Wood, Puig, Kemp traded to Reds

[CB3UK]

Sources: Dodgers trade Matt Kemp, Yasiel Puig in blockbuster deal with Reds

Buh-bye Homer!

 

[JohnU]

Immediate upgrade though with Puig and Kemp, Reds have 6 outfielders.
Jeter Downs was about the only guy Reds could lose who doesn't bother me.
Gotta think there's another pitcher coming in.
Best guess: Winker or Schebler?

 

[Redsfan1507]

Can’t fathom how the Reds can afford to add $40-50 mil a year. Wood is the only pitcher...a straight arm lefty not sure about how he plays in a short park. Kemp is oft injured past prime slugger and defensive minus OF, and Puig may be mentally unstable- often reprimanded by the relatively loose LA club for unstable actions on and off the field- he is a big horse though.

Head scratcher...but glad Senzel and Trammel are still here.

 

[JohnU]

After looking at it, it's a show trade, all financial.
If they throw some money at Wood, they get an experienced lefty. Not sure that's a good plan but they might. Puig is an instant upgrade as a RH hitter and is a better arm / runner than Winker or Schebler. They cant sign Puig and maybe will trade him. Kemp is the Marlon Byrd of the 2019 season.

The catcher may be the most useful player here.

All it does is kick open the door for Harper in La-la land. Scribes on the MLB boards can resume compiling their lists based on who fits where in the roster gleaning exercise.

 

[CB3UK]

Can’t fathom how the Reds can afford to add $40-50 mil a year. Wood is the only pitcher...a straight arm lefty not sure about how he plays in a short park. Kemp is oft injured past prime slugger and defensive minus OF, and Puig may be mentally unstable- often reprimanded by the relatively loose LA club for unstable actions on and off the field- he is a big horse though.

Head scratcher...but glad Senzel and Trammel are still here.

Cayts Reds and Bengals....you are a man of impeccable taste sir.

 

[CB3UK]

I've said, for me, getting Homer off the books and replacing him in the rotation with Wood is a win in and of itself. Yes, we need a CF, but right now we have options out there. None of these guys are under contract after this season, so as long as we get good mileage out of them this season, we can cross whatever bridge we come to next offseason. Yeah, we took on a lot of salary, but we were paying Homer for jack in return. We can argue about his run support, injury, mechanics, whatever, the bottom line is it was money down the drain. We get three more than serviceable guys in return, I'm pleased. Not going to pretend to know anything about the catcher, Tucker is OK for us. Obviously needs to be more consistent at the plate. His arm strength will always be his big issue for me.

 

[JohnU]

To the end that this is financial, hell all of life is making decisions about value.
In some respects, getting players for a team is a matter of either trusting stats or thinking stats are fake news. in rare cases when a Scooter Gennett amazes us, there are manifold cases where guys level off to who they always were.

Nobody has fooled an analytics department yet, unless it was the players themselves.
The Reds are instantly relevant but only for about 4 months until they have to decide if borrowing players from another team can be converted to talent. I'd wager they can trade Puig to Miami for a couple of pitchers, which would be OK.

If they think Roark and Wood are better than Harvey and Bailey, they probably are right.

The promise that Senzel is the next superstar is still a promise. His vertigo is troubling.

I'd lock up Wood for 3 years if he shows he can get out of spring training, which isn't an automatic with all the arms the Reds have flung out there since 2014. If Wood comes out strong, there's no way he doesn't test the FA market. If not, let him walk.

The best way to spend the money is to shove the damned outfield wall back 10 feet and raise the fences.

 

[CB3UK]

I know it's heresey to traditionalists, but for the life of me I can't understand why the measurements to the fence haven't been standardized. Generally I'm with traditionalists on a lot of baseball stuff, but not this one. If it's 90 ft to first at every ball park it should be 400 or whatever to center everywhere as well. Can you imagine if we decided to have our rims at Rupp Arena at 11 ft, or if Paul Brown was 110 yds from end zone to end zone?

 

[JohnU]

I know it's heresey to traditionalists, but for the life of me I can't understand why the measurements to the fence haven't been standardized. Generally I'm with traditionalists on a lot of baseball stuff, but not this one. If it's 90 ft to first at every ball park it should be 400 or whatever to center everywhere as well. Can you imagine if we decided to have our rims at Rupp Arena at 11 ft, or if Paul Brown was 110 yds from end zone to end zone?

The problem with GABP is that the walls aren't high enough to prevent dinker homers and they aren't angled enough into the alleys. It made for great theater for Dunn and Griffey 15 years ago but it's murdering this lame-ass pitching staff. Of course, Reds hitters benefit from it.

 

[CB3UK]

The problem with GABP is that the walls aren't high enough to prevent dinker homers and they aren't angled enough into the alleys. It made for great theater for Dunn and Griffey 15 years ago but it's murdering this lame-ass pitching staff. Of course, Reds hitters benefit from it.

Yeah, and thats why I agree and disagree with you. Sure, the pitchers are hurt by it, but the bats benefit greatly from it.

I pitched from age 4 to 17 before hanging it up to focus on playing music. Shouldnt have but thats neither here nor there.. my point is I side with pitchers, so I agree more than I disagree. As much as the focus this past season in MLB was on the dearth of SO or HR and nothing in between, you just know as staffs adjust there will be a regression to the mean for more small ball.

 

[Redsfan1507]

There is no way to make equalf MLB parks with standard distances , when altitude, humidity and using a humidor or not, are variables.

I'd say with the recent Reds, the quality (or lack of ) of pitches thrown might have a large bearing on HR's, regardless of the park they pitch in. The cookie cutter stadiums of 40 years ago went the way of astroturf...people wanted unique, generally smaller, throwback stadiums where fans were closer to the field (and there is less foul ground, aiding offense, again...). The bases are still 90 feet, the distance plate to the rubber is still 60'6"... although the height of the mound is flatter, the ball is wound tighter, and players are bigger, stronger, so pitchers are disadvantaged at every opportunity. Smaller parks coincided with PED padded power,too. All this, and the DH in half of all parks, has changed the game considerably, putting less emphasis on making consistent contact, as long as the distance off the bat is longer when hitters do get wood on the ball. K's are up, as are ERA's.

Perspectives differ, but I'd say there are greater equalizers than just park size available, if a few traditionalist tendencies were reintroduced back into MLB.

Part of my issue is, I perceive the NL game as real baseball, in its original form where pitchers can brush hitters back, but still have to go to the plate themselves, and old fat hitters have must also be exposed on D. I think most of the changes in the game have made it less interesting, not more. Pace of play is mostly B.S. to true baseball fans, because it was designed to be different than the other sports. It's the only game where the defense has the ball, and there is no clock. It's the only sport that requires players to be able to catch, throw, run, AND swing a round bat making contact with a round ball thrown at deadly speed.

Pace of play IMO, is less about the game, than control of it by the umpires, and those dastardly revisers and ignorers of the rules. The strike zone that is called is little more than half the one in the rules..I despise hitters stepping out on every pitch, and 6 relief pitcher changes in a game...and replay 2-3 times a game, especially when they still get the call wrong frequently. I don't like more and more "playoff teams" that just amount to glorified 1 game play in wildcards, or the yearly roster sell-off- add on for playoff pushes every year. I definitely don't like the inherent advantage huge media market teams have. This league badly needs a salary cap, but the fear of a MLBPA strike holds MLB and it's fans hostage. I acknowledge the right of free agency, but it has been counter productive from a value, and player / team loyalty perspective. It hasn't made baseball better, just more divided and expensive.

 

[JohnU]

Well, yeah ... Cueto proved you can win there if you pitch better but all the same, the defensive shifts are forcing hitters to adapt. The easiest way is launch angle. I like offense in baseball so the long ball suits me. I just think GABP is a cheep-cheep shot way too often. Dunno ... I could be persuaded otherwise.

 

[CB3UK]

There is no way to make equalf MLB parks with standard distances , when altitude, humidity and using a humidor or not, are variables.

I feel like NFL fields have had those things for over a century, and somehow have managed just fine having equal measurements.

 

[Redsfan1507]

It's still not equal if you are a kicker in Buffalo kicking against the wind. lol.

 

[eburg5000]

One of the things that makes baseball such a unique sport. Is that every ball park is different. Please don't mess with that. I've seen to many negative changes already in my life. Just throw me one last bone , and leave ballparks alone

 

[JohnU]

One of the things that makes baseball such a unique sport. Is that every ball park is different. Please don't mess with that. I've seen to many negative changes already in my life. Just throw me one last bone , and leave ballparks alone

Here ya go. Polo Grounds ... loved this monster.

 

[Hit-n-Run]

Ball parks span the careers of different players throughout multiple decades. Most teams know where they'll be playing home games well into the future. The common sense approach is to build your team for the ball parks you play most of your games in. That's why it's called home field advantage. If it's not advantageous to your team, it's not the fence's fault.

I agree with you Eburg. Baseball went from the Crosley Field type uniqueness to the cookie cutters like Riverfront.

IMO, GABP is easily the best ball park for viewing a baseball game of the three.

 

[JohnU]

I think the old time parks were more adaptable to that because teams could keep a player for his whole career and profit from that. Ruth didn't hit 714 home runs because he played in Chicago. So the FA market makes crafting parks to players a little tougher.

Dunno. ... it's still about pitching to me. If you throw fly balls, they will hit them and if they land in the front row, you either need to be taller or jumpier.

But old Croz was kewl ... the scoreboard made the difference there and the terrace. Lots of doubles ... and antics by outfielders. Riverfront was an insult to baseball. I like GABP, just don't like having a bunch of meatballers pitching there.

 

[Hit-n-Run]

Circling back to the thread.

When you look at the moves the Reds have made they've come without adding much to the payroll. Non-tendering Hamilton and trading Homer Bailey cut around $33M. Add in the $7M from the Dodgers and it's $40M. Trading for Roark, Puig, Kemp, and Wood cost the Reds about the same- $40M. The Reds aren't taking a big hit in arbitration either.

When you consider the Reds new TV deal has kicked in since their record payroll a few seasons ago they look to have some money to spend if they so choose.

Trading Jeter Downs, Josiah Gray, and Tanner Rainey seem inconsequential at press release time. But so did trading Didi Gregorius and Justin Turner.

 

[JohnU]

Every deal they make is a risk of looking bad 4 years down the road and BBRef is full of them.
I think the Reds are in position to buy a pitcher and I think they might go after Keuchel. Dunno 4-80 is a lot but you don't get grapes at the feed store. I do think flipping Puig is in the works. I love Hot Stove thinking.