The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

This team just seems to have something at the moment - and by moment, we're talking about a consistent upward trend that ranges over the entire season past the first month - that is indicative of a team that is greater than the sum of its parts. I don't ever remember such a period of sustained success even earlier in this decade when we were legitimate contenders, especially when you consider the teams we've been squaring up against over the past couple of weeks.

Unless we trade one of our top prospects, I just don't see a significant enough return coming from a trade involving Scooter, Harvey, or Hamilton to net us anything that will help us in the next 1-2 years beyond what we have already in the pipeline. Iglesias is the exception - large market teams are far too happy to drop their drawers for pitchers who have minimized their impact to 1/4 the innings of a starter so we can easily add depth or a promising starter prospect down the line.

This team already has the tools and chemistry to make an impact for this year's wildcard race and has payroll capacity to add a quality starter via free agency this off-season. We might as well go for it. I wouldn't question the Reds one bit if they did.

Edit, to add:
We need to look at adding Senzel to the OF. That's where his future with the Reds exists, but his value is increased with the knowledge that he can play multiple positions if something happens in the infield. He's the type of depth that is indicative of teams that have the cache for a playoff run.

(07-14-2018 07:54 AM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(07-14-2018 01:25 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  Yeah, my head is telling me I'm just getting caught up in the moment, especially considering we were losing the game before 17-0. Then you have to consider we're still 10 games out of the 2nd wildcard and would have to pass 7 teams just to get there.

But dangit if there isn't part of me that says let's just go for it and sort the future plans (SP, OF, SS, 2B) out in the offseason. Harvey's the only guy we really "need to trade" from a contractual standpoint. Obviously we could, should and probably already have talked to him about a possible extension of anywhere from 1 to maybe even 4 years if the price is right. Realistically it probably won't be so he's probably going to turn us down. Which means he'll become a free agent who nets us zero compensation at the end of the season if we don't trade him. But basically that's all it would cost us (along with the risk of players losing trade value via performance or injury but hey maybe some will gain value too) to hold our cards and see what happens with this team.

But if we're not selling, we've got to at least consider buying. I think we've got the hitters already on board (heck I almost wouldn't be that upset if we had an injury so we could see what Dilson could do). So we look for pitching. Now I don't think we're close enough this year to raid the farm system and trade any crown jewels (Senzel, Trammel, Hunter, Santillian, etc.) but we might be able to package some of our B and high C prospects for either a risky SP (maybe Zach Wheeler) or certainly for a quality reliever or two at a minimum. Is it worth it when the mountain is so high to climb? I dunno. But I think I'd sit tight (as long as nobody blows me away with an offer) right up the trade deadline week and make the buy/hold/sell call then.

IMHO Hawk, typically you get equal value in trades. I don't see any purpose for trading a prospect for a prospect or low-end professional. I would rather this team take a direction - either sell or buy. And I'm not talking about mortgaging the future either. One example (my guess is we differ on this one) is Scooter is 28 and wants to be a Red, he's from the area and he's having an incredible year. When is Senzel going to be ready for consistent, major league level of play? Or maybe, when will the organization feel he is ready? Next year? The following year? What will his impact be once he's called up to give it a go full time? There are still a lot of questions. See Stephenson and Homer - great potential in the minors. Again, I'm not saying trade Senzel but if the Reds want to improve the club they have to give up something for something. If they can get something of value for Senzel or whomever that would give them a quality player to go along with Scooter and a Votto who is still playing at a healthy, high clip for the next several years to try and, wait for it, win the division. I mean, what else is the purpose if we keep hoarding talent that may/may not help the club in the long run? I know its a hard decision but dammit this club is on the verge of doing something special over the next several years and I'd hate to see it go back the other direction. Or, stay in the "wait 'til next year" mode.

The thing about trades is that "equal value" can be very subjective on two counts. First is simply projecting performance. Second is factoring your specific need at a particular position. So I'm pretty much always open to any "type" of trade you talk about as long as it makes sense for my team. That's my philosophy on this.

But let's look at where rubber meets road. Part of the tough thing about say signing Scooter to a LTC for a small market team like the Reds is that now you are paying him for past performance. Sure that gives you some confidence about future performance, but it basically means all that money is caught up in downside due to injury and/or performance slide (see Bailey, Homer or even Phillips, Brandon). Meanwhile, Senzel might be the closest thing we see to the next Votto for decades and he'll be making peanuts. He's all upside through his arbitration years. Sure you could trade him (especially if he was healthy) but to another team he's still a guy who hasn't proven anything yet. It depends upon the return of course, but getting anything less for Senzel than a ML ready stud SP prospect would be mortgaging the future imo.

Anyway, there's a real nice discussion of both sides of the Scooter dilemma here:

Cincinnati Reds considering extension for Scooter Gennett


Maybe the most interesting idea though is this tweet:

I'd be interested in hearing a Cubs' fan's (paging bearcatmark or others) take on how that their juggling act is working out and how long they can keep it up.

The central problem I have with it (aside from the potential ego clashes and uncertainty if we have the manager capable of juggling it) goes to the issue I don't hear you or any of the sign Scooter crowd (and like I said, I get it, I love him tooaddressing. How are we going to improve our SP for the immediate and near future? And don't even mention Harvey if you are advocating a LTC for Scooter. Without Scooter's money to use, there is almost zero chance of getting a deal with Harvey. Which means you trade Harvey or get nothing for him at the end of this season. You're basically putting all your eggs in a basket filled with a Homer comeback, a Stephenson blossoming and a 100% healthy Disco. Any of the above I could buy, but counting on all three to happen? That's either a ton of faith or a ton of foolishness.

i'm with hawk. senzel's potential coupled with scoot not continuing on this pace makes me want to go with senzel. unless of course like hawk said, guys willing to play outta position

(07-14-2018 10:44 AM)crex043 Wrote:  Unless we trade one of our top prospects, I just don't see a significant enough return coming from a trade involving Scooter, Harvey, or Hamilton to net us anything that will help us in the next 1-2 years beyond what we have already in the pipeline. Iglesias is the exception - large market teams are far too happy to drop their drawers for pitchers who have minimized their impact to 1/4 the innings of a starter so we can easily add depth or a promising starter prospect down the line.

This team already has the tools and chemistry to make an impact for this year's wildcard race and has payroll capacity to add a quality starter via free agency this off-season. We might as well go for it. I wouldn't question the Reds one bit if they did.

Edit, to add:
We need to look at adding Senzel to the OF. That's where his future with the Reds exists, but his value is increased with the knowledge that he can play multiple positions if something happens in the infield. He's the type of depth that is indicative of teams that have the cache for a playoff run.

I think you and I are on the same wavelength crex. I admit I'm tired of losing and seeing a beautiful baseball stadium two-thirds to half empty year after year. Cincinnati has and always will be a baseball town with the rich history of the Reds. I can't remember this potent, diverse (power and small ball) of an offense in some time. No one has mentioned Winker's improved play at the plate - another star is born? I agree that our "luxury" is Iglesias and would most likely command the highest return in value if the Reds felt the need to make a move.

(07-14-2018 11:09 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  The thing about trades is that "equal value" can be very subjective on two counts. First is simply projecting performance. Second is factoring your specific need at a particular position. So I'm pretty much always open to any "type" of trade you talk about as long as it makes sense for my team. That's my philosophy on this.

Agree. Perhaps the better operative word is trading for "desired/perceived value" or "filling a need."

Quote:But let's look at where rubber meets road. Part of the tough thing about say signing Scooter to a LTC for a small market team like the Reds is that now you are paying him for past performance. Sure that gives you some confidence about future performance, but it basically means all that money is caught up in downside due to injury and/or performance slide (see Bailey, Homer or even Phillips, Brandon).

I don't see how you can avoid paying for "past performance" across your payroll and there is risk/reward with any player when it comes down to it. What is long term? The last thing we need to do is pull a Votto or Bailey type contract. How about a 2-3 year extension? The "advantage" the Reds have is Scooter has made it known he wants to play here. Of course, money has to be realistic in order to make any deal work but the length of the contract to me is the key piece. Also, any higher dollar contract can be a risk but all teams have to face this dilemma - it's not specific to the Reds organization. I realize we are a smaller market team but Scooter may work with the Reds on this as well.

Quote:Meanwhile, Senzel might be the closest thing we see to the next Votto for decades and he'll be making peanuts. He's all upside through his arbitration years. Sure you could trade him (especially if he was healthy) but to another team he's still a guy who hasn't proven anything yet. It depends upon the return of course, but getting anything less for Senzel than a ML ready stud SP prospect would be mortgaging the future imo.

I don't disagree but similar to the point above. It comes down to managing risk/reward. Short term vs. long term. Personally the more I think about it, I'd keep Senzel regardless of what happens to Scooter but I'll never say never.

Quote:How are we going to improve our SP for the immediate and near future? And don't even mention Harvey if you are advocating a LTC for Scooter. Without Scooter's money to use, there is almost zero chance of getting a deal with Harvey. Which means you trade Harvey or get nothing for him at the end of this season. You're basically putting all your eggs in a basket filled with a Homer comeback, a Stephenson blossoming and a 100% healthy Disco. Any of the above I could buy, but counting on all three to happen? That's either a ton of faith or a ton of foolishness.

Points well taken. However, how long have the Reds been trying to improve their starting pitching via the minors? It definitely has to play a role for a smaller market team but there's only so much that avenue can give on a consistent basis. IMO, the ship has sailed on Stephenson and Homer so I don't see either making a big, consistent impact to the team and to think otherwise is fool's gold. So, what is the market for Harvey? He's a career 34-37 with the Mets (5+ seasons). He is playing better at the right time after getting healthy. What is the limit of the payroll expansion that the GM has alluded to? I have no clue. All I know is Harvey looks to be a solid "piece" to the SP puzzle. Moving Iglesias could help with payroll for next year and what if Hamilton wins a gold glove and continues to improve at the plate? Again, it comes down to managing risk/payroll and determining if the Reds can win now and over the next several years vs. waiting 'til next year. I'm tired of the latter...

yee haw!

i think votto had juiced bases three times in a row. he singled once scoring two

Cards get stomped second game in a row 8-2. When was the last time we did back to back beatdowns in St. Louis? Been awhile. Redlegs go for the broom tomorrow. I am euphoric right now! 21-9 since June 10th. Keep on riding the Big Red Wave folks!

Dear Reds Brass: Sign Him Now!!!

.328 AVG
.375 OBP
.526 SLG
.901 OPS
16 HR
63 RBI
20 2B