From the Enquirer:
Mackanin thinks a September call-up can do a lot of good – even for a player like Jay Bruce who is not likely to get a lot of playing time.
But Mackanin also made it sound as if Bruce might not be in the Reds’ September plans.
“I think there’s always a benefit for anybody to get that experience,” he said. “However, there’s reasons why he may not be called up. There’s a lot more that goes into it than that. I think it’s a great experience for anybody to be up here – see the type of game that’s played, get used to the bright lights. But, perhaps in the case of Jay Bruce, it may not happen.”
Bruce, the 20-year-old who was the Reds’ first pick in the 2005 draft, is not on the 40-man roster, so the Reds would have to make a move to get him there. Bringing him up would start the arbitration clock.
I’ve been told that Jay was hoping for a September callup. As much as I’d like to see him get some ML ABs, I don’t think this is a real huge deal.
As I mentioned in the comments the other day, who do you bench to play Bruce? Dunn, Griffey or Hamilton? Is it worth starting his arbitration clock if he’s not going to play much?
If he makes the club out of ST next year, it should be as a starter, which means either:
A) Griffey or Dunn is no longer with the club (or one has been moved to 1B and Votto has been traded).
B) Someone (probably Griffey or Hamilton) is hurt.
I’m saying this assuming that he won’t have to be added to the 40 man roster next season. If he has to be added for the 2008 season, you’re not saving much by not bringing him up this September (and there are plenty of guys that could be cut off the 40 man roster) and it’d be a nice “thanks for a great season” reward for Bruce.