Comments on: The trade http://www.seths50centers.com/2008/05/19/the-trade/ Central Ohio and beyond... Sun, 01 Jan 2012 19:10:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Stuck in a fogg http://www.seths50centers.com/2008/05/19/the-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-162 Stuck in a fogg Tue, 20 May 2008 16:19:29 +0000 http://www.seths50centers.com/2008/05/19/the-trade/#comment-162 It is a fun exercise to try to imagine where we would be right now if the trade had not happened. Our opening day outfield with Dunn, Griffey, and Hamilton, would have been formable. I bet we still would have signed Dusty’s adopted son, Patterson. That makes a pretty crowded outfield with Freel, Patterson and Hopper fighting for ABs. I guess that means that we probably would not have signed Hairston. Assuming no Hairston, what would the injuries at shortstop mean for the roster? I think we would still bring up the kid (Janish). Does that mean we need to add another backup outfielder? Suddenly a spot is open for Jay Bruce. It is important to note that the outfield is still Hamilton, Dunn, and Griffey so Bruce would be in a backup role. Management would probably keep him in AAA in order to let him play everyday. What would our rotation look like? Would Fogg still be in the rotation? Who knows where we would be in the standings right now if Fogg had started in place of Volquez in every fifth start this year. Overall this trade is a win-win for both teams. The Rangers had all but given up on Volquez so he would have had zero impact to their major league team at this point in the season. So at the major league level, the Rangers gave up nothing and received a good outfielder in return. As for the Reds, Hamilton could have been leading the league in RBIs but would it have made up for having the hole in our rotation? The battle cry in Cincinnati for the last few years is that we need to trade some offensive firepower for pitching; now we have. I think I may have to go out and get an authentic Volquez jersey. It is a fun exercise to try to imagine where we would be right now if the trade had not happened. Our opening day outfield with Dunn, Griffey, and Hamilton, would have been formable. I bet we still would have signed Dusty’s adopted son, Patterson. That makes a pretty crowded outfield with Freel, Patterson and Hopper fighting for ABs. I guess that means that we probably would not have signed Hairston. Assuming no Hairston, what would the injuries at shortstop mean for the roster? I think we would still bring up the kid (Janish). Does that mean we need to add another backup outfielder? Suddenly a spot is open for Jay Bruce. It is important to note that the outfield is still Hamilton, Dunn, and Griffey so Bruce would be in a backup role. Management would probably keep him in AAA in order to let him play everyday. What would our rotation look like? Would Fogg still be in the rotation? Who knows where we would be in the standings right now if Fogg had started in place of Volquez in every fifth start this year.

Overall this trade is a win-win for both teams. The Rangers had all but given up on Volquez so he would have had zero impact to their major league team at this point in the season. So at the major league level, the Rangers gave up nothing and received a good outfielder in return. As for the Reds, Hamilton could have been leading the league in RBIs but would it have made up for having the hole in our rotation? The battle cry in Cincinnati for the last few years is that we need to trade some offensive firepower for pitching; now we have. I think I may have to go out and get an authentic Volquez jersey.

]]> By: Matt http://www.seths50centers.com/2008/05/19/the-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-161 Matt Tue, 20 May 2008 15:34:54 +0000 http://www.seths50centers.com/2008/05/19/the-trade/#comment-161 I like the deal. A trade that has helped out both teams and should for the foreseeable future. Sure, I'd love to still have Hamilton, but where would this rotation be without Volquez. Pitching is what we preach...pitching, pitching, pitching. I think it's a good deal for both squads. Herrera has allowed only 1 run (in AAA Louisville) in about 10 appearances. He's got nasty stuff and can locate. Not a fastball pitcher, but he can pitch. I like the deal. A trade that has helped out both teams and should for the foreseeable future. Sure, I’d love to still have Hamilton, but where would this rotation be without Volquez. Pitching is what we preach…pitching, pitching, pitching. I think it’s a good deal for both squads. Herrera has allowed only 1 run (in AAA Louisville) in about 10 appearances. He’s got nasty stuff and can locate. Not a fastball pitcher, but he can pitch.

]]> By: Ben http://www.seths50centers.com/2008/05/19/the-trade/comment-page-1/#comment-160 Ben Tue, 20 May 2008 14:42:13 +0000 http://www.seths50centers.com/2008/05/19/the-trade/#comment-160 It looks like the trade is working out for both teams at this point, but I would still take Volquez. I look at it like this, would you rather have a combination of Volquez/Freel or Hamilton/whoever would be in the rotation for Volquez? I think you can find adequate outfielders all the time, but as the Reds have shown over the years, plugging in a journeyman pitcher usually doesn’t work out too well. Plus, hopefully Jay Bruce is as good as he is supposed to be. That could also offset Hamilton in the future. It looks like the trade is working out for both teams at this point, but I would still take Volquez. I look at it like this, would you rather have a combination of Volquez/Freel or Hamilton/whoever would be in the rotation for Volquez? I think you can find adequate outfielders all the time, but as the Reds have shown over the years, plugging in a journeyman pitcher usually doesn’t work out too well. Plus, hopefully Jay Bruce is as good as he is supposed to be. That could also offset Hamilton in the future.

]]>