded. There's no great surplus. They don't have people at Class AAA beating down the doors. All their talent is in the lower levels.

And Scott Evans, the criticism of Marge is unfair? Because she brought two division titles and one world championship?

Good God. Learn something about the organization. Marge stripped away the entire scouting and development departments. Then, when the cost of free agency got too high for the Reds, there was no talent coming through the system and no money to sign draft picks.

It's just amazing the fantasy league mentality of so many fans. It's call the Wimpy Syndrome.

at 2:43 AM

Anonymous said...

Alright from what I've heard Bruce has a good shot at being the best pure hitter from his draft class. Everyone one of you who think he should be traded are insane..If he even has a 30% chance at being an MVP at somepoint, you can't trade that valuable of a chip. I'm not saying he's winning an Mvp at some point, but from the stuff I've read from other sources away from the team, he's got at least a shot. Trade him and then watch him blow it up somewhere else and the reds are a laughing-stock...again. I'm not taking that chance and krivsky's not that stupid either

at 7:34 AM

Anonymous said...

John, Can you find out if there is any truth to the Reds sending Johnny Cueto, Joey Votto, Matthew Maloney, and Kyle Lotzkar for Erik
Bedard.

That seems like a ton to give up for a player who we will only have for two seasons....Your thoughts?

at 7:39 AM

Scott Evans said...

Mr. Redlegs,

I completely disagree. Marge sold the team April 20, 1999. They finished second that year. Winning on the major league level is all that should matter.

Having a good farm system is nice, but there are two reasons you have one. A) To try to have lightning strike with a top notch rookie or B) To trade top notch prospects for proven players.

Reds have been rebuilding since 2001, its time they build for now rather than a future that never develops.

at 8:03 AM

Anonymous said...

Forty two years ago the Reds traded a real MVP to the Orioles for the ace of their staff plus a few throw-ins. They either ignored or were refused two prospective pitchers, a right-hander who went to the HOF and a left- hander who hand more 20 win seasons than the Reds have had in the last 42 years. Both also beat the Reds in the 1970 World Series. Does anyone want a repeat of the 65 disaster.

at 8:19 AM

Anonymous said...

John
What I really don't understand is our lack of scouting in Japan and Latin America. What stops the Reds from developing this pool of talent?

at 9:07 AM

Anonymous said...

Definitely it is true Marge Schott destroyed the scouting department. But the responsibility for not rebuilding or repairing it when it was needed most falls on Jim Bowden. Remember, Schott was suspended for the 93 season----she could not have anything to do with the running of the team. It was all on Bowden (hence the firing of Tony Perez). She was then suspended again from 96 to the time she finally sold the team to Lindner in 99. Bowden and John Allen were making all the decisions thast whole time and into Lindner's ownership. Bowden could have improved the scouting department all that time. He didn't. So while Schott may have torn down the building, Bowden burned down the foundations and let it rot

at 9:43 AM

Anonymous said...

Geez,
Why is it Mr. Redleg you have to feel you must belittle everyone in here?

Some are sick of losing and see Bedard has a chance to improve the team. As wrong as it might be i don't get on the soapbox and start hammering people about it. It's their opinion and leave it at that.

Are you not the genius that recommended Votto for Padilla of Texas?

at 9:56 AM

Anonymous said...

"Hey, I'm a lifelong Reds fan and a Democrat"

Must be a rough life.

at 10:01 AM

Mr. Redlegs said...

Wow-wee, comparing Erik Bedard to Steve Carlton. Let's see.

By the same age as Bedard, Carlton had already. . . .

* Won 117 games

* Been a Cy Young winner, MVP and won a World Series ring.

* Been a four-time All-Star

* Led the NL in ERA once, finished second once.

* Led the league in strikeouts once, finished second once, and twice led in innings pitched, starts and complete games.

* And yet pitched for such piss-poor teams in Philly that he somehow led the league in losses twice.

How in the name of Doubleday can a fan project Jay Bruce to be another Carlos Lee? Slow, lumbering, one-dimensional Carlos Lee?

Scouts and Baseball America have projected Bruce to be the next Larry Walker, who had one of the best throwing arms of our generation, who flashed 30-30 talent by always being around .300, 30 homers and 100 RBI. He won three batting titles, six Gold Gloves, three Silver Sluggers and if not for leg injuries would have a shot at the Hall.

Plus, any argument that allows the kicker, Put Jr. at first, is summarily dismissed without prejudice. You really ain't paying attention if you think that is happening.

at 10:02 AM

reaganspad said...

Yea Marge..."why pay scouts, all they do is sit around and watch baseball games."
Maus's point, "but we have plenty of outfielders already."
Griffey and Dunn are not currently under contract for 2009. Everyone wants to trade Hamilton and Bruce, Bailey and/or Votto.
Each of these players is an upgrade over the Red who start 07. Isn't that the goal, upgrade the 25 man roster and win as a team?
So we weaken 3-4 positions to improve our #2 starter? No thanks

sign Jason Jennings to be Jack Billingham and play 1975 bash ball.

at 10:05 AM

John Fay said...

the reds are doing better in Latin America -- cueto, juan francisco. The problems there go to marge. Then the reds pulled out of the academy with jose rijo. Johnny alamaraz left.

They're just starting in japan.

at 10:12 AM

Anonymous said...

Man, I REALLY hate to say it, but I agree with Mr. Redlegs on this one. I still disagree with the way he says it (I'm always right, everyone else is always wrong), however he makes a good point THIS time.

Bedard is no absolute guarantee to be a stud in the our rotation and it's crazy to clean out all of our top prospects for him, especially if he leaves in two years.

Blanton to me seems like a better option if we can get him to sign long-term (with the Kentucky ties). My questions is, how much do you think we would need to give up for him? Bailey, Hamilton and someone else?

at 10:13 AM

Mr. Redlegs said...

Anon 9:43, I'm not the genius who said make the Votto-for-Padilla deal. I'm the genius who said the Reds need to look for that kind of deal for a back-end starter without a big player outlay.

Everyone seems to think the Reds' big window is 2008. Right now they are a 3rd- or 4th-place team. Does Bedard push them over the top? No. And even if they make the playoffs, is this a World Series winner with Bedard added? No.

(A power right-handed bat in the middle is just as needed.)

But they have young players right on the verge, needing another year, and then some huge payroll comes off the books. 2008 has always looked like a stepping-stone year and that's okay.

You'd like to think fans would be excited about seeing Bailey, Cueto, Bruce and Votto get up to the big squad and start their development and be seasoned for long careers in Cincinnati by 2009, when the free agent market is better and the Reds have more payroll flexibility.

But nah. Too many shortsighted people are peeing in their pants to win in 2008. Be damned with anything else. be damned with the fact this team won't be good enough, Erik Bedard or no.

Then he walks after 2009.

at 10:14 AM

Anonymous said...

I think there is a pretty easy solution to this problem. Trade Bailey, Hamilton and Votto for Bedard. I think Cueto is already more polished then Bailey (look at the K/BB ratio), the Reds have a surplus in the OF, making injury prone Josh Hamilton expensable, and Votto was only a .290, 20-25 HR guy in the minors, so he doesn't prject to be a superstar anyway. This way you hold onto Bruce and Bailey, free up the log-jam in the OF, and Scott Hatteberg is more then serviceable at a cheap price at 1b.

at 10:15 AM

Anonymous said...

That's true. The Reds and the government have been terrible since 1999!

at 10:47 AM

Anonymous said...

Bedard is not Steve Carlton. There arent many who are. However, he is a stud and a definite upgrade for the Reds. Arroyo would be in the bullpen for championship caliber clubs and he is our number two????!!! I would like to see Bedard in Cincy and I dont think its a forgone conclusion that he wouldnt sign an extension here. He had good reason to pass on Baltimore's contract extension offer: The Orioles stink and will continue to stink as long as Peter Angelos owns the team. Any real competitor would want out of Baltimore. Thats also why no free agents of note land there even though big money is offered.

Having said all that, I would be sick if they gave up Bruce and or Cueto in any deal for anyone.

I have no problem dealing Bailey, Votto, or even Cordero. I think trading Bruce, Cueto or Hamilton would be foolish.

at 11:01 AM

Anonymous said...

No one is looking at the detailed plan for 2009. Bruce is obviously expected to be here and really contribute. Therefore, he is almost untouchable. I think Dunn will sign a new deal and stay. Griffey will not be here (which is why the payroll can jump this year without too much risk. Hatteberg will also be gone. Ideally, Votto is a part of 2009 also, but finding a first basemen such as the the Reds are used to (high average, OBP, sound defense) is relatively easy.

So what are your chips that you'd give away instantly without thinking: Hamilton, Freel or Hopper (not both), Hatteberg, Bailey or Cueto (not both, and possibly some of your off-roster young minor leaguers. This sounds like the makings of a package for someone's #3 starter, not a #1. I thought it would be Garza, but the Twins got a better deal.

I think finding a #3 would make them competitive in 2008 (if either Bailey or Cueto prove to be what we think they are) with the real chance being in 2009/10. The trouble is how hard a push do you owe Griffey in 2008? As much as I want to see them win with Griffey, it is not worth sacrificing 09 and 10. Krivsky is not in an easy position, especially with it being his last year of his contract. Considering it a desperate situation is when you make mistakes and the wrong trade could ruin an otherwise, pretty good run as GM.

at 11:16 AM

Anonymous said...

Brendon T,
I don't think I'd trade Bailey strait up for Blanton, let alone Bailey and ..... anything.
Maybe one of the Position players (Votto/Hamilton ect.)and a lower prospect or 2

at 11:18 AM

reaganspad said...

Zach, The Reds Have NO Surplus in the outfield.
Again, Jr. and Dunn are signed only for 2008.

Trading Hamilton is silly since he takes one of those spots. Bruce takes the other. You now have Zero depth in the outfield and you are hoping the rest of the farm kids arrive, or you are signing free agents or resigning Dunn.

Hamilton and Bruce give the Reds the best outfield both offensively and defensively. 2 studs you build around for 5-6 years or longer.

We are really not building this team around Griffey anymore.

I tivo'd the last game of the season and the interview of Bruce and Votto is awesome. Listening to those guys and watching them play together with Hamilton for the next 6 years will be a joy for all Reds.

Hal McCoy would kick Bedards butt the first time he smarts off. What do you think Marty would do to the guy?

at 11:23 AM

Anonymous said...

alan in Baltimore said... Arroyo would be in the bullpen for championship caliber clubs and he is our number two????!!!

Look at every teams starting rotation, Arroyo would be #3 on most of them, a #2 on a few, a #4 on a few and a #5 on 1 or 2 teams. and maybe in the bulpen on 1 team.

at 11:29 AM

Anonymous said...

Hal and Marty, both Hal of Famers, don't take nonsense from anyone. Nor should they for that matter! We have two of the BEST with those guys.

at 11:34 AM

Anonymous said...

what about Kris Benson?

at 11:34 AM

Anonymous said...

Reaganspad.....Taking Griffey out of the equation, you still have Dunn, Hamilton, Hopper, Freel, Bruce, Votto (if he switches positions), and Drew Stubbs down the line. how can you not call that a surplus? Without Griffey, thats 7 potention quality OFs for 2008-2009. Castellini has all but said they are going to sign Dunn to a longterm extension (which I agree they should do considering his OBP, OPS, HR, RUNS, and RBI). Freel and Hopper are more then serviceable CFs and leadoff men. Bruce is the best prospect in baseball, Votto might make for a pretty solid LF, and Stubbs is a five tool guy. Hamilton has the most trade value while also having the most question marks. They guy hasn't even proven he can stay healthy for a whole season.

at 12:08 PM

Anonymous said...

Mr. Fay, los días pasan y la directiva no hace ningún movimiento, qué pasa???, la firma de Blanton sería buena, pero no por Bailey ni Cueto, que tal Silva o Burnett???

at 12:29 PM

Anonymous said...

Why get rid of Bruce? Griffey is on his way out. We all know that he can't play a whole season. So someone needs to spilt time with him.Hamilton still isn't proven. His second year will prove if he is all that. Hopper and Freel are only utility players and thats it and not everyday starters.
So Dunn is the only position in the outfield that is not a question mark and thats not saying much except his offense. Yeah, lets get rid of Bruce. Idiots, only in cincinnati where you get so much ignorance.

And also, why does everyone have high regards for A-Gon, he is overpaid for what he does. Close to 4 mill a year. He has an average batting average, low teens in home runs(if that) and a defense that is on a decline. Keppinger is the future, making under 1 mill a year. He has a great bat and a decent defense that can improve. It's a no brainer. Start Keppinger.

at 12:31 PM

Scott Evans said...

Mr Redlegs,

The problem with the people who keep looking at our prospects like yourself is you keep looking for a future that never arrives.

Lets take a look at the "next big" superstar over the last few years.

1. Brandon Larson
2. Miguel Perez
3. Jeff Austin
4. Phil Dumatrait
5. Ryan Wagner

All of those "stars" you would have said don't trade when they were all Bats or Lookouts.

Edwin has worked out but not the way he was projected to. Homer Bailey is too soon to tell, but he doesn't seem to be the second coming of Cy Young. Jay Bruce falls in the same realm.

Is the window only open for 2008, no. But it is open, and each year the Reds need to continue to make moves that make the team better. If that involves trading Bruce for a good pitcher then that may have to be the price to pay. Outfielders have never been a problem for the Reds.

at 1:46 PM

Mr. Redlegs said...

Scott Evans, look at the prospects you listed. Not a single one of them were in Baseball America's Top 10. Not even the Top 30.

And, uh, Jeff Austin was taken from the Royals after they gave up on him. Dumatrait was came from Boston as a Class A player. Larson was taken because they felt he was more major-league ready and because they couldn't afford to sign Berkman, Ryan Anderson or Adam Kennedy.

Perez was never considered a top, top prospect because he couldn't hit. Wagner was revealed for being a two-pitch pitcher, then got hurt.

Those level of prospects were never on the level of the people the Reds have on the cusp now.

Why is that so hard to understand? Best group of Reds talent since the mid-80s.

at 2:03 PM

Anonymous said...

yeah I could see the reds potentially sign kris benson. He is a proven winner and when healthy can pitch 180 innings. His wife would also be nice to look at in the stands.

at 4:16 PM

sabo said...

Orioles insider, I can dispell one of those names you asked about. Lotzcar was a 2007 draft pick, and can't be traded until a year after he signed.

at 4:48 PM

reaganspad said...

Zack, why count Votto as an OF? He is an upgrade over Hatte, Cantu and Conine. Leave him at 1B for the next 6-8 years and enjoy. He will make us forget the Mayor's 1999 season.

The other 6 outfielders you mention: Freel is the one who cannot stay healthy, who admitted last year Hamilton should start in front of him. Hopper is a nice player, but he is not Hamilton, we do not know how far away Stubbs is, maybe one year, maybe 3-5. Not everyone developes into a major leaguer. BJ Smanski (sp?) sure has not developed yet

and you do not get the value by trading Hamilton now, nor do I think in the next 5-7 years. let him grow old with Votto, Bruce, BP, Bailey, EE. This team has a chance to be very good offensively and defensively next year.

Pitching is so costly right now, we are just not where you gut the team for one player

at 5:48 PM

reaganspad said...

As probably the only person on this board who knew who Jacoby Ellsbury was before this season (Go Beavers) I can tell you that Hamilton is a better player than Jacoby. Most on this board feel Bruce is better than Josh. Interesting the value Boston has placed on Jacoby (via Fox):

"BoSox GM doesn't think Santana is worth Ellsbury?"
"So far, clearly, GM Theo Epstein has decided Santana isn't worth the price that appears to have been set in Minnesota, one that includes some combination of Jacoby Ellsbury, Buchholz, and Lester"

at 6:54 PM

Anonymous said...

Gosh, Mr. Redlegs, if we trade for Bedard we're going to be completely shot after two years, right? Last time I checked, when you have a good team (which the Reds would have with Bedard, maybe not World Series, but good) players are generally more interested in playing for you and you tend to make more money (tickets, playoffs...). So even if we didn't win a World Series in the next year with Bedard, chances are we might still sign him back, plus we'd have Stubbs, Maloney and others getting ready to break in. I'm tempted to insult your reasoning, but I don't want to be reduced to your level.

at 7:47 PM

Mr. Redlegs said...

Yes, Big Red Machine, you're right. What's the logic, reasoning and common sense in giving away 3-4 prime young players for a pitcher who can walk in two years; meanwhile not have expectations for the World Series. Go for second place. Go for just reaching the playoffs. Sell a few extra tickets.

Yep, that's low-level reasoning, alright.

Glad you said it and not me.

at 10:24 PM

Anonymous said...

Do you really not understand what I'm saying? The Reds would be a good team with Bedard NOW, but they would also be a good team LATER. We are not going to fall apart once Bedard's contract runs out. Either we'll resign him or make other deals, we know that Krivsky and Castellini are commited to having good teams (and Castellini isn't stingy with the checkbook). In your proposed plan, we're MAYBE good later if the prospects turn out, but if not, dang it, I guess we're screwed. Get the picture?

at 10:39 PM

Anonymous said...

Mr Redleg,
You did offer that trade up. Why don't you just admit it? You are a clown plain and simple. And you now you get called out on it you deny it. Classic!

Tell me.....whatt's the color of the sky in your little world?

at 9:28 AM

Mr. Redlegs said...

Oh, I so love clowns. Coco, Grock, Grimaldi, Bozo.

But my favorite clown of all time is the Anonymous cluck who is too lazy to get his own blog handle, too narrow to come up with proprietary baseball perspectives of his own, and too thick-witted to know the difference between black, kettle and pot.

That clown, plain and simple, is named Nitwit.

at 12:30 PM

Anonymous said...

Again dodging your lame trade. Yeah you give me crap as a anon, but you use Mr Redleg as your name which pretty much makes you a anon also.

You can't handle being called out,don't post!

Previous Posts

Monday, December 17, 2007

Kuroda ripple effects

77 Comments: