*

*
Reds Insider
From news of the day to news of the weird, John Fay provides a glimpse of what it’s like to cover the Cincinnati Reds

John Fay
John Fay has been the Reds beat writer for the Enquirer since 2001. Prior to that, he served in a variety of roles for the Enquirer: backup Reds writer, UC beat writer, backup Bengals writer and as a general assignment reporter. He is a Cincinnati native and a graduate of Elder High School and the University of Dayton.

Powered by Blogger

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

O's on Bedard

This from today's Baltimore Sun:

Despite rampant rumors that (Brian) Roberts, shortstop Miguel Tejada and ace pitcher Erik Bedard are about to be traded, MacPhail said no deals were imminent as of last night.

"There's no shortage of talk, but it's just that - talk," MacPhail said. "The conversations have not ebbed since we left Nashville."

MacPhail said the club is in the process of filtering the number of suitors to decide who is the best trade fit for several Orioles. At this point, it appears the Cincinnati Reds, Los Angeles Dodgers and Seattle Mariners have emerged as the leading contenders for Bedard. The Houston Astros have been the most aggressive suitor for Tejada, and the Chicago Cubs have honed in on Roberts.


I talked to someone today who thought the Reds were third in the race, but that they could get the deal done if they offered Jay Bruce. I don't think they'll do that.

It's interesting, this trade is likely to come down to what the Reds and O's think of Reds' top two prospects. That's a very fluid thing. This time last year, my guess is the Reds would have traded Bruce but not Bailey. If Bailey wins 11 or 12 games this season, he'll go back to untouchable.


93 Comments:

at 2:29 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bruce is a great, young minor league player, but he's just that, a minor league player. If you can trade minor league hitting for major league pitching, I think you have to do it. The Reds can't afford to part with 2 of the big 3 prospects (Bruce, Bailey, Cueto) but if there is a way to package one of those 3 with the likes of Hamilton, EE, Freel, or Votto and add on a mid-level prospect, I think you have to take that deal.

 
at 2:31 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

I won't be heartbroken if the Reds can't get the deal done. We'll still be left with all our young talent, poised to take on the league for a 10 year run starting in 2009.

 
at 2:39 PM Blogger Petaluma Redsfan said...

John,

The Reds should trade Jay Bruce for Bedard and put themselves in a position to win the division next year, make the playoffs and see how far they can get. Yes, Bruce is a top prospect..but how many times have we seen top prospects not perform up to their billing? I would say alot from a Cincy sports standpoint. Case in point, Paul Householder, the Bengels, Kjana Carter, the list goes on.

The Reds management should not get caught up into their own minor league hype. Bruce is still unproven at this point in time. Move forward and acquire Bedard and put themselves in a position to win in 2008.

 
at 2:43 PM Blogger doomgoblin said...

If any team out there is willing to give up more than homer bailey, joey votto, and another good prospect (if not great), i say let them have him. bedard is good, and i'd love to see him on the reds, but that's too much for a guy who's never made 30 starts.

john, two thoughts: are there any talks with teams that would do a one for one pitcher for offense trade, along the lines of garza for young? seems like if the reds could deal one of hamilton, votto, ede, or even phillips straight up for a young starter, that would be the best deal for them.

second, i read that the O's might look to package bedard and tejada together a la the marlins to pull down a huge return in prospects. Is that just too much salary for the reds to take on? If not how far would they go for that?

 
at 2:47 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think it'll go down to what the Orioles value the Dodgers young talent versus the Reds. If they think Kemp and Kershaw are better than Bailey and Hamilton, they (O's) would be making a BIG mistake. Bailey and Hamilton are studs. Kemp makes baserunning blunders, Kershaw is not as established as Bailey, at least he pitched in the majors this season.

 
at 3:01 PM Blogger JS said...

I value our young prospects more than a pitcher with a decent year and a half service that may or may not help the team. Bedard is as much of a risk as the youth, and we would have to give up more of our future. I hope this deal does not happen. Baseball is very much a game of what ifs...but I do not want to play the "what if we had not picked up Bedard for one year or over paid for an extension he may or may not sign and instead had 6-8 years of Votto, Bailey, Bruce, Cueto, etc."

 
at 3:34 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think the Reds should make this trade. I think they save there young talent and be improved and still possibly win this year, but for sure next season when Bailey, Cueto, and Bruce get some experience. I have heard rumors of Kris Benson possibly being available, why don't the Reds go after him, he would be cheaper and would be a decent back end rotation pitcher.

 
at 3:44 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'd prefer they stop pursuing Bedard, he's had two decent years. Remember how good Arroyo was in 2006?

Look at the trend right now in baseball. Teams are developing talent instead of paying for it (Cleveland, Detroit, Colorado, etc.). Between Bruce, Votto, Cueto and Bailey, I think we have a solid future.

 
at 3:56 PM Anonymous bogey said...

If Bailey stays, I am thinking conservatively he wins 10 games this year. If we get Bedard, best case he wins 18.

So what is the value of 8 wins? Is 8 wins worth two established, or at least semi established, players and one that is nearly ready? Not to mention a piss pot full of cash.

 
at 3:56 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is interesting how far Bailey's star has fallen...hmm that is overstating it, but he was once untouchable. Now the Reds don't view him as untochable and other organizations don't seem to see him that way either.

So-while we know he didn't exactly perform (not a huge deal as a young rookie)-do scouts see a larger issue than that?

 
at 4:18 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bruce = Frank Robinson

seriously.

 
at 4:26 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

What made last year the year Bedard got good? He looked to be pretty mediocre before then.

I like Jon Leiber as a pick-up for the Reds. If healthy, he knows how to pitch and was one of the better ones when healthy.

 
at 4:29 PM Blogger tom dunne said...

I don't understand why so many fans are adamant about holding onto all of these prospects for "the future." Has that been a blueprint for past success, always waiting for "the future?" Five years ago, the Reds had Wily Mo Pena, Austin Kearns and Ryan Wagner on the team - they were going to be "the future", right up until they were traded away, never living up to expectations.

To JS, who is concerned about "what ifs"... What if Homer Bailey's command never improves and he's an average MLB pitcher? What if Bruce never learns to sit back against a major league breaking ball? What if Joey Votto falls off the Roebling bridge and washes up in the Amazon? Baseball IS full of what if sceanrios. You don't want to make a trade because "what if" each one of the Reds prospects becomes a star player? Pena, Kearns, Wagner and others are Exhibit A of how likely that is.

Also, Bedard had a "decent" year and a half? He pitched in the same division with the Yankees and Red Sox, and still put up a lower ERA than Aaron Harang had in the weak NL Central. Bedard was so "decent" last season that he was fifth in the Cy Young voting despite missing five starts.

 
at 4:37 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

This Bedard rumor reminds me too much of the Great Greg Swindell trade. That one paid off big, didn't it. If you can trade a position player or two, fine, but he is not worth giving up Homer Bailey for. Last year this time, no one in their right mind would unload Bailey, now it seems everyone is. Sorry but too me, Bailey is our future and is also our here and now. He's got the first year thing out of the way. He will be awesome this year for us.

 
at 4:45 PM Anonymous please don't call on me said...

Bedard is good and appears to be getting better. Still, he hasn't thrown 200 inning in a season. If the Reds are going to jettison Bailey, Votto and / or Hamilton, they would be better off going to the A's for Danny Haren, who has three years left on his contract instead of Bedard's mere 2. Sure, it'd be great to get a legit #1 or 2 pitcher, but I suspect you're going to get a lot more value out of Bailey and company for the next 5 years than you will out of Bedard over the next 2.

 
at 4:51 PM Blogger Rob Dicken said...

So what is the value of 8 wins?

8 more wins would have put us a little closer to contention last year! Based on your other comments, it seems to me that you are saying you'd rather have Bailey's 10 wins instead of Bedard's 18 wins. I don't see the logic in that.

You also need to take QUALITY STARTS into effect. Even if Bedard wins 18 game, it's a good possibility that he would have 5-6 more quality starts that he didn't get wins on. So that gives us 23-24 possible wins out of ONE PITCHER! Is that worth Homer Bailey, Joey Votto, and another lower level prospect? Absolutely! Right now everyone's ASSUMING that Homer Bailey will be good in 3-4 years. Erik Bedard is already good (and getting better every year) and still decently young. When it comes to being a business and winning ball games, you can't run a successful business on "what if" statements. You'll never make any money and you'll never win any games or be productive.

The Reds bullpen is also still not complete, people. We STILL have Stanton and Coffey!

Meanwhile, the Brewers just DFA'd Matt Wise, who has had a pretty good run the past 3-4 years in Milwaukee. I'd pick him up if I were the Reds!

 
at 4:57 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

We know that the O's want to get rid of their catcher Hernandez and his salary, so why don't we take him?

Here's the deal - Bedard, Hernandez to Reds for Belisle, Ross, Livingston and Freel.

 
at 5:16 PM Anonymous WD Gann said...

It's always a tough call. I would hate to trade away Jay Bruce or Josh Hamilton, but to me trading Homer Bailey makes no sense.

Why would you trade pitching away???...we desperately need all the pitching we can get.

This is a little off the topic but the Reds seem to be making strides at actually drafting and developing pitching (Bailey, Cueto) for the first time since Tom Browning. I'd hate to see them give up on Homer at this point.

Bedard was a 6th round draft pick so someone had a good eye or developed him very well.

 
at 5:20 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Reds need to put the offer of Bailey and Hamilton on the table for either Bedard or Haren. This will get both the O's and the A's coming to the Reds instead of just focusing on Bedard and paying to much for him

 
at 5:22 PM Blogger Rob Dicken said...

This Bedard rumor reminds me too much of the Great Greg Swindell trade. That one paid off big, didn't it.

It worked for the year we had Swindell...he had a 12-8 Record, 138 K, 2.70 ERA, and 200+ innings pitched.

Swindell is quite different...he played 6 full years in the Majors before coming to the Reds, and never exceeded 180 K in a season. Bedard has played 4 full seasons, and his strikeouts increase every year.

 
at 5:29 PM Anonymous CHEVIOT SPORTS AUTHORITY said...

Can Homer Bailey really throw 95+ MPH on a consistent basis? We were led to believe by Reds management that he could. That is, until he came up here and threw around 90-91. Very average.
Unless Bailey really can throw 95-96 or better for 7 plus innings 200 innings a season, he is destined to be nothing more than a journeyman at best. Nothing against Bailey, I hope he can do it. But the Reds have lied to the fans for so long and so often that until I see it I do not believe it. The fact that suddenly they want to trade him also tells me that there is reason to believe that all of the hype about him was just that.

I would like to see him in the rotation with Harang and Bedard. Arroyo should be a number 3 at best. If Arroyo is your number 2 guy, you are in for another long season and why would anyone possibly believe that Matt Belisle will be any better than lousy as he was last season?

Cueto is now getting the hype that Bailey used to get. Lets hope he is the real deal.

 
at 5:36 PM Anonymous redfuture said...

You can chalk it up! Bailey easily wins 11 or 12 when healthy. He won 4 out of 9 starts last year. He pitched with an injured groin in 2 of those that he didn't win and the bullpen blew one he was in line to win. The new bullpen will better protect leads than last year. Bailey's a stud waiting to happen.

 
at 5:49 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wasn't sure before but when you look at it this way:
We can't use Bruce in 2008 unless we move hopper, hamilton, or the donkey (half-way through the season as his option stipulates). We can use Bedard immediately and he wins games, period.
If they don't want Homer and Bruce, then we have a plethora of pitching including young serviceable guys in Cueto and Bailey.

 
at 5:56 PM Anonymous Dusty Backer said...

I would like us to win this year as well, but I do think we are trying to give to much away to rent a player we all know will leave in two years(if he plays well that is). We have a good if not great group of players a year away from taking the central by storm. Lets get these guys up here get them some on the job training, lets trade some of the guys who are so-so vets, not that we don't like to watch them play, lets just enjoy watching Votto, Bailey, Bruce, Cueto and company take there lumps this year, and then lets really enjoy watching them give lumps the next six. Mr. JR. hows about heading to first to make room for the young blood, we all still love ya man, and want you to retire a red. My outfield Dunner, Hamilton, Bruce, 1B JR., 3B Votto(sorry easy E). Lets let big Dusty turn these kids into great players!!!!

 
at 5:56 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow,

I always considered Reds fans to be among the most knowledgable out there. But what I am reading here today makes me question that. Erik Bedard is a true No. 1, top-of-the rotation, power pitcher. And he's a lefty to boot. There aren't a lot of those out there.

Playing in the division that the Reds are fortunate to reside, they would be overwhelming picks to finish first with the addition of Bedard. Do you really care that it could stunt the team's growth in three to five years? Is there any guarantee that some of your current players or the ones being discussed as part of the trade will still be healthy in three years?

I say make the trade and win the division while you still can.

 
at 6:33 PM Anonymous matt said...

Get rid of Homer, he is not as good as everyone says he is. the reds will have enough young talent in future drafts to make good on the deal. You can't win if you don't take chances and it's been a long time for the reds.

 
at 6:54 PM Blogger Al in Ohio said...

To Anonymous at 4:57: If you think the Orioles would take Belisle, Ross, Livingston, and Freel in a deal for Bedard, you are absolutely smoking the best stuff in the country.

To all Reds fans: What has you so convinced that picking up Bedard would make the Reds a near lock to win the division next year? Their rotation would still not be as good, top to bottom, as the Cubs or Brewers, and their bullpen is nowhere near as solid, even after adding Cordero. The Reds team I've seen the last couple of years is certainly farther than one good starting pitcher away from the playoffs.

 
at 7:03 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Picking up Bedard would make the Reds the favorite only if they didnt trade Bailey to pick him up. What the Orioles fans dont realize is that Homer Bailey isnt just some prospect that is going to be sitting in the minors for the Reds, he is going to start in the rotation. Therefore the Reds would still only have 4 starters with major league experience and less offense if they include Hamilton and/or Votto. The Reds need to find a team that will trade pitching for offense and throw in a guy like a Maloney or Roenicke. That is what the Reds were trying to do when they were pursuing Willis before the Tigers outbid them and I think that is what Krivsky continues to do.

 
at 7:20 PM Blogger Al in Ohio said...

Cheviot Sports Authority - I find it interesting that you call Homer Bailey's fastball, topping out at around 91 MPH as "very average", and claim that "Unless Bailey really can throw 95-96 or better for 7 plus innings 200 innings a season, he is destined to be nothing more than a journeyman at best".

Bedard's fastball rarely exceeds the low 90s, and he's never thrown more than 200 innings in a season, and is known to use a lot of pitches, which causes him to have to leave games early, yet your anxious to have him in the rotation.

I think there's some "the grass is greener" stuff going on here.

 
at 7:31 PM Blogger Steve said...

Ask 20 people and you'll get 20 different comments. For what it's worth: you don't trade Bruce, Hamilton, Bailey or Cueto. It's amazing to me how far Bailey's fallen out of favor. Trade him? Not yet. Package Votto, EE and a prospect or "other" but keep the core and hope for the best.

 
at 7:41 PM Blogger Rob Dicken said...

Ok...now I have heard some non-sense in my time, but did I just see a guy tell me he would like to see Votto play 3B? Good lord...the last poster was right! I thought Reds fans were pretty knowledgeable...but that was the most off-the-wall thing I have ever heard!

Not to mention, saying that Homer Bailey wins 10-12 games every year is moot. If that is all he is winning out of 30+ starts, then he NEEDS to be traded. I like Homer Bailey and think he has a lot of potential, but we are giving him too much credit for the performances he had last year. A 5.76 ERA with a 4-2 record is nothing to brad about folks, anyway you look at it. He made 5 out of 9 quality starts and won 4 of those. Having a 5.76 ERA, he's lucky to have that many wins. We all saw where that type of ERA got Matt Belisle.

 
at 8:35 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

It seems to me that from the information out there... the sticking point is not bailey but bruce? so why is this even a point. Sources from espn to CTR say reds most probably already offered Hamilton & Bailey but no one bit. The question then becomes is it about Bruce. (as it seems to be) So who do you package with Bruce and do you?

 
at 8:39 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Last season Homer Bailey pitched all right including a couple signs of dominance. He did that last year with a groin injury. If a pitcher has an injury to his legs that means he has less power, explaining why his velocity dropped off from the minors. This coming season should be a great improvement for Homer because his velocity will be back up. That is why the Reds shouldn't trade Bailey.

 
at 9:07 PM Blogger reaganspad said...

Rob,
LOOK at Aaron Harang's first year. And Bedards for that matter. It is Belisle and Bailey. It takes time to develop a ML pitcher, stretch out to 200innings. You would not have given Harang or Bedard a second chance 3 years ago? sounds like Frontrunnin to me.
Belisle will be good to very good next year as will Bailey.

We will win more games in 2008 with Bailey, Votto and Hamilton than with Bedard.

 
at 9:16 PM Anonymous mikec said...

I thought Reds fans were knowledgeable too. Until I started reading this blog last spring.

 
at 9:28 PM Blogger Hugh D. Pohl said...

OK, look. Trading Bailey to get a major starting pitcher is not "giving up" on him. And, yes there are some of the most ridiculous trade ideas I have heard on this thread. Bruce and Hamilton are position players with huge potential. Hitters are much easier to project than pitchers. Keep them. Votto, while good, lacks the potential of the other 2. He can hit and with some power,but he is not a top notch defender. If Bedard can be nabbed for Bailey and Votto and a lesser prospect go for it.

And how is two years a considered a "rental" player if they acquired Bedard? A rental player is when you trade for someone only signed through the final month or so of a season, as we did with Jeff Conine and Kyle Lohse last year.

 
at 9:39 PM Blogger NC Reds Fan said...

It feels like there is a witch hunt out for Homer. Yeah he had a 5.76 ERA. But he was 4-2 in 9 starts and he was 2-0 his last 3 starts after, listen to this Cheviot Sports Authority, he came off the DL for a groin injury that is one of the hardest injuries to pitch with, especially for Bailey considering how long his stride is. Above all he is a competitor. I watched him last year when Louisville came to Charlotte and I went to his first game in Cin. He’s a gamer just like Livingston is. Bailey shouldn't be moved, he is going to be the #2 behind Harang by '09. The Reds don't need to trade away all of their young talent, if they pick up a "2nd tier" pitcher like Lieber or Prior, somebody along the lines of that and the team will be in good shape. The Central wont be that good and a lot of players that people on here seem to want to cast away will have better years. Everyone wants Belisle gone, but remember this was his first year as a starter in the majors. He has the stuff to be a good 3 or 4 starter he will pitch this year and he will have 10+ wins. Guaranteed. And or bullpen will be one of the best. Cordero, Burton, and Weathers 9,8,7 and then Bill Bray, Jon Coutlangus, Magic man, and Coffey. Cut Stanton and Im telling you Coffey will be back to his 06 stuff. He tried to use to use 4 pitches this year and his best pitches suffered. He admitted that and said he is going back to 3. The Reds will be fine this year and because we didn't trade all our young talent we will have a stacked team in 09. Don't forget about Tom Shearn for the rotation. Went 3-0 and looked pretty good for a 5th starter.

 
at 10:11 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whatever happens or doesn't happen on the trade front, you got to give it up to the front office trying to improve the team. I don't see alot of people giving them their due on this.

If they can't pull off the deal so be it. It takes two to tangle and if they feel they would be giving up too much I have no problem with that. To say Bedard isn't a top notch pitcher is kinda crazy. Just check the stats.

Bailey had a groin injury and that I am sure had something to do with him throwning in the low 90s(hard to believe some people think that is a definition of a soft tosser). I do recall seeing him hit mid-90's in his start in Oakland.

And I think all the talk about "been down this road before" about developing and keeping the minor leaguers, we didn't have the quality and qaunity in the minors that we are beginning to build up as we speak.

Woody

 
at 10:58 PM Anonymous redfuture said...

I'm in favor of trading Bailey, Cueto, Votto, & Bruce to the Yankees, Redsox, Mets, & Dodgers respectively for three top-notch prospects each like our current ones after the 2011 season, one year before their free agency.

 
at 11:45 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Al in Ohio:

There is generally understood to be a difference in a left-handed "power pitcher" and a right-handed "power pithcer." The righty needs a little more zip to be a power pitcher.

 
at 12:05 AM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wait a minute. Someone told me on another thread that Cheviot Sports Authority died of a heart attack last week. What's he doing here, sending posts from the beyond? I was almost thinking of being respectful, but it seems even in death, he's still a muffinhead.
Low 90s are not average for a fastball, they are a bit above average. Considering that none of the other 3 starters the Reds have now----Harrang, Arroyo and Belisle----have a fastball that gets past 86, even at 91 Bailey is dominating. And even if he does only get 10-13 wins a year, at least it's not 10-13 losses. Mario Soto only got more than 15 wins once. Jose Rijo never won more than 15 in a season. Any complaints about them?

 
at 12:13 AM Anonymous Anonymous said...

The offer I would put on the table for Bedard or Haren would be Encarnacion, Cueto, Coffey and Stubbs. If the Orioles threw in Chad Bradford, maybe I would consider throwing in another prospect or two.

As someone pointed out somewhere, trading Bailey for Bedard would not solve the biggest problem, that the Reds only have 4 viable starters with Major League experience. Why would some of you be willing to scrape the bottom of the free agent barrel if they have Bedard, but not if they have Bailey? Won't John Lieber still be John Lieber, no matter who pitches before him?

 
at 12:14 AM Blogger Mr. Redlegs said...

Bedard is a top-notch pitcher? He's worth three top players/prospects? He guarantees a winner?

Has he ever won more than 15 games?

No.

What's his career ERA?

3.86

Does he complete games?

No.

Does he get into the seventh inning?

No.

Does he keep runners off base?

No.

Does he have low pitch counts?

No.

Has he ever pitched 200 innings?

No.

Does he stay healthy?

No.

But isn't he on the upswing?

Aren't Bailey, Cueto, Hamilton and Votto?

 
at 3:19 AM Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't believe it! There really are people on this site that have common sense, Mr. Redlegs, NC Reds Fan, and a few others. I just hope the Reds management has as much sense. To trade several of your top prospects for a guy like Bedard (bad attitude, injury prone, etc.) does not make good long term business sense. As it is, with the prospects now in the system the Reds can be a very competitive team for the next several seasons. If you give away the best goods in the store for one pitcher (who is not the next Sandy Koufax) you are going to hurt the future of this franchise. If the team feels it MUST make this deal, offer only Bailey, Majewski,and E.E.. If that does not get the deal done. PLEASE pass on it! I think this team can win now in the Central Division without giving up the store! Just my thoughts, but if they trade Bailey, I bet a hot-fudge sundie that they end up regretting it. Have a wonderful day! Rocco

 
at 3:25 AM Anonymous Red Faced said...

BEDARD IS THE REAL DEAL. Listen people, most of you most likely don't realize that Bedard didn't even play the month of September last year or his numbers would have been even better. He was suffering from a pulled muscle in his rib cage and the Orioles just shut him down because they were playing for nothing. He went 4-1 in Aug and 6-0 in July. If he had been healthy and pitched in September (he could have come back and made another start or two but there was no reason to do so) then he would have easily won 15 games and most likely would have led the AL in strikeouts as well. He also would have easily eclipsed the 200 inning mark that some of you think is so important. He only needed 18 more innings - 3 starts easy and the prior year he pitched in 5 more games and fell 3 2/3 innings short of the 200 inning mark. His ERA was lower last year, fewer hits, BB per inning and more strikeouts per inning than the previous year. This guy is on the up-swing big time. He had a WHIP of 1.09 which is awesome. This guy is the real deal and he's a left-hander, we desperately need a left-handed starter. Bedard will contend for the Cy Young award mark my words.

Don't break the minor league bank by no means but giving up Bailey for Bedard appears to be a very smart move on the Reds part from where I'm sitting. I say let's get this done and enjoy the season all. It would be oh so nice to see 2 Reds pitchers receiving Cy Young votes in the same season, heck pitching on a winning club might just put one of them over the top and actually allow them to win it.

 
at 5:41 AM Anonymous Bedardian Logic said...

Bottom line here is very simple. Irrespective of whether you agree or disagree that the Reds should trade any of their high ceiling prospects for Bedard, fact is Wayne Krivsky has done a heck of a job restocking the minors and building a team which has the potential to be good for years to come. Moving Bruce and/or Bailey and/or Hamilton is risky because of their upsides, but the fact of the matter the Reds need another ace besides Harang in the rotation to contend, and none of the guys being talked about in this thread as alternatives to Bedard can be that guy ... and neither can Bailey. The kid's got a nice arm, but his fastball is not overpowering, his control is suspect and his off-spead stuff is average at best. That may change, but I'd trade him and Bruce. Jay may turn out to be a great player, but Hamilton is a tremendous defensive center fielder with excellent offensive skills, so Bruce is expendable. Plus, if you trade Bruce to the AL, he won't be a thorn in our side. I say squeeze the trigger and get psyched for a pennant in 2008 (if only the NL Central).

 
at 5:46 AM Anonymous Captain Morgan said...

Anonymous said...
"Considering that none of the other 3 starters the Reds have now----Harrang, Arroyo and Belisle----have a fastball that gets past 86, even at 91"

What are you watching?
How can anyone who supossedly watches the Red's say Harang throughs in the the 80's. Whe he is close to unhitable is when he is hitting 94-95 on the gun, they say he is sneaky fast on those days and these comments are from other teams broadcasting crews. That is why Harang is considered our ACE. Belisle is constantly around 93-94, which is why they want him to learn to be more consistent since he has better stuff than Arroyo but hasn't really learned to pitch yet, but I do admit Arroyo is rarely at 90.

 
at 8:47 AM Anonymous J-Diggety said...

in response to Mr. Redlegs post:

"What's his career ERA?

3.86"
that's seems like a pretty good number to me, considering the division he's pitched in. Not to mention it's about 30 points lower than Harang's. throw out his rookie year his ERA is under 3.60



"Does he get into the seventh inning?

No."

wrong, he averaged 6.5 innings per start last year, which obviously means he pitched into the 7th on a regular basis.

he did only comeplete 1 game last year, so I'll give you that one.

a 1.09 whip, by definition means he kept runners off base.

Also, I'm getting a little tired of the he hasn't pitched 200 innings thing. He pitched 196+ innings two years ago and he pitched 182 last year, be fore getting shut down with an oblique strain.

not only is he on the upswing, He's already right near the top.

 
at 8:50 AM Anonymous J-Diggety said...

all that said, I still don't think he's worth the talent that is rumored to be required to get him. My point was that just because his price tag is too high, it doesn't change the fact that he already is a legit #1 or #2 starter, and has the potential to be one of if not the best in baseball.

 
at 8:56 AM Anonymous J-Diggety said...

one more stat to consider, the last 2 seasons Bedard has had a 1.48 ground ball to fly ball ratio. That would work very well in the Great American Smallpark.

 
at 9:01 AM Anonymous timidatr3 said...

Bedard pitches in the AL EAST, check what any of your pitchers ERA's would be if they had to face those line-ups. Bedard was one of the most feared pitchers according to most batters in the AL. Not many pitchers in the AL last more than 7 innings. Strikeouts tell the tale!

 
at 9:09 AM Blogger Rob Dicken said...

Considering that none of the other 3 starters the Reds have now----Harrang, Arroyo and Belisle----have a fastball that gets past 86

Wrong. All three of those guys thrown in the low to mid 90s. Harang hits 92-95 on a normal basis, as does Belisle. Arroyo is consistantly at 88-92 when throwing his fastball.

Mr. Redlegs, you also need to consider the fact that he has played for a very CRUMMY Baltimore Orioles ballclub the last 3-4 years. The offense has been little to none the last few years. He's won 13 and 15 game the last 2 years when playing for a VERY BAD team. What do you think he would do on a team that has a potent offense and a good bullpen? He'd be an easy 18 game winner. Is that worth Homer Bailey and Joey Votto/Hamilton? Absolutely! Offense puts runs on the board, but in the end, pitching and defense win ballgames for you. Homer Bailey COULD be good...we're all basing an assumption on that. But that's not a guarantee. Right now, Erik Bedard is a good pitcher. His stats show that. 221 strikeouts in 189 innings and 3.16 ERA is pretty darn good, no matter how you look at it. I will take 6.5 innings per start any day from a starter!

 
at 9:14 AM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Swindell had 1 yr left on his deal and we traded Jack Armstrong and Scott Scudder.

Yeah, that really still hurts the Reds...

Swindell actually pitched so well that we couldn't afford to resign him.

At least Bedard has 2 yrs left, and Haren has 3.

And the O's certainly aren't taking our garbage for Bedard when they have already turned down Bailey and Hamilton.

 
at 9:59 AM Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you are smart like most of us,you will realize Mr Redlegs post are drawn out(think he could use less space?) winded remarks that are usually off the mark or retreaded info he reads on other peoples blogs. He really won't adde much to the conversation and if he's outsmarted(happens 99.9% of the time) he'll say you are all stupid and no nothing of baseball,which pretty much defines himself.

 
at 10:02 AM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Redleg speaks and once again,someone points out to him why he's a knucklehead. You think he'd do a litlle more research before he slams a player. Great job J-Diggety!

 
at 10:20 AM Blogger Mr. Redlegs said...

Whatever the excuses, however you want to spin it, Bedard has not pitched 200 innings a year. You've giving Ifs, Ands and Buts. They don't count.

Is he a good pitcher? Absolutely.

Would he help the Reds? Positively.

Does he guarantee anything? Nope.

Is he worth the kind of prospects and player outlay that should bring a more established starter, like a two-time Cy Young winner in Santana? No freaking way.

And after he walks in 2009, howya gonna feel about the players doled out, especially if getting Bedard didn't "guarantee" that winning (and winning right this instant!) so many of you are crying for?

 
at 10:57 AM Blogger Gene in WV said...

Bottom line is all of us would love to have a Bedard or Haren. It would be silly to think otherwise.

However, the difference comes in as to how much we would be willing to give in return.

I am of the opinion we make a basic offer of a combination of two good young players, then, if we get one of them, fine, if we don't, we no longer have to panic and do something we might regret for a long time.

We have a little more leverage here than some seem to think-IMHO. We have some guys others would like to have. Thats a rarity for the Reds(past 10 years). Why? Because the minors have been rebuilt(even before Krivsky).

If need be, we can get by with Harang, Arroyo, Bailey, Shearn, Belisle, Livingston, Cueto, and a grizzled old veteran that we could land for a season--especially now that our pen would seem to be in pretty good shape.

Just cut the blown saves in half, which this pen would seem, on paper, to be able to do, and we win the Central, even with the starters we had last year, all of which should be better this year with another year of seasoning.

I trust Krivsky's scouting background enough to have confidence he knows how much to give up, and more importantly, when to draw the line.

 
at 11:06 AM Blogger Gene in WV said...

I am of the opinion we don't have to panic and do anything. For the first time in over a decade we actually have some young players other teams would really like to have--thanks to patiently rebuilding our minor leage system(yes, Dan O'Brien included).

Would love to have Bedard, or Haren, but we are in a better bargining position than in years past, because with the improvement of the pen, if we can just cut the blown saves in half(Which, on paper, we should be able to do), we can win the Central, EVEN WITH OUR CURRENT STARTERS.

We can live with Harang, Arroyo, Belisle, Shearn, Livingston, Bailey, Cueto, and perhaps a grizzled old veteran for one year.

Lets make a decent offer, perhaps two good young players, and let them take it or leave it. The Orioles are the ones desparate to do something.

I trust Krivsky's scouting background enough to know when too much is required.

 
at 11:09 AM Blogger Rob Dicken said...

Mr. Redlegs...

You just stated an "If" statement. Anytime someone makes an assumption on Homer Bailey and Joey Votto, it's an "If" statement.

Who's saying that Erik Bedard would walk in 2009? What makes you think he won't resign? Aaron Harang has had 3 great years in a row and re-signed recently. He's in the same boat as Erik Bedard...and he's a bargain! $4 mil per year for a top notch starter is a BARGAIN!

But nonetheless, you just made a PURE "If" statement. Right now...as we speak...Erik Bedard is a great pitcher. Homer Bailey is not. Getting Erik Bedard would give us a 1 through 3 combination that would dominate the NL Central. Who else would have a better 1-3 combo? The Cubs? NOPE! The Brewers? NOPE! The Cardinals, Houston, and Pirates? Definitely not!

We would have the best 1-3 combination in the National League, quite possibly. I'd take the trade in a heartbeat!

 
at 11:23 AM Anonymous timidatr3 said...

Bedard actually had a better year than Santana. Bedard had 5 less starts with 14 less strike outs and had a better ERA and just short of Santana's win total of 15 with a far less superior team. They both had 1 CG and 1 Shut out. Bedard surrendered 22 less runs and 42 less hits and Bedard only allowed 19 HR opposed to Santana's 33 and thats playing in the AL EAST! Bedard has a good fastball and also knows how to pitch. Being a lefty is also a plus, it's not just about a 95 MPH fastball

 
at 11:53 AM Blogger Mr. Redlegs said...

That's pretty funny, two Anonymous geniuses who haven't looked at a page of Bedard's stat splits or gone beneath his surface body of work, likely have never seen him pitch on TV or in-person, never offer a counter opinion other than duh, he's really good.

For one year.

I didn't take the Fantasy-Leaguer approach and slobber over one season, but went through every element of Bedard's career, including until last year he had never averaged pitching into the sixth inning and had a piss-poor history for quality starts.

Last year got him up to 5.8 innings per start for his career. He averages 102 pitches in his career. For less than six innings.

Oh, the disabled list and other ailments: 2001--missed six weeks with shoulder injury; 2002-pops elbow ligament; 2003-misses all but 19 innings with Tommy John surgery; 2004--shut down in September with tired arm; 2005--strained knee ligament, missed two months of season rehabbing and in minors; 2006--clean; 2007--missed last month with strained oblique.

So once again:

A guy with four MLB seasons who has never thrown 200 innings, made 30 starts only once, only has one great season, turns 29 this March, and has an injury history?

That's exactly the kind of deal, giving away 3-4 prospects for a team without a deep system, that murders a franchise.

Pass.

That's ain't conjecture, that's facts, written out of the narrative so the Anonymous nimrods can understand it.

 
at 12:09 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the Reds are serious about this trade for Bedard then I would like to see them go all out in order to make the team a true contender. In reality a deal of Homer and Votto for Bedard simply replaces a young Homer with a better pitcher right now in Bedard. Would this make the Reds favorites in the NL Central, I don't really think so, last year they trailed the Cubs by 13 games in a horrible year. They need to make additional moves. What about trading for Bedard and then turning around and also trading for Haren. Package a deal of Bruce, Hamilton/Votto (whichever is left from the Bedard trade) and one other midlevel prospect (not Cueto). In effect we would have the same regulars from last year (minus Hamilton's half of a year) but with adding three elite pitchers (Bedard, Haren, and Cordero). I realize that this would be mortgaging the future, but if you are going to make a statement to win now by trading to for Bedard go all out or don't do it at all. Addin gonly Bedard, while no doubt makes the team better still does not even push this team to 90 wins. It's kinda like the Celtics this offseason. Trading for Allen by himself didn't make all that much sense, but then when the got Garnett also it was brilliant. Anyways, can you imagine a rotation of Haren, Harang, Bedard, Arroyo, and ? (Belisle, FA). This no doubt would give the Reds the best rotation in the NL. Either commit to winning now, or hold onto the future, don't sit in the middle. We as
Reds fans have been stuck their for far too long.

 
at 12:11 PM Anonymous J-Diggety said...

one of my other post mysteriously never showed up. I said following my other post that if the talent that Baltimore has been rumored to want from the Reds or other teams is what it would take to land Bedard. Then I still might not pull the trigger on that trade. Even if he was the most dominate pitcher in baseball last year.

I personally believe Homer is going to have a very good year this year.

 
at 12:26 PM Blogger reaganspad said...

I love some guy named "anonymous" bashing Mr. Redlegs.
Seriously, if you are going to bash, grow a pair.

Bedardian Logic, Bailey has 2 plus pitches, one of them a 12-6 curveball that he throws about 7% of the time because he is busy being Nuke LaLoushe. And everybody on this board is now calling him "meat."

Dusty will have him at AAA if he continually wants to ride his fastball in majors.

It is called learning your trade. Bailey has Roy Oswalt type stuff but not Oswalt type execution

 
at 12:52 PM Blogger Mr. Redlegs said...

Rob Dickens, my man at the Balto Sun says the Orioles dangled (not offered, but dangled) a 3-year, $52 mil extension at Bedard and he passed.

That's $17 mil a year. And the dope with a 40-34 career record passed.

So should the Reds.

 
at 1:02 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

ESPN is reporting that Tejada is being traded to the Astros for Luke Scott, pitchers Matt Albers, Troy Patton and Dennis Sarfate, and third baseman Michael Costanzo.

I'm not really sure what to think about that trade. Tejada's numbers should be better on the Astros, but I'm not so sure he'll make that much of a difference for them.

 
at 1:13 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

It was announced the Cubs landed Fukudome and the Astros got Tejada. The NL Central just got a lot tougher for the Reds. The Reds HAVE to trade for a starter now, and if that means giving up Bruce, so be it.

 
at 1:24 PM Anonymous timidatr3 said...

I watched the majority of the Orioles games last year where the IDIOT manager (Perlozzo) took Bedard out with the lead or tie just to have the bullpen lose the game. He probably would have had 200 innings and a couple more wins at least. I believe Bedard would have pitched a few more starts if the O's had something to play for, but why take that risk?

 
at 1:30 PM Anonymous firefly118 said...

All I know is, I want us to win. We always hear about our young players developing for the future and it never happens. What is the sense of keeping guys who might play in the majors, rather than getting guys who are playing in the majors and help us win. Bedard or Haren for that matter isn't Cy Young, but they are proven major league pitchers. Lets do what we have to do to get one of them and win now. If you tell me Jay Bruce will start in the OF for us this year and contribute fine, Bailey will win 13 to 17 games great, Votto will hit .315 with 90 RBI fantastic, but if you can't lets move them for players who will help us win this year.......

 
at 1:35 PM Anonymous timidatr3 said...

Tejada was just traded to the Astros for 5 players. Good work Mcphail!!!!!!!!!!!

 
at 1:52 PM Anonymous Red Faced said...

Just to make it clear, I like picking up Bedard in a trade for this team both now and potentially down the road. But I don't agree on giving away the farm in order to get him. At the most ONE of our top minor prospects and perhaps Hamilton or EE but that's it besides a lower minor league prospect. I Would not give Bruce, nor Cueto but could be talked into Votto or Bailey but not both of them.

Yes I think Bedard is a great fit for us, no I would not like to see us overpay for him. If the O's want too much then I agree, let's just see what our guys can do for us this year. We could easily win the division, now winning it all I don't see happening with this staff this year. But, they could develop into a top notch rotation in 2-3 years. I know a lot of if's and but's. But that's the only game to play in December isn't it?

So as for bashing Mr Redlegs, I did not intend to do so and I actually agree with you on some level. I would not mortgage the future for Bedard. But I would give a little of its potential for him.

As for the Reds' management and ownership: I think they are doing a fine job this offseason. I would not be surprised to see a deal get done for a rotation guy before the spring but I also would not be surprised if it isn't soon.

 
at 2:04 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Has anyone ever notiuce that players seem to get better with expierence? So wouldn't logic dictate that Bedard will get better? And 190 plus inninngs in a year isn't that shabby? If you are going to use stats in a arguement make sure you present them all.
John

 
at 2:21 PM Blogger redsfaninrochester said...

The Astros gave up some talent for Tejada, but not there top two prospects, and Scott isn't as highly thought of as the year before. We shouldn't have to give everyone of are top prospects either. I know it's a pitcher in Bedard, and pitching is at a premium, but this trade does give us somewhat a market price of what the Orioles are asking. We need a third frontline starter.

 
at 2:50 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's a question for you all to ask yourselves as you play arm-chair GM. Are the Reds better this year, and in the future, trading for someone like Bedard and then signing a Mark Prior (if he's non-tendered) or a Freddy Garcia? Or would they be better suited letting Bailey and Cueto develop behind Harang and Arroyo?
I'm not sure the Tigers just didn't mortgage their future by trading for Cabrera and Willis.

 
at 2:58 PM Anonymous WD Gann said...

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7555796

I thought this was an interesting comment on the Tejada trade. I would like to have Bedard but I would not give up pitching to get him.


Astros shouldn't trade pitching prospects
Ken Rosenthal / FOXSports.com
Posted: 13 minutes ago

The Astros have little to recommend in their rotation beyond Roy Oswalt. Yet, they keep trading young pitchers while trying to satisfy short-term goals.

They sent Mitch Talbot to the Rays in a deal for Aubrey Huff in July 2006.

They sent Jason Hirsh and Taylor Buchholz to the Rockies in a trade for Jason Jennings last off-season.

And now they've parted with three more pitchers — Troy Patton, Matt Albers and Dennis Sarfate — in a five-player package for Orioles shortstop Miguel Tejada.

Patton, 22, and Albers, 24, were rated the Nos. 2 and 3 prospects in the Astros' organization by Baseball America before last season.

Sarfate, 26, is a reliever who has a 2.70 ERA in 15 career major-league appearances, with 25 strikeouts and five walks in 16 2/3 innings.

Of the three, Patton has the highest upside, though he had shoulder problems at the end of the season. Albers projects as a middle-of-the-rotation starter or late-inning reliever. Sarfate has the stuff to close, or at least set up.

Tim Purpura, the Astros' previous general manager, made the deals for Huff and Jennings, neither of whom is still with the club.

Ed Wade, the new GM, gave up the three pitchers plus outfielder Luke Scott and third baseman Michael Costanzo even though the interest in Tejada from other clubs appeared minimal.

It was not immediately clear whether the Orioles included money in the deal; Tejada, 31, is guaranteed $13 million in both 2008 and '09. His slugging percentage has dropped in each of the past three straight seasons, and his defense at shortstop also has declined.

His addition, combined with the signing of free-agent second baseman Kaz Matsui, should give the Astros one of the more formidable lineups in the National League Central.

But the question remains: Who is going to pitch?

 
at 4:39 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

This deal is so simple Trade Bailey, Hatteburg Edwin Encarnocion and an OK prospect Who ever said tade Hamilton Is crazy But if you trade Hatteburg you still will have Votto and if he goes down you can al ways put the big 6'6 275 pounder on 1st base you can't always think future be aggressive Reds fans have been sick of the future talk for at least 7 years GO REDS YOU CAN DO IT KRIVSKY

 
at 4:47 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

John,
Just saw this article in San Fran...Guys take a look at this and tell me what you think? John do you think we can get Haren?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/12/SPNBTSBLA.DTL

 
at 5:23 PM Anonymous Nate said...

Anon 4:39
Please pay attention to the ever changing market... The Tejada trade gives the O's three very young pitchers, a young outfielder, and a third basemen of the future. So why would they want Bailey or EE if they have significantly addressed those areas via another trade.
**The O's want Bruce, period, and probably Votto.** They think in this market it is reasonable to want/ask for both. I don't think so, but that is me. K-Dog is probably on the phone with the A's already he knows he can get Haren for less. So, now that we know what the O's want the question is do we want a lefty that bad?

 
at 7:35 PM Blogger jbench5 said...

Does Alex Gonzalez all of a sudden become part of the conversation with the O's? Seems they have a gaping hole at SS now.

 
at 7:35 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was at Shae stadium to see the Reds/Mets games both this year and last year. Both times I saw Harang pitch he never got any higher than 86. I'm not saying this is a bad thing. As all of baseball seems to be learning after 20 years of split-fingered Tommy John surgeries, the pitchers who will play the longest and be the most dominating are the masters of control, like Harang. So I stick by what I said. Despite being 6'7 and 250, Harang doesn't throw terribly fast

 
at 7:49 PM Anonymous louisvilleredsfan said...

2 years ago the NL West was the laughing stock of baseball. Now look at what the Rockies and D-Backs did this season with a group of good young players that were given a chance to play. I'm sure the Orioles have taken notice and may see what those teams were able to do as a blueprint for becoming relevant AL east again. Hopefully, it will not be at the Reds expense. After listening to what Marty and Thom had to say about Bruce on the hot stove, there is no way I trade him for anybody... If we can get Bedard without overpaying, I would be all for it. Votto and a couple of good but lesser prospects (Stubbs?) might be enough. Its apparent that the Astros and the Brewers also feel the division is "up for grabs". It won't suprise me if it ends up being the strongest division in the NL this season after the dust settles on all the trades that will be made.

 
at 8:25 PM Blogger Mr. Redlegs said...

Gonzalez is due $11 mil over the next two years, and a team like the Orioles, who are shedding payroll, completely rebuilding and going absolutely nowhere, would want Gonzalez, why?

The Reds are trying to build a winner and one of their strengths is middle infield defense.

The question should be: Would the Orioles take Keppinger? He of the 122 career games entering age 28 because, you know, many of you think Keppinger is the greatest thing since runny, cinnamony chili and he's an untouchable, a cornerstone, a godsend.

But Gonzalez is a bum.

 
at 8:50 PM Anonymous Allan said...

As I have said before, I have seen Bedard pitch many times and I think he is a good fit. I live 20 minutes from Baltimore and have watched this kid develop. He is the real thing. Having him would be like having a left handed Harang.
As for his attitude, I obviously dont know the guy, there are lots of guys who had bad attitudes who are Hall of Famers. I would have a lousy attitude if I were stuck on a losing team, going backwards toward rebuilding like the O's. They have been as bad if not worse than the Reds for a long long time. Their owner is more meddlesome and cheap than any owner Cincy has had. There is no hope in Baltimore. I would hate playing there too.

I would trade Bailey, Votto and any prospect not named Cueto or Bruce to the O's for Bedard today. I would not trade Hamilton, at least not yet. If he proves he can put up big numbers over an entire healthy season, his trade value would go up exponentially. If he does that, the Reds should keep him, but only then would he have any real trade value.

 
at 9:00 PM Blogger jbench5 said...

Didn't say I wanted to get rid of Gonzalez, Mr. Redlegs, I like the guy. Hopefully, if some of his burdens lighten, he'll have an outstanding 2008.

I was just wondering if if the O's would be interested in him. I take if from you their answer is no.

Thanks.

 
at 9:28 PM Blogger Brad said...

For everyone saying we HAVE to make this deal for Bedard, whats the huge urgency? It seems like the common theme is we have to win now. Do you all assume that Bailey, Votto, Bruce, hamilton, etc will all fail in the Bigs? And...have you actually looked at Bedard's stats? they are good, definitely. But are they good enough to mortage the next 5-6 years of the franchise? NO WAY!

I know we're all hungry for winning Baseball in Cincy, but be patient. If we trade away all these players, the talk of the town in a year or two will be "Man, I wish we had those guys back" or "Fire Krivsky for trading away the farm system".

Please Wayne, don't trade away the Farm!

 
at 10:14 PM Anonymous wanderin reds fan said...

Seems like alot of folks are worried about the future 3-5 years down the road, which is anything but predictable. I'll ask you this: What happens if either Harang or Arroyo goes down to injury next year? Hell, even Belisle with an injury would be devastating. We have no depth in the rotation, but a plethora of potential position players. We have to make a trade for a #2-3 starter, in addition to signing a back-end free-agent, or next year will be more of the same. FYI: the central is getting much tougher by the signing, as the other teams aren't resting on their laurels. Houston realizes that they have a short window of opportuntity to win. With Dunn and Griffey likely gone in the next couple of years, our window may be just as short. Bedard or Haren have to be gotten and we will have to spend. I'm all for keeping Bruce, but any other prospect player (Bailey, Hamilton, Votto, etc.) is fair game.

 
at 10:46 PM Anonymous firefly118 said...

Just turned over to espnews, Mark Prior wasn't tendered and is now a free agent. With Dusty here, I think we take a mid level chance to sign him, even if just for a year. He probably wants a 3-4 year deal, maybe a 3 year 12 - 15 million contract would be good. 4 mil a year is cheap now a days for a good pitcher. I know its a risk, but the upside is to great, and we have given a lot more money in the past to pitchers of a lot less worth (Milton...). Well at least it changes things a little bit with all the Bedard and Haren talk, we may be a little more reserved in what we give up... Thoughts anyone..

 
at 12:09 AM Anonymous Anonymous said...

The addition of Bedard alone won't win the division for the Reds. If they trade Bruce, they're just insane.

We're not going to the playoffs in 2008. Just forget about that stupid notion. There are at least 7 teams in the NL far superior to the Reds in every way: Chicago, Milwaukee, Arizona, LA, Colorado, NY, Philadelphia...

So keep Bruce, Votto, Bailey, Cueto, Hamilton, Keppinger and stop trying to take short-cuts.

Cordero MIGHT work out. Baker MIGHT be a decent upgrade. How about our pitchers actually exercise instead of gorge on pizza and beer all winter? Can we have a pitching rotation without beer guts for once?

Reds 2008... .500 would be a miracle. No playoffs. Keep Bruce and keep developing players and by 2010...maybe the Reds will get there. Maybe.

Or just go trade Bruce and be very sorry for many years to come.

Bruce isn't exactly Paul Householder!

 
at 9:12 AM Blogger Rob Dicken said...

Anon 12:09 is a perfect example of the negativity that's in Cincinnati.

His reasoning is that we keep all of talent, so that MAYBE we can compete in 2010...what kind of faith is that?

The point is to compete NOW and in the future. If we have a chance to get a GOOD young pitcher, we should do it. Erik Bedard or Dan Haren are exactly what we need. Mark Prior should not be an option because he is a health liability. Other teams have not taken a chance at him yet because of his health records (source RotoWorld.com).

And what's with the comment about 'fat guys in the bullpen?' Have you actually even went to a Reds game, or are you watching on TV? There's not a fat guy in the pen! Stanton is a little stocky, but TV adds about 30 pounds to any player...he's not fat by any means if you have seen him play at the Stadium.

 
at 9:30 AM Anonymous Matt Gorrasi said...

Hey I wonder how many people in the Red Sox organization said that they couldn't, at all, trade Hanley Ramirez for Josh Beckett and Mike Lowell, but they went ahead any way and it has worked out quite well for both teams. Red Sox won the Series and the Marlins have one of the top 5 or 10 offensive players in baseball. Oh wait what's the difference, oh yeah the Red Sox won the series because they picked up a stud pitcher (am I saying that Eric Bedard is a stud pitcher like Beckett is? - well no, but if he continues to progress he sure might be; and by the way Josh Beckett had a lot of injuries when he was with the Marlins so he was no sure thing, but I bet everyone thought Hanley was and he was, but pitching always trumps hitting - ask A-Rod when it comes playoff time and he has to face better pitching). I say Bruce and Encarnacion and Freel or something like that for Bedard, but if Bruce is going there shouldn't be any additional prospects and we would need to extend Bedard for a couple more years. We've been playing for next year since like what 1997? I didn't know the Reds were the Bengals, but hey maybe they are.

 
at 9:49 AM Blogger Mr. Redlegs said...

So if TV adds 30 pounds to a player, you're saying Terry Foster, fat tub-o-goo, was actually a much more svelte 240 pounds.

Got it. That's one helluva filter.

 
at 10:27 AM Blogger Brad said...

Another Brad.....

 
at 4:57 PM Blogger Rob Dicken said...

So if TV adds 30 pounds to a player, you're saying Terry Foster, fat tub-o-goo, was actually a much more svelte 240 pounds.

Got it. That's one helluva filter.


I'm not really sure who Terry Foster is, nor do I really care, but if you had any TV or broadcasting knowledge at all you would know this. Instead, you're making cheap shots about filters and looking like a complete TOOL in return. I usually can tolerate sarcasm, but not when someone purposely does it to degrade a person based on pure opinion.

If you want "fat" pitchers, look at David Wells, Bob Wickman, and Bartolo Colon. Stanton is no where near ANY of those guys. I agree that the guy is terrible, but being 6'1" 215lbs. isn't fat.

Speaking of "filters," some people can't live off a cigarette and coffee diet. *cough* Mr. Redlegs *cough*

 
Post a Comment*

* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.

By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site. << Home


Blogs


Jim Borgman
Today at the Forum
Paul Daugherty
Politics Extra
N. Ky. Politics
Pop culture review
Cincytainment
Who's News
Television
Roller Derby Diva
Art
CinStages Buzz....
The Foodie Report
cincyMOMS
Classical music
John Fay's Reds Insider
Bengals
High school sports
NCAA
UC Sports
CiN Weekly staff
Soundcheck

Advertisement