The Cincinnati Reds made a set of roster moves on Sunday morning before their game against the Milwaukee Brewers. We learned earlier in the week that Graham Ashcraft would be activated today. What we didn’t know is what the corresponding move or moves would be to get him onto the roster. Today we learned that it would be just one move and that it would be that reliever Sam Moll was designated for assignment. That cleared a spot on both the 40-man roster and the 28-man roster that was needed for Ashcraft to come off of the 60-day injured list and be activated.
Back in late May Ashcraft injured his elbow. He had a tear in his UCL but he and the doctors opted to try rehabbing the injury with the hopes that he could come back healthy enough to pitch and avoid Tommy John surgery. The right-handed reliever didn’t pitch for three months before he returned to the mound on a rehab assignment with Triple-A Louisville on August 25th.
Over the next week-and-a-half he would pitch in five games for the Bats. He would threw a shutout inning with two strikeouts in each of his first two outings before running into some trouble in his third game where he allowed two runs on two hits and two walks while recording just two outs. Ashcraft came back a few days later and pitched on back-to-back days against Nashville and threw a shutout inning in each game to complete his rehab assignment.
His velocity did improve as his rehab assignment went on, but before the injury this season his cutter was averaging 98.1 MPH. In his five rehab games he averaged just 95.8 MPH with his final game seeing him average 96.3. With the amount of time off that could be a part of the explanation, but coming off of an injury there’s something worth keeping an eye on here, too.
After pitching very well in his first two seasons with the Reds, Sam Moll just hasn’t been the same. In 2025 his ERA was 6.38 and he spent plenty of time in Triple-A because of his ineffectiveness with Cincinnati. This season he had pitched in 65 games for the Reds and his ERA was better, coming in at 4.79, but that was still just an 88 ERA+ (ERA after adjusted for park factors where anything below 100 is worse than the league average).
The left-handed reliever was still arbitration eligible next season and wouldn’t have been a free agent until after 2027. But his struggles now have him off of the 40-man roster.
Moll has been really terrible last month… The Reds gave up on him apparently since he could be optioned to Triple-A but and move Hayes to 60-day IL as alternative if I’m not wrong
It had to be a pitcher. Only allowed 14 P and 14 OF/INF/C on 28 man roster.
Moll was out of options.
A pitcher had to go off the active roster, and a spot was needed on the 40-man roster. Moll fit the criteria for both in one swoop.
Spencer Steer is still hanging out on the 10-day IL. I thought maybe he would be moved to the 60-day IL to create the 40-man opening. But then, at this point in the season, with the 15-day length of both the IL and the option minimum before recall for pitchers, making a “short-term” move with a pitcher would have essentially ended that guy’s season.
We have some nice parting gifts, tell him Johnny…..
Well Moll certainly help his cause Friday night.
The player the Reds should DFA at the seasons end, My pick is Hayes. He is great at defense, but he makes too much to be a regular player during the season with his low batting average.
Even if the Reds DFA Hayes they will still have to pay him all the money on his contract unless someone else claims him. Which they won’t. All that DFA’ing him would do is allow the Reds to release him or send him to the minor leagues while still paying him his full contract.
It would open up a roster spot.
I’ve never been a fan of the Hayes acquisition, but there are a couple of ways in which he can earn his keep with the Reds. First, he can start hitting. While his production has been abysmal, multiple analytical statistics indicate there is potential for improvement. The Reds need to have an honest internal discussion on whether improvement is likely.
Second, he can be used as a late-inning defensive replacement. As long as he’s a gold-glove defender at 3B, he can be a productive player off the bench.
In summary, he’s not a great fit for the Reds and shouldn’t have been brought in; but he was. Whether he should or should not have been acquired or whether he has or has not been used properly, should not factor into the decision on whether he is retained or cut. As Brian notes, there is no way to recoup the poor financial investment at this point. His contract is a sunk cost.
Now, he simply needs to be honestly assessed for his potential to add value to future Reds rosters. I believe his defense alone is worth retaining. However, the Reds need to be ready to use him in that role, because he’s been a well-below-average hitter for too long to simply hope for improvement.
You’ve only got four bench spots. You suggest using one of those for a defensively replacement at 3B only? That’s all he’s got and his defense has declined this year too from what it was.
@Melvin, your question rests on a false assumption. Hayes is not limited to 3B; he only plays 3B because that’s where he brings the most defensive value.
As for his defensive decline, he’s still well above average based on defensive metrics, although not quite otherworldly like he was last season. Also, he’s played about half the innings compared to last season, which yields a less reliable sample size and limits his value.
Based on the current Reds roster, Sal Stewart would be the most likely player to man 3B in 2027. He can easily slide over to 1B and remain in the game or get rest by coming out of games after 7 or 8 innings. The Red’s other candidates under team control in 2027 and capable of playing 3B (e.g., Steer, Arroyo, Brito) are even more versatile than Stewart. In short, the Reds don’t need Hayes to be versatile.
I can understand a case for cutting Hayes, but what most who want him gone really want is to reverse a bad decision and its ramifications. Cutting Hayes won’t accomplish that goal. Remember, I replied to Ron’s post that acknowledged Hayes remains special defensively at 3B, but doesn’t hit well enough to justify his starting role or a starter’s salary.
BK – You may be correct but as far as I know Hayes has never played anywhere besides 3B at least in the majors. With only four bench spots don’t you think a bench guy should be versatile? Anyway, I think we agree mostly as usual. It’s out of our hands anyway. 🙂
I can’t believe I just saw he was activated as I’m writing this. Krall is not going to give up. lol
I addressed versatility in my post, but yes I mostly agree. I am a bit, but only a bit surprised that Hayes is starting at 3B. I am hoping we either see marked improvement in his bat or we accept him for what he is, a bench player who should be exclusively used as a late game defensive replacement, if that.
BK – He’s got a chronically bad back. The chances of any part of his game getting better consistently are very slim. The opposite is a lot more likely wouldn’t you agree? He probably would be a much better player and we’d be happy to have him if it wasn’t for that. It’s not his fault. It’s Krall’s fault ultimately.
My guess it that Krall is rolling the dice believing that his job is on the line and giving Hayes every chance to miraculously succeed to save his (Krall’s) hide.
I mean, he logged an incredible 17 OAA with the same chronic back last season, right? So, it’s not affecting his defense, at least to this point.
I wouldn’t bet a dime that he’ll achieve an 85 OPS+ or better, which is likely what he would need to hit to be an average starter with his plus defense.
That said, why not capitalize on his one elite skill? Few MLB bench players have one. Francona has shown he can use him in that role effectively. Yes, we only have four bench players and one will be a catcher. However, we rarely have good bench players. I’m not sure there will be a better alternative, but if one comes, great. I’d be happy to move on.
I’m going to go back to one of my key points. I don’t think most posters here can let go of how bad the Hayes trade was and make an honest assessment of how to use Hayes moving forward. For example, your last post mentioned Krall three times. Many (maybe not you) are conflating Krall and Hayes. Both need to be evaluated separately, although it’s hard to see Hayes’ acquisition helping Krall’s case to remain POBO. It was a very questionable trade when it was made and it looks even worse a year later.