sportscoach
RD's Guardians PR Man!
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2016
- Messages
- 20,776
- Reaction score
- 9,530
- Points
- 113
The Reds wouldn't..
Neither should the Guardians..
While getting Petty would be a nice add (MOR SP / Back of the Pen, ceiling) and well conceived as part of this deal.... The rest of it offers more questions than solutions.. Bradish's delivery looks like a lot of moving parts and a lot of effort.. Guys like him almost always end up losing control or having to have ligament surgery.. The two middle infielders being given the opportunity to move other positions says the deal is not well thought out.. The biggest problem with this deal is the FAILURE to address the catching situation if one or both of Basallo and/or Tanner are excluded...
David Fry isn't the answer.. (neither is Zunino & Lavas.. as stated in the spring training) Catching is the key to the Guardians near future.. This deal ignores that desperate need.. Easy pass..
See, I don't think the deal ignores it as much as you think...
Yes, we need catching and Bradish, is just an MLB ready arm, which we could see if we could get someone else in place and the Petty, was just moving Straw/Freeman so it doesn't have to be him. We could do a couple separate moves... We just need to move Straw, Freeman, Rosario for the deal to 100% work the way I wished it too...
Norby is a 2B who already plays some SS, LF, RF so doing an utility role wouldn't be a bad idea, so he wouldn't be doing new positions really... Westburg would be, but he has been playing OF this season with Baltimore. He adds the 20+ HR element we have needed from the right side...
So would you take a lesser pitching prospect and one of the catchers back instead of Bradish?
If we did Bieber for Westburg, Norby, Haskins, an SP prospect like a Johnson/Povich and Basallo, would that be a better deal for you in a sense?
Like I said, we could figure out a way to trade Straw, Freeman, Rosario, while trading prospects for a C?