Bedard

Reading through the comments on John Fay's Reds Insider blog post about Bedard, I have to agree with Dave from Louisville, who says ...

Currently if we keep Bruce, I don't see him getting many ABs next year given the current depth. And don't start that "When Griffey gets hurt crap" because he played 144 games last year with more ABs than Dunn. Trade from a position of excess for a position of weakness.

How many more years do we need to go into camp with 4 or 5 OFs that can start on any team in baseball?

Why is trading Bailey better than trading Bruce?

Think about it.

I love Bruce as much as the next guy (sounds weird), but I said months ago that I don't think we'll ever see him in a Reds uniform. How can they afford NOT to trade him for Bedard? Isn't it common knowledge that they'd at least have a better shot at contending if Bedard was their No. 2? I don't know how much more patient fans can be ... and the message you're sending if you don't do what it takes to acquire Bedard (even if it involves dealing Bruce) is that you're not doing everything you can to win now. And John confirms (in the comments section) ...

The Orioles can't comment publicly on Bruce and the Reds can't comment on the Bedard. Talking about another teams players is tampering. This is not rumor or speculation. People with the Reds have told me -- not for attribution -- that Orioles want Bruce, but the Reds aren't going to give him up.