Hamilton Available?

[Backtobanks]

In today's Tribune, Phil Rogers speculates that any of Hamilton, Freel, or Hopper could be available in the Red's quest to add a #2 starter or additional relief pitchers. The Marlins are said to want pitching depth to go with their young offensive team. How about:

 

Cubs trade: Jones (Marlins sought him earlier for CF), Marshall, Veal to Marlins and Ohman to the Reds.

Marlins send Dontrelle Willis to the Reds.

Reds send Hamilton and Gonzalez/Keppinger to the Cubs.

 

Marlins get a starting CF, a young lefty starter, and a future lefty starter.

Reds get a lefty starter and reliever.

Cubs get a left-handed bat to play or platoon (with Murton) in RF or to take over CF if Pie fails and an upgrade at SS.

 

Perhaps with some tweaking this might work out.

[Lefty]

Saying Hamilton, Freel or Hopper might be available reminds me of one of those college logic classes. Since Freel is available, whatever else is added to the statement, no matter how ludicrous, doesn't change the logic in the statement. The Reds will release Freel before they trade Hamilton for anything like what you have here.

[Hosak8]

Saying Hamilton, Freel or Hopper might be available reminds me of one of those college logic classes. Since Freel is available, whatever else is added to the statement, no matter how ludicrous, doesn't change the logic in the statement. The Reds will release Freel before they trade Hamilton for anything like what you have here.

 

That's an awful "matter-of-fact" statement for someone who doesn't work in the Reds front office, and therefore has little to no idea what they would consider. How do you know what the Reds would do?

 

It's a fact that the Reds want pitching. It's a fact that to get a #2 starter, you will have to give up value. It's a fact that releasing Ryan Freel in no way fetches you anything at all in return. So, again, how can you be so certain as to what the Reds would do?

[SweetZombieJesus]

In today's Tribune, Phil Rogers speculates that any of Hamilton, Freel, or Hopper could be available in the Red's quest to add a #2 starter or additional relief pitchers. The Marlins are said to want pitching depth to go with their young offensive team. How about:

 

Cubs trade: Jones (Marlins sought him earlier for CF), Marshall, Veal to Marlins and Ohman to the Reds.

Marlins send Dontrelle Willis to the Reds.

Reds send Hamilton and Gonzalez/Keppinger to the Cubs.

 

Marlins get a starting CF, a young lefty starter, and a future lefty starter.

Reds get a lefty starter and reliever.

Cubs get a left-handed bat to play or platoon (with Murton) in RF or to take over CF if Pie fails and an upgrade at SS.

 

Perhaps with some tweaking this might work out.

 

Keppinger is a improvement to Theriot/Cedeno is akin to saying a unicorns is a upgrade over leprechauns

[jersey cubs fan]

Hamilton was a great risk/reward gamble when you could pick him up for nothing. Now that you'd have to give up significant value, I'm not sure he's worth the risk.

 

Although I certainly wouldn't eliminate him from discussion.

[Keener98]

In today's Tribune, Phil Rogers speculates that any of Hamilton, Freel, or Hopper could be available in the Red's quest to add a #2 starter or additional relief pitchers. The Marlins are said to want pitching depth to go with their young offensive team. How about:

 

Cubs trade: Jones (Marlins sought him earlier for CF), Marshall, Veal to Marlins and Ohman to the Reds.

Marlins send Dontrelle Willis to the Reds.

Reds send Hamilton and Gonzalez/Keppinger to the Cubs.

 

Marlins get a starting CF, a young lefty starter, and a future lefty starter.

Reds get a lefty starter and reliever.

Cubs get a left-handed bat to play or platoon (with Murton) in RF or to take over CF if Pie fails and an upgrade at SS.

 

Perhaps with some tweaking this might work out.

 

Keppinger is a improvement to Theriot/Cedeno is akin to saying a unicorns is a upgrade over leprechauns

 

While it was only 241 AB's his numbers dwarf Theriots/Cedenos.

 

.332 .400 .477 equals out to an almost .900 OPS.

[frostwyrm]

Freel won't be available. He's a classic Dusty player. Moving Hamilton may actually be about getting Freel more at bats.

[Abe Frohman]

Why would Murton need to platoon? He hits LHP well.

[Keener98]

Why would Murton need to platoon? He hits LHP well.

 

 

Which is why he said the Cubs would get a LH bat to platoon with Murton.

[SweetZombieJesus]

In today's Tribune, Phil Rogers speculates that any of Hamilton, Freel, or Hopper could be available in the Red's quest to add a #2 starter or additional relief pitchers. The Marlins are said to want pitching depth to go with their young offensive team. How about:

 

Cubs trade: Jones (Marlins sought him earlier for CF), Marshall, Veal to Marlins and Ohman to the Reds.

Marlins send Dontrelle Willis to the Reds.

Reds send Hamilton and Gonzalez/Keppinger to the Cubs.

 

Marlins get a starting CF, a young lefty starter, and a future lefty starter.

Reds get a lefty starter and reliever.

Cubs get a left-handed bat to play or platoon (with Murton) in RF or to take over CF if Pie fails and an upgrade at SS.

 

Perhaps with some tweaking this might work out.

 

Keppinger is a improvement to Theriot/Cedeno is akin to saying a unicorns is a upgrade over leprechauns

 

While it was only 241 AB's his numbers dwarf Theriots/Cedenos.

 

.332 .400 .477 equals out to an almost .900 OPS.

 

And he's been in three organizations in the past two years and couldn't find a job (Cincy, NYM, KC) and played mostly 2B and 3B in the minors.

[Keener98]

In today's Tribune, Phil Rogers speculates that any of Hamilton, Freel, or Hopper could be available in the Red's quest to add a #2 starter or additional relief pitchers. The Marlins are said to want pitching depth to go with their young offensive team. How about:

 

Cubs trade: Jones (Marlins sought him earlier for CF), Marshall, Veal to Marlins and Ohman to the Reds.

Marlins send Dontrelle Willis to the Reds.

Reds send Hamilton and Gonzalez/Keppinger to the Cubs.

 

Marlins get a starting CF, a young lefty starter, and a future lefty starter.

Reds get a lefty starter and reliever.

Cubs get a left-handed bat to play or platoon (with Murton) in RF or to take over CF if Pie fails and an upgrade at SS.

 

Perhaps with some tweaking this might work out.

 

Keppinger is a improvement to Theriot/Cedeno is akin to saying a unicorns is a upgrade over leprechauns

 

While it was only 241 AB's his numbers dwarf Theriots/Cedenos.

 

.332 .400 .477 equals out to an almost .900 OPS.

 

And he's been in three organizations in the past two years and couldn't find a job (Cincy, NYM, KC) and played mostly 2B and 3B in the minors.

 

So whos to say the other 2 organizations were wrong?

[Backtobanks]

In today's Tribune, Phil Rogers speculates that any of Hamilton, Freel, or Hopper could be available in the Red's quest to add a #2 starter or additional relief pitchers. The Marlins are said to want pitching depth to go with their young offensive team. How about:

 

Cubs trade: Jones (Marlins sought him earlier for CF), Marshall, Veal to Marlins and Ohman to the Reds.

Marlins send Dontrelle Willis to the Reds.

Reds send Hamilton and Gonzalez/Keppinger to the Cubs.

 

Marlins get a starting CF, a young lefty starter, and a future lefty starter.

Reds get a lefty starter and reliever.

Cubs get a left-handed bat to play or platoon (with Murton) in RF or to take over CF if Pie fails and an upgrade at SS.

 

Perhaps with some tweaking this might work out.

 

Keppinger is a improvement to Theriot/Cedeno is akin to saying a unicorns is a upgrade over leprechauns

 

Okay, so we insist on Gonzalez instead of Keppinger. Actually, the White Sox should look into a straight Garland for Hamilton plus Gonzalez. That would solve two of their problems (CF & SS).

[Lefty]

Saying Hamilton, Freel or Hopper might be available reminds me of one of those college logic classes. Since Freel is available, whatever else is added to the statement, no matter how ludicrous, doesn't change the logic in the statement. The Reds will release Freel before they trade Hamilton for anything like what you have here.

 

That's an awful "matter-of-fact" statement for someone who doesn't work in the Reds front office, and therefore has little to no idea what they would consider. How do you know what the Reds would do?

 

It's a fact that the Reds want pitching. It's a fact that to get a #2 starter, you will have to give up value. It's a fact that releasing Ryan Freel in no way fetches you anything at all in return. So, again, how can you be so certain as to what the Reds would do?

 

Perhaps my language was inexact. "I believe there is a greater chance that the Reds release Ryan Freel than trade Hamilton for the proposed package."

 

I am flattered that you take my posts so seriously. I was under the impression that this was a fan's board. The tenor of your reply indicates that I am under some obligation to check with the Reds' front office, assuming I do not work for them, before publishing such a post. Maybe one of the moderators can clear that up.

[Hosak8]

Saying Hamilton, Freel or Hopper might be available reminds me of one of those college logic classes. Since Freel is available, whatever else is added to the statement, no matter how ludicrous, doesn't change the logic in the statement. The Reds will release Freel before they trade Hamilton for anything like what you have here.

 

That's an awful "matter-of-fact" statement for someone who doesn't work in the Reds front office, and therefore has little to no idea what they would consider. How do you know what the Reds would do?

 

It's a fact that the Reds want pitching. It's a fact that to get a #2 starter, you will have to give up value. It's a fact that releasing Ryan Freel in no way fetches you anything at all in return. So, again, how can you be so certain as to what the Reds would do?

 

Perhaps my language was inexact. "I believe there is a greater chance that the Reds release Ryan Freel than trade Hamilton for the proposed package."

 

I am flattered that you take my posts so seriously. I was under the impression that this was a fan's board. The tenor of your reply indicates that I am under some obligation to check with the Reds' front office, assuming I do not work for them, before publishing such a post. Maybe one of the moderators can clear that up.

 

And what was the tenor of your reply to the original post? You belittled him for suggesting that Hamilton might be available. How is your reply fine and dandy, while mine is not? Honestly, I don't see the difference in "tenor" between your post and mine.

[Guest]

Calm down, guys.

[Lefty]

Saying Hamilton, Freel or Hopper might be available reminds me of one of those college logic classes. Since Freel is available, whatever else is added to the statement, no matter how ludicrous, doesn't change the logic in the statement. The Reds will release Freel before they trade Hamilton for anything like what you have here.

 

That's an awful "matter-of-fact" statement for someone who doesn't work in the Reds front office, and therefore has little to no idea what they would consider. How do you know what the Reds would do?

 

It's a fact that the Reds want pitching. It's a fact that to get a #2 starter, you will have to give up value. It's a fact that releasing Ryan Freel in no way fetches you anything at all in return. So, again, how can you be so certain as to what the Reds would do?

 

Perhaps my language was inexact. "I believe there is a greater chance that the Reds release Ryan Freel than trade Hamilton for the proposed package."

 

I am flattered that you take my posts so seriously. I was under the impression that this was a fan's board. The tenor of your reply indicates that I am under some obligation to check with the Reds' front office, assuming I do not work for them, before publishing such a post. Maybe one of the moderators can clear that up.

 

And what was the tenor of your reply to the original post? You belittled him for suggesting that Hamilton might be available. How is your reply fine and dandy, while mine is not? Honestly, I don't see the difference in "tenor" between your post and mine.

 

Well I apologize to BacktoBanks (BtB) if he was offended. But he was only quoting Phil Rogers. As such the statement does not even reflect on BtB.

 

I believe Rogers' statement is the throwaway statement. I am obviously fine with BtB running with it, and my comment on it is that it is highly improbable that Hamilton is going anywhere.

[SAMMYWHO]

Someone please explain how Alex Gonzalez is an upgrade to anyone. We need offense, if we needed a ss who made all of the spectacular plays, Play Cedeno.

[Hosak8]

Saying Hamilton, Freel or Hopper might be available reminds me of one of those college logic classes. Since Freel is available, whatever else is added to the statement, no matter how ludicrous, doesn't change the logic in the statement. The Reds will release Freel before they trade Hamilton for anything like what you have here.

 

That's an awful "matter-of-fact" statement for someone who doesn't work in the Reds front office, and therefore has little to no idea what they would consider. How do you know what the Reds would do?

 

It's a fact that the Reds want pitching. It's a fact that to get a #2 starter, you will have to give up value. It's a fact that releasing Ryan Freel in no way fetches you anything at all in return. So, again, how can you be so certain as to what the Reds would do?

 

Perhaps my language was inexact. "I believe there is a greater chance that the Reds release Ryan Freel than trade Hamilton for the proposed package."

 

I am flattered that you take my posts so seriously. I was under the impression that this was a fan's board. The tenor of your reply indicates that I am under some obligation to check with the Reds' front office, assuming I do not work for them, before publishing such a post. Maybe one of the moderators can clear that up.

 

And what was the tenor of your reply to the original post? You belittled him for suggesting that Hamilton might be available. How is your reply fine and dandy, while mine is not? Honestly, I don't see the difference in "tenor" between your post and mine.

 

Well I apologize to BacktoBanks (BtB) if he was offended. But he was only quoting Phil Rogers. As such the statement does not even reflect on BtB.

 

I believe Rogers' statement is the throwaway statement. I am obviously fine with BtB running with it, and my comment on it is that it is highly improbable that Hamilton is going anywhere.

 

My issue was not with the first half of your statement. It was the last sentence, which was directed at BtB. That said, I don't want to get into a pissing match over this, because it's silly.

 

And, for the record, I can see the Reds dealing Hamilton. They have plenty of OF, and with the scenario suggested above, they get a #2 starter to go between two decent righties, and if Willis were to have one of his good seasons, that pitching staff would look very, very good. Dontrelle Willis for a guy who might spend half the year on the DL? Yeah, I can see a team making that trade. Especially if you can get a reliever, and we all know how much middle relief is valued in Cincy.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

Josh Hamilton for an 8-Ball..str8 up.