Yonder Alonso

[reillymcshane]

The odds of the Reds dealing within the division are probably small, but what do you think it would take to get Yonder Alonso from them?

[StearnsFTW]

Well, it sounds like they'd want Andrew Bailey+ from the A's, so Axford maybe?

 

I'd probably consider that deal. I don't know if the Reds would, but I would.

[GamelToe]

It'll never happen because of being in the same division, but I'd trade Axford for Alonso as much as I like Axford. Closers are generally overpaid in arbitration and I'm more of the Billy Beane style myself. I bet they'd consider it if Axford didn't play for the Brewers.

[RockCoCougars]

No way. I don't see how he has any more promise than Gamel.

[Patrick425]

RockCoCougars[/b]]No way. I don't see how he has any more promise than Gamel.

Yeah, I was going to post almost the exact same thing and I would never trade Axford for Gamel.

[ilikewisco]

Except Alonso has shown he can hit in the majors. It might be a small sample, but he already did it, Gamel has yet to.

 

My opinion is Alonso will be better, but I know that doesn't mean much.

[dadofandrew]

The Reds have said Alonso is worth far more than a reliever, and he is. They should just put him in LF and coach him to just being a few runs below average. He's a total stud.

[Dollarbill13]

The Reds have said Alonso is worth far more than a reliever, and he is. They should just put him in LF and coach him to just being a few runs below average. He's a total stud.

Disagree with "total stud". 860 OPS in his 2nd year of AAA makes him solid but unspectacular. He's closer to Lyle Overbay.

[StearnsFTW]

The Reds have said Alonso is worth far more than a reliever, and he is. They should just put him in LF and coach him to just being a few runs below average. He's a total stud.

Disagree with "total stud". 860 OPS in his 2nd year of AAA makes him solid but unspectacular. He's closer to Lyle Overbay.

I think he'll be a lot better than Lyle Overbay. I know his numbers look pretty pedestrian, but scouts rave about him. We'll see I guess.

[paul253]

Apparently the Reds have shopped Alonso to the White Sox. Does anyone have any idea what the were asking in return? I think Alonso would would be a great addition to the team, but I'm only willing to give up so much for an unproven prospect who can only really play first base.

[sheetskout]

Yonder Alonso is a much more polished hitter than Gamel. That being said I don't think he's still worth a financially controllable dominant closer.

[StearnsFTW]

^^You may be right. I just think a guy who pitches 60 innings (albeit very important ones) isn't as valuable as a guy who plays 1,400. Especially when you can just sign Broxton to close (or whomever). Obviously Axford is a lot better than the alternatives, but so is Alonso.

 

Doesn't matter anyway, the Reds wouldn't make the trade I don't think.

[RockCoCougars]

Broxton is horrible. A swing from Axford 2010/2011 form to Broxton as closer would result in at least 5 additional losses.

[TheCrew07]

Broxton is horrible. A swing from Axford 2010/2011 form to Broxton as closer would result in at least 5 additional losses.

hyperbole... and how likely is Axford to repeat last year's success? What if he pitches 3 wins below this year, is the drop off from 3 to 5 using your unsupportable 5 that much to kill a deal?

 

There is no way any relief pitcher, no matter how good or when he pitches, is as valuable as a middle of the order position player by any measure. WAR, WPA, VORP... use whatever metric you want, use the eye test, use common sense, use whatever measure you choose, relief pitchers are the worst value in baseball because the good ones get paid like starting pitchers to throw 60-90 innings under a specific and arbitrary set of criteria. He's my closer... he's my 8th inning guy... he's this, he's that... bah, relief pitchers drive me nuts. Just take the damn ball when they hand it to you and do your job.

 

The truth is that the negativity towards trading productive players while they have maximum value comes from the simple fact that many people are unwilling to give up anyone who's productive for fear of the unknown. It doesn't matter what reason or what excuse is offered, the same arguments every time, even though the end result has been so obvious. We hang onto these players through their peak so we end getting nothing for a Hardy (sorry, Gomez is nothing), riding out a Hall contract, trying to extend McGehee, while trading away our best prospects to acquire players from other teams at the same points in their career... on the verge of getting very expensive and heading into the steep part of the injury nexus. We should be selling those players and not buying them, what sense does it make to dry up the talent well?

 

This practice makes no sense from any long-term organization building standpoint and only makes sense if you narrow your view of the entire organization to the MLB team for a single season. In finite window like that people can justify anything they want and ignore the domino effect of the moves that are made from season to season. Which is what many posters on this site do, the 2008 Milwaukee Brewers, then the 2009 Milwaukee Brewers, and so on... Acquiring Sabathia led directly to the bad rotations in 2009 and 2010, but people only want to acknowledge 1 side of the equation, or treat the effect as if it were the cause.

 

We got to the point of the 2011 off season by buying high on name players and constantly trading down in value, Melvin's trade history isn't some mystical yellow brick road to success. It's actually a lesson about mediocrity... even though the 2011 Brewers were successful, the success isn't sustainable. Everything, and I do mean everything, broke the Brewer's way this season and it wasn't enough to get back to the WS. I don't care about the franchise record in wins, we certainly weren't beating up on the AL East, we beat up on 3 of the worst teams in baseball to get to where we were. The starting pitching was incredibly healthy and the only major injury to a position player of consequence happened to Weeks at the perfect time when the pitching got hot and the team was in the weakest part of their schedule. Maybe the 2012 Brewers will share that same fortune but I doubt it, everyone is a year older and for players in their and passing their peaks, that's not a good thing.

 

I say it again, if someone offers you a top young starting pitcher or legitimate hitter for a closer you jump on that deal immediately and don't think twice about it. Always trade up in value... I don't care about experience, I care about talent. We've had way too many feel good stories like Pods, Clark, and McGehee but not enough talent from top to bottom in this organization to sustain anything.

 

I'm a "next man up" type of guy... I love what the Packers have done and continue to do, lock up a core, lest the rest walk. Sure there are growing pains, but sometimes young/inexperienced make game changing plays just like the player they are replacing. Talent is more important than experience... Gomez has plenty of talent but I would have taken Cain over him 100 times out of a 100 coming into this season. I called my shot in 2008 when I said if they didn't trade Fielder when his value was peaking they'd never get it done. I called my shot the following year with Hardy, now I typically don't care enough to even argue about this stuff anymore (except when I'm feisty for whatever reason) because it's obvious nothing is going to change with Melvin at the helm. His strategy doesn't evolve, it just gets recycled. He traded for one young starting pitcher and the deal blew up on him in TX, and he's never made a move on an unproven/limited success player like that again.

 

He's a large market GM in the game's smallest market, every string he pulled in 2011 was perfect, not a single move backfired, I highly doubt that success repeats itself for 2012. Sports are a young man's game, Melvin only acquires experience or high floor players, I'll take getting younger and more dynamic athletically just about every single time.

 

Axford isn't young, nor is he irreplaceable, replenish the talent well and set the organization free.

[RockCoCougars]

hyperbole... and how likely is Axford to repeat last year's success? What if he pitches 3 wins below this year, is the drop off from 3 to 5 using your unsupportable 5 that much to kill a deal?

 

It's very unlikely. That said, if you move him for an unproven bat, and then sign Broxton, the Eric Gagne experiment and the Trevor Hoffman encore season would look like smashing successes. Broxton is just that bad. Thank God the Royals signed him. As for Alonso, he was great in garbage time down the stretch last year, but he's shown only middling power in the minors. I'd prefer to give Gamel the shot.

[danzig6767]

The Reds have said Alonso is worth far more than a reliever, and he is. They should just put him in LF and coach him to just being a few runs below average. He's a total stud.

Disagree with "total stud". 860 OPS in his 2nd year of AAA makes him solid but unspectacular. He's closer to Lyle Overbay.

Yea, i don't get this talk like Alonso is some special prospect. His power numbers in the minors have been decent, but nothing great. He walks at a solid rate, but nothing eye popping.

[NievesNoNO]

He's a large market GM in the game's smallest market, every string he pulled in 2011 was perfect, not a single move backfired,

So your saying he did a pretty good job then? http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif I would agree than Melvin makes safe moves and as much as I like him as a GM, wouldn't mind seeing him take a few more higher risk/reward type moves. I would much rather fill most of our bullpen roles and bench with players from our system instead of the "gritty, battler, veteran" types. It would be nice to see more of our young players that we took the time to develop getting a chance to contribute, even as bench players. I would have no problem moving Axford for the right player. I'm not sure Alonso fits that bill as he's really only a first baseman.