(07-29-2014 09:58 PM)BeerCat Wrote:  The worst part about BP being injured is that he can't be traded.

He can't be traded even if he's healthy. No one wants to pay a guy 8 figures whose OPS has hovered around 700 and RC+ in the low 90s for two consecutive years. Only way to get rid of him is picking up most of his salary which doesn't help you anyway.

(07-29-2014 10:05 PM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 09:58 PM)BeerCat Wrote:  The worst part about BP being injured is that he can't be traded.

He can't be traded even if he's healthy. No one wants to pay a guy 8 figures whose OPS has hovered around 700 and RC+ in the low 90s for two consecutive years. Only way to get rid of him is picking up most of his salary which doesn't help you anyway.

Yeah I don't get the urgency to trade BP - it's not like we have a quality prospect chomping at the bit at 2b. Although I wouldn't mind seeing a bit of Navarro with BP out - based upon what he's doing so far this year in AAA, I'm not sure why he doesn't seem to get any respect as a prospect.

Fox's Jon Morosi reported that the Reds will listen to offers for Cueto. Perfect time to trade him if you aren't going to sign him long-term. I'd much rather have two top prospects under control for 6-years than just 1 more year of Cueto.

(07-30-2014 12:49 AM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  Fox's Jon Morosi reported that the Reds will listen to offers for Cueto. Perfect time to trade him if you aren't going to sign him long-term. I'd much rather have two top prospects under control for 6-years than just 1 more year of Cueto.

On that note, there's also this from Morosi:

Quote:FOX Sports’ Jon Morosi reported Monday that the Phillies have made ace left-hander Cole Hamels available ahead of Thursday’s July 31 trade deadline, but the asking price on him is apparently sky-high.

Bob Nightengale of USA Today writes that the Dodgers — who are known to be in the market for a top-tier starting pitcher — reached out to the Phillies front office recently but were told it would take top prospects Joc Pederson, Corey Seager, and Julio Urias to get Hamels. Los Angeles quickly said no.

Would LA have been as quick to say no if the deal were for Cueto instead of Hamels? What about if the Reds also add Broxton to the mix? Intersting thread on Redszone along those lines and an article here as well fwiw...

Like probably all of us, I love Cueto but really have a hard time seeing the Reds signing both Cueto and Latos beyond 2015 (best case is probably the presumably relatively cheaper Leake and one of the other two and even that might be pushing it). Cueto's trade value (taking his contract into consideration) will certainly never be higher than it is right now. And not only are all 3 of those Dodgers' prospects consensus top 20 in all of baseball, but they would make for some very intriguing and tempting fits for the Reds specifically (the OF is probably ready now, the SS is coming soon while the pitcher is only 17 years old - you can read a bit more on them at the links).

It would be a major haul for the Reds, but if LA really wants to win a WS this year the idea of adding Cueto to Kershaw and the rest of their rotation has to be mouth-watering (not to mention Broxton hypothetically to their bullpen).

(07-29-2014 11:13 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 10:05 PM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 09:58 PM)BeerCat Wrote:  The worst part about BP being injured is that he can't be traded.

He can't be traded even if he's healthy. No one wants to pay a guy 8 figures whose OPS has hovered around 700 and RC+ in the low 90s for two consecutive years. Only way to get rid of him is picking up most of his salary which doesn't help you anyway.

Yeah I don't get the urgency to trade BP - it's not like we have a quality prospect chomping at the bit at 2b. Although I wouldn't mind seeing a bit of Navarro with BP out - based upon what he's doing so far this year in AAA, I'm not sure why he doesn't seem to get any respect as a prospect.

I know you'll post a several paragraphs of numbers. It's not about numbers to me, it's his attitude. I don't think he's a winner.

(07-30-2014 01:28 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 12:49 AM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  Fox's Jon Morosi reported that the Reds will listen to offers for Cueto. Perfect time to trade him if you aren't going to sign him long-term. I'd much rather have two top prospects under control for 6-years than just 1 more year of Cueto.

On that note, there's also this from Morosi:

Quote:FOX Sports’ Jon Morosi reported Monday that the Phillies have made ace left-hander Cole Hamels available ahead of Thursday’s July 31 trade deadline, but the asking price on him is apparently sky-high.

Bob Nightengale of USA Today writes that the Dodgers — who are known to be in the market for a top-tier starting pitcher — reached out to the Phillies front office recently but were told it would take top prospects Joc Pederson, Corey Seager, and Julio Urias to get Hamels. Los Angeles quickly said no.

Would LA have been as quick to say no if the deal were for Cueto instead of Hamels? What about if the Reds also add Broxton to the mix? Intersting thread on Redszone along those lines and an article here as well fwiw...

Like probably all of us, I love Cueto but really have a hard time seeing the Reds signing both Cueto and Latos beyond 2015 (best case is probably the presumably relatively cheaper Leake and one of the other two and even that might be pushing it). Cueto's trade value (taking his contract into consideration) will certainly never be higher than it is right now. And not only are all 3 of those Dodgers' prospects consensus top 20 in all of baseball, but they would make for some very intriguing and tempting fits for the Reds specifically (the OF is probably ready now, the SS is coming soon while the pitcher is only 17 years old - you can read a bit more on them at the links).

It would be a major haul for the Reds, but if LA really wants to win a WS this year the idea of adding Cueto to Kershaw and the rest of their rotation has to be mouth-watering (not to mention Broxton hypothetically to their bullpen).

I'd have to think the Dodgers would value Hamels over Cueto. He's under contract for another 5 years and he's a lot more durable (over 200 IP in 5 of the last 6 years with 193 being the low point). Having said that, I don't think the Reds would demand Seager, Pederson, and Urias for a year+ of Cueto. I think you could get two of them in the right package. Broxton would make sense, although I don't know if he'd want to go back there. He does have a limited no-trade clause that allows him to block a trade to 10 teams every year.

Unfortunately, I don't think Castellini lets this happen even if the right trade presents itself. Trading your ace would signal a waving of the white flag to the average fan, although it would make perfect baseball sense. Latos, Bailey, Leake, Simon, and Cingrani is still a very good rotation and Stephenson should be ready next year as well. My fear is that they go all-in next year for one final run with this rotation and Cueto spends half the year on the DL. He's the perfect sell-high candidate.

(07-29-2014 04:54 PM)ctipton Wrote:  Why do you folks want to sell everyone on the Reds team? This is the same team (minus those who have been hurt) that won 90 something games last year and was expected to win approximately the same this year. This isn't your money, so why get rid of them? If Castellini couldn't afford them, he wouldn't have them. What is the necessity to get rid of them now? You now want to get rid of Simon (12 wins) Broxton (a great 8th inning guy and closer when Chapman wasn't closing and Lecure who is the best Reds all-around long man. WTF? Why? You will need pitchers in 2015.

Simon's performance this year has made it unlikely the Reds will be able to afford him. + Cueto/Latos/Leake have contracts coming up.

Might as well get something for Simon now. His trade value will never be higher.

Broxton- has been great this year but is making a lot of money for a setup/part time closer.

(07-30-2014 12:49 AM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  Fox's Jon Morosi reported that the Reds will listen to offers for Cueto. Perfect time to trade him if you aren't going to sign him long-term. I'd much rather have two top prospects under control for 6-years than just 1 more year of Cueto.

x2. Cueto is an amazing pitcher, but he's going to command a huge amount of money on the open market.

After you have divested the team of all the top money players, do you expect to compete for the Division Championship/Wild Card in 2015 and beyond? If not, attendance is shot and Castellini hasn't accomplished anything.

(07-30-2014 09:49 AM)HoopsJunky Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 04:54 PM)ctipton Wrote:  Why do you folks want to sell everyone on the Reds team? This is the same team (minus those who have been hurt) that won 90 something games last year and was expected to win approximately the same this year. This isn't your money, so why get rid of them? If Castellini couldn't afford them, he wouldn't have them. What is the necessity to get rid of them now? You now want to get rid of Simon (12 wins) Broxton (a great 8th inning guy and closer when Chapman wasn't closing and Lecure who is the best Reds all-around long man. WTF? Why? You will need pitchers in 2015.

Simon's performance this year has made it unlikely the Reds will be able to afford him. + Cueto/Latos/Leake have contracts coming up.

Might as well get something for Simon now. His trade value will never be higher.

Broxton- has been great this year but is making a lot of money for a setup/part time closer.

He would be a closer on other teams.

(07-30-2014 10:41 AM)ctipton Wrote:  After you have divested the team of all the top money players, do you expect to compete for the Division Championship/Wild Card in 2015 and beyond? If not, attendance is shot and Castellini hasn't accomplished anything.

Take the short-term hit to rebuild the team. Right now, the Reds don't have much in the minor leagues that is even close to being ready. They aren't going to spend more money on the free agent market and are bound to be losing players over the next two years while the roster continues to age.

If the current roster has reached it's ceiling, why not sell off your valuable parts and start rebuilding? It beats sitting in a holding pattern, which is what the Reds often do.

Hamilton, Mesoraco and Votto are a solid base to build upon.

(07-30-2014 10:57 AM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 10:41 AM)ctipton Wrote:  After you have divested the team of all the top money players, do you expect to compete for the Division Championship/Wild Card in 2015 and beyond? If not, attendance is shot and Castellini hasn't accomplished anything.

Take the short-term hit to rebuild the team. Right now, the Reds don't have much in the minor leagues that is even close to being ready. They aren't going to spend more money on the free agent market and are bound to be losing players over the next two years while the roster continues to age.

If the current roster has reached it's ceiling, why not sell off your valuable parts and start rebuilding? It beats sitting in a holding pattern, which is what the Reds often do.

Hamilton, Mesoraco and Votto are a solid base to build upon.

And Frazier.

C incinnati has always been a hitting team with mediocre pitching. Now we have damned good pitching, are competing every year (this year is a complete aberration) and aren't acting like the Blue Jays. Divest the team of pitching, and we are back to thumpers with Leake being your best starter.

(07-30-2014 09:18 AM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  I'd have to think the Dodgers would value Hamels over Cueto. He's under contract for another 5 years and he's a lot more durable (over 200 IP in 5 of the last 6 years with 193 being the low point).

The 30 year old Hamels is under contract but it ain't a cheap one. He makes $22.5M each year through 2018 (obviously this year would be prorated) with a $20M option for 2019 that vests at $24M if he is indeed durable in 2017 and 2018. Meanwhile Cueto is only getting $10M this year and next (also would be prorated this year). Really hard to say what it would take to sign Cueto for 2016 and beyond but I'm not sure I see him making as much or more than Hamels from now through 2018/2019. If he went to LA, I'm guessing a new contract would interest both parties this off-season if not earlier.

Durability is obviously important but it's tricky to project (see Arroyo, Bronson) and a lot of data can be taken either way. Cueto is 2 years younger and certainly having an even better season than Hamels (11-6, 175 ERA+ and .925 WHIP to 6-5 145 ERA+ and 1.128 WHIP). Cueto leads the league in innings this year but has a lot fewer MLB innings on his arm as well (1120 to 1727).

Add it all up and I see Cueto as the more valuable asset for LA to trade for right now but I guess it's open to interpretation.

(07-30-2014 11:21 AM)ctipton Wrote:  And Frazier.

C incinnati has always been a hitting team with mediocre pitching. Now we have damned good pitching, are competing every year (this year is a complete aberration) and aren't acting like the Blue Jays. Divest the team of pitching, and we are back to thumpers with Leake being your best starter.

Trading a starter isn't going to divest this franchise of pitching. They have 6 starters right now and their AA rotation is one of the best in the minors.

(07-30-2014 07:33 AM)BeerCat Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 11:13 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 10:05 PM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 09:58 PM)BeerCat Wrote:  The worst part about BP being injured is that he can't be traded.

He can't be traded even if he's healthy. No one wants to pay a guy 8 figures whose OPS has hovered around 700 and RC+ in the low 90s for two consecutive years. Only way to get rid of him is picking up most of his salary which doesn't help you anyway.

Yeah I don't get the urgency to trade BP - it's not like we have a quality prospect chomping at the bit at 2b. Although I wouldn't mind seeing a bit of Navarro with BP out - based upon what he's doing so far this year in AAA, I'm not sure why he doesn't seem to get any respect as a prospect.

I know you'll post a several paragraphs of numbers. It's not about numbers to me, it's his attitude. I don't think he's a winner.

You didn't address the underlying issue of how to replace BP's "attitude" with a real "winner" but nevermind. Reality, facts and data are useless when matched up with an expert trained eye for "attitude" and "winners" like you are gifted with.

(07-30-2014 11:27 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 09:18 AM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  I'd have to think the Dodgers would value Hamels over Cueto. He's under contract for another 5 years and he's a lot more durable (over 200 IP in 5 of the last 6 years with 193 being the low point).

The 30 year old Hamels is under contract but it ain't a cheap one. He makes $22.5M each year through 2018 (obviously this year would be prorated) with a $20M option for 2019 that vests at $24M if he is indeed durable in 2017 and 2018. Meanwhile Cueto is only getting $10M this year and next (also would be prorated this year). Really hard to say what it would take to sign Cueto for 2016 and beyond but I'm not sure I see him making as much or more than Hamels from now through 2018/2019. If he went to LA, I'm guessing a new contract would interest both parties this off-season if not earlier.

Durability is obviously important but it's tricky to project (see Arroyo, Bronson) and a lot of data can be taken either way. Cueto is 2 years younger and certainly having an even better season than Hamels (11-6, 175 ERA+ and .925 WHIP to 6-5 145 ERA+ and 1.128 WHIP). Cueto leads the league in innings this year but has a lot fewer MLB innings on his arm as well (1120 to 1727).

Add it all up and I see Cueto as the more valuable entity for LA to trade for but I guess it's open to interpretation.

I fully expect Cueto to get a deal in Hamels' range, if not more. Since 2010 only Kershaw has a lower ERA. Johnny is going to get paid! I just think the additional 4 years of guaranteed control would give Hamels the edge, but your point about Cueto's career year could certainly be the difference maker. We just saw an elite prospect get traded for a guy in the midst of a career year that didn't have near the career numbers of Cueto.

This pretty much sums up how things have been going lately. At least they didn't have anyone thrown out at home in the inning!

Cincinnati - Bottom of 3rd
Wade Miley pitching for Arizona

C Heisey singled to left center, C Heisey out stretching at second.
R Santiago singled to center.
T Frazier walked, R Santiago to second.
R Santiago caught stealing third, catcher to third.
D Mesoraco flied out to right.

(07-30-2014 11:47 AM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 11:21 AM)ctipton Wrote:  And Frazier.

C incinnati has always been a hitting team with mediocre pitching. Now we have damned good pitching, are competing every year (this year is a complete aberration) and aren't acting like the Blue Jays. Divest the team of pitching, and we are back to thumpers with Leake being your best starter.

Trading a starter isn't going to divest this franchise of pitching. They have 6 starters right now and their AA rotation is one of the best in the minors.

Please name the six starters you talk about. In reality we still have a long reliever as an untested starter in the rotation. If we had six starters, why would he be in the rotation?

Before you state that Simon was in the all-star game, remember that he is just about at his all-time high in a yearly pitch count. Nobody knows how his second half will play out, but he hasn't been overpowering anybody since the All-star game.

(07-30-2014 12:41 PM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 11:47 AM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 11:21 AM)ctipton Wrote:  And Frazier.

C incinnati has always been a hitting team with mediocre pitching. Now we have damned good pitching, are competing every year (this year is a complete aberration) and aren't acting like the Blue Jays. Divest the team of pitching, and we are back to thumpers with Leake being your best starter.

Trading a starter isn't going to divest this franchise of pitching. They have 6 starters right now and their AA rotation is one of the best in the minors.

Please name the six starters you talk about. In reality we still have a long reliever as an untested starter in the rotation. If we had six starters, why would he be in the rotation?

Before you state that Simon was in the all-star game, remember that he is just about at his all-time high in a yearly pitch count. Nobody knows how his second half will play out, but he hasn't been overpowering anybody since the All-star game.

The current 5 plus Cingrani.

Simon has never been overpowering, but he's got the job done since the start of last season. I fully expect him to wear down a bit in these final months. Who wouldn't? I don't expect any future All-Star games out of him, but I think he's more than good enough to hold down a rotation spot until Stephenson is ready.

Simon is starting to show signs of fatigue. His velocity is down from early in the year and his pitches are missing higher in the zone. He may not be a starter by the end of the year.

Cingrani has shown no capability of being a starter or a reliever this year. He is currently on the DL and may not pitch again this year. I would not be counting on him in the future.

You are now down to four pitchers that start and only one of them is locked in for more than next year.

Many people think pitching is a strong point on the ball club. We have very little depth at the major league and AAA level. That is evident by Curtis Partch wearing out I-71. And he certainly is not a long tern big league pitcher: Or at least he isn't yet.