This post is narrow. It’s just a few early musings about today’s trade. It doesn’t address the Reds off-season taken all together. That can wait for a little while. Over the next couple days, we’ll run detailed scouting reports of the players the Reds got in return for Chapman.

I also can’t promise this stream of consciousness forms a coherent point.

1. The timing of this trade was surprising. Chapman is being investigated by Major League Baseball for his involvement in a domestic incident in late October. The outcome of that proceeding is highly uncertain because this is a brand new process for MLB. They could treat Chapman harshly to send a message. They could let him off without much punishment since no charges were pressed. (We’ve also heard – from Jim Bowden, fwiw – that Chapman’s girlfriend isn’t going to talk to MLB which works strongly in Chapman’s favor). We don’t even know what “harsh” and “lenient” mean in this context, since it’s all new. And MLB has to be concerned with losing an early case over their new authority on appeal (see Goodell, R; and Brady, T). To add to the uncertainty, we don’t know when MLB will rule on Chapman.

If Chapman is largely exonerated – say MLB’s punishment is aimed at his gun misuse, not the alleged domestic violence – his market value should go up considerably. He wouldn’t be wearing a new domestic violence label, at least that’s what a team could say. If Chapman is punished by MLB for domestic violence, he becomes all the more toxic to any potential trade partner. Maybe the Reds weren’t willing to take that chance and grabbed a deal now. What a mess.

2. The low return isn’t all the Reds fault (sorta). It isn’t the Reds fault that Chapman’s value was hurt by his domestic incident, causing the Dodgers’ deal to collapse. It is their fault that there is only one year left on his contract. They could have moved him last summer at the trade deadline. We have no way to know if the offers were better in July than in December. Given the interest from several teams in July, I’d guess yes (since 1.5 > 1). In terms of pennant races and post-seasons, you’re talking 2 > 1. The longer you wait, the more that can go wrong. It did. And, of course, the organization’s serial mistake to keep him in the bullpen hurts his value (200 > 60).

3. It’s worse than it looks stacking up the players. While a couple of the players the Reds got in return for Chapman look promising, keep in mind that the Yankees have a good chance of earning a compensation pick for Chapman at the end of 2016 when he becomes a free agent. That makes the Reds return look worse. They weren’t just trading the best closer in baseball, they were trading a pretty good draft pick, too.

4. It wasn’t a salary dump. The Chapman trade can be looked at several ways, but it wasn’t a salary dump. Unlike last year, the Reds aren’t under any payroll pressure. They cleared salary with the Frazier trade and their previous commitments added up to less than they were spending last year. There is ZERO chance the Reds will be able to spend as much money on payroll in 2016 as they did in 2014 and 2015. If the Reds were motivated to take less for Chapman out of eagerness to save the money, none of us should show up next year. But I don’t think that’s what happened.

5. He’s finally gone. I wrote a few weeks ago that I’d feel relieved when they traded Chapman. Pretty sure by tomorrow morning, that will be the case.

That’s it for now. More in upcoming days.

144 Responses

  1. David

    With Chapman now gone, the lottery for the Closer role begins. Lorenzen back to the bullpen?

  2. Gonzo Reds

    For the garbage returned for Frasier and Chapman we should have kept both as well as Phillips (who has no interest in moving) and Bruce, added pieces and had a competitive team next year that possibly could have contended for a wild card (and we have seen that wild cards CAN win the World Series). Rather have compensation picks than the swill we got. Plus fans would have continued to come to the games, excited about the stars we had with Winkler and young SP we got for Cueto/Leake (who did need to be traded as we couldn’t afford them). True that Price would have had to go, now might as well keep him, we are going to be REALLY bad the next few years so who cares?

    Bottom line, it’s not death to be small market (see KC as just one recent example), it’s death to be small market with people in charge that are small minded. We as Reds fans deserve more than that.

    • ohiojimw

      I like a lot of this. They finally realize things are broken. They don’t know how to fix them; so, they just follow the path they’ve seen other orgs follow without considering why things are broken or whether there might be an easier and better way to fix their particular situation.

    • Chuck Schick

      Why do Reds fans deserve more? Their support of the team is tepid at best. I believe people care about the Reds, but they don’t support the team in a meaningful way. In 2012, the Cardinals still out drew the Reds by 1 million.

      • TR

        Tepid doesn’t describe the fan support the Reds get. If you’re looking for tepid fan support check out Tampa Bay and Miami. And the metropolitan population of St. Louis Is almost 700,000 more people than metropolitan Cincinnati. Maybe that has something to do with the better Cardinal attendance also.

      • Chuck Schick

        I’ll stick with tepid…..Tampa and Miami just suck.

        St. Louis is has 700k more within 40 miles of the stadium. When you extend that to 60 miles, Cincinnati has 200k more…..extend that to 120 miles and Cincinnati has 3.5 million more. In 1976, the Cincinnati Metro area of 1.2 million created 2.6 million visits to Riverfront…, 2.1 million are equal to 2.5 million to GABP… yes, tepid

      • ohiojimw

        Agree with Chuck about market size. Cincy/Dayton is a functionally a single market whether any of the bureaucratic machinery has caught up to admitting it yet (I have LaRosa’s, Graeter’s, Skyline, UDF, GoldStar, Frisch’s plus 2 or 3 Kroger’s within 15 minutes of me and I am 10-15 miles or so NE of downtown Dayton).

        Then the two hour market adds in Columbus, Indy, Louisville, and Lexington.

      • Michael E

        Chuck, the Reds had an awesome team in the mid 70s and ANY teams fans will attend more when you have a great team. That doesn’t show tepid support and it doesn’t show population density. If the Yankees sucked, you’d rarely see a sellout, even with 10 million plus withing a close distance.

        If the Reds had BRM right now, we’d be pushing 2.5+ million attendance.

    • Creigh Deeds

      I too like a lot in your words. Small thinking from the old days have definitely hurt the Reds’ comeback path. With that said, Chapman, Frazier and the rest needed to go. More housecleaning is in order, starting with Jockey. He needs to be gone yesterday! The Royals can be a model. Need to start now!!

      • Aaron Bradley

        Don’ t think we got near enough for Frazier…
        it just creates a logjam at middle infield and we lose an elite power bat for the first half a season… they could have easily traded him this season at the deadline and gotten an even better return… that is why I am theorizing that they are hellbent on cutting payroll. These jerks showed too much patience and now they are showing lack of patience… its obvious they are out of step and it may take a change of ownership to fix things and maybe Castellini knows it.

      • DEN

        Why do you think we didn’t get enough. I love Todd Frazier, but numbers (his age) and lack of production in over 50% of the season screams limited value on the trade market. As for what we got, the key piece is all of what 21 years old? This isn’t the NBA or NFL where you can tell much easier at that age the talent for the game a player might have. Lets give that kid a chance to mature and by the end we may look back and be happy with what we got for Frazier, but to say right now we didn’t get near enough isn’t fair.

    • VaRedsFan

      I too, feel the same as Gonzo. If we could have garnered a few top 50 prospects for for Todd and AC, then I would be more OK with it. The returns appear poor on the surface, so its not much of a reload, but more of no-direction, listless ship IMO. I’m still in love with what we got for Cueto/Leake last year. I feel that they did that correctly. Perhaps there’s a diamond in the batch of low level prospects. I can dream right?

    • sultanofswaff

      +1 Gonzo. I too would’ve rather gone into the season with Frazier and Chappy and flipped them if we aren’t competitive. Just being heathly would’ve had this group at .500. Now we’ll never know.

    • Michael E

      KC did take 20 years to rebuild, so don’t get carried away. That said, their GM (from Atlanta), after many years on the job, has pushed many of the right buttons. We can safely say we don’t have and haven’t had such GMs in decades.

      If you give the Reds the leesh the Royals, Astros and Pirates had to rebuild, then I think we’ll do even better (though a WS title probably trumps most anything we can do in the next 10 years).

  3. Aaron Bradley

    As I said in the other thread I think it is a salary dump… I think Bob is either selling the team or divesting more of his shares, and the best way to sell stock is to show profitability and that means reducing overhead while giving away cheap bobbleheads to fill the stands (have you seen the Votto superman bobbler… the marketing dept. is in damage control mode this off season).

      • Michael E

        This is my hope. That shaving lots of payroll now means getting ready for when 12+ of these prospects are in MLB, many starting, and we need a couple of already good FAs to fill in a spot or two for $15 million each or something.

  4. ohiojimw

    I also can’t promise this stream of consciousness forms a coherent point…..

    Given the focal point you have to work with, the Reds front office, coherence may be a lot to expect.

  5. seat101

    If the Red’s analytic people are right in their belief that pitching and defense are being undervalued by most teams, then we are in good position for the future.

    Patience is a virtue.

    • Hotto4Votto

      I’m not arguing either way the pitching and defense aspect being keys to winning.

      But…looking at the position players the Reds have brought in:
      Duvall – poor defense at any position he plays
      Schebler – weak arm limits him to LF
      Peraza – Seems to be above average defensively, but doesn’t have a position to play for the time being. Blocked by Phillips at 2B, SS, and CF and all by better defenders.
      Jagielo – poor range/speed, differing reports on his arm, most question whether he can stick at 3B.
      Renda – “Defensively he won’t stick out, but he projects to be an average defender at second base.” – Doug Gray. Renda is also blocked for the time by Phillips and then later by Peraza and Blandino. If he’s a utility guy, then he should start playing some other positions, 83 minor league innings at SS (out of over 3300 innings played) with only 17 innings last year at SS.

      And then, they’re going to move Suarez, a guy who struggled last year at SS, to 3B because they don’t have a better option, either offensively or defensively.

      On the other hand, Duval, Schebler, and Jagielo all have legit pop in their bats with varying degrees of plate discipline from bad (Duvall) to around average. Peraza and Renda both have high contact rates with low K numbers. With Peraza that comes with a low walk rate, with Renda being around average.

      Defense has not been the calling card of any of the prospects we have received. Peraza should be above average once he has a place to play, but his calling card is speed and contact.

      • jack

        Let’s point out that everybody wanted to move Votto to left field after his first year. Everybody was screaming g that his defense was putrid. Let’s give these kids a couple years before we put them somewhere else.

      • Michael E

        Absolutely. Defense can be learned via repetition. The good defenders work on it daily and many of these “projects to be poor defensively” can easily work their way into gold gloves, or close to it.

        Defense is not a worry. I’d rather have promising bats and learn the defense via hard work than great defense and a complete inability to hit (or walk), like several Reds starters of the past 20 years.

      • lwblogger2

        @MichaelE – To an extent, I agree. This is particularly true of footwork, positioning, and knowledge of what to do with the ball when you get it. Arm strength, range, and hands while they can be improved through practice, can only be improved so much before the raw talent’s ceiling is reached.

  6. james garrett

    Chappy is gone so lets turn the page and move on.Gone are the days when he only pitches the ninth inning with a 3 run lead or we lose the game in the eighth while he sets and watches.As you said the serial mistake was making him a closer rather then a starter.It hurt him and the Reds from a value standpoint.

  7. Ed Koverman

    If you take the three best players from the trades of Frazier and chapman and got them for one of them I won’t be so bummed

    • Aaron Bradley

      Truer words never spoken, we got terrible return … but it was poor timing that caused this mess.

      • pinson343

        I agree with your “poor timing” comment. If the Reds had traded Frazier and Chapman at the 2015 trade deadline, they would have gotten a good deal more for both. The people who pushed for that at the time were right.

        The timing of the Chapman trade confuses me, for reasons given by Steve. The Reds seemed to trade him to get rid of an embarrassment ASAP.

        What I don’t understand is why people on this site think the Reds could have gotten more for Frazier NOW (except for those who feel they should have taken the prospects the Dodgers got, that’s fair enough to argue).

        I read statements like: “The Reds don’t know the value of their players.” It isn’t the Reds who determine the trade values of their players, it’s the 29 other teams. An article on mlbtrade rumors talked about how the Reds stood on their head to try to get a decent return for Frazier from the Indians. The Indians wouldn’t bite, and they never offered as much as the Reds got. And other than the Indians and White Sox, who was showing interest in Frazier, who was going to offer more than the Reds got ?

      • Aaron Bradley

        Because Frazier is better than his numbers dictate… the guy was #1 in the league 2 or 3 months in last year… then he fell off a cliff (predictably I might add) and went into a huge slump for the 2nd year in a row. See, a lot of people are arging there is a book on him, but this happened two years in a row after the derby… I am gonna argue he is a young guy, got into bad habbits because swinging for the fences derby time, muscle memory being what it is, he fell into a swoon… it happens… but to sell low is just poor evaluation of what you have, and it indicates to me these fools just want to unload salaries with no thought process of anything more than the immediate situation. I think a sale or a huge divestment of shares is forthcoming… see if they even report it… as I understand it Castellini divested huge last year too and no one really reported it, he is not holding that many shares anymore.

      • pinson343

        Aaron: Teams other than the Reds don’t agree with you, and those are the only opinions that count.

      • pinson343

        Aaron: PS My above comment loses the context that I agree with you that these trades are badly timed.

      • Chuck Schick

        Aaron….how is it possible to be better than your numbers? A baseball player is his numbers. We can debate which numbers, but not the actual mathematical result.

      • DEN

        Your basing your belief we would have gotten more on what? Your assumption? We have no idea what either would have brought at the trade deadline.

      • Chuck Schick


        The shares the were sold last year were from the Nippert Trust, not from Bob C. He is the majority owner and there is no reason to believe that the team is for sale. The Reds already have a 18 person ownership group so diluting that even further makes little sense.

  8. vared

    I’m still amazed that Kansas City is a world championship team and Houston is a playoff team. I would love to see a study of the pieces they moved/received in the wrecking ball days compared to what the Reds are doing now. I think it would be an alarming look, but perhaps/hopefully I’m wrong.

    • Michael E

      They had many top 5 draft picks. The Reds have not had that yet. The Reds just started rebuilding. When the Astros started, Frazier wasn’t even drafted yet and our best pitcher was Jimmy Haynes. The Royals started a decade earlier, with one or two surprise seasons, it took the better part of 20 years of agony and top 10 and top 5 draft picks to become today’s team.

      A good GM can get us there in a few years, but we also need a couple of top 5 draft picks to, hopefully, find a cornerstone hitter and pitcher or more.

    • Michael E

      What I am saying is, though the Royals just won the WS (and runner up last year), they had set the bar very low on how to rebuild quickly. I’d venture to say we’ll go through 3 or 4 GMs in the next 20 years and likely have success, at some point, similar to the Royals are having now, though I dont think it will take 20 years…more like 4 or 5 seasons.

  9. kmartin

    Whenever I visited Cincinnati during the summer I tried to catch a day game if the timing was right. I loved to sit in Section 130 or 131 in the hot sun with a clear view of the Reds’ bullpen. I recall how number 54 would sit ensconced in the middle of the bullpen bench with his long legs draped over the bench seat. I loved the excitement that started building around the sixth or seventh inning of game where the closer rules might apply. I understand there are reasons for trading Aroldis, but I will sure miss him.

  10. Ncmountie1

    I don’t see any upside on this trade or timing. Seems like a fire sale. We gave up the premier closer in baseball for 4 not ready for prime time ( yes 2 starts by pitchers) prospects. In addition we are adding more arms & INF. Just seems like random trades with no master plan. Disappointing to say least.

    • Hotto4Votto

      I’m with you. The timing doesn’t make sense. I think they could have waited this whole Chapman bad media thing out and received better value.

      • greenmtred

        Your point supposes that other front offices care alot about bad media . They might care more about the limited value of a high-priced closer with one year before free agency.

      • Hotto4Votto

        I think it’s been pretty universally accepted that Chapman’s value has been dinged because of the incident in Florida. All front offices care about bad media to some degree.

      • Steve Mancuso

        For some reason, Jocketty wouldn’t admit that. Said market hasn’t changed. Even Yankees said that’s why they made the deal. Red Sox said they pulled out in November. Seems like Jocketty could have helped himself by acknowledging that obvious fact. His old-school obfuscation is one of the more frustrating aspects of his public interface.

  11. Carl Sayre

    The musings were well put together but I have asked this and I can’t find anything to make me think I misread the story. This is the understanding I have the thing the union agreed to was to allow the commissoner to deal with players when it was about domestic violence. The “gun issue” as you phrased it would not be in the agreement. They could argue that discharging a firearm while they were involved in a domestic dispute would qualify I just think that would cause an issue with the union.

    • sixpacktwo

      In Florida it is not illegal to fire a Gun in your Garage, only if you endanger someone and he was by himself. Some people check out a Gun in their back yard and I can not remember anyone ever getting hurt.

      • lwblogger2

        True… Where it gets a little dicey is that a round escaped the premises. Thankfully, it didn’t hit anyone,

  12. ohiojimw

    $20M is off books. It sounds like they are still looking to move Bruce. That represents another $13.5M minimum off the books ($12M for 2016, $1M on the 2017 option).

    That’s $30+M that could be put toward the rebuild as unlike past seasons there are only Cozart and Hoover to eat up some small portion of these savings in arbitration influenced negotiations. As Steve and others have pointed out, they don’t have to and really shouldn’t wait until the pitching is ready to start filling in other spots with guys who figure to be here in the next “window”. If some of the $20-30M doesn’t end up getting spent on an established player or two either in an FA signing or trade, then the secret will be out of the bag that the “rebuild” is more about dumping costs than rebuilding a competitive team.

    • VaRedsFan

      I would be tickled if they used the money saved on international free agents. I know there is a cap to what can be sent in that market.

      • Michael E

        That sounds good to me to. Though there are some bad misses, it seems cheaper to get a MLB ready 24 year old international player for $5 – 8 million per season for 5 years or so (along with a modest posting fee for anything not a star), than signing North American FAs in their late 20s that are very overpriced.

  13. Chuck Schick


    There is nothing wrong with retaining earnings while you build a team. The Cubs made more than the Reds could ever dream between 2012-2014 and didn’t spend any of it until they were loaded with cost controlled players and ready to compete

    • ohiojimw

      Your are thinking in terms of set piece management; I’m thinking more aggressively.

      If then pitching is not ready by 2018, then this rebuild cycle is a bust. If you wait two years (to make sure on the pitching) to fill in the pieces, they will cost more.

      The Reds need outfielders in a serious way. Even with the moves to date, the only real can’t miss guy in the org is Winker. Schebler, Ervin and YRod?? and who beyond them???????

      Go on and get a good established MLB OF (or 2) lined up now for 5 years out.

      • ohiojimw

        Also my 5 star “wealth management” funds are losing value this year while my index stock funds and a couple of flyers have made up the difference. So I’m a little down on “retained earnings”. 😉

  14. EJT

    I don’t know where else to post this, but I just want to say a few eulogic words for someone who died today. And I’m not talking about Meadowlark Lemon or Lemmy Kilmister (though they both deserves heaps of praise, in my opinion).

    Former Reds’ lefthanded pitcher Jim O’Toole passed away, as most of you have probably already heard. I was born in 1968, so I never saw him pitch. For a five year stretch in the ’60s he was an outstanding pitcher, but what moves me say a few words about him was something other than his on-field talent.

    When I was about twelve I pitched for a Knothole team in Cincinnati that was managed by a guy that resembled the Vic Morrow character from Bad News Bears. This manager was arrogant, impatient, and pathologically competitive. I loved playing baseball but I hated being on that team. The manager was sucking the joy out of the game for me. However, my dad urged me to remain with the team through the season so as to uphold my committment to the manager and team. I did, and I’m glad I did, not just because it was the right thing to do but because about half way through the season the manager brought in his “close, personal friend, and former Reds great” Jim O’Toole to personally coach me. Two days a week for the rest of the summer, Mr. O’Toole would work with me. He was always wise, kind, patient, and encouraging. I really admired him. He helped me become so much better at pitching, but, more importantly, at a time when I was becoming disillusioned about baseball, he helped me fall in love with the game again.

    Thank you, Mr. O’Toole. God bless you and rest in peace.

    • ohiojimw

      Well stated.

      Over the weekend Enquirer ran an old gray scale photo of the two Jims, O’Toole and Maloney, in what I assume was spring training St Patrick’s day adornment. It took me back to my youth as the 60’s were my teenage years.

      • sixpacktwo

        I remember Maloney matching up with Drysdale and Kofax for some great pitchers battles.

  15. zaglamir

    Has any thought been given to the idea that Castellini and Jockety seem to be resetting the payroll to a minimum balance… without really getting what seems like market value for their players in trades, which is the way many owners set things up the year before they sell? Are there any rumblings that might link Castellini to selling? Maybe when Jockety is out at the end of the year, Mr. Castellini will follow suit, so the goal is to minimize spending for this last year? I don’t rightly know and I’m just spit-balling, but I’d be interested in hearing from folks that know more about the business side of baseball if that’s a possibility.

    • ohiojimw

      Somebody pointed out on the other Chapman thread that Phil Castellini is COO and Dick Williams is in line to become Pres of Baseball Operations or whatever exactly Jocketty’s title is. Given these two are the next generation (sons) of the primary ownership, a sale of the team would not seem to be in the works.

      On then other hand, sometimes family based businesses undergo financial reorganization when generational control changes. That can also require liquidity and reduction of debts and liabilities.

      • David

        The Reds have the opportunity to draft a couple of real good players next summer. After Spring Training and the first two months of the year, they should have a pretty good idea of how good/bad they are. I think Peraza, despite some of the scouting reports, has a good upside. He has emerged young, and could develop. I don’t have much hope for Schebler or Duvall, but you never know. Flip them for somebody else, younger?
        Yorman is still young and from watching him play last year, is really a pretty good outfielder. He may yet become a good hitter. It will just take time and patience.

        Winker has a good approach to hitting, but I am not sure that he is “sure thing”. He had to repeat AA ball, and was not really tearing the cover off the ball last year.

        What if Eugenio Suarez is like Felipe Lopez, who had ONE really good year?

        Being a devil’s advocate above, but I think this argues for the Reds to draft top rated outfielders (college players) that will be in a short trip to the bigs from draft day.

      • ohiojimw

        The problem for YRod is that the time allotted him for patience has passed in two senses.
        First off, he is out of options; and, he has to be on the 25 man roster or be exposed to waivers (actually this may be more of a problem to the Reds in hanging onto him than for the player himself).
        Secondly, the service time clock is or will soon be ticking on the crop of young pitchers, moving them toward arbitration eligibility. This second point would also apply in terms of the draftees.

        Based on the lack of top OF prospects in the org, the Reds are likely going to have to sign or trade for established MLB OF’s to maximize the bump from the current crop of pitching prospects ahead of the pitchers reaching arbitration eligibility.

      • WVRedlegs

        I too was thinking of the starting pitching and service clocks aticking. I don’t think this wave of SP right now is much of a concern for the front office. Lorenzen and Finnegan go to the back end of the bullpen. Iglesias is signed and is set. DeSclafani, Lamb and Moscot have the clocks ticking. Now the next wave of SP will be Robert Stephenson and Cody Reed who both arrive this coming season. Attention to their clocks will be vitally important. Then the next wave of SP that arrives for the back end of 2017 and 2018 will be a tsunami. Travieso, Garrett, Romano, and now Rookie Davis. This makes the service time clocks of DeSclafani, Lamb and Moscot more inconsequential as we look at 2016 and beyond.
        And besides Winker arriving this season, look at the position players now schedule to arrive in the second half of 2017 and for 2018. It is looking more and more like the new window will begin in 2018.

      • Hotto4Votto

        Winker didn’t repeat AA last year. He earned an end of the year promotion the year before. He played 21 games in 2014.

      • Hotto4Votto

        WV – I think you’re right about the service time. The last thing we really want is a repeat of the 2014-15 offseason when 4 of the starting 5 pitchers are in the last year of team control. If we didn’t have to sell off all the pitching we did, we probably could have extended the competitive window a year or two with the position players we had set.

    • Chuck Schick

      With Votto, Bailey, Bruce, BP, Meso and Cozart the Reds 2016 payroll will still be higher than 2012…..I’d hardly call that a minimum reset.

      • David

        They will have more money in 2016 than in 2012, but point is well taken. This may give them an opportunity to lock up some of their young and most promising pitchers to contracts to keep them around through and beyond the arb years.

      • ohiojimw

        You overlooked Hoover and Iglesias who are both going to be in low 7 figure territory in 2016. Just by quickly eyeballing Cot’s, I’d put the Reds right now at ~$75M before the prearb guys get added in. Across that group, I’d guess the per capita is going to average ~600K.

        As things stand now (Bruce still there; no additional 7/8 figure additions), the 25 man opening day payroll is probably going to fall between 2011 (80.8M) and 2012 (87.8M). If Bruce goes, which per a Jockettty quote in the Enquirer in comment to the Chapman deal seems almost certain, the opening day payroll is going to be under 75M which puts it between 2009 (73.5M) and 2010 (76.1M).

        Seeing as how that 2010 payroll was 19th highest in MLB at the time and the 115+M payroll in 2015 was 17th highest, dropping to even 85M in 2016 is getting close to bargain basement territory and 75M would almost be the sub floor.

      • zaglamir

        Yeah, this is sort of what I was figuring too. When I started adding up the contracts, a few teams will have more assets in their pitching staff than the Redlegs will have on the 40 man roster. That seems like such a supreme shift if ideology from the past few years of, “spend what we need.” Of course that will happen in a reboot, but just not (IMO) to the extent that I see happening right now, where they aren’t even filling out the roster yet. The idea of a liquidation while the old guard hands off the reins to the new guard seems more plausible than a sale, but I didn’t think about that. That’s a much more solid idea, and seems more likely. Thanks OJW.

  16. Tcf

    I don’t think this trade is as bad as the Frazier trade. It would have been nice to get a top 50 guy, but that was probably off the table anyway and definitely wasn’t happening after Chapman’s incident. So, the Reds made a play for depth and I don’t think it’s that bad of a decision. I think too many prospect guys over rate “ceiling” and star potential, when the chances of any prospect hitting their ceiling are low and the chances of becoming a star are even slimmer. The Reds got three guys who should be major leaguers some day with a little potential for two of them to be more. It’s not the worst thing in the world, especially when you consider that the lack of depth is the main reason that this club has been so bad the last two years.

    Had they traded Chapman last July, like they should have, it would have been a different story. But considering where his value is right now, it’s not horrible.

    • jessecuster44

      The problem is that both Frazier and Chappy were traded for depth, and the only player that is highly regarded is a slap hitting IF with some speed.

      Remember – REMEMBER – that the goal was to trade veterans for MLB ready players. Ha ha ha.

      • Ncmountie1

        Exactly. Both these trades could work out—no one really knows– but we traded all stars for bunch of AA /AAA pieces that will have to grow into MLB. It also appears to me the Reds went tith QUANTITY ove QUALITY in both deals.

      • Tct

        And I’m saying that if you’re not getting a top 30 type, slam dunk kind of guy, then it may make sense to go quantity over quality. The Reds have essentially had a stars and scrubs team the last couple years and you see how that has worked out. Meanwhile, teams like the Cards, Pirates, and Royals have been built on depth.

        I like to compare prospects in a package to Reds prospects of similar value and see what the package looks like then. I would say this package is similar to Blandino, Travieso, Trahan, and Sampson. For one year of a guy who won’t help you and will only throw 50-60 innings, that return isn’t horrible.

        But both of these trades illustrate why I think that the most important quality a person can have is good timing. The Reds could have done much better last July or last off season.

      • ncmountie1

        You raise a good point….but in addition to lack of timing, doesn’t it also indicate lack of a real plan to improve this club??

      • Hotto4Votto

        I think you’re right, it’s not a bad plan to amass quantity if you can’t get “sure fire” types. At the trade deadline it was much more possible to get 1-2 sure fire types for Frazier and Chapman. Once we entered the offseason the opportunity lessened a great deal, especially with Frazier’s 2nd half struggles and Chapman’s off-field situation. I still think we could have received one top player for Chapman if we waited until the smoke cleared.

        As far as the prospect package, I don’t think you can include Travieso. He’s a top 5 Reds prospect, and we didn’t get a top 5 Yankee prospect back. (Obviously this depends on where you look as rankings vary). But I think Travieso is far and away a better prospect than anyone the Reds got back. Romano is probably a better comp. to Davis.

      • jessecuster44

        Trading for quantity just so see if one out of four mid-level prospect sticks is a terrible return for the best arm in baseball. It’s a bad strategy that could be acceptable if Chappy was traded at this coming year’s deadline. But not when you have an entire season of control.

    • pinson343

      Agree about Chapman. But I would also put the Frazier trade in the category of “bad timing”. His value dropped after the All Star break, the Reds talked with the Indians for a long time and they would not offer as much as the Reds got.
      In talking about the Frazier discussions, Jocketty said that GMs told him how, like all GMs, he over-values his own players. So do fans, once a player gets traded.

  17. dan

    So where does the Reds farm system now rank in comparison with the other teams out there? Think we are a top 5 team yet for farm system ranking?

    • Obc2

      Top 1/3

      The next few drafts should bump it top 5

      • jdx19

        Only if the Reds draft well.

        I’d say they are more middle-of-the-pack right now, rather than top 1/3. Most national scouts don’t seem to like Stephenson as much as all us homers do.

      • Takao

        One of the Baseball America guys rated us in the top 10 (not top 5 though) before the Frazier and Chapman trades. With those trades, we’re probably pushing top 5 in baseball.

  18. jessecuster44

    This trade is baffling. It’s like Walt/Dick/Bob just gave up and decided to hand Chappy over to the first team that offered more than scraps.

    The return on Frazier and Chappy has been atrocious. This is what you get in return for an All-Star 3B with pop, and two years of team control? This is what you get for Mr. 103?

    This smacks of an owner who wishes to sell the team. I’d expect Bruce, BP, Bailey and Votto to be traded as well. This team is going to be unwatchable in 2016 and beyond. I’ve been a Reds fan since 1978; this is the absolute worst I’ve ever seen the franchise.

    • Westfester

      You certainly don’t remember the post Marge-Bowden days, when the organization suddenly realized there was NOBODY in the farm system. That’s why it took 20 years to return to competitiveness.

      • jessecuster44

        Ugh – The post Bowden days began in 2003. Which was 12 years ago. I remember.

        I also think that comparing eras is silly, especially when trying to say “At least it’s not as bad as that time.”

        The only era that matters is now. Walt and Bob have presided over two straight awful seasons, with more coming. Time for them to go.

  19. pinson343

    Clearly the best way for the perceived value of a Reds player to go way up is for him to get traded. I’ve been reading here about how Chapman is an average closer for years. Now he’s the best close in baseball.

    And I all heard thru August and September was “get rid of Frazier”. No one has answered ny question about who would have given up more for him than the Indians or White Sox were willing to.

    • jessecuster44

      So do you think the Reds got fair value for Frazier and Chappy? I don’t. I bet I could have worked the phones myself last July and got a better package.

      Arizona’s package for Chappy last July must have been better that the Yankees. And if the Mets were willing to trade Zach Wheeler for Bruce, then Frazier should have commanded a better quality of player.

      • pinson343

        PS The Reds DID get a much better offer from the DBacks last July, according to mlbtraderumors.

    • Hotto4Votto

      I don’t recall anyone calling Chapman an average reliever. I do recall several times people citing that his save percentage was about average. That much is true. I don’t think anyone has questioned his talent or arm. That’s why most people wanted him to be a starter so that he didn’t waste his elite arm by pitching only a fraction of the innings.

  20. pinson343

    The key to your statement is “last July”. That’s the main point: the Reds could have done much better last July, as I and many others (you too ?) said above.

    Also I agree that now is a very odd time for the Reds to trade Chapman, it seems like the worst possible time.

    • pinson343

      Jessecuster44: indentation not working for me here. Above comment meant for you.
      The bottom line is that it’s a very tough time to be a Reds fan. Cueto pitching with the Giants, Leake with the Reds, Chapman for the Yankees, ugh.

      • jessecuster44

        Horrible time to be a Reds fan. Since season’s end, there hasn’t been one acquisition where I’ve thought “Hey, that was a good idea.”

        I find it maddening that Leake and Cueto can be traded in season for a solid return, but after the season, Frazier and Chappy are handed away to other teams. The same will happen for Bruce – and BP if he waives his no trade.

        So now you have Meso, Suarez and Votto as your offensive centerpieces, and a raw pitching staff. By the time the Reds can imagine being competitive again, Meso and Suarez’ contracts will be up, along with Billy Hamilton’s.

        How do you sell this team to fans now? It’s a shame. When the dust settles, I’m afraid that apathy will take over. Better things to do with time than rooting for a team whose management so clearly doesn’t care / isn’t trying / cannot function properly.

      • ncmountie1

        Agree it’s extremely difficult to be a fan right now and my biggest issue is I see NO PLAN. Perhaps there is one, but it just doesn’t appear we are trading for positions of need as much as just trading. Suarez is REALLY our 3rd base plan? LF still goes unaddressed. Counting on Mez coming back to 2014 level. Bench?

  21. sultanofswaff

    More than anything, we need a center fielder. There is now A LOT of money to spend with a couple good options left. I think we need to make a serious run at Cespedes first. He’s only 29 and a plus defender. Fowler would be a less expensive option, but well worth it. He would be a stabilizing force at the top of the order.

    • CB

      Obviously Chapman should’ve been traded in July. Walt thought he could squeeze a few higher prospects out in December. Hopefully he learned his lesson albeit a costly one at that. I think Davis has chance to be nice sp within a few years. Frazier was traded for a decent return. Problem is that every other team knows what we know about Frazier. Has nice power but approaching 30 years old with many holes in his swing. Leaning more towards second half numbers than first. Ken Rosenthal wrote an article back in June on how reds should offer him $100 million. Sometimes even the so called experts buy into hype. Bottom line is to stop falling in love with speed, smiles, and Twitter quotes. Start falling in love with quality hitters and team leaders.

      • redslam

        It is an interesting narrative sometimes, the notion that we should trade players for various reasons (rather than resign) and then sometimes we have simultaneously a little bit of denial that the reasons we should trade aren’t also factored in by the other party.

        Not saying it occurs here, but it does feel rather like as we evolve into better analytical/strategic club (I hope), we are already entering a market that looks at things the way we want to and aren’t going to give us what we think we might want.

        In this case; however, it is nearly impossible to argue that we haven’t missed a big opportunity for bigger hauls simply through poor timing (in this case, waiting too long).

    • ncmountie1

      I would be all for Cespedes but what do you do with Billy? Send him down and learn to hit? What about the never-ending issue in LF??

      • Joe McManus

        I’m all about Cespedes too, but in right. He’s got that cannon and Duvall, Schebler and YRod can handle left. Like it or not, we’re not sending Billy to AAA. Hopefully he gives up switch hitting and reduces his fly ball rate, but he is one of the best CFers in baseball right now and he’ll be starting there come opening day. They should let him go for the stolen base record this year so we have something to be excited about, besides the development of the young pitching.

      • vegastypo

        And if Billy learns to steal first base, he just might get that record. If not, well …

    • Hotto4Votto

      Currently we have compiled a decent amount of players that could play CF moving into the future. At the MLB level we have Hamilton, Cave, and YRod capable of playing the position. Coming up the pipe we have Ervin, and with all the middle infield prospects we have accumulated, we have to consider Peraza may get moved to CF eventually.

      Between those 5 players, one would have to think that one will step up and claim the spot moving forward. If anything the Reds should give that group a year or two, when we’re not going to compete anyway, to grow see if anyone realized their potential instead of spending money in FA. The floor in the mean time should be a 2 WAR player in Hamilton based on defense and base running alone.

    • jessecuster44

      What is the point of acquring Cespedes or Fowler when it is so clear the Reds are planning to tank?

  22. earmbrister

    I don’t understand the people lamenting that we got nothing but a bucket of balls for Frazier and Chapman. These are some of the same people that worried that the FO would only nibble around the edges of a rebuild, and only do half measures.

    Since the beginning of July the Reds have added the following prospects to their system (per MLB):

    # 1+ Brandon Finnegan

    # ?? Adam Duvall

    # 1 Jose Peraza

    # 6 Keury Mella

    # 7 Cody Reed

    # 8 Rookie Davis

    # 9 Eric Jagielo

    # 15 Scott Schebler

    # 19 Jake Cave

    # 26 John Lamb

    In a short 6 months, the front office has turned an above average farm system into a top 5 farm system. The Frazier trade returned to us the NUMBER ONE prospect in our system, as well as the # 15. The Chapman trade gave us the # 8 and # 9 prospects. Peraza is rated better than ANY prospect in our system (including Winker), yet he is dismissed by some here as a slap hitting utility infielder. What he IS is a quality prospect that covers positions of need: 2B, SS, and potentially CF. Jagielo is a 2013 # 1 draft choice who hits for power at another position of need, 3B. Yes, SOME scouts question whether he’ll remain at 3B, but he is rated an average fielder with an average arm (yet is rated the # 7 3B in all of MiLB), who has well above average power. Schebler is another quality prospect at another position of need, LF. Davis is yet another quality mid rotation starting pitching prospect. Two more LH bats were added to the system in these two trades, which addresses yet another need (much like the Cueto trade addressed a lack of quality LH pitching). TEN prospects were added to our system in the last six months, and most of those prospects were upper tier/top ten-ish.

    Lament away.

    • ncmountie1

      Where are you getting those ranking numbers from? 2016 list isn’t available until January.

      • ncmountie1

        Your list is of the REDS then, when we added #24 & #94 in MLB in Peraza & Mella. Had # 27, 36, 70 & 93 already out of top 100. So we traded 3 all-stars & a solid starter for 2 top 100 prospects…. with prospect being key word. No sure fire starters in the group though Peraza will likely get the nod.

    • WVRedlegs

      Peraza is not “the NUMBER ONE prospect in our system”, period!! The team that drafted/signed Peraza finally had his evaluation downgraded to the point that he didn’t figure into their future plans after switching him to a position they had a need. So they traded him to a team that had a big need for a 2B. But after their up close evaluations, they traded him and are still looking for a 2B.
      Peraza’s stock has been like the prices for oil in 2015, falling sharply. Two teams with big needs at 2B quickly gave up on him and traded him. The Reds got suckered on Peraza. Peraza is the baseball equivalent to pyrite. Fool’s gold.
      The Dodgers quickly found a sucker in Walt Jocketty. Brian Cashman and the Yankees did too.

      • earmbrister

        WV — I gave you numbers (from an independent source) and you gave me opinion (just where does Peraza rate in the WVRedleg listing of the Reds prospects?) and a ton of conjecture. You speak of evaluations as if you were privy to them. Atlanta “quickly gave up on him” after signing Peraza as a 16 yr. old in 2010. He has hit at every stop through the minors and was almost exclusively a SS through his 2013 season in A ball. In 2014 the Braves moved him to 2B because he was blocked at SS by Andrelton Simmons (another guy the Braves gave up on). Peraza continued to hit even after switching positions, slashing .339/.364/.441 in 2014 at A+ and AA. He was promoted (again) to AAA to start 2015, and hit .293/.316/.378 for the year, largely at Gwinnett, at the ripe old age of 21. The Braves promoted him in 2013, twice in 2014, and again in 2015. I don’t know how you can conclude that they gave up on him when he was 1 part of a 10 player trade involving 3 teams. The LAD had him for all of 22 games in AAA, and then he was promoted, yet again, in a September call-up, where he played in a whopping 7 games while the LAD were gearing up for the playoffs. Exactly how close an evaluation did they have in that large sample size? Did the LAD not like the technique he used while riding the pine in September?

        WJ, by most accounts, came away the winner in the Latos, Simon, Leake, and Cueto trades. He was obviously intent in acquiring Peraza (and Schebler), first for Chapman, and then for Frazier. To say he got suckered, stretches credibility.

      • WVRedlegs

        Atlanta is in a re-build mode that might even be larger than what the Reds are going through. Why trade him if he is starting material and that affordable? The Braves decided they could do better at both the SS position and 2B position than with what they had in Peraza. Off to DodgerTown he went.
        Why would the Dodgers trade Peraza if they felt great about him? They have a big need at 2B. They saw him play and chose to go elsewhere for their 2B. They obtained another 2B prospect in the deal from the WhiteSox that will likely be on their 25 man roster. Not Peraza.
        Peraza at SS I can get on-board with, but not at 2B yet. Not in the bandbox that is GABP. After trading low on Frazier and the impending send-off of Jay Bruce, give me someone with more pop in his bat for 2B (Suarez), not Peraza.

      • earmbrister

        Why would the Dodgers trade Peraza if they felt great about him?

        Because they had a bigger need at the back of their bullpen. Chapman was more valuable to them than a 2B prospect. When the Chapman deal fell thru, the LAD still were looking for a big armed reliever. That’s why they traded for Frankie Montas. He was the headliner in the return that the Dodgers got, not Johnson.

        Peraza is rated a better prospect than Micah Johnson across the board. Peraza is a top 25 and top 100 prospect, Johnson is neither. Peraza is rated by MLB as the # 2 2B prospect; Johnson is # 5. Some scouts doubt whether Johnson can stick at 2B because of his fielding and poor footwork, which may necessitate a move to the OF. Peraza is a better hitter and a better fielder, and neither Peraza or Johnson has power. Their ratings are as follows:

        Peraza: 60 Hit, 30 Power, 75 Run, 50 Arm, 60 Field, 55 Overall

        Johnson: 55 Hit, 30 Power, 75 Run, 50 Arm, 45 Field, 50 Overall

        Peraza is a quality prospect, despite all the nonsense about him being a slap hitting utility player. It’s obvious that the FO and the Reds’ scouts were high on him due to their persistence in acquiring him.

        If “Peraza at SS (is someone you) can get on-board with”, you should be content. Because in the long term, Suarez is not a 3B, and he isn’t a quality defensive SS either. Suarez will be moved to 2B before he leaves the Reds, and Peraza is the heir apparent at SS, which is his natural position. If Phillips doesn’t get moved, look for the Reds to move Cozart in July or next off season.

      • DEN

        How old is this Peraza kid? Isn’t he like 21, how in the world can anyone know what kind of talent this kid could mature into at this point?

      • Steve Mancuso

        No one knows for sure. But two major league clubs who worked with him for a while judged him to not be their 2B of the future. The Dodgers traded him for other prospects. Yes, he’s young. And we have to hope he’ll become the player the Reds think he is. But it’s wrong to imply there’s no information from which to base an opinion.

    • Hotto4Votto

      I think the return we got for Chapman, at this moment in time, is pretty good and about as good as we could expect. Of course, if Jagielo can’t stick at 3B and Davis gets moved into the bullpen, then this return looks to be poor. If Jagielo is an everyday 3B and Davis can stick in the rotation, this trade looks good. It really hinges on whether or not Jagielo can be an every day 3B. My main issue is that the Reds sold Chapman at about his absolute lowest value possible. After the situation in Florida came out, I think they should have waited until this MLB investigation is cleared up. His value wasn’t going to lessen.

      I also believe that the Reds did receive a solid group of prospects overall that for the most part should slot into our top 15 (although depending on the site you’ll get differing views on where those prospects fall). At the same time, I don’t think any of the prospects the Reds received should be in the Reds top 5 outside of Cody Reed. I believe the Reds top 5 prospects are Stephenson, Winker, Reed, Garrett, and Travieso. Four of those guys were already in the system.

      Those listed prospects rankings seem very optimistic to me. Like others have said, Peraza is not our best prospect. He’s a top 10 guy. I would think Mella, Jagielo, Davis, slot in somewhere in the 10-15 range. With Mella slotting further down if he ends up moving to the bullpen.

      Ultimately, it’s hard to argue rankings, because a lot of these guys aren’t seen much at all by the guys ranking them. Depending on when they were seen can lead to very differing views. That’s why when it comes to our guys, I tend to rely on Doug Gray’s rankings because he actually sees these guys multiple times and has witnessed them over the course of years and different levels.

    • jessecuster44

      So when do they start printing the Cincinnati Reds “Top 5 Farm System” T-Shirts? Should all Reds fans just drive 100 miles south to L-ville instead of seeing games at GABP?

      Stats and rankings of prospects are nice, but many prospects just don’t pan out. I see no one impressive in the return for Chappy and Frazier. They went for quantity over quality and are hoping someone sticks when they try them out. Awful, awful strategy.

      And yes, Peraza is a slap hitting utility player (next time, cite my name if you are going to quote me). We traded Todd Frazier, HR derby champ, primarily for a kid who might knock 3 out of the park all year. Thank goodness Peraza can be a mediocre hitter at three positions instead of just one. That’s going to pack the stands.

      Walt and Co. have NEVER undertaken a rebuilding project, and the more work they do, the more obvious it becomes.

      I applaud your optimism. Bob C’s going to need 19,999 more of you each night.

      • jessecuster44

        And Just for fun, here are the 2010 Top 20 Prospects for the Reds: (per SB Nation: Minor League Ball)

        1) Aroldis Chapman, LHP, Grade A-: Could be a truly amazing pitcher if it all comes together, but there’s obvious risk here given the need for cultural adjustment, as well as potential command issues.

        2) Todd Frazier, INF-OF, Grade B+: Doesn’t quite have Alonso’s offensive upside, but much more versatile defensively and a very solid hitter in his own right. I like him a lot.

        3) Yonder Alonso, 1B, Grade B+: Borderline B. Kills right-handers, but inability to hit lefties is an issue and how do they get him into a lineup with Votto? Stock will drop if he doesn’t start to solve lefties next year.

        4) Mike Leake, RHP, Grade B: Borderline B+. Might bump him up the notch, haven’t decided yet. Outstanding pitchability and athleticism, and I think his stuff is a bit underrated by some people. Shouldn’t take long to fit into the rotation. While perhaps “only” a number three starter, what’s wrong with that?

        5) Chris Heisey, OF, Grade B: Just a very solid player, looks like a .280, 15-homer, 15-steal guy.

        6) Juan Francisco, 3B, Grade B-: Borderline C+ due to strike zone issues. Could be a genuine monster if he gets the zone under control, but major league pitchers will eventually exploit his current approach. Is he really a 3B?

        7) Brad Boxberger, RHP, Grade B-: Could move quickly if used in the bullpen, but needs better command to rank higher.

        8) Travis Wood, LHP, Grade C+: Outstanding comeback season last year, but looks more like a four/five starter based on his stuff. Ranks ahead of Maloney since he’s younger.

        9) Matt Maloney, LHP, Grade C+: I have always liked this guy as a possible four/five starter. Great K/BB ratios with good strikeout rates despite average stuff. Main worry is home run tendency.

        10) Zack Cozart, SS, Grade C+: Took a big step forward with his plate discipline last year, good glove, has some pop, but probably just a .240 hitter.

        11) Donnie Joseph, LHP, Grade C+: Relief arm from the University of Houston should move quickly, lots of strikeouts, won’t have to be stuck in LOOGY role.

        12) Billy Hamilton, SS, Grade C+: Great athleticism, but will need time to develop the bat. Defensive value puts him a little ahead of the tools outfielders listed below.

        13) Josh Fellhauer, OF, Grade C+: David DeJesus type.

        14) Chris Valaika, SS, Grade C+: Gets an injury mulligan but has to get the bat going again quickly or he’ll drop fast in ’10.

        15) Neftali Soto, 3B, Grade C: Great tools, terrible approach, still young.

        16) Yorman Rodriguez, OF, Grade C: Yes, yes, I know all about his tools. If you go just by tools he’s a top ten guy. If you go by skills he’s not in the top 20 or 30. Since I look at both tools and skills he ends up here in a compromise position. He could turn into something good, but the risk of failure is too great for me to rank him higher at this point. See Neftali Soto.

        17) Juan Silva, OF, Grade C: Pretty solid tools, and he was effective in rookie ball. Sleeper for the top ten next year.

        18) Juan Duran, OF, Grade C: See Yorman Rodriguez.

        19) Juan Carlos Sulbaran, RHP, Grade C: Dayton numbers aren’t great, but I like his arm and I think he could break through next year.

        20) Enerio Del Rosario, RHP, Grade C: Ground ball machine for the bullpen.

        So when we are excited about “Top Ten-ish” and “Upper Tier” prospects, I look at this list and see that unless we’re looking at “top 4-ish”, the return for the Frazier and Chappy trades just doesn’t look encouraging.

  23. redmountain

    At this time last year there was lamenting about the trades for DeSclafani and Suarez. Oh we did not get enough for those guys….! I do not believe BA or is any better at figuring out who will be good and who will not be good than I am. You have to let them play and let it work itself out.

    • Hotto4Votto

      You have a different recollection than I do. No trade is going to get universal approval on sites like this, but I feel the two trades last offseason were generally seen as positive returns.

      • Steve Mancuso

        They were. I think the Cueto and Leake trades were also largely supported.

      • jessecuster44

        Which is why it baffles me that Walt pulled the trigger on two stinkers like these latest ones. He has a history of being capable of doing much better deals. No one argued that he overvalued Latos or Simon, yet he got good talent. But people are saying he overvalued Frazier and Chappy? Doesn’t make sense.

    • Steve Mancuso

      I’m not sure anyone thought DeSclafani would turn into the success that he did (if the Reds scouts did, kudos to them). But several people here felt (and wrote) that he might even outproduce Latos in 2015, which he did. That turned out to be a fantastic trade. So did the Suarez trade given the Reds only had to give up Alfredo Simon. Hopefully the latest trades will produce a few unexpected and pleasant surprises.

      • ncmountie1

        Steve-Also in all fairness weren’t the Latos & Simon trades much different dynamics? Latos coming off injury riddled season and worn out welcome in CIncy with medical staff questions. Simon was frankly a “pig in a poke”. I mean he was pitched a career high WAR and pitched lights out in first half of 2014.
        I guess my point is neither were really long term core players for Reds (Latos was until contract, health issues, went south) and Simon was great pickup but anything we got for him was a plus. These last 2 feel different IMO as they were All-Stars.

      • earmbrister

        The difference is: fan expectations.

        That WJ got DeScalafani for a broken down Latos was a major coup. Likewise, in getting Suarez for Simon (who the Reds astutely picked off the scrap heap).

        The last 2 trades involve giving up a total of 3 yrs of team control of 2 players, albeit All-Stars, for years and years of control of many above average prospects. If even 2 of these guys turn into good major leaguers, it’s a solid deal. It’s very apparent that the FO liked Peraza; liked him a lot.

  24. Steve Schoenbaechler

    I do believe there are several aspects to this trade, none necessarily overpowering the other.

    One, I would think we could have gotten a better return, but Chapman ruined that with his domestic violence report. A couple of the prospects could prove worth something. Which is pretty much what you look for in a rebuild, prospects that could work out. I believe we could have gotten higher level prospects, though.

    Two, it does allow us to concentrate on our rebuild. No need to have Chapman out there if we aren’t ever going to be able to use him.

    Three, I do believe it was a salary dump (again, no one aspect to this trade overpowers another, so, “only” a salary dump? No). No need to pay that much money to a player who isn’t going to be utilized that much. It frees up money where we could possibly get a FA to fill a role until a prospect is ready.

    Overall, I believe, in the short term, of course, it doesn’t help us. We would be a better team with Chapman out there. But, in the long term, Chapman just doesn’t fit into our plans. That got hurt when Baker ran to the papers insisting on a decision on Chapman, and our FO deciding to keep Chapman on the main roster, thus allowing Baker to use him as the closer. That move also hurt our return. Chapman as a starter, if he developed into a prime starter, would have brought much more in return.

    Overall, I would have to say a decent trade. Like so many trades that involve prospects, it’s going to depend upon how the prospects develop.

  25. Steve Mancuso

    Folks, please confine your comments toward the Reds, not other commenters or writers or fans. Also, please treat everyone, including the Reds front office and ownership personnel with respect. I’ve had to ban or edit several comments this morning. Don’t bother coming here to score points against other commenters. Just write about the Reds. If you can’t live with that, you’ll have to post somewhere else.

  26. larry papania

    I, too, am happy with the returns we received in the Cueto, Leake, Latos and Simon trades. As stated elsewhere, the Chapman return was muted by allegations of October being investigated by MLB. No one, except the red sox and Chapman family and friends knew about it. The return doesn’t look awful, time will tell. I was a little disappointed by the return for Frazier, but everyone knew we were trying to trade him, which hurt his trade value somewhat. The Reds lost 98 games with a half year of Cueto and Leake and a full year of Frazier and Chapman, so maybe we’ll lose 110 games next year. Look on the bright side= we should get the number one draft pick. Let’s see what the team looks like in two or three years before we bury the Reds.l

    • jessecuster44

      Look on the bright side? Where? Looking at Reds’ top draft pick history, and getting a high pick is nothing to get excited about.

      • earmbrister

        The Reds have never had the first overall pick. However, the recent (last 10 years) # 1 pick history (including supplemental first round picks, therefore sometimes more than 1/yr) for the team include:

        Bruce, Stubbs, Mesoraco, Frazier, Alonso, Leake, Boxberger, Grandal, Stephenson, Travieso, Winker, Ervin, Lorenzen, and Blandino.

        Not too shabby.

      • earmbrister

        Misses or the jury is still out on:

        Lotzkar, Gelalich, and Howard

      • jessecuster44

        Recent pick: Nick Howard (shabby)

        I get it. But I don’t want this current management team anywhere near a high draft pick.

      • earmbrister

        Most Recent Pick: Tyler Stephenson (another hit – rated the #2 catcher in MiLB, after one short season).

        This current management team has (seemingly, to date) hit on 14 of 17 #1 picks over the last 10 years, an 82+% success rate, in a sport where #1’s often don’t pan out. You’re barking up the wrong tree regarding draft history.

      • earmbrister

        I omitted one Stephenson in my list above.

        Make that 15 out of 18, or an 83+% success rate.

      • CP

        Although I think the Reds have drafted fine in the 1st round, you’re reaching on calling guys like Ervin, Lorenzen, Blandino, Travieso, and even T. Stephenson “hits”. They are all still TBD.

        The amazing thing is they have basically failed to produce anything of value after the 2nd round.

  27. doofus

    Yankees have now fleeced the Reds twice in the past 25 years: Paul O’Neill and now Aroldis Chapman.

  28. ahab

    I assume everyone knows that if Jocketty knew baseball he would still be with the Cards?

  29. mel reed

    Gents, I am late to the party and apologize if this has been asked and answered but does anyone know if the Reds pursued any of the Yankees OF prospects? I know they probably couldn’t touch a guy like Aaron Judge but I would have thought adding Dustin Fowler or Mason Williams would have been very doable and would have brought some intriguing bats into the system that really needs to add firepower.
    Right now the return to me looks like a good pitching prospect in a system now loaded with same and three AAAA guys.
    Hope I’m wrong. But I would sure would have tried to go after one or more of those bats.

    • earmbrister

      Eric Jagielo and Rookie Davis are higher rated prospects than Fowler and Williams. Jagielo plays at a position, 3B, where the Reds lacked a quality upper minors prospect. He also has plus power, another need for the Reds, while Fowler and Williams merely have average power. The Reds have Winker, Ervin, Schebler, YRod, and Cave: all in the upper minors, and rated as high or higher than those two. Third Base was a real need.

      • mel reed

        We’ll probably just have to agree to disagree on this one too. Probably because of our difference of opinion on Jagielo being a MLB 3B and my belief that the Reds aren’t going to be competitive for at least 3-5 years. Thus a surplus of power hitting in the minors at in 2-3 years will be attractive as trade chits as and a better way to leverage resources than landing AAAA guys who can make the roster this spring. We’ll see if its a reboot or a rebuild.

    • Steve Mancuso

      Would also be interesting to see the number of good prospects who never contributed much in the major leagues.

      • CP

        It is an interesting article, although it could be interpreted another way. The top prospects are outnumbered something like 45 to 1. Some percentage of the mediocre prospects are going to succeed, and it is certainly less than the 30% cited in the article. The “top” guys have much more certainty as a group.

        Of course, I guess you could really start drilling down into tiers and seeing what percentage of those guys ranked #101-200, 201-300, etc . succeed.

      • Steve Mancuso

        Thanks. Wonder what that says about the chances Jose Peraza will make it as a big league player.

        Quantity definitely has its virtues. But also really highly rated prospects have a better chance than an average Top-100 prospect.