Reds Trade Values

[For an explanation of how these rankings work, check out the introduction post here.]

Too Early to Rank

Billy Hamilton, Tucker Barnhart, Michael Lorenzen, Raisel Iglesias, Kris Negron, Anthony Desclafani

Effectively No Trade Value

Skip Schumaker; Brennan Boesch; Jason Marquis, Ryan Mattheus, Jumbo Diaz, Burke Badenhop

Trade Assets

15.  Homer Bailey: Bailey got a big contract, struggled, and then got hurt. It’s a shame for him and a shame for the Reds. No one is going to trade for him now, but if he has successful surgery, a team could hope to acquire him in the offseason to anchor their rotation for the next 4 years. Owed: $86M through 2019.

Reasonable return: At this point Bailey could only bring salary relief because of his large contract extension. A team would have to be pretty high on him to trade for him coming of Tommy John, but it might just be a shrewd move. I think the Reds would have to take on about $50M to get any interest, which would save them $36M going forward. Estimate: $.7/1 ratio of dollars saved to dollars spent.

14.  Marlon Byrd: The Reds biggest offseason acquisition has been a mixed bag, but not a very valuable one. His power offsets his low average and OBP to make him about average at the plate, but his terrible defense offsets that to make him about replacement level. He’s signed for this year, but has an option for next year that will vest if he gets about 350 more plate appearances this year. Owed: balance of $8M, $8M option for next year.

Reasonable return: I think it’s possible for the Reds to trade Byrd for salary relief, but it’s tricky because a lot depends on that option. I have trouble believing that anyone is going to want to pay Byrd more than $1M – $2M next year, so if his option vests, the Reds would have to take on just about all of it to move him. If it doesn’t vest, I could see a team paying most of what the Reds owe him this year for a slugger off the bench. Estimate: Vested, 1/10 ratio; Unvested 10/1 ratio, average of both possibilities, 1/1 ratio of dollars saved per dollars spent.

13.  Joey Votto: The Reds former MVP got off to a torrid start, but the worst calendar month of his career has tamped down some of the excitement about a career resurgence. Votto, who has spent significant time on the DL in 2 of the last 3 years, is signed for 9 more years, so he would be a major commitment and risk for an acquiring team. He’s also got a full no-trade clause. Owed: balance of $14M, $219M through 2024 including $7M buyout.

Reasonable return: Because of the very large size of the contract, Votto can certainly only be traded for salary relief. My guess is that the Reds would have to pay at least $70M of his future money to move him, but who really knows? With numbers this big, ownership of both teams would have to be heavily involved, and when that happens, anything can happen. Estimate: 1.5/1 ratio of dollars saved to paid.

12.  Brandon Phillips: DatDude has decided that power hitting is for the birds, and somehow it’s working for him. His OBP and defense have made him a solid big league contributor this year, if not the All-Star caliber player he once was. He’s signed through 2017, and struggling with turf toe at the moment. Owed: balance of $12M, $27M through 2017.

Reasonable return: Phillips will probably only bring salary relief at this point. I would guess the Reds would have to eat at least $10M to get another team interested. Still that could save $15M – $20M over the next two years. Estimate: 1.7/1 ratio of dollars saved to paid. This value could plummet however if he isn’t doesn’t bounce back from the toe injury.

11.  Manny Parra: It’s been tough for Manny to stay on the mound, but he’s had success before. If he gets on a roll up to the deadline, he could be a solid LOOGy addition for a contender. Owed: balance of $3.5M.

Reasonable Return: If he has a decent month, I bet the Reds could do a straight salary dump, moving Parra to save over $1M without picking up any of his tab.

10.  J.J Hoover: Hoover is putting together a decent season ERA-wise by getting the ball on the ground more and keeping balls in the park, but his control is still pretty bad. He’ll hit arb for the first time next year, and could be an average middle reliever for the next three years. Owed: balance of $.5M, three years of arb.

Reasonable return: This would be a trade like Heisey’s last year, that would probably net the Reds one C or C+ prospect.

9.     Bryan Pena: Off to a great start with batting average and walks (.296/.379/.352), Pena also provides some versatility in the field and could be a nice boost to the clubhouse of a contender. He’d be a half season rental, so he’s also not much of a commitment. Owed: balance of $1.4M.

Reasonable return: I think the Reds could get a solid C+ prospect, a guy who could possibly develop into a bullpen arm or bench depth.

8.     Jay Bruce: How the mighty have fallen. Once an All-Star and fan favorite, Bruce’s struggles have continued this year, leading to calls for him to be benched, sent down, or banished and never spoken of again. He’s generally been average at the plate and in the field this year, but he’s still just 28 and could improve, and a club that acquired him would have him for next year with an option for 2017. Owed: balance of $12M, $12.5M next year.

Reasonable return: I think if the Reds put Bruce on waivers, he would get claimed. I don’t know how much anyone would give up to trade for him, but it would save the Reds about $17M over the next year and a half.

7.     Mike Leake: Leake isn’t doing the Reds any favors if they want to trade him, pitching miserably his last three starts. Right now he doesn’t look very good, but he’s got a solid track record as a 3rd or 4th starter. He’d be a half season rental for an acquiring team. Owed: balance of $9.8M.

Reasonable return: It would help if Leake would pick it up on the mound, and rentals like him can really boost or kill their value with a few appearances near the deadline. Still, I think that the Reds could get a C+ or B- prospect for him.

6.     Devin Mesoraco: The Reds All-Star catcher is suffering from a hip injury that will likely have him sidelined for the rest of the season. He just signed an extension through 2018. Owed: balance of $2.4M, $25.1M through 2018.

Reasonable return: Devin would be a lot higher on this list if he weren’t injured (obviously), but being on the DL looking at season ending surgery would probably make most teams think about low-balling the Reds if they tried to deal him. Right now I have trouble believing the Reds could get more than two B- prospects for him, since there’s really no reason for a team to deal for him now as he probably wouldn’t help them this year.

5.     Tony Cingrani: It looks like Cingrani is better suited for the pen than the rotation, but good innings are good innings, and right now he’s throwing them. He’ll be arbitration eligible for the first time next year, so an acquiring team would control him for three years at a reasonable cost. Owed: balance of $.5M, three years of arb.

Reasonable return: Relievers usually don’t bring much in prospects when traded, but they also aren’t usually traded when they’re 26 years old and have decent numbers in the majors. I think the Reds could get a B+ level guy for him.

4.     Zack Cozart: Cozart is enjoying a renaissance at the plate and that together with his sterling defense has him playing at close to an all-star level. He’s in his first year of arbitration, so a team could acquire him for the stretch run and control him at a reasonable cost for two more years. Owed: balanced of $2.35M and two years of arb.

Reasonable return: Cozart probably isn’t good enough to bring back a top 50 prospect that a team has hung their future on. He’s still got a lot of value though, so the Reds could try to go for quantity and try to get three B or B- prospects with decent upside and hope that one develops into a future star.

3.     Johnny Cueto: It’s hard to find a guy on this list without a caveat to his value, and Cueto’s recent elbow issue is his. If he’s healthy, he’ll probably be the best pitcher traded at mid-season this year as he’s off to another excellent start. He’s a free agent at the end of the year. Owed: balance of $10M.

Reasonable return: Cueto is right on the edge of being a guy you trade for quantity or quality, and it will probably depend on the desperation of the acquiring team. I think the Reds will go for quantity in the end because I doubt that anyone will give up a top 50 guy for a half year with injury concerns. I think the Reds could get two B+ prospects and maybe another one or two B or B- prospects from a team with a deep system.

2.     Aroldis Chapman: He may be one of the 5 best pitchers in the game right now, but he’s only pitched 20 innings. As confusing as that is in general, it doesn’t make valuing very easy. He’ll be arbitration eligible for the final time next year. Owed: balance of $8M, 1 year of arb.

Reasonable return: As a top tier closer, Chapman could legitimately make the difference in winning it all for a contender. That plus his additional year of control could make him very tempting (especially if the team that got him used him more creatively). I think the Reds could potentially get an A- / top 50 guy for him, or maybe two in the 75 to 100 range.

1.     Todd Frazier: Frazier has continued his breakout and has himself in the discussion for top 10 players in the league. A team acquiring him would get gold-glove defense, power from the right side, a solid batting eye, and a generally nice dude for this year and two more. Owed: balance of $3M, $7.5M next year, and one year of arb.

Reasonable return: Now that he’s got more of a track record and he’s signed for next year at a low rate, Frazier is the kind of guy that could bring back a true top tier prospect and maybe then some. Being at his peak, I can’t imagine the Reds would go for quantity with him, and they could expect an A-level / top 30 guy as the heart of a package.

111 Responses

  1. WVRedlegs

    You are holding a fire sale and only getting flea market/yard sale returns. Not very encouraging for a re-build or re-tool.
    But then again, with Jocketty at the helm, nothing should seem encouraging for a re-build.
    Leake could get Brock Holt from the RedSox.
    Cueto (with maybe BP) could bring back Corey Seager, Chris Reed and Zach Lee from LA Dodgers.
    Bruce could bring back Wil Myers from SD.
    Chapman is the wild card that really could supercharge a trade scenario.
    This a real golden, once in a generation opportunity for the Reds to retool their team.

    • Jeremy Conley

      I don’t think it’s flea market level, just realistic.

      As of February this year, this is how Baseball America broke down the Reds prospects:

      Grade A: Zero
      Grade A-: One
      Grade B+: One
      Grade B: Zero
      Grade B-: Nine
      Grade C+: 11
      Grade C: 15

      I think if you trade Chapman, Cueto, Leake, Bruce, and Pena you could very easily end up with

      1 A-, 3 B+, 3 B, 1 B -, 2 C+ prospects, and saving more than $35M over the next two years. That would add 7 guys to the Reds top 10 prospects, plus whoever they draft this year and next. That would set the Reds up really well for 2017 I think.

      • WVRedlegs

        I like what you are thinking. I see where you are going. I hope you are just under valuing the pitchers’ return. I keep hearing what a “Sellers” market it is going to be this July for pitchers. And the Reds have two of the top ones going and a pretty decent one in Leake. They should capitalize on this situation and attempt to corner the trade market the last two weeks of July.

      • Jeremy Conley

        Hey, I hope I’m under-valuing what they can get for everyone. That would make it a lot easier to get back into contention.

      • Redsfan48

        Honestly, I think we need Peña as a leader to help these young pitchers.

      • Jeremy Conley

        Pena seems like a good guy for sure, and he doesn’t seem to be slowing down much at the plate. I would have no problem keeping him for another year or two.

      • VaRedsFan

        Instead of waiting until the end of the year and extend Pena 2 years (as Walt usually does with veterans), why not extend him for 1 yr NOW?

      • Dr. K

        I agree. I keep reading of the importance of having Mesoraco behind the plate, but I’d be more than satisfied with Pena being the every day catcher. That opens the door to moving Meso to a less strenuous position and Pena seems like a plus 7 or 8 hole hitter.

      • whereruklu

        Gotta agree. More than adequate behind the plate, in the box, or at 1st if needed, and a god-send with all of the rookies coming up. He looks like a teacher back there holding class. Just his constant smile is worth a half a mil. Please don’t get rid of him, too good of player, upper-scale backup, and all around class guy. The Reds still need him. ….and I’m a Messo man.

    • Steelerfan

      I wish you were right, but I do not there is any chance that SD would trade Myers for Bruce. And the way Leake has been pitching and his contract status, I think Brock Holt would be a huge stretch.

      Hope you are right though

      • WVRedlegs

        SD’s OF is all RH hitters. They have Kemp long term and are said to be trying to sign Justin Upton to an extension. They have inquired about Bruce before. They are said to be looking for a LH hitting OF and might be offering Myers to get it. Myers, I understand is on the DL now, but I do not know for what reason.
        A Bruce-Leake package could be inticing for SD and get the Reds Myers and another prospect. There is a need and a want there for SD, and looking at what they did this past winter, and they just haven’t set the NL West on fire yet. They need something to get them over the hump.

      • Jeremy Conley

        I think SD is going to have to close some ground with they guys before they become buyers at the deadline this year. They are below .500 and behind the Giants for 2nd place.

        Bruce would help them this year and next, but Wil Myers is better than him right now, and cheaper, and controlled longer. Leake would be a good incentive to make the deal, but he only helps them for this year, and how much better would they be with 10 starts from Leake than 10 starts from their 5th starter.

        Maybe that gets them over .500, but I don’t think that move helps them enough to make the playoffs by itself.

    • reaganspad

      I think Jay Bruce is turning a corner. Really impressed with the walks at the plate right now as it is helping his overall approach at the plate right now. He is on the verge of one of those streaks, and with Votto and Frazier going good right now, we get back to 500 very soon. I can see another sweep or 2 in the next 3 series, then all these values might be going up.

      • VaRedsFan

        We’ve seen it from Bruce before. In an interview he will say, “I’m more patient at the plate…I’m getting better pitches to hit, thus, I’ve been hitting better.” Only to see him revert back to what he’s been doing for the last 1.5 yrs

      • Nick Carrington

        We’ve never seen Bruce have this long a stretch with an elevated walk rate. We also haven’t seen his strikeout rate this low since 2012. He is also swinging at fewer pitches outside the strike zone. Safe to say we haven’t seen this from Bruce before.

        Maybe he continues to be streaky. Maybe he has turned a corner. We’ll find out soon enough.

    • Redsfan48

      Leake and Cueto for Julio Urias and Corey Seager. That could be a very good trade for both teams.

      • Redsfan48

        But I can understand if the Dodgers would only want to give up one, so an alternative could be Cueto for Seager plus a lower ranked prospect (B- or C+)

      • Jeremy Conley

        If the Reds could get Seager for Cueto and Leake I’m sure they’d do it in a heartbeat. But c’mon, there is no possible way that the Dodgers trade him for a rental.

        You’re talking about a 21 year old shortstop, who is a consensus top 10 prospect in all of baseball, who is hitting .300/.342/.455 at AAA. This guy is on a path to be an all-star in the next few years, and a possible top 10 in MVP voting. The Dodgers would have to be 100% insane to trade that for 10 starts by Cueto.

      • Michael E

        Jeremy, top 10 prospects do get traded for ace level rentals. Happens often. You are severely underrating Cueto return. Too many pessimistic Reds fans that keep harping on rental, yet EVERY year we see an ace rental bring back two top 8 prospects from another team, with one usually being the top or second best prospect on that team.

        Cueto package should start with a top 2 prospect from buying team and another top 12 prospect. WE should leave with an A- and a B+ or B prospect. The only way we do WORSE is if we add another salary dump with it…which makes no sense.

        As for the salary dumps, most of those won’t require the Reds paying any money to buying team, BUT we won’t get back any worthwhile prospect either. I can’t believe you think half the team would require the Reds sending 10s of millions to trade them. That is way too cynical.

      • Michael E

        Between a Chapman and Cueto trade, we should walk away with two A grade prospects and two B grade prospects of some type. C grade shouldn’t even be in the discussion, unless the Reds scouts really like a lower rated prospect.

      • VaRedsFan

        Seager is not going anywhere. People need to stop throwing his name around as if he is available.

      • WVRedlegs

        The Dodgers are not trading Urias, nor Pederson. It will take Seager to get what the Dodgers want and need. Another top arm to go with Kershaw and Grienke.
        Trade Cueto in June and the Dodgers have him for 15-17 starts. That has more value to the Dodgers.
        And, it will take much, much more than Seager to get Cole Hamels, and the 3 1/2 years remaining on his contract, from the Phillies.
        The Dodgers would also get exclusive negotiating rights with Cueto until the World Series is over. There is something to be said for that, and LA’s big bank accounts. The Dodgers have other mid-infield prospects at lower levels.

      • PDunc

        I don’t know if Seager is available from the Dodgers or not. But a thought I had to get the Dodgers to part with him was to package Cueto and Cozart together.

        Dodgers would have the best 1-3 starters in the league this season and a 2-5 WAR (depending on if Cozarts offense continues at this season’s pace) shortstop at a reasonable salary through 2017. If Seager is at all available, I would think this package would interest the Dodgers.

        The Yankees currently have the worst offense from the 2B position in the league and are in need of starting pitching.
        http://www.pinstripealley.com/yankees-analysis-sabermetrics/2015/5/26/8655741/yankees-trades-starting-pitching-kazmir-latos-kazmir-haren-leake-gallardo
        If Phillips would agree to go to the Bronx, and the Yankees would agree to take his salary, I’d send him and Leake there for whatever else you can get.

        I’d move forward with Seager and Suarez as my middle infield and feel pretty good about the roughly $17 million you are saving vs what you would have paid Cozart and Phillips.

      • Jeremy Conley

        WV:I hope you’re right, but I don’t think you’re looking at it very realistically. The Cubs traded Samardizja with a year of control left and Hammels (who was much better at the time than Leake is now) for Addison Russel and a high draft pick who was struggling at A-ball. And everyone wrote about how the Cubs got a great deal and the A’s shouldn’t have made the trade.

        If Cueto had another year left, and they included Leake, maybe you could start to get in the discussion of a top 5 to 10 prospect. You just don’t see teams give up what you’re talking about for a rental anymore.

      • WVRedlegs

        JC,
        You are talking about two first round picks for Smardzija and Jason Hammel. Addison Russel was the A’s 2012 1st round pick. And OF Billy McKinney was a first round pick for the A’s in 2013. And McKinney has torn it up for the Cubs at A+ and AA since that trade.
        Seager was a 1st round pick also. What did Smardzija give the A’s after the trade? Cueto will deliver the goods for the Dodgers or whoever gets him. That you can count on.

      • WVRedlegs

        And the Cubs-A’s trade was made the 1st week of July, which let Samardzija have 16 starts for Oakland. Which is why I say trade Cueto in late June to maximize his value for the trading team, and the Reds.

      • Jeremy Conley

        WV: Samardizja put up a 3.14 ERA (3.30 FIP) in 112 innings for the A’s and then was traded for their current starting shortstop who is putting up a .770 OPS. I’d say that worked out pretty well. Samardizja didn’t pitch in the Wild Card game, which the A’s lost, to the American League champs. If they’d won that game, he may have won them the WS too.

        The point about McKinney was that he was very far from the majors. He’s got an .806 career OPS in the minors. He’s young, and he may end up being good, but it’s a lot easier to get team’s to give up guys in A-Ball than a guy who is killing it at AAA at a premium defensive position.

        So the Cubs gave up their ace and their 3rd starter. Their ace gave the A’s a great half season, and then had another year of team control that was enough for the A’s to flip him for another good player. What they got was consensus top 5 prospect, and a good prospect who was far from the majors, and everyone said that the Cubs won that deal by a lot.

        You think that if we gave the Dodgers just Cueto, that they would give us their consensus top 10 prospect who is major league ready? That doesn’t add up to me.

      • Redsfan48

        Yeah, Cueto is ten times better than Samardzija and Leake is much better than Hammel as well. If the Cubs got McKinney and Russell, who is pretty equivalent to Seager, why couldn’t the Reds get more for Cueto and Leake? And we all know the Dodgers have the money to retain Cueto long term, especially with the money saved by Greinke opting out. Think of a rotation of Kershaw, Greinke, Cueto, Leake and ask yourselves, if you were their GM, with the amount of money they have, wouldn’t you do WHATEVER necessary to make that deal happen? If I was Jocketty, I wouldn’t even consider an offer from the Dodgers without Seager. And if I were Jocketty, if necessary I’d be willing to trade Chapman, either in a package with Cueto or by himself, if it meant getting Seager (and more if you include Leake/Cueto with Chapman.)

      • Redsfan48

        And especially with Greinke likely to opt out of his contract, the Dodgers might prefer to sign Cueto long term over trying to re sign Greinke or go after Price.

      • Jeremy Conley

        RF48: Cueto is better than Samardizja, but not by leaps and bounds. He was legitimately one of the best pitchers in the national league the last year and had a 2.83 ERA with the Cubs. Hammel has put up better years than Leake ever has. He had a 2.98 ERA when traded after putting up a 3.43 in the AL East the year before.

        But the biggest thing is that Samardizja had another year of control, which the A’s used to acquire a good player. If Cueto had another year of control, this would be a different story, but he doesn’t.

        Further, the A’s got ripped for that trade, and I doubt that another team is going to make one like that this year.

      • Michael E

        They say that about every semi-interesting prospect “he’s not available” or “why would they give up a top prospect for him?”, but you have to give up top prospects to get an ACE pitcher (Cueto) or fireballing reliever (Chapman). No way anything less than a top 3 prospect is starting point on both trades. If not Seagar, then their second prospect or top pitcher.

        That said, I have faith that Jocketty is just as “their probably not available” lazy in his thinking and will settle for the worst possible trades for both. We’ll end up with two low ceiling 25 year old A ballers I bet…and Jocketty should then be fired immediately for getting raped in the GM chair. We’ll be laughed at by other teams fans…

        “You didn’t get a stud prospect back for either Cueto or Chapman? Wow, your GM is terrible!”

      • jdx19

        This is the craziest thing I’ve seen in awhile.

      • michael

        Agreed. Cueto has put up triple the war as jeff. Jeff never had higher than a 2.0 war. The only thing that keeps him and cueto in the same world was his extra year left under contract

      • jdx19

        I was referring to Leake/Cueto for Seager/Urias. Nothing about Samardzija and Cueto.

      • jdx19

        Based on BBR, sure… based on FG, he’s put up 2.9 WAR, 2.9 WAR, 4.2 WAR the last 3 seasons and already at 1.2 this year.

        During the same time period, Cueto has done 4.7, 0.7 (injured), 4.6, 1.3. So, if we want to be super technical, by fWAR, Cueto has put up exactly 0.1 WAR more than Samardzija since 2012. Not being injured is part of being a good pitcher.

        I’m tired of all the talk from people thinking Samardzija isn’t in the same league as Cueto. Yes, Cueto is marginally better (stats and eye test for me), but Samardzija is a front-line starter. If you don’t think so you haven’t seen him pitch very often.

      • Jason

        I would give say Chapman leake and cueto for arias seager and joc perderson. Heck throw in maybe Brandon Phillips plus cash. I would do that in a heartbeat

      • Redsfan48

        No way in the world the Dodgers give up Pederson. He’s their starting center fielder.

      • Michael E

        Judging by many fans here, the Dodgers wouldn’t give up anything to get Cueto or Chapman or whomever. come on guys, the Dodgers are loaded, don’t have a bid need for their own prospects and can pay to keep all their top players. When you’re rich trading prospects is no big deal.

        I truly think Seagar or even Pederson would be moved for Cueto. Not both mind you, but I can see it without any issue. If I were the Dodgers, I’d keep Pederson, but he is available if it gives them a chance to win it all this year.

    • jdx19

      Cueto won’t get Seager. No way, no how.

      • Jeremy Conley

        I agree, but I do think the point about the Dodgers being a good trade match with the Reds is true. I would be interested in trying for a package with both Chris Reed and Grant Holmes in it. Holmes is a first rounder from last year who’s still in low A, and Reed is 25 in AAA and looks like he could be a solid 2 or 3 starter pretty soon.

        I’m sure Cueto could get you one of those guys, I’m not sure he gets you both, but it would be worth asking.

        The Royals are also a good fit, and have several of those good-not great prospects. I think you could see Cueto for a package of 4 prospects from the Royals pretty easily.

      • jdx19

        Agreed. I might look at Alex Verdugo also (19-yr old, A-Ball). He’s a high-upside kind of guy that might be easy to part with for LA.

      • WVRedlegs

        Reed is a good choice. So would their LH at AAA, Zack Lee. Take both. Holmes fell to the Dodgers in the draft I because of arm issues, maybe TJ surgery. He throws hard though.
        But if we want a very nice hard thrower, maybe a Chapman to Toronto for pitching prospect Jeff Hoffman. In his first start after TJ surgery, he threw 99 mph a few weeks ago.

      • greenmtred

        Jeremy: Thanks for the detailed analysis. What do you think of the Red Sox as potential trade partners? They are struggling, but not out of it at all, and seem to need pitching. They also, generally, seem to have good young outfield prospects. If we have to lose Johnny, I’d rather that he went to a team we wouldn’t play frequently.

      • Jeremy Conley

        Green Mountain: Thanks for reading. You know, before the season I talked about the Sox a lot as possible trade partners with the Reds because of their outfield surplus, and I still think it’s pretty crazy the Reds didn’t try to get one of their guys for the bench.

        That said, at this point it’s tougher to see it working out. Unless the Sox go on a serious run, I have a hard time believing that they are going to trade for a rental. I could see them being buyers at the deadline, but I think they would likely go for someone they could control next year as well.

        If they wanted Cueto or Leak, I’m sure they could put together a package of prospects that would be worth trading for, but there’s no one in their top 10 that really jumps out at me. I’d rather try to get Brock Holt, but that probably isn’t happening at all, and certainly not for a half year of one of our guys.

      • Redsfan48

        The Reds do not need ANY more pitching. We need hitting prospects. We are set for a long while with all the young pitching we already have, but we need a replacement for Phillips when his contract ends, and a couple corner outfielders at a minimum.

      • Jeremy Conley

        I agree we have position player needs, but with our bullpen and a rotation that has featured Jason Marquis this year in addition to our top two starters that will no longer be with us next year, I don’t understand people who say the Reds don’t need pitching.

        Right now our 2016 Rotation looks like this:

        Iglesias
        Lorenzen
        Desclafani
        ??
        ??

        Maybe Moscot and Stephenson are ready, maybe not. That’s still pretty thin.

      • Redsfan48

        Moscot, Stephenson, Travieso, Amir Garrett are all pitching prospects. Cingrani could still potentially be used in the rotation in the future. It’s reasonable to assume 2 of them will be ready for next year, and if not, I’m guessing the Reds are planning on 2017 being their year to contend again, so they can always sign a cheap stop-gap arm to get them to 2017 and by then, 2 of the prospects above would almost certainly be ready.

        Maybe we could use one or two pitching prospects as well, just in case, but they should get the pitching prospects in other trades, not for Cueto.

  2. wkuchad

    Under “no trade value” you forgot to list Price and Jocketty.

  3. Scot Lykins

    Waive Bruce. Trade Cueto and Chapman. Sit Bird and play a prospect. Trade Hamiton. Sell Votto.

    • Jeremy Conley

      I think the Reds have to wait on Hamilton. He won’t cost them anything next year, and they have to hope that with more instruction, conditioning, and experience, that he can get himself up closer to a .340 OBP.

      If he can do that by next summer, with his elite defense and base running, he could be giant trade chip that could bring back a top tier prospect

      • eric3287

        If Billy, by some miracle, can actually be a .340 OBP guy, he’d be worth holding on to.. He’s not arb eligible until 2017, not a free agent until 2020, so unless you think the Reds won’t be competitive until 2021-2022, a .340 OBP Billy is the kind of guy a re-tooling team would want to hold on to.

      • Jeremy Conley

        Yeah, it would matter how the Reds viewed when their next real playoff run will be. By 2018, if he’s turned the corner, he could already be making $5+mil.

        But actually, as I’ve posted on this site before, my preference would be for the Reds to lock Billy up this offseason to a long and cheap deal. I think with his defense he’ll always be an average player at worst. That’s valuable at a reasonable cost. If he can turn a corner at the plate in his mid-twenties, the Reds would have a legitimate steal on their hands.

      • Tom Reed

        Hamilton has some maturing to do, put speed often drives the opposition crazy as we saw in yesterday’s game.

      • jdx19

        A .340 OBP Billy is an MVP-caliber player.

        Be still, my heart!

    • lwblogger2

      So basically you want to give up Bruce for nothing? I’m pretty sure if the Reds wanted to move Bruce they would be able to get something beyond simple salary relief. I don’t think any money would have to move in the deal unless the Reds wanted a higher ranking prospect. If the goal was just to move him and get rid of his salary, I’d say they’d get a B- kind of prospect for him without having to pay of his salary.

      Trading Cueto (if healthy) and Chapman is the right move if the Reds are in rebuild/retool mode. Sitting Byrd is ok assuming you have a prospect to play out there who is better than he is. I think the better option though would be to try to trade Byrd. That way his vesting option isn’t the Reds’ problem.

      I’m not sure the Reds want to give up on Hamilton. His defense is so good and he’s still dirt cheap. He doesn’t have to be a plus hitter to have good value.

      Moving Votto isn’t impossible but like Jeremy said, it would have to be to the right team and there is a lot of money that would have to go along with him to any team in the deal. What if he puts up a few really good offensive years for another team and the Reds are paying him millions of dollars to perform that way for another team? How hard would they be kicking themselves? Maybe it’s the right move in the long run but in the short run, watching Votto hit OPS at around .875 or higher and hitting some doubles and HR for another team, while the Reds pay part of his salary would be painful.

      • Jeremy Conley

        I’ll agree with you that for me, Bruce was one of the toughest to rank, and I went back and forth on him a few times. At the end of the day though, I tried to put myself in another GM’s shoes, and it was hard to think about trading much for a guy with a .222 /.328 /.407 line, coming off of a down year, who’s got a $13M price tag next year.

        That said, offense is down, and walks and power will always play. So while I felt like the most reasonable return would be total salary relief, it would not surprise me at all if the Reds traded him and got a decent piece in return. If the Reds do deal him, I think the most likely scenario would be for them to send a little money with him and get a solid B or B+ type guy.

      • lwblogger2

        Yes, for a solid B or B+ they’d probably have to send some money to the receiving team. I was thinking C+/B- for him straight up. This is assuming he can continue to bring his numbers up some.

      • Michael E

        Most of the listed trade values are undervalued. We wouldn’t have to send any money with most of those he listed as needed 10s of million sent to entice a buyer. We also WOULD get back a solid prospect (not MLB ready or teams top 5, but a good one) for players like Bruce, Phillips, Pena, Leake and Byrd.

        Votto and Bailey WOULD require some money, but lets stop there, neither are being considered for a trade at this painful a value level. The Reds are not a team that will send money to trade a contract, sorry. If anything, the Reds would acquire a player by taking on a contract with money.

        Cueto and Chapman should both bring back at least a top 3 prospect from buying team and another top 12 prospect. Nothing less than that, as that is what upper level starting and closing pitchers bring, year in and year out. Just because they’re Reds doesn’t mean their value is 10 times less than similar pitchers of years past.

  4. tct

    Really good list, and agree with the top 3. I have taken some heat for saying the Reds should trade Frazier, but I think they have to if they are going to rebuild. I agree completely with you that Frazier is the only player the Reds have who could realistically bring back a top 25 type prospect, and the Reds really need some young guys with star potential. I like Todd, but he will be a free agent by the time the Reds are ready to win again.

    I hope the Reds learned their lesson with the Votto, Bailey, and Phillips contracts. If you are going to extend your stars, then you need to do it early before they get too much leverage, like they did with Bruce, Meso, and Cueto. None of those contracts are big enough to really hurt you, and the Reds aren’t committed to any of those players after the age of 30. Lock up their arb years and get a couple free agent years on a discount. With Bailey, Votto, and Phillips they waited until the players were in their late twenties, or 30, I believe with Phillips, and only had a year or two before free agency. If you do that, you will have to pay basically market value and have to commit to years in their mid to late thirties. That’s what the Reds would have to do to extend Frazier, and it would be a mistake.

    Love Todd, but for once I’d like to see the Reds sell high instead of buy high.

    • WVRedlegs

      Frazier to the Mets. He gets to go home to play before his hometown folks. Reds get a bigtime pitching prospect. Probably not Syndergaard, but LHP Steven Matz would start a nice package.

      • jdx19

        “Probably not Syndergaard.”

        I’m not sure the Reds could put together a package for Syndergaard that would be reasonable for both sides.

    • Michael E

      The big decision is this, are the Reds rebuilding or not? If they can decide that a rebuild (not necessarily complete teardown, but trading several solid players for a half dozen top 10 (other teams) prospects type of rebuild, then yes, Frazier SHOULD be traded because by the time the Reds are contenders, he’ll be on the downside of his career and we’ll have to sign a bad contract to keep him (think Brandon Phillips scenario). Strike while the value is high.

      By the end of the deadline, Chapman and Cueto should be gone, without any hesistation, and I’d be pretty happy if Frazier, Bruce, Byrd, Leake, Parra, Hoover or Phillips were gone as well. Not ALL of them, but if we’d move 4 or 5 players for a handful of good prospects, we’d suddenly have a very deep farm system and ready to bust out in a year or two with a talented, very affordable payroll team. We’d also have some free money to sign a one really good FA or two solid ones to fill holes in the youthful team.

  5. gaffer

    Reds will not do a total fire sale. Castellini wants to win now. They will not trade anyone who is not signed beyond this year.

    • Jeremy Conley

      Every owner wants to win. Castellini is a business man and right now he’s paying a lot of money for an inferior product. I can’t imagine that that will go on forever.

      I agree that they probably won’t trade Frazier or Cozart, but I think Chapman is a real possibility.

      • azredsfanazredfan

        The Reds will need to field a team next year that is improving to get the big FS Ohio contract for 2-2.5 billion dollar contract that covers 20 years which will start in 2017. If the Reds totally start over , no big FS Ohio contact. Walt needs to earn his money.

      • Jeremy Conley

        I don’t think that a billion dollar negotiation is going to hinge on the Reds record next year. Castellini has made so made tons of improvements to the stadium, secured the all-star game, increased payroll, and gotten attendance consistently around 30K per game up from normally around 25K.

        The Reds value as a team and as a product has gone way up, and a one year rebuild won’t change that.

      • Michael E

        Jeremy, I agree about the TV deal. A 10 or 15 year deal doesn’t depend on ONE season. If it did, Castellini could go all Marlins on the TV deal, sign a bunch of studs, then do a firesale after the deal is made. The broadcast company will sign a deal based on viewership potential, advertising revenue and character and integrity of the ownership, not whether they have an aging, overpriced contending team that is due to implode into mediocrity in a couple of years.

    • Michael E

      I would hope Castellini has already seen the folly of trying to win now EVERY year. It can’t be sustained without a $300 million payroll. Surely he isn’t that emotionally dense? He didn’t get rich being that stupid…or did he?

  6. Art Wayne Austin

    Bruce is the most likely to go, I could see him in a Yankee uniform becoming another Paul O’Neil. Both have and had an average career at Cincy. O’Neil caught fire in NY becoming a premier player, so could Bruce.

    • Dr. K

      Interesting comparison. I don’t remember O’Neil being as streaky as Bruce is. The NY media (and fans) would crucify him after a couple of his 0-32 streaks.

      • jdx19

        Crank the power down a notch, and crank the plate discipline up a notch, and you’ve transformed Bruce into O’neill. Their nunbers at similar ages are fairly close, with the noted changes.

        Wow, O’Neill put up 41 career WAR… much better than I realized.

      • lwblogger2

        He was a very, very good player. Lou Pinella messed up trying to make him a power hitter. Although he was an extreme pull-hitter, O’neil really wasn’t a power hitter. He was a very good hitter who happened to have some power. He was also an excellent defensive RF, with good range, good instincts, and a strong, accurate arm.

      • jdx19

        Yeah, unfortunately I missed the ‘O’Neil Era’ in Cincy. While I do have a vauge recollection of watching Game 4 of the ’90 WS (I was 6), it wasn’t until around ’93 that I really started paying attention to baseball.

    • Michael E

      Bruce has never come close to O’Neill in the batters box. He may have hit a few more HRs a few rows deeper than O’Neill, but nothing else compares. In the field, O’Neill was slightly better (Bruce is good, but a hair behind).

      The Bruce of last year and this year wouldn’t be worthy of being O’Neill’s batboy. The early Bruce had promise, but hasn’t met expectations, save for one season or so.

  7. Frogger

    As Reds fans we mostly have a good idea of what current Reds players are worth. I am concerned that Jockety will screw up these trades. Who are some of the young players around baseball the Reds should target? I don’t have a good idea of the talent around baseball myself. This is probably the main reason folks keep bringing up Seager. We all know him and he is pretty much a can’t miss. Personally, I would rather get two or three of those in a fire sale than a bunch of ? that won’t make MLB rosters.

    • Dr. K

      That’s a great question, and a great idea for an article here: Who Should the Reds Target? What would it take to get them?

      • Jeremy Conley

        The question, “who are the best available prospects?” is a good one, but not one that’s easily answered. First off, who is “available” depends entirely on who is being offered. Everyone is available given the right deal. Second, “best” is clearly subjective, as prospects are ranked based on different things.

        Do you want guys that are major league ready? Do you want guys that have a high ceiling, or a high floor? How much do you value pitching vs. position players. How much do you value defense?

      • Michael E

        Exactly. EVERYONE is available if it makes the other team better. Those on here saying “Seager is not avialable” or “stud prospect A is not available” haven’t paid attention to all the same kinds of stud prospects that have been moved every single year. Remember, even near ready prospects aren’t locks to be MLB worthy players, as well we Reds fans know. The Dodgers may love Seagers potential, but what if he is mostly a disappointment in 5 years? Josh Hamilton was a stud that got so bad that he was obtained in a rule V draft for almost free (we traded with Cubs or someone after they drafted him for us). Teams know prospects are just that, still prospects only, and the chance to get an already MLB-star will make ANY prospect available, so long as the selling GM has any ability to negotiate and doesn’t start off as pessimistic as many Reds fans do…

    • Jeremy Conley

      Everyone would rather get quality than quantity. But imagine if the Reds had a guy in AAA that was like Votto or Bruce was in the minors. Would you have wanted the Reds to trade him for a half season of a starting pitcher?

      The point is that it takes a very specific type of player that can get another team to give up a guy that will be a big part of their future. Right now the Reds have Frazier and maybe Chapman, depending on the team and the circumstances, that could realistically bring them a top-tier, major-league ready prospect.

      But quantity does work too, you shouldn’t just overlook it. For example, when the Indians traded CC Sebathia to the Brewers the prospect that everyone talked about was Matt LaPorta, who was rated in the top 30 or so at the time. But they also got Michael Brantley as PTBNL, who had never cracked anyone’s top 100. LaPorta was a total bust in the majors, and Brantley was 3rd in the MVP voting last year.

      There’s just so much variation in how prospects develop. Sometimes it’s better to get 5 guys with 20 percent chances to become stars than it is one guy with an 85 percent chance.

      • WVRedlegs

        LaPorta was a great prospect. I saw him play about a half season in A ball. He was on the 2008 Olympic team. He had some success, but injuries derailed his career. A “hip injury” killed his career and he was not a catcher, but a 1B/OF. Gives you some pause when you think about Mez.

      • Jeremy Conley

        I agree, he was a totally great piece to get in the Sebathia deal. My point was just that even those guys don’t work out sometimes, and so we shouldn’t just throw away the idea of trading for a package of prospects just because we don’t get one in the top 10.

      • jdx19

        Great post here, Jeremy.

        Quantity over quality is my mantra with prospects, all the way.

        Real “can’t miss” prospects are so few and far between it’s insane. I think the recency of Strasburg, Harper, Trout, Bryant (highly touted guys that have successfully transitioned to the majors and done well) have pulled the wool over people’s eyes. There usually isn’t a player of this calber in every draft, and certainly not one of this caliber in everyone’s farm system.

        Getting 2 guys who project as solid everyday players is almost always going to be the correct route over 1 blue-chipper, in my eyes.

      • Michael E

        Jeremy, your question is not valid. No one would WANT the Reds to trade a Votto-like prospect for an Ace rental, but we would have to do that. If we were trading for Cueto now, it would take Stephenson or Winker as prospect 1 and then another lower prospect to get a pitcher that would immediately be our Ace and put us, theoretically, over the top. This is all based on the fact as buyers we’d probably be in first or near first and looking a little weak in the front of the rotation.

        If we find a trading partner that is contending, but a little weak in the front of the rotation, they’ll give up a top 3 and another top 12 prospect for Cueto in a heartbeat.

  8. sezwhom

    Move Cueto NOW! We’re not going anywhere. Cueto would make the Astros rotation spooky good. They have pieces to move. LF with Preston Tucker plus RHP Vincent Velasquez would be a good place to start.

    • jdx19

      I’d try to get Jake Marisnick in any trade with Houston. From what I’ve seen, he’s like Chris Heisey but 15% better and also much younger. A guy who can play all OF positions very well and can hit a little bit. He wouldn’t take much to get as an add-on and we could forget about Brennan Boesch.

      • Michael E

        Ick, I hope Heisey and 50% better at least. 15% better than Heisey is still replacement level, journeyman platoon player.

  9. jdx19

    I decided to peruse some prospect lists and make a list of guys who I’d consider “untouchable” by their respective teams.

    Untouchable Major League “Prospects”
    Kris Bryant
    Addison Russell
    Blake Swihart
    Joc Pederson
    Jorge Soler
    Noah Syndergaard
    Eduardo Rodriguez

    Untouchable Minor League Prospects
    Byron Buxton
    Julio Urias
    Carlos Correa
    Corey Seager
    Joey Gallo

    ‘Touchable’ Top 20-type Prospects
    Carlos Rodon
    Lucas Giolito
    JP Crawford
    Tyler Glasnow
    Francisco Lindor
    Miguel Sano

    Obviously, each team either likes their guys or views them as expendable. i think the Cubs and Dodgers fall into the “we like our guys” camp and it would take a king’s ransom to pry anyone away.

    Highly ranked guys who are from teams that do weird things (ChiSox, Rodon), teams that are stacked at the position (Giolito, Nats, Pitcher), and guys who aren’t necessarily top-hitters, but more all-around guys (Franciso Lindor, JP Crawford) are the types of players the Reds should be attempting to target as returns from teams who may want Cueto or Chapman.

    Generally, I’d say anyone in the Top 25-50 range is ‘touchable’ for the right amount of return.

    All my opinions, of course!

    • Michael E

      While I somewhat agree, remember, high payroll teams value their own prospects less due to the ability to sign many FAs. Small market teams would make top prospects untouchable, but big market teams like the Dodgers and Cubs would be willing to move ANYONE if it gives them a shot at a title. The Cubs may be one year away from that thinking, but soon enough, they’ll be prepared to trade any prospect that isn’t named Bryant for an Ace rental or stud hitter rental.

  10. Vanessa Galagnara

    If these projections are true I would totally back the Reds in not making any trades and just getting a compensation pick. At least you would get a first rounder that is better than a B level prospect.

    • Jeremy Conley

      I think that’s the trap that people can fall into. It’s easy to think of all first rounders as future major league stars, or at least A level prospects.

      But look at the grades of some Reds former first rounders:

      Phil Ervin, C+
      Nick Travieso, B-
      Nick Howard, B-
      Michael Lorenzen, B

      And that’s after they’ve had a few years of development. If you can get 2 B+ guys and 2 B guys in a package for Cueto, that would be way more valuable than one compensation pick.

      • big5ed

        I’ll take a lot of “B level” Michael Lorenzens all day.

        On prospects, one woman’s trash is another woman’s treasure. Ervin got derailed for a while with a wrist injury but appears to be over it now. Amir Garrett, who I believe to be the gem of the Reds’ organization, was a 22nd rounder.

      • jdx19

        Ervin might be over the injury, which is great, but for a guy who will be 23 in less than 2 months that is in high-A ball, it makes me think we won’t see him in the bigs until at least 25, which isn’t bad, but you hope for more out of college first-rounders.

        Ervin looks like he’ll get send to AA some time this year. If he can excel there and has a good ST next year, it’s possible he could start in AAA in 2016, maybe with a 2017 arrival in Cincy. Best case. If he struggles at AA or AAA, could see him at 26-27 or not at all.

    • jdx19

      Like Jeremy said, a guy with at least a little minor league experience that has shown he’s a B-guy is a lot better than an unknown first rounder. Guys like Bryant, Harper, Trout don’t come along very often. MLB has been spoiled the last few years. Also, 20-some teams passed on Mike Trout, who is the best player the game has seen in years.

  11. rhayex

    Bailey likely wouldn’t even bring back much salary relief right now. Dave Cameron named him one of the worst contracts in baseball in the most recent Fangraphs chat.

    • Vanessa Galagnara

      In fairness any pitcher in the first year of a multi year contract that would under go Tommy John surgery would have their contract rated as one of the worsts in baseball. Homer Bailey was a pretty good pitcher in his moments. Unhittable at his best. Not to many pitchers out there have 2 no hitters on their resume.

      • IndyRedMan

        That was a bad contract before the TJ surgery. You don’t pay a guy $100+ mil based on 2 games. It wasn’t like he’s been this workhorse either…he had 2 seasons over 150 ip out of like 6 as a Red

      • lwblogger2

        I think the Reds gave him that contract based on his prior to seasons to offering it. It was market value for a #2/#3 starter. The Reds in no way got a discount but it wasn’t a drastic overpay either. Not to say I agree with the signing. I don’t think the Reds can really pay market value for players, especially pitchers in free-agency but the contract wasn’t awful when offered and signed.

      • lwblogger2

        Prior “two” seasons even… Good grief my grammar is bad when I’m typing quickly.

      • Michael E

        That was a GOOD contract based on him improving EVERY year and already a solid SP2 type at the time of the deal. Had he not gotten injured, he be approaching ace-level stats now for half the pay of an ace-level pitcher.

        Stop being so hindsight-smart.

    • Jeremy Conley

      I did list him as the Reds least valuable trade asset. That said, he’s still a good pitcher when healthy, and that’s worth trading for. If I was a GM and I could get Bailey for the next 4 years at $8M or $9M, I think that would end up being a great deal for my team.

    • Michael E

      Bailey is only bad due to being injured. Had he pitched about like he had, with some modest improvement (expected for player just entering his prime years) he’d have been a very good contract.

      Just because he got injured doesn’t make the original deal bad, it just looks bad now, and its not Bailey’s fault he suffered injuries. It does seem like the Reds are doomed to never get a long-term deal right. At least we’re not the Twins with Mauer. He hasn’t been a third as good as the year they extended him. He makes Votto deal look like a steal.

  12. Michael E

    I disagree with many on here that think an Ace rental is only good for a middling prospect or two. Why not just settle for a player to be released for Cueto? I mean come on, this is ridiculous to think we’d give away an Ace for some unknown low A prospect.

    Put it this way, if we were in first, but needing an Ace and traded fore Cueto, what do you think it’d take to get Cueto now? Nothing less than one of our top 2 or 3 prospects as a starting point. Stephenson or Winker would likely be one and then another in the last part of the top 10 range.

    Yet we think other teams don’t have to even look at their top 5 prospects and can pawn off some high risk, fringe top 10 prospect for an Ace. Rental is NOT THAT big a factor in dropping Ace value from true top prospect range to barely top 10 prospect range. That is silly.

    • Jeremy Conley

      I just think you’re not understanding the prospect grading system. The Reds currently have one A- prospect (Stephenson) and one B+ prospect (Winker). So when I say that Cueto could get you two B+ prospect and two B level prospects, that is not middling. Those guys would immediately become 4 of the Reds top 7 prospects.

      The grades are confusing because they are looking at a prospect as a future major leaguer. An A prospect is expected to turn into an MVP level player. Winker is expected to be a good major leaguer, so he gets a B+. That is a high ranking, not a middling one.

  13. Kevin Michell

    Just going to leave my best possible for Cueto/Leake here is anyone wants to discuss it-

    Cueto, Leake to Rangers for Nomar Mazara (BA #81), Chi Chi Gonzalez, Yeyson Yrizzari, and Keone Kela.

  14. Steve Schoenbaechler

    If I were in charge, let Bruce and Bailey go for whatever you can get. Trade Cueto; you can’t afford him. Extend Leake. Check out the FA ads for fill-in players for next season, the highest possibly being a starting pitcher.

    That doesn’t do much? Right. For, most of my attention goes towards putting a lot more/a majority of resources in developing your minor league system. Krivsky/Obrien had the right plan. For all practical purposes, it seems like Walt entirely stopped it.

    Walt may have done some right moves. I do believe a lot of his moves have simply been unlucky, aka extending Bailey and Devin during this offseason then both sustaining essentially season ending injuries (I consider Devin’s as such; he isn’t going to make an impact on this team). No one can predict the injuries.

    But, Walt’s has just had too many bad moves for me. First came with drafting Alonso. He knew we had Votto on the team and set at first. A first baseman was what we didn’t need. I could have understood if right then we switched Alonso to another position, but we apparently never did till it was too late.

    I understood the Broxton trade, but I wouldn’t have done it. We gave up, at that time, a good upcoming minor league lefthanded reliever, as valuable as those can be. He brought in Broxton as the closer, for Chapman to move to a starter. But, then, he caved to Baker and kept the roster with Chapman as a reliever.

    He also caved to Baker when Baker went crying to the media midseason 2010, I believe, wanting an extension, when the team hadn’t even won anything yet.

    I liked the Rolen move. It worked well for 2010. It just didn’t work well after that, again, because of injury.

    I will never understand the Marshall trade. We gave up a good upcoming lefthanded pitcher who we could have used as a starter or reliever, plus our best hitting OF prospect at the time and a minor league middle fielder prospect, where we were weak at (minor league depth) right after the trade.

    I thought we should have kept Simon (now 5-3 with 2.97 ERA, better than who we have going now).

    We needed better OBP during the offseason; we didn’t get that.

    It didn’t help much having Baker here so long misusing the players that Walt was giving him. Like, when Rolen went down then Baker trying make Harris the next 3rd baseman for so long, when we had Frazier then (remember Baker and his, “We need to get him going”; what, we don’t need to get Frazier going?). I still remember Baker putting Coco in there 3 straight days before the AS break in 2011, knowing Coco didn’t have his best stuff going.

    The biggest thing I still believe is still a problem, though, is something with our medical/training staff. Ever since 2011, we have been talking about how injuries have affected the team. I stated how we made the trades, losing prospects in the process. Thus, when we had injuries, we had no major league ready prospects ready to come up when we had injuries or players weren’t performing well. And, in the meantime, I’ve heard so much about injuries it’s become sickening to me. Marshall, Masset, Broxton, Votto several seasons, Bruce and BP last season, Ludwick, Latos, the 2011 pitching MASH unit. Something is going on in there I just don’t like.

    • Anthony

      Agree on simon. The organization sold the local media the idea that he would be too expensive and his stats was a one time thing. A fluke. Well he only got about 5 million while local talk show host were screaming he’ll get 11 million. What some people dont realize is that simon used to be a starter. He had the ability, the pitches and the experience but lacked confidence.

      • IndyRedMan

        He had the ability to kill someone and be accused of rape as well. Good riddance…never wanted him on the Reds to begin with and don’t care what he makes or doesn’t make

  15. Anthony

    Why are you making so much of cueto injuries? No shoulder or elbow injuries and that all other teams care about. cueto is the only player besides chapman and votto who can get top talent back. Toronto is the only team that will take on vottos contract. Joey wont block this that trade.