T-Dub Posted August 21, 2014 Report Share Posted August 21, 2014 Right on for the most part but I don't get the Bruce/Dunn comparison. Maybe Bruce will match 100 RBIs again next year but I don't think anyone's ever considered nominating Dunn for a Golden Glove. Generally, the main issue seems to be talented but inconsistent hitters & that points to coaching. The Votto & Bailey contracts are a mess, too, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC Posted August 21, 2014 Report Share Posted August 21, 2014 Hoover to AAA. ... ... ... About 3 months too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted August 21, 2014 Report Share Posted August 21, 2014 Hoover to AAA. ... ... ... About 3 months too late. No shit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC Posted August 22, 2014 Report Share Posted August 22, 2014 Skip Schumacher>>>>>>>hitting your shin on a trailor hitch>>>>>>>>girlfriend sticking a digit in the pooper>>>>>>>>>>>prohbibition>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Steelers>>>>>>>>>>>>>>...JJ Hoover. *obviously bitter reds fan* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Elflocko| Posted August 27, 2014 Report Share Posted August 27, 2014 Bailey Likely Out for Year Sure glad they gave him $100 million... :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted August 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Can someone smarter than me about baseball explain the Reds move to place Latos and Leake on "revocable waivers" today? My understanding is that an interested team has a couple days to agree to a trade with the Reds for either of them, and after that the Reds can deal them without compensation. First, why Leake? Isn't he in their plans with the likely departure or trade of both Latos and Cueto, neither of whom the Reds are going to be able to afford after paying 250 million dollars to two players that are both injured? Also...the timing seems weird. I mean, Latos pitched tonight. I guess I just don't understand what this means for the team or why they did it. Why not wait to trade Latos in the offseason? Why try to trade Leake at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDawgBengal Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Can someone smarter than me about baseball explain the Reds move to place Latos and Leake on "revocable waivers" today? My understanding is that an interested team has a couple days to agree to a trade with the Reds for either of them, and after that the Reds can deal them without compensation. First, why Leake? Isn't he in their plans with the likely departure or trade of both Latos and Cueto, neither of whom the Reds are going to be able to afford after paying 250 million dollars to two players that are both injured? Also...the timing seems weird. I mean, Latos pitched tonight. I guess I just don't understand what this means for the team or why they did it. Why not wait to trade Latos in the offseason? Why try to trade Leake at all? Once a player is placed on the waiver by the Reds, any team has a chance to claim that player. If a team claims a player, then only that team can attempt to make a trade with the Reds. If the Reds decide not to make a trade with the team, then they can pull the player back and he no longer can be traded until the offseason. If a player is claimed, only the team that claimed him can make a trade for him. If a player goes unclaimed then any team can attempt to make a trade with the Reds for him. So for example if the Cubs claim Latos, then the Reds either have to make a trade with the Cubs or pull him off the waiver and keep him the rest of the season. If no one claims Latos, then the Reds are free to make a trade with any team. The Reds will probably need to trade at least one pitcher in the off-season. It does not hurt the Reds in anyway by placing Leake or Latos on the waivers now. The Reds are basically just testing the water. If a team in a playoff race is really desperate, then they might be willing to give up a ton to get one of these guys. This time of year, tons of players are placed on the waiver. Most teams have the intention of keeping the player but they just dangle them out there in case some team is really desperate and stupid and will give up a lot. Basically the Reds will only trade Latos or Leake now if they are just absolutely blown away with an offer. They realize that they will more than likely get a better deal this off-season but why not try now and just see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted August 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Makes sense, but I can see how while we are still playing games THIS season that I wouldn't want to be Latos or Leake, especially Leake, right now. The team is basically saying they don't want you and could care less if they keep you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBandJoeyV Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Makes sense, but I can see how while we are still playing games THIS season that I wouldn't want to be Latos or Leake, especially Leake, right now. The team is basically saying they don't want you and could care less if they keep you. Tons of players get put on waivers. Cant really take it personally. They are going to be free agents in 13 months one way or another, they are pitching for themselves as much as they are pitching for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDawgBengal Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Makes sense, but I can see how while we are still playing games THIS season that I wouldn't want to be Latos or Leake, especially Leake, right now. The team is basically saying they don't want you and could care less if they keep you. I don't know that it means the Reds don't want Leake. Some teams put players on waivers with absolutely no intention of trading them whatsoever. Some teams just want to see how other teams value their players. The Nats put Harper and Strasburg on the waivers last week. You know they had no intention of trading them but were probably just trying to figure out how other teams value them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted August 28, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Thanks for the replies. I am so ignorant in the ways of the business of baseball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDawgBengal Posted August 31, 2014 Report Share Posted August 31, 2014 Broxton headed to the Brewers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalRep85-9 Posted August 31, 2014 Report Share Posted August 31, 2014 Getting 2 players to be named later. Just a salary dump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Elflocko| Posted August 31, 2014 Report Share Posted August 31, 2014 And so it begins. Knew I shouldn't have shelled out for the MLB package... :glare: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted August 31, 2014 Report Share Posted August 31, 2014 Hopefully they can get some kind of young bats to beef up the farm system again. This team is missing two things, hitting and middle relief (hover is properly named because he sucks) if we can make some moves that can get both this is a championship team, but that's a tough thing to do in a no salary capped game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go Skins Posted August 31, 2014 Report Share Posted August 31, 2014 Hopefully they can get some kind of young bats to beef up the farm system again. This team is missing two things, hitting and middle relief (hover is properly named because he sucks) if we can make some moves that can get both this is a championship team, but that's a tough thing to do in a no salary capped game. Hopefully they can get some kind of young bats to beef up the farm system again. This team is missing two things, hitting and middle relief (hover is properly named because he sucks) if we can make some moves that can get both this is a championship team, but that's a tough thing to do in a no salary capped game. Kansas City is making things interesting. http://deadspin.com/2014-payrolls-and-salaries-for-every-mlb-team-1551868969 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted September 1, 2014 Report Share Posted September 1, 2014 Hopefully they can get some kind of young bats to beef up the farm system again. This team is missing two things, hitting and middle relief (hover is properly named because he sucks) if we can make some moves that can get both this is a championship team, but that's a tough thing to do in a no salary capped game. Particularly when you sign 2 guys to $100m contracts that aren't worth that kind of money combined. The lack of a cap has a lot to do with it but IDK why anyone would sign a player to a guaranteed 7-10 years. They need ace-quality starts from Bailey *and* Votto in the MVP discussion or they're going to have a hard time staying competitive. I think those 2 deals painted the club into a tight corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalRep85-9 Posted September 1, 2014 Report Share Posted September 1, 2014 Particularly when you sign 2 guys to $100m contracts that aren't worth that kind of money combined. The lack of a cap has a lot to do with it but IDK why anyone would sign a player to a guaranteed 7-10 years. They need ace-quality starts from Bailey *and* Votto in the MVP discussion or they're going to have a hard time staying competitive. I think those 2 deals painted the club into a tight corner. The Bailey contract is the one that stings, he is in no way worth anything close to that kind of money. Especially knowing you had Cueto and Latos coming due. His contract almost single handedly costs you Cueto. Take Bailey's $17.5M and Broxton's $9M off the books and there's your Cueto money. Cueto>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bailey&Broxton. Edited to add: after thinking about it, in terms of monetary value and the other talent it cost you, Bailey's contract might be the worst contract in Reds history. I seriously can't think of any worse. Maybe the Griffey contract but at the time any GM in baseball would have signed him to that deal and much more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted September 1, 2014 Report Share Posted September 1, 2014 Particularly when you sign 2 guys to $100m contracts that aren't worth that kind of money combined. The lack of a cap has a lot to do with it but IDK why anyone would sign a player to a guaranteed 7-10 years. They need ace-quality starts from Bailey *and* Votto in the MVP discussion or they're going to have a hard time staying competitive. I think those 2 deals painted the club into a tight corner. Yeah, I'm willing to wait on Joey since he has shown MVP talent and hes injured but I want to see him stop being so safe with his bat, Homer though I like him but thought they gave that contract to the wrong guy, should have given it to Latos or Cuato. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatorclaws Posted September 1, 2014 Report Share Posted September 1, 2014 Yeah, I'm willing to wait on Joey since he has shown MVP talent and hes injured but I want to see him stop being so safe with his bat, Homer though I like him but thought they gave that contract to the wrong guy, should have given it to Latos or Cuato. I'm assuming they can't get Latos or Cueto for the same money, probably need to add 3-5 million per year for them. With that being said I agree they still signed the wrong guy. With Votto I seem to be one of the few that doesn't hate the contract when he's healthy, unfortunately his health has been a huge issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThurmanMunster Posted September 1, 2014 Report Share Posted September 1, 2014 Yeah, I'm willing to wait on Joey since he has shown MVP talent and hes injured but I want to see him stop being so safe with his bat, Homer though I like him but thought they gave that contract to the wrong guy, should have given it to Latos or Cuato. Votto isn't injured. Hasn't been for a long, long time. Homer was signed at a discount (neither Latos or Cueto will take a deal near his #s). On the free agent market Homer would have gotten way more than 100 mill. Even if they didn't sign Homer they weren't extending Cueto and Latos. Their focus is Cueto. They will only sign Latos if they can't get Cueto. The plan is to ride Latos to FA or trade him at deadline of his last year. The problem was they paid Broxton, Marshall and Chapman too much for their roles. They paid Votto way too much. They paid Bruce hoping he would out play his contract and he has not come anywhere close to that. They overpaid Phillips to keep him. Then Walt randomly thought it was Ryan Ludwick back in STL and paid him as such. So Broxton, Marshall, Chapman, Votto, Bruce, Phillips and Ludwick contracts have hurt them the last couple of seasons. That is a lot of money tied up into less production than is needed from the collective group for a mid MLB payroll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDawgBengal Posted September 1, 2014 Report Share Posted September 1, 2014 Bailey was not signed at a discount. He got about what he would have got on the open market. He will average 17 million a year with his new contact and no one is paying way over that for a guy that is not a number 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThurmanMunster Posted September 1, 2014 Report Share Posted September 1, 2014 Bailey was not signed at a discount. He got about what he would have got on the open market. He will average 17 million a year with his new contact and no one is paying way over that for a guy that is not a number 1. Except his value based on FA is that he would have easily been approached as ace material. He is still young, extremely talented with more potential and other organizations are far superior at improving and refining talent. They were offered some pretty good trades for Homer prior to his extension. The Reds fan base has always been against him yet the rest of MLB has always been very high on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_B Posted September 1, 2014 Report Share Posted September 1, 2014 So they just put guys on IR for no reason then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDawgBengal Posted September 1, 2014 Report Share Posted September 1, 2014 Except his value based on FA is that he would have easily been approached as ace material. He is still young, extremely talented with more potential and other organizations are far superior at improving and refining talent. They were offered some pretty good trades for Homer prior to his extension. The Reds fan base has always been against him yet the rest of MLB has always been very high on him. He would not been approached as ace material. There are only a handful of teams where he might be a number 1. Most teams look at him as number 2. The teams where he might be a number 1, they are the bottom of the payroll teams and they would not pay more than what he's getting now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.