Travis Wood

[JohnU]

I recall there wasn't consensus agreement that the Reds ought to have traded him for Marshall. As it appears, would you want the guy back? He's turned into a good pitcher on a terrible team.

 

[BigBlueNation111]

I recall there wasn't consensus agreement that the Reds ought to have traded him for Marshall. As it appears, would you want the guy back? He's turned into a good pitcher on a terrible team.

 

[bengaldoug]

They had to give up someone, and I still doubt Wood would be in our rotation today. He just needed an opportunity to mature a bit, and I'm happy for him and his success in Chicago. Of course Marshall's present situation gives one pause about the trade. Hopefully he can get healthy and be as effective in the future as he was last season. Dusty certainly is unable to manage around his absence.

 

[pursifull14]

To me, he's a left-handed Mike Leake, or maybe a little better. I'd rather have Wood in the rotation per 1507's constant reminder about WS teams with a lefty in the rotation.

 

[Cincy the Red]

Personally....no thank you on Wood. The trade was appropriate then and still is to me (and I do not think he is better than Leake). Kinda tough to gauge at the moment given Marshall's stint on the DL (not helping us much), but Marshall has been quite an asset in the past. Besides, I believe Wood has high 40's in K's & high 20's in walks year to date....not all that impressive (Leake's numbers are much better). I would prefer to see Cingrani in our rotation rather than Wood all day......assuming we part with Arroyo at season's end. Hopefully: Cueto, Latos, Bailey, Cingrani, Leake next year....would be awesome in my opinion.

For the record, I appreciate everything Arroyo has been for us the past few years...he has been all class, but I think it is time to get a little younger and it will be at less cost than we are paying now. In addition, I am also happy for Wood and his "success" this year....wouldn't want him back though.

Just my take on it.

 

[bengaldoug]

They had to give up someone, and I still doubt Wood would be in our rotation today. He just needed an opportunity to mature a bit, and I'm happy for him and his success in Chicago. Of course Marshall's present situation gives one pause about the trade. Hopefully he can get healthy and be as effective in the future as he was last season. Dusty certainly is unable to manage around his absence.

Today's game certainly exemplified Dusty's inability to manage around Marshall's absence. Luckily for him Leake was up to getting out of the eighth inning. He would not have been so lucky if the opponent was St Louis.

 

[JohnU]

No question, Leake has become the pitcher he needs to be to get hitters out.
As well, there may be a relationship with his pitching and his hitting. I'd really rather he be a bunter than a swinger.

But if he improves as Bailey has improved, the rotation looks strong for awhile.
I would still like Travis Wood in the bullpen ahead of at least two guys on the staff.

 

[redsfan03]

I questioned the trade at the time for two reasons - #1. Travis Wood is a lefty starting pitcher; #2 - Who TRADES for a set up man? I had no idea that Wood would turn out to be this good, and I'm confident that he probably wouldn't be having this success if he were still pitching for the Reds. A change of scenery probably did him some good. Either that or the curse of Reds' deadweight being lifted only to reappear with resounding success on other teams is alive and well. I always thought Wood was a slightly more talented and smarter version of Mike Leake. Plus he was left-handed in a rotation devoid of southpaws.

Marshall is fine (when he's not injured), but I still think it was pretty ludicrous for the Reds to trade for a set up man. You can find set up men all over the place. Was it really necessary to dump a decent left-handed starter and a prospect for Sean freaking Marshall? Not to mention, was it really necessary to throw Marshall a fat contract extension for being a set up guy? I know they had delusions of using Marshall as the closer once Chappy was moved to the rotation (oh wait, he's STILL the closer...), but let's be honest, Marshall simply isn't closer material. Never has, never will be.

Not a fan of the trade in hindsight. Sure wasn't a fan of the trade to begin with, but that's just my opinion. Win some, lose some. The Latos trade is looking awfully good for the Reds right now, as is the Choo trade.

 

[JohnU]

Several peculiar moves relating to the bullpen.
The Broxton contract was probably not a **bad** idea at the time.
The Madson mistake was one that really struck me as unfortunate, then the dumb-fux Angels went and did it too.
Manny Parra was a mistake the day the first phone call came.
Arredondo? Ondrusek?
Simon was a lucky break, as it turns out.
Marshall won't get us a dollar value, I think.
Travis Wood, meanwhile, wasn't going to make the Reds rotation with the skill set that he had at the time. He might never win in a place like GABP, but there isn't a reason to believe that -- based on what others have learned.
Remember as well, the Reds dealt Brad Boxberger and Donnie Joseph, two other relief pitchers.
I think the Cincy bullpen is living on a reputation that is daily proving to have a lot of holes in it.
The "ERA" doesn't mean squat to me.

 

[Redsfan1507]

You just gotta have some EFFECTIVE lefty pitching. Wood and Marshall both fit the description, in different roles. Leake hasn't pitched bad for a 5th starter, but I'm a guy that believes a #1 pick should have top of the line potential, so if I draft a pitcher #1, I get a guy with a skill you can't teach- a plus fastball, and try to develop secondary pitches. That doesn't fit Leake. IMO, he would have been a better value pick in the 4th round, with back if the rotation probability. In that regard the Reds drafted well (Leake IS a MLB SP) but they overpaid (over drafted) too much.

Drafts, trades and roster decisions in general are supposed to be about value. I assume a balanced team and winning is the goal. Like Leake, I think giving up a potential back of the rotation LHSP (Wood) with some experience, a 4th OF and another player, was too much to pay for Marshall, a situational lefty reliever that wasn't good enough to close OR start for one of the worst pitching staffs in MLB. Other pitching options do go into the thought process in who gets traded, etc. but Wood HAD minor league options at the time (as Leake still does) so it wasn't like they were forced to trade him when they did. I'm leery of trading pitching, especially if I have to give up pitching to get it. I ask which is more valuable a LH#5SP or a LH setup man, and I think the SP wins. There are a lot more LHRP out there than LHSP.

At the time I also thought the Reds overpaid for Latos too, because it took what I saw as a ( near term potential) an 80-90 RBI 1b (Alonzo) a 20 HR Catcher, and a reliever to get him. Latos DID have #1-2 SP potential though. You never know how players are going to pan out, but it was a trade that immediately put pressure on Latos to BE that guy (he has been so far), or the trade would be a bust, assuming Alonzo and Grandal played close to their potential in the next 2-3 years. You can't assume the trade pieces would have had to be used in the current roster if the trade in question hasn't been done-they probably would have been in a different deal, and it's all supposition.

Is the team better ? That's the real question, and we really won't know that for sure for a while.

 

[JohnU]

All, really, I know about Wood is that he has turned into a fairly consistent LHSP with a team that doesn't score a lot of runs or play decent defense. Could be, his own adrenaline has contributed. Some guys know they need to do better if the team sucks. To that end, bonus points for a guy who doesn't whine his way out of town. That's pretty common in Chicago. If the team sucks, play bad and hope you get traded.

To some end, getting better by experience is fairly predictable and there's no reason to think Bryan Price couldn't have made Wood better too. He has with everyone else on the staff, except for maybe an attitude here or there. Wood can also hit a little and is faster than Drew Stubbs on the bases.

I guess it's a question of getting a guy who IS a relief pitcher and trading a guy who is NOT ... but could be. Wood was cheaper at the time, won't be for long. Marshall can be replaced eventually.

But if the swap is really Wood for Parra, the short-term verdict is: the Reds made a mistake.

If it's Wood for Marshall, the short-term reality is that Parra is available and Marshall isn't. So it's still a case of Wood vs. Parra, is it not?

 

[Redsfan1507]

Cliff Lee is Woods neighbor. They worked out together this winter. Probably not a coincidence. They should have moved Dusty next door to Walt Alston... or even Tony LaRussa.

 

[JohnU]

Cliff Lee is Woods neighbor. They worked out together this winter. Probably not a coincidence. They should have moved Dusty next door to Walt Alston... or even Tony LaRussa.

I think I'd like to have seen Chris Speier move in next door to the Keystone Cops. Could be he'd learn how to coach third base.

 

[Redsfan1507]

Mark Berry is no better. Kinda like getting Manny Parra to replace Bill Bray. Twice last week Dusty gave up runs to teams by pulling the defense in with 2 on in scoring position, 1 out and 1b open, and PITCHED to the 8 hitter. Got hurt both times, and both times the pitcher hit a GB that would have been an inning ending DP without giving up a run if he had walked the 8 hitter. He lost game 5 NLDS last year the same way. You can't correct a mistake until you recognize your making one. This dugout staff is oblivious of the obvious.

 

[JohnU]

I think a lot of runs don't get scored because the baserunners get a poor read on balls to the outfield.
At least three times this week, Speier stopped a guy at third rather than send him. The Votto flub the other day was atrocious. Yeah, mistakes happen but in MLB, you want to really have them be the result of a great defensive play, not a stupid baserunning mistake.

 

[Redsfan1507]

I think a lot of runs don't get scored because of lots of reasons:

There aren't many RISP until there are 2 outs.

There is no steal threat so hitters get fewer fastballs.

There is little bunt threat unless its the P, so the opposing D gets to play back and turn a few seeing eye singles into outs.

Sometimes when a leadoff hitter with speed is at 1b, we bunt on the 1st pitch instead of letting him steal 2b, then bunt him to 3b.

Lots of times, we don't even attempt to bunt a leadoff double to 3rd...we usually strand him unless there is a homer or 2 out hit.

The Reds are always trying to play Dusty Small Ball ( hit a solo homer) so they strike out a lot, giving an excuse not to hit and run, steal, or hit behind the runner to advance runners when they are on.

H&R or sacrifices or steals with slow runners at 1b and questionable contact hitters ( or pitchers) at the plate, or steal attempts with 1 out and 2 strikes on the hitter, result in more manufactured outs than runs. When good runners are on, and good hitters are at the plate, Dusty is afraid he's ruining a 2 run HR by putting on a play.

When the Reds have runners at 2nd & 3rd with 1b open, and the 8 hitter at the plate, the opposing manager walks the 8 hitter and gets the pitcher to hit into an inning ending DP, instead of playing the defense in, and throwing fastballs to the 8 hitter.

We rarely advance (safely) a trailing runner on a play on a lead runner. We do periodically get Uncoached trailing runners thrown out because the 3b coach is watching the play on the lead runner.

Basecoaches don't always give runners a signal until its too late.

Hitting coaches encourage struggling Reds whiffaholics a to prevent striking out on the 2 strike curveball, by popping up or hitting into a DP on the first pitch.

Luckily, these instances aren't that common, only about one every couple of games, and it probably only costs us 30 runs a year, and we don't always lose the games where they happen. Just mostly against good teams and in the playoffs.