PDA

View Full Version : Graves signs for three years



guernsey
01-17-2003, 02:40 PM
per MLB radio.

guernsey
01-17-2003, 02:50 PM
Cincinnati Reds - Agreed to terms on a three-year contract with a mutual option for 2006 with pitcher Danny Graves.

guernsey
01-17-2003, 02:53 PM
CINCINNATI - Cincinnati Reds general manager Jim Bowden today agreed to terms with RHP Danny Graves on a 3-year contract through the 2005 season, plus a mutual option for 2006. Terms of the deal were not disclosed.

Graves was eligible for salary arbitration and would have been a free agent following the 2003 season.

"Danny is at the core of the good, young group of players we have under control the first few years of Great American Ball Park," Bowden said, "These players are going to provide our fans with an exciting brand of baseball."

Graves, 29, last season for the Reds went 7-3 with a 3.19 ERA and a team-high 32 saves in 68 games. He made his first 64 apps in relief, then finished the season in the rotation and went 1-0 with a 1.89 ERA in 4 starts. Graves is expected to fill a spot in the front of the Reds' starting rotation in 2003.

An All-Star in 2000, Graves has contributed to 117 of the Reds' 229 victories the last 3 seasons (51 percent). His 129 career saves is a club record for a righthander, and his 121 saves the last 4 years is the eighth-highest total in the Major Leagues. In the last 6 seasons, Graves has thrown 469.2 innings in relief, third-highest total in baseball.

Bowden acquired Graves from the Indians on July 31, 1997 as part of a 6-player deal in which LHP John Smiley was sent to Cleveland.

Graves' contract will be finalized following a physical examination by Reds medical director Dr. Timothy Kremchek, scheduled for 11 a.m. on Monday. The Reds formally will announce the signing at a 4:30 p.m. press conference on Monday at the Great American Ball Park administration building. Graves will not be available to the media until that Monday press conference.

Falls City Beer
01-17-2003, 02:58 PM
Ok, what's going on?

I feel better about the Reds than I have in three years.

Another fine move.

oregonred
01-17-2003, 03:11 PM
This is great news :thumbup:

Hooligan
01-17-2003, 03:22 PM
I like whats going on in Cincinnati!!

Raisor
01-17-2003, 03:24 PM
I think I'll wait until we find out how much money they gave him before I decide if I like it.

PSR

gm
01-17-2003, 03:24 PM
Yesss! :D

(I only hope this doesn't suddenly make him "more tradeable")

guernsey
01-17-2003, 03:26 PM
Originally posted by Raisor
I think I'll wait until we find out how much money they gave him before I decide if I like it.

PSR

So, lets start a Redszone pool.

I'll take $17M.

Chip R
01-17-2003, 05:24 PM
I got $18M excluding the option year

cincinnati chili
01-17-2003, 06:31 PM
I'll guess 5.5 in year 1, 6.5 in year 2, and 8 in year 3.

That's 20 mil, but less in NPV.

Reds1
01-17-2003, 06:35 PM
I bet it's backloaded like 4.5 million yr 1, 6 million year 2, 8 million yr 3. 18.5 million total. I hope it's incentive based like Scott Williamson. With this contract it gives us another million to play with and then next season we will be rid of Larkin's 9 million and we can afford him if he rocks and then 8 million 3rd year keeps him here long term. I hope it's a bit less on that 3rd year, but probably not. I may be way off.

Falls City Beer
01-17-2003, 06:41 PM
"I think I'll wait until we find out how much money they gave him before I decide if I like it."

The fact that the Reds chose to give a LTC to a pitcher with a career ERA of 3.40 instead of a 'tweener third baseman leaves me pleased as punch.

Dollars be damned.

Red Leader
01-17-2003, 06:44 PM
Here's the breakdown on Graves' contract.

Reds signed RHP Danny Graves to a three-year, $17.25 million contract with a mutual option for 2006.
That's a lot of money to give to someone who might be nothing more than an average starter. The contract includes base salaries of $5 million, $6 million and $6.25 million for each of the three years, with escalators that will increase his pay if he is a full-time starter. He also got a limited no-trade clause, and his salary will increase if he is traded during the contract.

BigRed75
01-17-2003, 07:02 PM
Excellent signing. Contract seems pretty fair to me. Danny Graves will be far from an "average" starter. I guarentee Danny will be this team's ace.

LvJ
01-17-2003, 07:09 PM
Ohh, feeling good right now. Great movie, good contract. :thumbup:

CougarQuest
01-17-2003, 07:16 PM
That is a big chunk of change for 3 years. If Graves turns out to be the starter that a lot of people in here think he will be, then we got a brillant signing. If he turns out not to be a starter or and average starter, then we have a huge problem. I was very surprised that it was $5M for the first year.

Raisor
01-17-2003, 07:39 PM
It's the two trade clauses that worry me.

Limited no trade AND more money if he IS traded.

If he tanks as a starter, the Reds are in big trouble.

PSR

Reds1
01-17-2003, 07:42 PM
great deal. I was almost right on.

traderumor
01-17-2003, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by Raisor
It's the two trade clauses that worry me.

Limited no trade AND more money if he IS traded.

If he tanks as a starter, the Reds are in big trouble.

PSR Why? If he tanks as a starter, you have an above average closer. Besides, he has good stuff and the transition went fine at the close of last year. Just can't say it, can ya? Good pitcher, good move. Try it, it was really easy.

red-in-la
01-17-2003, 08:45 PM
This I like. The Reds have just, in the past week, given pretty good money to STARTING PITCHERS. Seems like somebody is finally getting the idea as to where you build a win from.

Tho only thing I hate is the "Jimmy Haynes can walk if he is any good" deal that Bowden signed. I wish he had forked up a bit more cash and gotten a team option for 2004.

Old Red Guard
01-17-2003, 08:57 PM
I love the move. I'm with FCB - damn the dollars. Its about time we payed some dough for the best young arm we have. I was worried, real worried actually that Graves wanted out. Obviously that's not so. I think this will have an effect in the clubhouse, too. Not every guy who is going to make a good size paycheck is going to get shipped out - this news made my day.

Big Red 75 - You and I feel the same way about Graves! Thank You!

Scrap Irony
01-17-2003, 10:03 PM
* Good call, ORG, on the clubhouse issue. Now that Cincinnati has taken steps to at least compete, it looks like most of the malcontents (to borrow a member name) have already gone the other places.

* Note to self: never pi$$ off Jim Bowden. Players who happened to say something negative about the Red GM were shipped out to the Pirates and the Tigers. Both were happy when dealt; I wonder if they're as happy now, seeing the steps Bowden and co. have taken to compete?

* You've gotta think the Red clubhouse will be a pretty cool place to hang out now, what with LTC's given to Graves, Casey, Wilson, and others. All of them are reportedly fun to hang around with, work very hard at their craft, and care about the average fan and charity work. Wonder if the image of the Cincinnati player will improve?

* Think Junior is happy now that Cincinnati has antied up a few more bucks? Think that had anything to do with his desire to stay? (Nah. I don't buy that and I typed it.)

* Dunn and Kearns are probably playing Playstation 3 right now in the back of a pick-up truck, with rifles nearby, and fishing gear stowed in the back. 5 will get you ten that at least one of them has a can of Skoal handy.

* Can anyone make that noise when tapping their fingers against the top of a can of dip? In high school, that was the sign of a true ballplayer. (At least it was in my little redneck town.) Wonder how many Reds can do the same?

* Speaking of tobacco, wonder how many Reds smoke? I know Mark Grace does. Anyone know?

* Do all of these LTCs mean Cincinnati will again raise payroll in 2004? It looks likely, as not all of these guys will be able to be dealt.

* The Graves' deal the biggest risk the Reds have made in how long? Five years? Ten? A score?

* Why is a score twenty years and not one, seven, or three? What sport counts by twenties?

* Wouldn't it be nice if someone with enough money decided to buy Redszone lock, stock, and two smoking URLs? To Hell with the Reds, I need Redszone more!

* What, exactly, is enhanced mode on under the vB code, and, if I push it, will I then be truly enhanced? Will this mean that I become funnier and that all my split infinitives disapper? I so hope!

guernsey
01-17-2003, 10:36 PM
This I like. The Reds have just, in the past week, given pretty good money to STARTING PITCHERS. Seems like somebody is finally getting the idea as to where you build a win from.


The Reds will be spending about 20% of the '03 payroll on starting pitching. How long has it been since that happened? Rijo, Browning & Jackson?

M2
01-17-2003, 10:37 PM
The Reds didn't play this one safe and I couldn't be happier.

It's nice to see the organization make a big call. Moves like this, if they work out, are what helps you leapfrog over the competition.

That said, it doesn't really change the quality of the team on the field.

But hopefully we've got a frontline starter, a guy who you actually want to see take the ball in a big game, for the next three or four years.

letsgojunior
01-18-2003, 12:57 AM
Raisor, the NTC is extremely limited. From the DDN:

"And he has a limited no-trade clause in which he can nix a trade to four teams of his choosing."

So basically he can say I won't go to Montreal, the Devil Rays, KC, Detroit, or whatever four teams he really, really doesn't want to go to.

As far as I know, Bowden flatly refuses to give full NTC's, and thus you have situations like Casey where he has an option to void the contract if traded.

I like this move. The money is a little high for my taste, but Graves has been very solid and has a nice, smooth delivery (i.e. not very injury prone). I don't like the fact that he has what I feel is a pretty weak infield behind him, but still, I am glad he is staying a Red because unless Dempster finds the 2000 version of himself, I think Danny will be our best SP next year.

Not to hijack this thread, but according to Hal, the Reds are slightly over-budget right now and are trying to move Sully/White for prospects.

WVRedsFan
01-18-2003, 02:48 AM
Originally posted by Raisor
It's the two trade clauses that worry me.

Limited no trade AND more money if he IS traded.

If he tanks as a starter, the Reds are in big trouble.

PSR

My thoughts exactly. Graves has started 4 games as a Red. He did well. I'm glad, but to offer up that kind of money to a kid who has 4 starts in his major league career, has an iffy record as a closer, and who only 2 years ago was complaining about everything from the management of the club to the fans, simply is not my cup of tea. It will, in fact, make it a certainty that we will have Danny Graves on our staff for the rest of his career--win or lose. I hate to say this guys, but a Moehler or Estes signing would have more sense than this. I'm just flabbergasted at this deal.

Raisor
01-18-2003, 03:58 AM
Originally posted by BigRed75
Excellent signing. Contract seems pretty fair to me. Danny Graves will be far from an "average" starter. I guarentee Danny will be this team's ace.


Being the Reds' "ace" and being a legit major league "ace" is probably two different things.

Danny's got a LOT to prove now, and is going to have a ton of pressure on his shoulders.

PSR

Guacarock
01-18-2003, 05:07 AM
If the Reds are slightly over budget now, then the 2003 payroll has to be in the $56 million range, not the $60 million cap being bantered around. Removing White or Sullivan would reduce the figure to $53 million. Trading both of them off for prospects would further reduce the total to about $50 million.

Here's how I arrived at my figures:

Griffey $8.5 million
Larkin $7.6 million
Casey $5.6 million
Graves $5 million
Boone $3.7 million
Dempster $3.25 million
White $3.1 million
Sullivan $2.8 million
Haynes $2.5 million
Williamson $1.6 million
Larue $1.25 million
Stinnett $1.1 million
Castro $0.8 million
Chen $0.8 million
Wilson $0.5 million
Guillen $0.5 million
One additional pitcher (Rijo?, Heredia?) at $0.5 million
Nine additional players averaging between $0.3-0.5 million apiece (Kearns, Dunn, Taylor, Guillen/Mateo, Larson, Branyan, Lopez/Dawkins, Reitsma, Riedling)
Reds' residual payment to cover the Dessens' contract $0.3 million
Payments to deferred pools for Larkin,Griffey plus reserves to cover potential contractual bonuses $2.5 million
Contingency to pay minor leaguers filling in for contract players on the DL or called up in September $1 million

The only way that the Reds could be pushing $60 million for 2003 is if the team is preparing to offer long-term contracts to Dunn, Kearns or both of them, laying out some extra scratch this coming season in return for concessions down the line. Might be in the offing -- we'll see. But if not, then the $60 million cap is a chimera, or else Jimbo is holding back a few million in case it's needed for the stretch run.

My best educated guess. The Reds plan to spend $55-56 million this opening season at GAB, but can bump up the figure just a shade, to $60 million tops, if attendance and the heat of competition warrants it.

I can't see the team moving both the White and Sullivan contracts this off-season, but probably one of them's a goner. White is the most likely to go, based on his 2002 performance and our stockpiling of southpaws like Chen, Heredia, Mercker and Anderson. But we also have a few candidates waiting in the wings to replace Sullivan (Riedling, Reitsma, Hudson, Pineda, et. al.), so he could be sacrificed at the altar first depending on which suitors come calling.

Even with the abrupt downward shift we've seen this winter in salaries for relievers, either White or Sullivan can be dealt, especially if one of them comes on like gangbusters this spring. Somehow, somewhere, a well-heeled team will have miscalculated its available talent only to belatedly realize it's a premium setup man short of contending.

Just hope it's not the Reds who are caught in that crunch. I don't really mind us being a feeder team for relievers or dealing from a position of strength to satisfy other more glaring needs. Shifting resources from the bullpen to the starting corps is a gamble, but it's a calculated gamble we're probably overdue in taking.

ForLoveOfTheGame
01-18-2003, 05:51 AM
Count me in as one person who thinks this is the Reds best move this offseason. Graves is a great pitcher with 3 plus pitches. He has the stuff and low pitch counts to thrive as a starter, and his almost flawless delivery makes me believe that he will do just fine as a starter.

If he does produce like many of us believe he is capable of and crank out a 15-18 win season with a 3.00-3.50 era, he will be one of the better bargains in baseball. If he struggles as a starter and is moved back to the pen, he is still paid less than the top 1/3 of all the closers in the game.

Graves has a legit shot at producing at the level of a legit #1/#2 type of starter, and that is a bargain in today's market at an average of 6M per year. He is 29, and entering his prime, so i see nothing not to like about this deal.

cincinnati chili
01-18-2003, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by CougarQuest
I was very surprised that it was $5M for the first year.

As you can see here, his "arbitration value" is close to six million for 2003 (you can thank the contract to Billy Wagner and others for that). So there would have been no reason for Graves to agree to a LTC, unless the average was close to 6 mil/year.

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/news/mlb_news.jsp?ymd=20030117&content_id=192349&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp

Appalachian Red
01-18-2003, 10:21 AM
Great move to sign Danny to a LTC. Graves' stuff will be more effective as a starter than a reliever (3 pitches/ varied speed/ no overpowering fastball). I'm expecting a big year from him as a legitimate #1 or #2 starter.

RANDY IN INDY
01-18-2003, 10:22 AM
I like the signing. In view of the market, I think it was a fair deal. I think Graves will be a good starter, and I think he is a good guy to boot. (I met him in Florida a couple of years ago, and he comes across as a regular guy) It also is a good sign about the organization to guys like Dunn and Kearns. I'm very hopeful about this season. If the guys stay healthy, I think they are going to be very competitive and might surprise. Again, a good signing, and a very positive one for the ballclub.

Falls City Beer
01-18-2003, 11:20 AM
You can't have it both ways: you can't say, "we'll never compete because we don't dedicate ourselves to pitching" and then turn around and complain that this deal wasn't perfect. Unless your payroll exceeds 100 million, perfect deals don't fall into your lap; you make them happen. High risk; high reward.


Would you rather stick with low risk, low reward?

The optimal thing would be to produce a Roy Oswalt from your farm every year. The signing of a guy with the talent of Graves to a LTC is, IMO, the second most optimal thing.

whatafool
01-18-2003, 11:32 AM
good move...still doesn't improves the team. But a good move nonetheless.

guernsey
01-21-2003, 08:37 AM
More details on Danny's contract from Tony Jackson.



Graves deal includes limited no-trade clause
By Tony Jackson
Post staff reporter

The Reds called a news conference Monday to announce the signing of Danny Graves, an announcement that considering it had been made Friday without a news conference was about as fresh as whatever is under that mysterious foil wrapper in your refrigerator.
While not part of the announcement, some details of the contract have surfaced beyond the widely reported salaries of $5 million in 2003, $6 million in 2004 and $6.25 million in 2005. The deal contains a limited no-trade clause in which Graves can "blacklist" up to four teams to which he doesn't want to be traded. If he is traded, an escalator clause would add $500,000 to his salary that year and any subsequent years remaining on the contract.

Another escalator clause based on innings pitched would apply anywhere from $100,000 to $400,000, in $100,000 increments, to the buyout of the contract's mutual option for 2006. Graves was in his final winter of arbitration eligibility and could have become a free agent after the 2003 season if he hadn't signed the three-year, $17.25 million deal.

In fact, he had no interest in becoming anything of the kind, which clearly had something to do with the fact this winter's free-agent market is the softest in years.

"There were so many factors that went into our thought process, and that would be one of them," said Alan Nero, one of Graves' agents. "There was also the idea that he is becoming a starting pitcher, and there is some risk involved in that as well. It just got to the point where this made so much sense for everyone. Danny has been very clear from the get-go that he wants to stay in Cincinnati. When your client has those feelings, you ought to get something done."

Graves is a virtual lock for the rotation, where he will join Paul Wilson, Jimmy Haynes, Ryan Dempster and whoever emerges from a spring training free-for-all for the fifth spot.

REDREAD
01-21-2003, 10:46 AM
Wow.. I guess I was wrong about Graves wanting to leave.

Great move by the Reds. Although I have to agree with gm.. let's hope this means that Graves hangs around awhile.

Good move by the Reds.

SirFelixCat
05-20-2003, 10:06 PM
Thought I'd bring this gem up to the front again...he's starting to make that signing REAL good :thumbup:

remdog
05-20-2003, 10:41 PM
Personally, I like this move....for most of the reasons stated above.

Rem

buckeyenut
05-21-2003, 09:33 AM
This move took a lot of guts. Not sure I would have done it if I was them. But Graves is showing signs of making it look like pure genius.

He could be a real bargain by the end of this deal.

SirFelixCat
05-21-2003, 11:03 AM
Originally posted by buckeyenut
This move took a lot of guts. Not sure I would have done it if I was them. But Graves is showing signs of making it look like pure genius.

He could be a real bargain by the end of this deal.

He sure is making a ton of believers nowadays.

:beerme: Danny!

paulrichjr
11-06-2003, 03:58 PM
I have read so many negative things about the Reds payroll (some posted by me) lately that I thought I would look back at this post and refresh some people's minds about what many of us wrote. Man it sure is surprising to see what bad GMs we all are. Nearly all of the posts are positive about this signing while today you can't find one this is positive. He can still go into the bullpen and be a fairly inexpensive closer compared to many of them out there.... No I don't like the signing now either. Sure is funny what a difference a year makes.

GoReds
11-06-2003, 04:04 PM
I STILL think that Graves has the stuff to be an effective starter. Problem is, I don't think Danny believes it. His half-hearted attempt at developing a windup is evidence. Reminds me of the kid in Bad News Bears II (okay, yeah, I saw it) who couldn't figure out who he wanted to emulate.

Chip R
11-06-2003, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by paulrichjr
ISure is funny what a difference a year makes. Hindsight is always 20/20. Look how many folks who liked the Jr. trade want him out of town now. And all the folks who pleaded and begged Lindner not to trade Larkin were so pissed he was making that kind of money and hardly ever playing.

Red Leader
11-06-2003, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by Red Leader
Here's the breakdown on Graves' contract.

Reds signed RHP Danny Graves to a three-year, $17.25 million contract with a mutual option for 2006.
That's a lot of money to give to someone who might be nothing more than an average starter. The contract includes base salaries of $5 million, $6 million and $6.25 million for each of the three years, with escalators that will increase his pay if he is a full-time starter. He also got a limited no-trade clause, and his salary will increase if he is traded during the contract.

I still stick with what I said back then, "That's a lot of money to give to someone who might be nothing more than an average starter."

paulrichjr
11-06-2003, 04:18 PM
Wouldn't it be nice if he had even been average....

I know hindsight is 20/20 but it sure is neat to look back and see what we wrote at that time.... It makes you wonder what next year will bring....

I am now looking at the posts from October 2004 and WOW the Reds have Pete Rose as the manager and they just won the World Series...Griffey played 150 games and hit 45 home runs... Dunn hit 50 and only struck out 175 times.... Graves saved 40 games.... Claussen is the Rookie of the Year...Kearns believe it or not is the MVP with 200 hits and 35 home runs... and finally to prove that I am a total idiot... Jimmy Haynes won 15 games again.

traderumor
11-06-2003, 04:34 PM
Ugh! I didn't like seeing again what I wrote. But this is a good example of why we should appreciate how tough it is for a GM to make the right call when handing out multi year contracts. Go back to the 50s and before when all they did was one year contracts ;)

Phoenix
11-06-2003, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Raisor
Being the Reds' "ace" and being a legit major league "ace" is probably two different things.


PSR

I agree. Every team has a #1 starter. But there are only a few "aces" in baseball- and some teams like the Diamondbacks and the Cubs have 2.

Red Leader
11-06-2003, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by traderumor
Ugh! I didn't like seeing again what I wrote. But this is a good example of why we should appreciate how tough it is for a GM to make the right call when handing out multi year contracts. Go back to the 50s and before when all they did was one year contracts ;)

I agree, traderumor. I was skeptical of the Graves signing back when it happened and it turned out I was correct in my thinking. The problem is that if this deal wasn't done and Graves signed a 1 year contract and then went 18-6 with a 3.55 ERA or so, this contract would have looked pretty nice. At the time that this contract was signed if you would have put 2 lines on a board and told someone that one of these was Graves' actual line for 2003, I would bet you that the majority would have still taken this contract and picked line #2 as what they thought was his actual line (back when the contract was signed)

2003: 4-15 5.33 ERA

2003: 14-5 3.55 ERA

RANDY IN INDY
11-06-2003, 05:32 PM
I still like Graves, and think he can be effective, wherever he is used. Last season was a tough one to be a starting pitcher on the Reds. Absolutely no confidence in the "minor league" lineup getting you any runs. I won't be the least bit dissapointed if Danny Graves is a Cincinnati Red this season. I still like what he brings to the ballclub.

TeamBoone
11-06-2003, 06:46 PM
Well put, Randy. But I think we're in the minority.

wheels
11-06-2003, 08:35 PM
You know what? That "Minor league lineup" was what was keeping this club alive in the early goings.

That pitching staff was abysmal for the entire first half of the season.

RANDY IN INDY
11-07-2003, 09:11 AM
Yeah, that "minor league lineup" was great. Are you really Carl Lindner?;)

GAC
11-07-2003, 10:06 AM
I can see paying an effective starter/rotation guy 6 Mil/year... but not a BP guy.

IMO....guys like Danny Graves are a dime a dozen in MLB (and I'm referring to BP guys and closers).

We have always been able to find good closers, going back to the days of the Nasty Boys and forward.

I'm one who has always believed that the closer role was over-rated. ;)

UC_Ken
11-07-2003, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by TeamBoone
Well put, Randy. But I think we're in the minority.
I'm with you two. The problem is Graves never believed he could start and was almost looking to fail. I doubt Graves could mentally commit to being a starter but if he did I think that'd be the best role for him.

Chip R
11-07-2003, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by GAC
I can see paying an effective starter/rotation guy 6 Mil/year... but not a BP guy.

IMO....guys like Danny Graves are a dime a dozen in MLB (and I'm referring to BP guys and closers).

We have always been able to find good closers, going back to the days of the Nasty Boys and forward.

I'm one who has always believed that the closer role was over-rated. ;) And I thought you weren't a SABR guy. ;)

westofyou
11-07-2003, 12:04 PM
From what I surmise, Graves now "didn't" want to start, didn't have his heart in it. Couldn't find the time to work on a windup.

But somehow was able to fill out that automatic deposit paperwork he got from HR.

Graves as a starter averaged 2 less K's per 9 than he did as a reliever and he gave up a HR every 5 innings (every 12 as reliever)

In the house of cards built by Bowden (iffy defense, high BR/low K pitching staff) Graves season was as dangerous and damaging as Marcias bracelet was that fateful evening before the green stamps store closed.

TeamBoone
11-07-2003, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by westofyou
From what I surmise, Graves now "didn't" want to start, didn't have his heart in it. Couldn't find the time to work on a windup.

But somehow was able to fill out that automatic deposit paperwork he got from HR.

As you said, this is an assumption on someone's part.... Danny never said it (at least not publically) and no one knows what on in his head. Therefore, I think this is a very unfair statement.

westofyou
11-07-2003, 12:14 PM
As you said, this is an assumption on someone's part.... Danny never said it (at least not publically) and no one knows what on in his head. Therefore, I think this is a very unfair statement.

Reds.MLB.com's Chris Haft reports Cincinnati Reds P Danny Graves has been sent back to the bullpen after struggling as a starter. "I'm extremely excited," said Graves. "I'm excited that my arm's not going to hurt any more. It (starting) is something that's just not for me."

http://kffl.com/player/5016/mlb?PHPSESSID=a

Sunday, March 23, 2003

http://reds.enquirer.com/2003/03/23/wwwred2a23.html

Graves worked exclusively from the stretch Saturday. He has struggled to get comfortable with the windup in his first four starts.

"I have to get comfortable," he said. "My job is to get guys out. My job is not to worry about the windup."

It's hard to argue with the results. The windup is supposed to give pitchers added velocity. But Graves has thrown up to 93 mph from the stretch.

GoReds
11-07-2003, 12:25 PM
It sounds like Graves thought the windup wouldn't be a big deal and waited for ST to work on it. That mistake may have been costly. However, IIRC, Danny's pitching was so bad, he never had a chance to work on the windup (runners constantly on).

What I remember most about Danny's starts is that his pitches were consistently up in the zone. THAT (and the resistance to starting) proved to be Danny's undoing.

I'm hoping that Danny and the Reds now understand how much work needs to be invested in Danny to make the starting experiment work. It's easy to throw dollars at a problem expecting a fix - now they have to have the effort. IMO, Danny really screwed up. Hopefully, he will have the motivation not to look so bad given the opportunity this year.

Chip R
11-07-2003, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by GoReds
What I remember most about Danny's starts is that his pitches were consistently up in the zone. THAT (and the resistance to starting) proved to be Danny's undoing.

I'm hoping that Danny and the Reds now understand how much work needs to be invested in Danny to make the starting experiment work. It's easy to throw dollars at a problem expecting a fix - now they have to have the effort. IMO, Danny really screwed up. Hopefully, he will have the motivation not to look so bad given the opportunity this year. That's exactly what his problem was last year. His ground ball to fly ball ratio was not even close to what it was in previous seasons. Now I don't know if that was because he didn't have a windup or not. Not winding up didn't seem to affect his GB ratio when he was relieving. I think that he also was not motivated to start. Sure, you can say that he had that new contract to motivate him but evidently that didn't do the trick. So they either need to find a different form of motivation or put him back in the bullpen.

gm
11-07-2003, 04:24 PM
"So they either need to find a different form of motivation"

No more tatoos or body piecings until you win 10 decisions/year?

No change of hairstyle until 15 wins

etc

Chip R
11-07-2003, 04:36 PM
Originally posted by gm
"So they either need to find a different form of motivation"

No more tatoos or body piecings until you win 10 decisions/year?

No change of hairstyle until 15 wins

etc Whatever it takes.

RedFanAlways1966
11-07-2003, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by Chip R
Whatever it takes.

FCB.... oh FCB, where are you?!?!

Would you might betting an FCB kid on Danny winning 10 or 15 games in the 2004 season? The REDS need you, brother!

Come on... the kid's "Jimmy term" has to about be done. Should be available for another Dad-bet. Do it for your team, man!

:roll:

TeamBoone
11-07-2003, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by westofyou
Reds.MLB.com's Chris Haft reports Cincinnati Reds P Danny Graves has been sent back to the bullpen after struggling as a starter. "I'm extremely excited," said Graves. "I'm excited that my arm's not going to hurt any more. It (starting) is something that's just not for me."

That was stated AFTER the fact, not before, which is what I thought you meant in your original statement.

westofyou
11-07-2003, 05:49 PM
That was stated AFTER the fact, not before, which is what I thought you meant in your original statement.

What I "really" meant is that Graves "knew" he was going to be a starter, he "knew" he needed to learn to pitch from the windup, he also "knew" that his contract was being based on the hope that he would sufficently eat up innings.

It all failed and now the Reds will be paying a guy over 10% of their payroll and he'll pitch less than 5% of the innings next season.

GoReds
11-07-2003, 05:54 PM
Danny, hello, my name is Dan O'Brien, the new GM. Listen, I heard about the problems that you had pitching last year. I also understand that you signed a starter's contract. Okay, so here's the deal - work on the windup and keeping the pitches down or I'll send you to Detroit for a paperweight and you can room with Dmitri.

Look forward to seeing that windup in ST, Danny.

Oh, and, get your hair cut.

TeamBoone
11-07-2003, 06:09 PM
OK, now I'm even more confused. I was not aware that Danny becoming a starter was a done deal at the time his LTC was signed... or that it had even been discussed.

But then, my memory has failed me before.

GAC
11-08-2003, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by Chip R
And I thought you weren't a SABR guy. ;)

It didn't take SABR to come to that conclusion. :lol:

We can get the same production from Graves, in the closer roles, for alot less money IMO.

Those guys are out there.

Remember...."NOBODY SCORES ON DANNY GRAVES!" :evilgrin:

Chip R
11-08-2003, 10:40 AM
Originally posted by GAC
It didn't take SABR to come to that conclusion. :lol:

We can get the same production from Graves, in the closer roles, for alot less money IMO.

Those guys are out there.

Remember...."NOBODY SCORES ON DANNY GRAVES!" :evilgrin: Come out of the closet, GAC. We know you dream about bullpens by committee and players with a big OPS. ;)

Raisor
11-08-2003, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by TeamBoone
OK, now I'm even more confused. I was not aware that Danny becoming a starter was a done deal at the time his LTC was signed... or that it had even been discussed.

But then, my memory has failed me before.


It has this time :D


Don't forget, Danny had that starting "tryout" at the end of 2002. That's when it was decided that he would be converted for 2003, and that was before the contract.

TeamBoone
11-08-2003, 01:06 PM
Yup, it's definitely declined (my memory, just in case you forgot what I'm referring too, LOL). Because I thought his LTC was signed during the 2001 offseason.

Yikes! :eek:

WVRedsFan
11-09-2003, 04:26 PM
I'll stick to what I said in January. Why offer that much money to a kid who hadn't started a game? It was Bowden's pipe dream to save money. Was he the ace? No and there was no reason to believe he would be. Not one. Could we expect Scott Williamson to last a season as closer? No. His history of arm trouble and his tendency to be very hittable gave me pause.

Not dissing either player, but this was a flawed deal from the beginning. It was based on hopes and dreams. That's one heck of a lot of money for hopes and dreams. And the result is legendary. Bust.

And for those who think he could be persuaded to believe in himself as a starter, I give you a line from the movie "Rookie of the Year."

"You have to reach down to your "want to." Or something like that. Danny has proven he doesn't want to.

paulrichjr
11-10-2003, 12:49 AM
He didn't have to "want to". The deal was signed... He was locked up for 3 years. Do you think that if he had had a 1 year contract he might have pitched differently. Just think what his contract would be this year after last years mess? 3 million tops - maybe 2 million. He would have learned how to pitch like a starter and not abandoned the plan in March. Bowden blew this big time. Was the Griffey deal dumb? Yes but understandable. This one was not understandable considering that he was being converted and had never really pitched as a starter.

TeamBoone
11-10-2003, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by WVRedsFan
Danny has proven he doesn't want to.

Do you really think Danny went out there on that mound for almost the entire season and didn't try to do his best? I honestly feel he has a whole lot more pride than that, and I don't believe it for a second.

GoReds
11-10-2003, 07:11 AM
I don't know if he didn't try to do his best, but I think he underestimated how difficult it would be to develop a good windup. It's obvious that he became frustrated early and never developed the confidence in his ability to start last year.

That was a helluva cop out to ask out of the rotation, considering that the Reds were going nowhere. He should have gone back to working on the windup.

WVRedsFan
11-12-2003, 02:24 AM
Originally posted by TeamBoone
Do you really think Danny went out there on that mound for almost the entire and didn't try to do his best? I honestly feel he has a whole lot more pride than that, and I don't believe it for a second.

Oh, I think Danny did his best. His heart just wasn't into it.

As all communications were somewhat blurred during the past administration, I think that probably JimBo never told Danny that he would definitely be a starter. I think that he implied it to Danny and announced it to everyone else. Thus, Danny gets to Spring training and he's a starter, and not just a starter--he's the ace. Talk about playing with a player's pshcye.

Graves simply had not even come close to proving he could be a multi-million dollar pitcher, starter or not. Bowden was just in survival mode--throwing out a crumb to fans with a somewhat popular player (popular in Cincinnati, I might add. No West Virginian or Kentuckyian has much love for Danny's comments about the drunkards who come from both places).

Danny's place is in the bullpen at about half what he is making. Thanks to the strange mind of Jim Bowden, he is not tradeable nor is he going to produce enough to justify his salary.

If there ever was a good move by John Allen, firing Jim Bowden was it. The other moves Allen has made are open for discussion.