17 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

According to a story on MLB.com they are now turning their attention to getting Kluber. 

Which makes sense.  They need a legit ace much more than an expensive OF upgrade, although I do think they’ll end up with Kluber & Pollack and accomplish both goals.

Was probably already mentioned but unless I am missing something (alwys a good possibility), what in the world were the Reds thinking? This seems like the dumbest trade ever. Sending talented prospects for the right to take on Kemps contract and the Puig soap opera? Almost seems like collusion somehow. 

Just now, Flash said:

Was probably already mentioned but unless I am missing something (alwys a good possibility), what in the world were the Reds thinking? This seems like the dumbest trade ever. Sending talented prospects for the right to take on Kemps contract and the Puig soap opera? Almost seems like collusion somehow. 

Just wanted to get out of Bailey's contract while giving their 2019 team a chance to compete.  I don't love the deal for them, but if they know they're about to get a few premier pitchers locked up in the next few weeks, they could have a pretty damn good roster.  The team that should really be pissed is the Pirates.  They have no chance in that division.

It'd be annoying for the Indians to get several good prospects for Kluber, but I could live with it if Harper came to the Sox. 

Just now, Whitesox27 said:

It'd be annoying for the Indians to get several good prospects for Kluber, but I could live with it if Harper came to the Sox. 

I think I'd rather they get prospects and hope they fail instead of facing Kluber the next 3 years.

11 hours ago, turnin' two said:

This doesn't seem like a real fact.

Can I introduce you to caulfield 

14 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Can I introduce you to caulfield 

Where is there any speculation one year ago that we were legitimate threats to sign Machado and Harper, if this was the plan all along?  If you haven’t noticed, almost every thread about Harper and Machado is based purely upon speculation and conjecture.

But thanks for the reminder of peavy44, he didn’t like to use periods or punctuation marks, either.

8 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Where is there any speculation one year ago that we were legitimate threats to sign Machado and Harper, if this was the plan all along?  If you haven’t noticed, almost every thread about Harper and Machado is based purely upon speculation and conjecture.

But thanks for the reminder of peavy44, he didn’t like to use periods or punctuation marks, either.

I dunno man, maybe let's reference something that happened 30 years ago and a few pop stars then we can get around to it

3 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

I dunno man, maybe let's reference something that happened 30 years ago and a few pop stars then we can get around to it

I’ll attempt to throw in some Marvel or DC Comics allusions, next time.

Edited December 22, 20187 yr by caulfield12

1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Which makes sense.  They need a legit ace much more than an expensive OF upgrade, although I do think they’ll end up with Kluber & Pollack and accomplish both goals.

Odd to see this said about a team with Kershaw.  Especially considering Kluber's postseason ERA is just about 4, and has been worse than that the last 2 postseasons (10.64 the last 2 years, though he has only pitched 11 innings -- in 3 starts, but still 13 ER).

5 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

Odd to see this said about a team with Kershaw.  Especially considering Kluber's postseason ERA is just about 4, and has been worse than that the last 2 postseasons (10.64 the last 2 years, though he has only pitched 11 innings -- in 3 starts, but still 13 ER).

Walker Buehler is just as good as both too.

4 minutes ago, bschmaranz said:

Walker Buehler is just as good as both too.

Yeah, no kidding there.  I still cannot get over the Sox taking his teammate over him in the draft.  Huge indictment of the scouting.  

1 minute ago, turnin' two said:

Yeah, no kidding there.  I still cannot get over the Sox taking his teammate over him in the draft.  Huge indictment of the scouting.  

Clearly no way to prove this, but I'm willing to bet every team in baseball had Fulmer ranked higher than Buehler.  Buehler's health was always an issue, and I have a very, very hard time seeing the Sox picking someone that that high that they know will likely need TJS sooner than later.

5 minutes ago, fathom said:

Clearly no way to prove this, but I'm willing to bet every team in baseball had Fulmer ranked higher than Buehler.  Buehler's health was always an issue, and I have a very, very hard time seeing the Sox picking someone that that high that they know will likely need TJS sooner than later.

This applies to anyone with elite velocity.  

6 minutes ago, fathom said:

Clearly no way to prove this, but I'm willing to bet every team in baseball had Fulmer ranked higher than Buehler.  

Maybe not Fulmer over Buehler, but drafting Fulmer and then not giving him the time or having the patience for him to smooth out his delivery says something.

6 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

This applies to anyone with elite velocity.  

yes but Buehler was known to have an elbow issue

Am I incorrect in remembering that Buehler was the more prized prospect heading into the draft season, and Fulmer passed him on the strength of that one season?  Am I also incorrect in remembering that while maybe Buehler did have injury concerns, weren't there serious -- he is a reliever -- concerns with Fulmer?  

I guess it doesn't matter in a lot of ways.  It is a blown pick and looking at the what-could-have-beens is only maddening.  

I can't stop thinking about how awful of a trade that this was.

Without reading through all 11 pages, is there anyone here who is actually defending it from the Reds perspective? I assume the only narrative is that they get a chance to win 69 games next year instead of 67? As if that's somehow going to energize the fanbase?

2 minutes ago, ChiliIrishHammock24 said:

I can't stop thinking about how awful of a trade that this was.

Without reading through all 11 pages, is there anyone here who is actually defending it from the Reds perspective? I assume the only narrative is that they get a chance to win 69 games next year instead of 67? As if that's somehow going to energize the fanbase?

I really think they believe they can contend. I bet they sign Dallas K soon

18 minutes ago, fathom said:

I really think they believe they can contend. I bet they sign Dallas K soon

That is LUDICROUS. I would bet a sizeable amount of money that they will struggle to even try to make it to .500

I'm friends with a Reds fan from college and he is thrilled with the deal right now because it means Homer Bailey is gone. That's all Reds fans care about, that Bailey is gone. Don't care about adding $3M to their payroll because of this swap, don't care about losing prospects, just never have to see him again.

That's fucking wild. I told him how FURIOUS I would be if the Sox had to give up Pilkington and Sheets (Sox next 2 draft picks after Downs and Gray, so those guys were even better picks than Pilks/Sheets) AND take on more money just to get rid of Shields in his final year of his contract in a rebuild anyway.

I mean, Kemp, Wood and Puig aren't exactly useless players here. It just doesn't make sense for the Reds to really deal prospects for them. The only bad part is Kemp's salary and the fact hes basically a DH. And who knows, a team in on Cruz can trade for him and only have to pay him for one year instead of Cruz for 2-3 years.

The White Sox wouldn't have had to give up anyone to get puig wood and kemp. 

3 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said:

The White Sox wouldn't have had to give up anyone to get puig wood and kemp. 

Why?

41 minutes ago, soxfan2014 said:

Why?

Theoretically not giving back Bailey’s money would have been worth the prospects Cincinnati gave up.