PDA

View Full Version : 2 more years for Freel



Danny Serafini
04-16-2007, 01:21 PM
According to the team press notes Freel and the Reds have agreed to a contract extension through 2009. No word on dollar amounts yet.

Red Leader
04-16-2007, 01:24 PM
ugh.

Joseph
04-16-2007, 01:24 PM
Didn't he just sign one last season? Not that I'm complaining much, hopefully it's a good deal and makes him more trade able if it comes to that.

pedro
04-16-2007, 01:27 PM
Considering the Reds current depth in the upper minors this isn't bad move if the money is fair.

KronoRed
04-16-2007, 01:27 PM
Not a fan of this unless it's ridiculously cheap.

membengal
04-16-2007, 01:29 PM
As long as he doesn't block Bruce, Hamilton, whomever when they are ready, sounds fine as long as the dollars are not crazy.

Joseph
04-16-2007, 01:32 PM
This has to signal a return to the role of super sub does it not? In coming seasons that is.

Puffy
04-16-2007, 01:33 PM
So does this mean his Hall of Fame plaque will be featured with a Reds cap?

BRM
04-16-2007, 01:34 PM
Didn't he just sign one last season? Not that I'm complaining much, hopefully it's a good deal and makes him more trade able if it comes to that.

It was after the '05 season according to MLB4U:


signed 2-year deal worth 3M thru 2007 season on 12/19/05- + he receives salaries of 1.3M in 2006 and 1.7M in 2007- + his 2007 salary can increase to 2M with with 200PA in 2006- + his 2007 salary could rise as high as 2.65M with 650PA- + 2005 salary: 405K

BRM
04-16-2007, 01:38 PM
Press conference at 4pm according to Fay's blog.

edabbs44
04-16-2007, 01:54 PM
rotoworld is guessing in the $8-9 million range.

Chip R
04-16-2007, 01:55 PM
Press conference at 4pm according to Fay's blog.


I wonder if he'll show up with dirt and grass stains on his shirt. ;)

edabbs44
04-16-2007, 01:57 PM
I wonder if he'll show up with dirt and grass stains on his shirt. ;)

Freel's buying tonight.

http://www.red-hot-mama.com/images/uploads/freel_mugshot_2005.jpg

CTA513
04-16-2007, 01:57 PM
*edit* just saw that the John Fay blog entry was about his old extention.

CySeymour
04-16-2007, 01:59 PM
I didn't see this one coming. Kind of shocking, actually.

redsfan30
04-16-2007, 02:09 PM
Is it just me, or has the overall tone towards Ryan Freel done a complete 180 relatively quickly around here?

Red Leader
04-16-2007, 02:13 PM
Is it just me, or has the overall tone towards Ryan Freel done a complete 180 relatively quickly around here?

I've never not liked Ryan Freel, I just think he's a spare part. I don't get all excited that the team signs spare parts to extensions or long term contracts before addressing holes on the current team, though. That's my reason for the "ugh" post above. Can't speak for anyone else.

After this signing it wouldn't surprise me to see the Reds go with a Griffey, Hamilton, Freel OF next year and bye-bye Adam. This signing makes that option a little more realistic, IMO, and that's another reason for the "ugh" above.

KronoRed
04-16-2007, 02:14 PM
After this signing it wouldn't surprise me to see the Reds go with a Griffey, Hamilton, Freel OF next year and bye-bye Adam. This signing makes that option a little more realistic, IMO, and that's another reason for the "ugh" above.
If it's 5+ mill a season then I think you could be right about this, budget minded teams don't toss 5 mill a year on guys who they plan to have as a backup.

redsfan30
04-16-2007, 02:16 PM
Depending on the dollar amounts, maybe this is a deal geared towards a possible trade?

Red Leader
04-16-2007, 02:19 PM
Depending on the dollar amounts, maybe this is a deal geared towards a possible trade?

I hope that's what it is, but I'm not going all in on that hope. If it's not and the Reds do plan on going with Griffey, Freel, and Hamilton they better get a huge butt load of talent for Dunn at the deadline this year. Still won't be the same, but letting Dunn walk at the end of the year would infuriate me.

kaldaniels
04-16-2007, 02:25 PM
Say what you all want about Freel regard the stats and production and all...he just seems to be one of those guys you'd rather have on your side than be playing against him. Imagine he hit FA and we played against him 18 times a year...he just seems to be one of those guys who drives opposing teams nuts. I like the extension, especially if he does assume the "super-sub" role.

oneupper
04-16-2007, 02:26 PM
Freel is VERY replaceable. The Freels of this world come in, give you 3-4 years of aceptable performance and you let them go on their way.

WK got rid of AK and FL because he didn't want to tie up big $$$ on average performance.

This is a horrible move. The team gets older and too many things can go wrong for it to be even remotely worth it.

fearofpopvol1
04-16-2007, 02:37 PM
Is it just me, or has the overall tone towards Ryan Freel done a complete 180 relatively quickly around here?

Agreed completely. Enter Josh Hamilton (though).

4-5 mil a year would be a bit pricey. I'll reserve judgment until the official amount(s) are revealed.

RedEye
04-16-2007, 02:49 PM
Color me confused. Freel is a useful player, but that's it. Why are we spending all our money on useful players rather than looking to invest in cornerstones? IMO, we've already overpaid for Arroyo and a gazillion old relievers. Depending on the dollar amount, we might now be adding an aging supersub to that list.

big boy
04-16-2007, 02:54 PM
Could this have been for the fans? I know someone who would boycott the Reds if they ever unloaded Freel.

Caveat Emperor
04-16-2007, 02:56 PM
Freel's a very valuable commodity for a small-market team: a player that can give above replacement-level performance at multiple positions on the diamond.

For a team with no bench to speak of, having someone like Freel around is beyond important -- especially if the team wants to start working Hamilton into the everyday lineup. Plus, if he feels hes being fairly compensated he'll be less likely to complain about fewer starts, IMO.

As long as the dollars aren't insane, I'm OK with this move.

Marc D
04-16-2007, 02:57 PM
Remember all these nickels and dimes being spent on spare parts when we can't afford/won't pay dollars to keep Dunn.

Caveat Emperor
04-16-2007, 03:04 PM
Remember all these nickels and dimes being spent on spare parts when we can't afford/won't pay dollars to keep Dunn.

So far I haven't seen any real nickel and diming behavior from the new regime. They paid Harang to keep him. They paid Arroyo to keep him. They paid Dunn to keep him.

Who is to say the Reds can't/won't pay Dunn to stay around when his contract comes up? I haven't seen any indication that they plan to nickel and dime with in-house talent, thus far.

Kc61
04-16-2007, 03:05 PM
Freel's a very valuable commodity for a small-market team: a player that can give above replacement-level performance at multiple positions on the diamond.

For a team with no bench to speak of, having someone like Freel around is beyond important -- especially if the team wants to start working Hamilton into the everyday lineup. Plus, if he feels hes being fairly compensated he'll be less likely to complain about fewer starts, IMO.

As long as the dollars aren't insane, I'm OK with this move.

Good post. Krivsky likes depth. He understands that, in addition to stars, you need good role players too. The depth of the pitching staff will definitely help the Reds this year.

Freel may not be a starter/lead off man for all three years, but he is a good guy to have. Plays multiple positions, covers ground in the outfield, hits right handed, a lead off type (Reds have very few).

Eventually Krivksy will spend for more stars, I'm sure of it. But making sure the team is deep and flexible is important too. Good move.

PuffyPig
04-16-2007, 03:08 PM
This makes Freel more tradeable.

Without the signing, eventually the descision to stay or go would rest with Freel.

It now rest with us.

As long as the dollors are in line with his value, I don't see the harm in getting some cost security for our assets.

And to those how thing we overpayed fro Arroyo? Did you see what guys like Meche, Lilly etc. were getting last year?

kaldaniels
04-16-2007, 03:08 PM
Good post. Krivsky likes depth. He understands that, in addition to stars, you need good role players too. The depth of the pitching staff will definitely help the Reds this year.

Freel may not be a starter/lead off man for all three years, but he is a good guy to have. Plays multiple positions, covers ground in the outfield, hits right handed, a lead off type (Reds have very few).

Eventually Krivksy will spend for more stars, I'm sure of it. But making sure the team is deep and flexible is important too. Good move.

Absolutely...and this is assuming Freel isn't an everyday starter, the Reds have just bought an insurance policy in case 1 of at least 5 positional players goes down. Or unless you want Golden Hands to play 3b every day if EE goes down.

Chip R
04-16-2007, 03:09 PM
Gotta remember, Freel has someone else to support now. ;)

Benihana
04-16-2007, 03:09 PM
Any word on the $$?

kaldaniels
04-16-2007, 03:10 PM
Could this have been for the fans? I know someone who would boycott the Reds if they ever unloaded Freel.

I doubt it...Freel is nowhere near Casey or Larkin status. Beloved by some, yes...but I don't think the FO takes too much stock in that. I would imagine if something is done for the fans, it would be with Dunn.

bucksfan2
04-16-2007, 03:11 PM
I have a feeling that Dunn will be back for at least next year. Look at his extention compared to the contracts that the likes of Pierre and Mathewes Jr. got. As for Freel I guess it really depends on how much they are paying him. Freel is a very good super sub. He just doesn't have the talent to play every day. But if the reds are able to maximize his talents then he can be very useful. I just do not want to see him take playing time away from better talents.

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 03:14 PM
rotoworld is guessing in the $8-9 million range.

OMG, that's way too much if true.

I like the idea of signing the core longterm, but Freel is not someone I want an expensive, long term commitment to. I really don't consider him part of the core at all.

Doesn't seem prudent to extend him now, unless it's ridiculously cheap.

PuffyPig
04-16-2007, 03:16 PM
I have a feeling that Dunn will be back for at least next year.

The Reds have an option on Dunn for next year.

There's zero chance they wouldn't exercise it.

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 03:17 PM
Could this have been for the fans? I know someone who would boycott the Reds if they ever unloaded Freel.

It's been proven to be wiser to invest in a winning team than to keep fan favorites.

Investing all that money in Casey and Graves ended up being wrong.

If Wayne gave him 4 million or more, that's another black mark against him.

I'd be ok with around 2 million/year for Freel.. That's about the going rate for a solid backup player. I doubt Freel would take it, but if he walks, he walks.

redsmetz
04-16-2007, 03:24 PM
It's been proven to be wiser to invest in a winning team than to keep fan favorites.

Investing all that money in Casey and Graves ended up being wrong.

If Wayne gave him 4 million or more, that's another black mark against him.

I'd be ok with around 2 million/year for Freel.. That's about the going rate for a solid backup player. I doubt Freel would take it, but if he walks, he walks.

According to Cot's, Freel made $2.35 Million with his Plate Appearance bonus from last year. I doubt he signs a new contract for less than he's making this year. I'd be comfortable with a $6 - $7 Million dollar deal.

I'm with those who suggest this makes Freel more tradeable. I'm not saying that's a given, but I think WK likes to have contract longevity to give him flexibility in the trade market. I could be wrong about that, and only time will tell, as we see how these things work out. It will be interesting.

I don't see a Freel extension effecting Dunn with the club. I'd like to believe Dunn will be here long term and I think they'll make the effort to extend him.

rotnoid
04-16-2007, 03:25 PM
Didn't he just sign one last season? Not that I'm complaining much, hopefully it's a good deal and makes him more trade able if it comes to that.

That was my initial thought. It's now a known cost until 2009. Other teams love that.

Redsland
04-16-2007, 03:28 PM
Extend an oft-injured super-sub whose manager doens't think he can play everyday to two more guaranteed years?

Weird.

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 03:37 PM
According to Cot's, Freel made $2.35 Million with his Plate Appearance bonus from last year. I doubt he signs a new contract for less than he's making this year. I'd be comfortable with a $6 - $7 Million dollar deal.

I'm with those who suggest this makes Freel more tradeable. I'm not saying that's a given, but I think WK likes to have contract longevity to give him flexibility in the trade market. I could be wrong about that, and only time will tell, as we see how these things work out. It will be interesting.

I don't see a Freel extension effecting Dunn with the club. I'd like to believe Dunn will be here long term and I think they'll make the effort to extend him.

Yes, I agree it's unlikely Freel would accept any offer I made him.

I see a guy that has yet to prove that he can be a starting player though. I don't like the idea of gambling 9 million over 2 years that he might be a starting player.

He's only OPSing in the 640 range now. He will never have power. He has to have that high OBP he showed us in spot starts early in his career in order to be valuable. Yes, I know it's early in the season, but he totally vanished in the second half of last year.

I'm not sure this makes him any more tradable or not. His main marketably point is that he can play CF, and there's a shortage of CF now.

I see it as a gamble. If he can get back to being a high OBP leadoff guy, it will be a good extension, but I am doubting that. The guy might end up losing his starting job to Hamilton before the end of the season. Why give guys on the bubble like that an expensive extension?

Lastly, I feel that it's moves like this which prevent us from having money to get those 10 million dollar impact players. Freel isn't that important to this team, particularly since his OBP seems to take a dive when he plays regularly.

PuffyPig
04-16-2007, 03:37 PM
.

I'd be ok with around 2 million/year for Freel.. That's about the going rate for a solid backup player.

Freel is quite a bit more than a solid back up player.

He plays at a near regular pace.

RedEye
04-16-2007, 03:37 PM
This makes Freel more tradeable.

Without the signing, eventually the descision to stay or go would rest with Freel.

It now rest with us.

As long as the dollors are in line with his value, I don't see the harm in getting some cost security for our assets.

And to those how thing we overpayed fro Arroyo? Did you see what guys like Meche, Lilly etc. were getting last year?

Just because other teams jumped off a cliff this off-season doesn't mean we should follow. We already had Arroyo signed for a few years. I think we should have waited to make sure he proved his value over a larger sample size. His 2006 season, by all accounts, was due to a lot of luck with BABIP. I liked the Harang signing a great deal, I just thought we jumped the gun with Arroyo.

redssouth
04-16-2007, 03:38 PM
You cant evaluate this extension at all until the terms are released.

flyer85
04-16-2007, 03:39 PM
Generally you don't sign guys to be able to trade them.

PuffyPig
04-16-2007, 03:39 PM
WHen CF's like Pierre get a 4 year deal worth $10M per season, I don't mind extending Freel at, what, $4M?

Freel is better than Pierre, I know that.

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 03:41 PM
Freel is quite a bit more than a solid back up player.

He plays at a near regular pace.

But he hasn't played well at a regular place, IMO.

He might lose his job to Hamilton before the end of the year.

I would've prefered to "Wait and see" on this one.

I don't think he has enough service time to be a free agent after this year anyhow.. but that is just a guess. If he's only arb eligible, I wait until after the season. If Freel plays well and burns us next year at arb, so be it.

I'm all for extending core players, but Freel is not a good risk, IMO.

PuffyPig
04-16-2007, 03:42 PM
Just because other teams jumped off a cliff this off-season doesn't mean we should follow. We already had Arroyo signed for a few years. I think we should have waited to make sure he proved his value over a larger sample size. His 2006 season, by all accounts, was due to a lot of luck with BABIP. I liked the Harang signing a great deal, I just thought we jumped the gun with Arroyo.


I hear what you say, but if Arroyo repeats his 2006 season, his price would have been jacked up even more.

We extened him like the 200 inning 4 ERA guy he likely is. If he gets better than that, we have a bargain.

kaldaniels
04-16-2007, 03:42 PM
Just because other teams jumped off a cliff this off-season doesn't mean we should follow. We already had Arroyo signed for a few years. I think we should have waited to make sure he proved his value over a larger sample size. His 2006 season, by all accounts, was due to a lot of luck with BABIP. I liked the Harang signing a great deal, I just thought we jumped the gun with Arroyo.

For his career...Arroyo has a 4.20 ERA. He averages 200 IP over the past few years. Ted Lilly has a 4.50 ERA for his career and has never pitched 200 innings. We did just fine with the Arroyo deal.

Caveat Emperor
04-16-2007, 03:43 PM
He might lose his job to Hamilton before the end of the year.

Freel doesn't have to start to be valuable -- especially when you consider how fragile Jr. has been the last few years.

LoganBuck
04-16-2007, 03:46 PM
I am pessimistically optimistic about the underlying themes of this move. Either that or totally ambivilant.

Chip R
04-16-2007, 03:48 PM
Generally you don't sign guys to be able to trade them.


Bronson is the exception to that.

redssouth
04-16-2007, 03:48 PM
I am pessimistically optimistic about the underlying themes of this move. Either that or totally ambivilant.

At least we know where you stand.

Strikes Out Looking
04-16-2007, 03:48 PM
Extending Freel is a good deal. It gives the Reds someone who can play the OF or 2b at a moments notice and he is the teams only true leadoff hitter.

He's even the emergency catcher, and if Ross continues to hit at a subpar .100 pace, the emergency may be sooner than later.

Additionally, as I said last year, another good sign is that the Reds have finally got rid of the darn "we won't negotiate contracts in season" that was a hallmark of the Uncle Carl era.

Sea Ray
04-16-2007, 03:50 PM
I wonder if they shoved him this pile of money so he won't start to moan about getting less and less playing time because of Hamilton? Like the rest of you, I am interested in the numbers. He's never been an everyday player and at his age I doubt he becomes one now, however I love him as a super sub who gets 450 ABs a year. Let's hope WK sees this and pays him appropriately.

As fans we have a right to be leery of big contracts because they force us to watch players who otherwise would have been cut or benched...not to mention any names...

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 03:51 PM
Freel doesn't have to start to be valuable -- especially when you consider how fragile Jr. has been the last few years.


4.5 million for a 4th OF seems too much (assuming we gave him 9 million over 2 years), even if he can play CF.

An outside observer would claim the Reds are jacking up the market again, and have a pretty good argument.

Freel has a decent OF glove, but if his OBP skills are vanishing, he's not worth much, since he has zero power. I really don't consider his value at 2b/3b either, since he is a weak glove there and Narron never uses him there.

My fear is that Freel has been showing a decline in OBP since the second half of last year (when he started playing more). Hopefully, he can reverse that trend.

Strikes Out Looking
04-16-2007, 03:53 PM
4.5 million for a 4th OF seems too much (assuming we gave him 9 million over 2 years), even if he can play CF.



That's nothing. 8+ million for a fifth starter is way too much!

Caveat Emperor
04-16-2007, 03:57 PM
4.5 million for a 4th OF seems too much (assuming we gave him 9 million over 2 years), even if he can play CF.

Insurance policy for Junior getting injured, Hamilton falling flat and reverting back to what he was: an old A-baller, or Chris Denorfia never getting back on the horse after his injury.

If either of those happen, then the Reds are short an OF -- with still probably 2 more years until the cavalry (Jay Bruce and Drew Stubbs) come charging in from the minors.

BRM
04-16-2007, 04:01 PM
John Fay thinks it's a good signing, FWIW.



I think any time you can get a player of Ryan Freel's caliber locked up for a reasonable rate, it's a good deal. I think that's what happened here. I don't know the numbers yet, but he Reds wouldn't have signed him if they had to break the bank to do it. That said, I could see Freel going back to being a utility guy if Josh Hamilton is what they think he is. So, no, I don't think they signed him to trade him.

Red Leader
04-16-2007, 04:04 PM
John Fay thinks it's a good signing, FWIW.

Well that makes me feel better about my position. ;)

Doro
04-16-2007, 04:06 PM
for a guy that can play every position on the field I think its a good sign. If Hamilton, Bruce, Stubbs all pan out and Dunn is still around Freel could still be at 3B or 2B depending on the situation in the future.

Redsland
04-16-2007, 04:07 PM
John Fay thinks it's a good signing, FWIW.
How, exactly, does John Fay evaluate a signing when he doesn't know how much he signed for?

I don't know the numbers yet, but...:confused:

BRM
04-16-2007, 04:09 PM
How, exactly, does John Fay evaluate a signing when he doesn't know how much he signed for?
:confused:

Well, he's assuming the money is alright.



but he Reds wouldn't have signed him if they had to break the bank to do it.

Chip R
04-16-2007, 04:11 PM
How, exactly, does John Fay evaluate a signing when he doesn't know how much he signed for?
:confused:


I'm sure he reserves the right to change his mind. ;)

BRM
04-16-2007, 04:17 PM
A couple more guesses/takes/assumptions/etc.

Rotoworld:


Freel, in the second year of a two-year, $3 million contract, is now signed through the end of his arbitration years. Considering that he's 31 and injury prone, Freel is smart to take the guaranteed money when he can get it. This deal is probably worth $8 million-$9 million.

mlbtraderumors.com:


It's tough to put a value on a player like Freel, a useful guy who plays 2B, 3B, and all outfield spots. Plenty of teams have a player like this but most don't get on base like Freel (.367 career OBP). I'm not sure of the financials yet but the Reds probably got a good deal.

KronoRed
04-16-2007, 04:21 PM
Well that makes me feel better about my position. ;)

Same :laugh:

BRM
04-16-2007, 04:22 PM
Well that makes me feel better about my position. ;)

Disagreement with Fay reinforces the opinion, huh? :)

The_jbh
04-16-2007, 04:36 PM
I doubt its more than 4 million a year. I'd say prob 3mil 2008, 3.5 2009

I know people are discourage bc freel is keeping fan favorite hamilton out of the line up but this is a great extension. Freel is a servicable guy that gives us a lot of flexibility. He is essentially and insurance policy on Phillips, Gonzalez (phillips to SS), EE, and all three OF. He is an above average lead off hitter, and he plays his heart out. He is an exciting player to watch.

I don't think there is any way the signing means we r getting rid of dunn, not favorable to hamilton, going to block bruce's rise etc... He is a role player who is VERY valuable to this ballclub and with Hamilton's production, should regain the super sub role, the role he flourishes in.

kaldaniels
04-16-2007, 04:40 PM
I doubt its more than 4 million a year. I'd say prob 3mil 2008, 3.5 2009

I know people are discourage bc freel is keeping fan favorite hamilton out of the line up but this is a great extension. Freel is a servicable guy that gives us a lot of flexibility. He is essentially and insurance policy on Phillips, Gonzalez (phillips to SS), EE, and all three OF. He is an above average lead off hitter, and he plays his heart out. He is an exciting player to watch.

I don't think there is any way the signing means we r getting rid of dunn, not favorable to hamilton, going to block bruce's rise etc... He is a role player who is VERY valuable to this ballclub and with Hamilton's production, should regain the super sub role, the role he flourishes in.

Well put. Like I said, Freel is an insurance policy for 5 of the 8 postions on the diamond, and if you flipped a few guys around, it's more like 7 of 8. Not to mention he is the emergency catcher.

registerthis
04-16-2007, 04:45 PM
I can handle $4.5 mil/year for Freel. If Hamilton eventually assumes a FT role in the OF< that puts Freel back where he belongs--all over the place. And considering the woeful state of this team's bench, and the fact that Freel can actually contribute, I think this is a good signing.

Particularly when you consider that Junior is more likely than not to spend significant time on the DL this year, and Hamilton may very drift below the mendoza line rather soon. With Deno out (and perhaps never to return), if you take Freel out of the equation this team's outfield depth becomes practically nothing. And the IF depth isn't too hot either.

Cyclone792
04-16-2007, 04:46 PM
I'd like to see the dollars involved as that's a major sticking point to determining if this deal is likely to help or hurt the Reds over the next two seasons.

Strictly from a personnel standpoint, the Reds' outfield depth right now is rather lousy, and even their infield depth leaves quite a bit to be desired. Chris Denorfia's injury could have been one of the driving factors beyond this extension too. The Reds could have been preparing Denorfia to take Freel's place as an outfield starter/reserve while letting Freel walk, but now there's no guarantee how well Denorfia can recover from his injury. Also, as fantastic as Josh Hamilton has looked in spring training and early this season, there still are a few remaining question marks surrounding how high up the ladder he'll be able to climb. Anything less than 100 percent requires some sort of contingency plan, IMO.

Plus, there's not one outfielder currently down in Louisville that I ever want to see starting for the Reds, and honestly, with the possible exception of Norris Hopper as a fifth outfielder at best, I don't even want to see any of them on the Reds roster.

Down in Chattanooga and further down the lower minors, unless a guy like Cody Strait can break out this season, Jay Bruce is likely the next big league starting caliber outfielder to come out of our system. I'm a huge Jay Bruce fan, and I think he's going to be a star for the Reds, but he's just starting out in High-A ball this season and is still quite far away from the big leagues. We can't be expecting Jay Bruce to be starting for the Reds on Opening Day 2008.

So given everything ... no guarantees regarding Hamilton/Denorfia and zero major league caliber outfield help in Louisville, the Reds needed an outfield insurance policy. Provided the money isn't excessive, Freel should provide that insurance policy. If the money is indeed excessive, then all bets are off ...

FWIW, what could be an interesting sidenote is to see this extension stretching through 2009. It could be merely coincidental, or it could be foreshadowing what the Reds may elect to do with Griffey's option in 2009. By this time next year, the question marks surrounding Griffey's option will probably dominate Reds Nation, and there's still no guarantees that Jay Bruce will be ready on Opening Day 2009 (FWIW, I hope he is ready or very close by then). If Ryan Freel can continue putting up a .370 on-base percentage and play a decent outfield, he could allow the Reds to buy out Griffey's option and provide an easy transition (i.e. hopefully not a blockade) for Jay Bruce in 2009.

kaldaniels
04-16-2007, 04:48 PM
I'd like to see the dollars involved as that's a major sticking point to determining if this deal is likely to help or hurt the Reds over the next two seasons.

Strictly from a personnel standpoint, the Reds' outfield depth right now is rather lousy, and even their infield depth leaves quite a bit to be desired. Chris Denorfia's injury could have been one of the driving factors beyond this extension too. The Reds could have been preparing Denorfia to take Freel's place as an outfield starter/reserve while letting Freel walk, but now there's no guarantee how well Denorfia can recover from his injury. Also, as fantastic as Josh Hamilton has looked in spring training and early this season, there still are a few remaining question marks surrounding how high up the ladder he'll be able to climb. Anything less than 100 percent requires some sort of contingency plan, IMO.

Plus, there's not one outfielder currently down in Louisville that I ever want to see starting for the Reds, and honestly, with the possible exception of Norris Hopper as a fifth outfielder at best, I don't even want to see any of them on the Reds roster.

Down in Chattanooga and further down the lower minors, unless a guy like Cody Strait can break out this season, Jay Bruce is likely the next big league starting caliber outfielder to come out of our system. I'm a huge Jay Bruce fan, and I think he's going to be a star for the Reds, but he's just starting out in High-A ball this season and is still quite far away from the big leagues. We can't be expecting Jay Bruce to be starting for the Reds on Opening Day 2008.

So given everything ... no guarantees regarding Hamilton/Denorfia and zero major league caliber outfield help in Louisville, the Reds needed an outfield insurance policy. Provided the money isn't excessive, Freel should provide that insurance policy. If the money is indeed excessive, then all bets are off ...

FWIW, what could be an interesting sidenote is to see this extension stretching through 2009. It could be merely coincidental, or it could be foreshadowing what the Reds may elect to do with Griffey's option in 2009. By this time next year, the question marks surrounding Griffey's option will probably dominate Reds Nation, and there's still no guarantees that Jay Bruce will be ready on Opening Day 2009 (FWIW, I hope he is ready or very close by then). If Ryan Freel can continue putting up a .370 on-base percentage and play a decent outfield, he could allow the Reds to buy out Griffey's option and provide an easy transition (i.e. hopefully not a blockade) for Jay Bruce in 2009.

I think not picking up Jr's option is a slam-dunk no. Now, if he puts together his best 300 games as a Red over the next 2 years, that changes everything, but for now...bye bye Jr after 2008.

Chip R
04-16-2007, 04:50 PM
I'm guessing in the range of 4-6M per season.

kaldaniels
04-16-2007, 04:51 PM
I'm guessing in the range of 4-6M per season.

I like the move but 6 M would be way too much.

osuceltic
04-16-2007, 04:53 PM
By this time next year, the question marks surrounding Griffey's option will probably dominate Reds Nation ...

There are no question marks, only explanation points. That is the end. No way -- NONE -- they pick up that option.

Cyclone792
04-16-2007, 04:57 PM
I think not picking up Jr's option is a slam-dunk no. Now, if he puts together his best 300 games as a Red over the next 2 years, that changes everything, but for now...bye bye Jr after 2008.

Well the hope is that the Reds elect to buy out Griffey's option, but I won't consider that a slam dunk until it's verified from Krivsky himself that the option won't be picked up. Griffey's a future Hall of Famer, the type of player where sentimental value could come into play, and sentimental value could always trump logic.

Stranger things have happened, and while I hope the option is bought out, I won't believe it until I see it.

bearcatfan24
04-16-2007, 05:01 PM
this is a great sign for the reds because he provides depth all across the board (Infield + outfield). I just hope they didn't overpay too much.

BRM
04-16-2007, 05:23 PM
Anyone see or hear anything from the press conference?

Highlifeman21
04-16-2007, 05:25 PM
Didn't he just sign one last season? Not that I'm complaining much, hopefully it's a good deal and makes him more trade able if it comes to that.

I really hope this makes Freel easier to move now. For 2008, you're looking at OF candidates of Dunn/Hamilton/Denorfia/Bruce and IIRC last year of Griffey's contract? That makes Freel the 6th man, unless he's content with being the super-sub, which I can't imagine he will.

AccordinglyReds
04-16-2007, 05:26 PM
I like this deal, as long as it's not too much. I like having him on the team. :)

On a side note, I kept noticing the high number of thread views, etc. but the Sticky totally caught me off guard. No wonder. ;)

Highlifeman21
04-16-2007, 05:27 PM
Could this have been for the fans? I know someone who would boycott the Reds if they ever unloaded Freel.

If this move was b/c of fan base, then Sean Casey would still be a Red.

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 05:36 PM
That's nothing. 8+ million for a fifth starter is way too much!

True, but one dumb move can't be used to justify another.

4.5 million for a 4th OF is foolish. The jury is still out on whether Freel is only a 4th OF, but that's how I see him. Thus, I dislike this move. Too much risk.

Has anyone figured out if Freel would've been eligible for FA after this year? I don't think he would've been.

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 05:37 PM
Insurance policy for Junior getting injured, Hamilton falling flat and reverting back to what he was: an old A-baller, or Chris Denorfia never getting back on the horse after his injury.

If either of those happen, then the Reds are short an OF -- with still probably 2 more years until the cavalry (Jay Bruce and Drew Stubbs) come charging in from the minors.

That's an expensive insurance policy. You can't cover every contingency. It's just not possible. Even the Yankees don't.

Not to mention, I don't think Freel was eligible for FA after this season anyway. Therefore, the Reds had the luxury of seeing how well he handled the starting job for a full year before committing.

PuffyPig
04-16-2007, 05:37 PM
Has anyone figured out if Freel would've been eligible for FA after this year? I don't think he would've been.

He has 2 years after this until free agency.

mroby85
04-16-2007, 05:38 PM
good signing, i love ryan freel and the hustle he brings to this team.

Chip R
04-16-2007, 05:40 PM
I like the move but 6 M would be way too much.


You can't put a price on scrappy. ;)

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 05:41 PM
He has 2 years after this until free agency.

Thanks.. so it looks like Wayne is gambling that Freel is on the rise and he's getting a bargain now, because there's no risk of FA..

The Reds just commited a bunch of money that they didn't have to. I like this move even less. It would be more justifiable if Freel was a FA at the end of the year.

BRM
04-16-2007, 05:46 PM
Thanks.. so it looks like Wayne is gambling that Freel is on the rise and he's getting a bargain now, because there's no risk of FA..


Wayne basically bought out his arb years.

BRM
04-16-2007, 05:50 PM
Per Fay



The contract is worth a total of $7 million over the two years -- $3 million '08; $4 million for '09.

Freel was Freel at the press conference: Humble, rambling, amusing and very complimentary of Josh Hamilton. Some highlights:

"I'm very happy to be where I'm at. I couldn't be in a better organization. I've said it from Day 1. I want to end my career here. This is another step closer to that."

"It's a dream come true." (he said that about 19 times).

"Reality is still setting in. I couldn't be any more happier. When I first came over here as Red, I didn't know what was going to happen in the spring. I battled. I didn't make the team out of spring. But fortunately, with the grace of God, I've been able to stick around for a few years."

"I've said it a million times, but the fans of Cincinnati have treated me . . . it's been unbelievable."

"All I can control is how hard I play on the field. I think the fans of Cincinnati respect that. I've said it before: It doesn't take talent, you don't have to be a superstar to play the game the way it's supposed to be play. It shows it came be rewarding if you do the things you're supposed to do in this game. How hard is it to run balls out and dive for a couple of balls? It's all about heart and desire. The only thing that could top this is us winning the World Series."

"The money's great. But a World Series would be better."

"We have the players here. Wayne has done a great job of getting players over here. The best one -- we really haven't seen as much people would like to see -- is Josh Hamilton. It might mean me playing more infield. I don't have a problem with that. That kid is going to help us win. He's an unbelievable player."

"I will still play the game the way it's supposed to be played. That's what people expect. They don't expect much."

Jerry Narron: "I hear from people all the time saying the love the way Ryan Freel plays. I'm tired of that. I want to say they love the way the Cincinnati Reds play."

Wayne Krivsky: "I'm not a afraid anytime -- if it makes sense to both parties. . . I like getting deals done. Put the contract aside for two years and go play."

edabbs44
04-16-2007, 05:51 PM
"I will still play the game the way it's supposed to be played. That's what people expect. They don't expect much."

I had no idea that Narron also wrote speeches for people.:)

Strikes Out Looking
04-16-2007, 05:53 PM
$7 million for two years. It's a steal.

oneupper
04-16-2007, 05:55 PM
The REDS are hustling themselves into being a below average offense.

New Motto: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of SCRAPPINESS.

pedro
04-16-2007, 05:55 PM
$7 million for two years. It's a steal.

Seems like a good deal for the Reds. The wouldn't be able to get a player of Freel's versatility for that much money on the open market and he'd likely get more than that in arbitration.

Benihana
04-16-2007, 05:56 PM
$7 million for two years. It's a steal.

agreed, I'll take it. He would have gotten more in arbitration, and he's still very tradeable once Denorfia comes back next year to be the 4th OF/KGJ insurance policy.

Sea Ray
04-16-2007, 05:56 PM
$7 million for two years. It's a steal.

Yeah. If I'm Krivsky I do that deal

kaldaniels
04-16-2007, 05:57 PM
Per Fay

Absolutely a reasonable contract. Nice work front office.

Falls City Beer
04-16-2007, 05:59 PM
Freel's a winner. It doesn't hurt to have winners on your roster or your payroll.

dabvu2498
04-16-2007, 05:59 PM
Chone Figgins is making $3.5 million this year.

Good deal for the Reds.

RedEye
04-16-2007, 06:09 PM
Now that I see the amount, I'm more positive about this signing. Good job by Krivsky.

Redsland
04-16-2007, 06:17 PM
so it looks like Wayne is gambling that Freel is on the rise and he's getting a bargain now, because there's no risk of FA.
Of course, Freel is 31 years old and has steady (rather than rising) numbers.

CTA513
04-16-2007, 06:19 PM
Did anyone see C. Trent Rosecrans blog?


Freel's presser was interesting. The deal is two more years - 3 mil in 2008 4 in 09. He said: 'I'm overpaid'

Was amazing. Basically he said he's lucky to do what he's doing, and if anything he can now afford (financially) to be more reckless. A scary thought, but probably not possible

What was also interesting was that Freel started on his own about how the team needs to get Josh Hamilton at-bats, that Hamilton is the most talented guy on the team and is a future All-Star, and if he has to sit or play the infield to get Hamilton on the field, he'll do it.

"He's a game-changing guy, I'm not," Freel said.

There was also a point where he said he'd take the league minimum to play, just so he's playing. Wayne Krivsky said to that, "That's why guys have agents."

Redsland
04-16-2007, 06:21 PM
There was also a point where he said he'd take the league minimum to play, just so he's playing. Wayne Krivsky said to that, "That's why guys have agents."
:laugh:

jmcclain19
04-16-2007, 06:25 PM
No mention of any team options in 2010? That team option seems to be the Krivsky MO of contract extensions.

For what it's worth - that now gives the Reds $58.225Mil in committed salary for 2008 on 13 players. That figure is including if they pick up the $13mil option on Dunn, the $2.25mil option on Cormier, the $1.85mil option on Hatteberg and the $1.3mil option on Valentin. Without those options it's $39.825mil for 9 players.

And to add a cherry on top - the Reds owe $2.5 mil to Arroyo next season as a signing bonus.

Under Contract
Arroyo
Harang
Weathers
Stanton
Ross
Castro
Gonzalez
Freel
Junior

Option Year
Cormier
Hatteberg
Valentin
Dunn

Free Agents
Conine
Lohse

Arb Eligible
Sarloos

Pre-Arbitration
Belisle
Elizardo
Majewski
Bray
Burton
Shackelford
Coffey
Encarnacion
Phillips
Denorfia
Hamilton

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 06:29 PM
$7 million for two years. It's a steal.


Well, that's better than the 9 million rotoworld guessed at.

However, the upside of this is if Freel plays well, we save some cash.
The downside is that we might've overpaid for him. He needs to flash some of that OBP he used to have in order to make this deal look good.

I still probably wouldn't have extended him, although 7 million isn't as bad.
I just don't see him playing so well that he'd sting us for more than that going year to year.

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 06:31 PM
Of course, Freel is 31 years old and has steady (rather than rising) numbers.

Hopefully the numbers will stay steady. I'm still concerned that his numbers have declined as a starter (since Last year, at least).

A couple of years ago, the average arbitration raise was 900k. Assuming that is still reasonably close, the Reds probably don't have much potential savings by committing now.

Redsland
04-16-2007, 06:42 PM
Assuming that is still reasonably close, the Reds probably don't have much potential savings by committing now.
Agreed. And there's the injury risk.

schroomytunes
04-16-2007, 06:55 PM
I may be wrong but I think this signing is to make Freel more of a commodity on the trade market. His salary is now locked up for 2 more seasons, and he is a super-sub. I think if we add another low level prospect, or a bullpen arm, we could probably land a RH bat that we desperatly need.

Redlegs
04-16-2007, 07:13 PM
Glad to have Freely around for a couple more years. Best thing was hearing the positive talk about Josh Hamilton. Freely says if he has to play more infield, so be it. Now that's a TEAM player. He also wants to retire with the Reds. That's always good to hear.

PuffyPig
04-16-2007, 07:39 PM
Well, that's better than the 9 million rotoworld guessed at.

However, the upside of this is if Freel plays well, we save some cash.
The downside is that we might've overpaid for him. He needs to flash some of that OBP he used to have in order to make this deal look good.

I still probably wouldn't have extended him, although 7 million isn't as bad.
I just don't see him playing so well that he'd sting us for more than that going year to year.

If Freel has 2 more years like his last one, he might have gotten close to $7M in his last arbitration year alone, when you consider what those type of guys are getting now adays.

Will M
04-16-2007, 07:42 PM
No mention of any team options in 2010? That team option seems to be the Krivsky MO of contract extensions.

For what it's worth - that now gives the Reds $58.225Mil in committed salary for 2008 on 13 players. That figure is including if they pick up the $13mil option on Dunn, the $2.25mil option on Cormier, the $1.85mil option on Hatteberg and the $1.3mil option on Valentin. Without those options it's $39.825mil for 9 players.

And to add a cherry on top - the Reds owe $2.5 mil to Arroyo next season as a signing bonus.

Under Contract
Arroyo
Harang
Weathers
Stanton
Ross
Castro
Gonzalez
Freel
Junior

Option Year
Cormier
Hatteberg
Valentin
Dunn

Free Agents
Conine
Lohse

Arb Eligible
Sarloos

Pre-Arbitration
Belisle
Elizardo
Majewski
Bray
Burton
Shackelford
Coffey
Encarnacion
Phillips
Denorfia
Hamilton

1. Dunn's option will be picked up if he has a good 2007.

2. Cormier's option will not be picked up.

3. Hat's option will depend on how good a year he has and how good Votto looks this year. Would the Reds what Conine back for 2008? - again depends on what kind of year he has and what Votto does.

4. Valentin's option will depend on how he does this year.

5. Lohse is gone after 2007 unless guys like Belisle & Homer get injured or stink up the joint this year.

- Will

P.S. Freel for 2 years and $7M is a good deal for the Reds.

Will M
04-16-2007, 07:44 PM
I may be wrong but I think this signing is to make Freel more of a commodity on the trade market. His salary is now locked up for 2 more seasons, and he is a super-sub. I think if we add another low level prospect, or a bullpen arm, we could probably land a RH bat that we desperatly need.

No can do. IMO once Denorfia went down the flexibilty to trade Freel to shore up another spot was lost.

vaticanplum
04-16-2007, 07:51 PM
FWIW, what could be an interesting sidenote is to see this extension stretching through 2009. It could be merely coincidental, or it could be foreshadowing what the Reds may elect to do with Griffey's option in 2009. By this time next year, the question marks surrounding Griffey's option will probably dominate Reds Nation, and there's still no guarantees that Jay Bruce will be ready on Opening Day 2009 (FWIW, I hope he is ready or very close by then). If Ryan Freel can continue putting up a .370 on-base percentage and play a decent outfield, he could allow the Reds to buy out Griffey's option and provide an easy transition (i.e. hopefully not a blockade) for Jay Bruce in 2009.

I can't believe we've gotten this far without anyone mentioning this signing as a signal of a potential Griffey trade. Not that I personally would even see it that way, but suffice it to say it did occur to me.

Fine signing. I disagree with those who believe he's a dime a dozen...versatility is an incredibly valuable asset to a team, and while it's true that some people mistake his guts for skill, his guts on their own are as good as it gets. guts-wise.

Matt700wlw
04-16-2007, 07:58 PM
Freel touched on Josh Hamilton in the press conference today. He said that he would expects playing time in the infield in order to get Josh into the lineup.

RBA
04-16-2007, 08:48 PM
2.5 million a year is more than fair for Freel.

Wow, the Reds gave him $7 million for 2 years? Another dumb move by the Reds organization.

mth123
04-16-2007, 08:54 PM
Not a big Freel fan, but this is a good deal. As some one said, he's a better player than Juan Pierre and he's making a ton more.

As long as Freel is depth and insurance all around and not plan A for any OF spot (or 3B), this actually gives the team a bonafide plus on the bench. Who'da thunk it?

I was thinking it would take about $6 Million per year for Freel which is why I was so in favor of trading him.

I have to say, I've been critical of WK but he's got 3 pretty good signings of Harang, Arroyo and Freel. Add the Rule 5 steals and the fairly cheap and low risk Bobby Livingston acquistion and WK has done more than I gave credit for. I still hate the Geezers in the bullpen and the Conine deal and am only so so on Gonzo, but WK is winning me back.

PuffyPig
04-16-2007, 09:11 PM
Hopefully
A couple of years ago, the average arbitration raise was 900k. Assuming that is still reasonably close, the Reds probably don't have much potential savings by committing now.

I'm not sure if the average has gone up, the average increases as you get closer to FA.

redsmetz
04-16-2007, 09:37 PM
Not a big Freel fan, but this is a good deal. As some one said, he's a better player than Juan Pierre and he's making a ton more.

As long as Freel is depth and insurance all around and not plan A for any OF spot (or 3B), this actually gives the team a bonafide plus on the bench. Who'da thunk it?

I was thinking it would take about $6 Million per year for Freel which is why I was so in favor of trading him.

I have to say, I've been critical of WK but he's got 3 pretty good signings of Harang, Arroyo and Freel. Add the Rule 5 steals and the fairly cheap and low risk Bobby Livingston acquistion and WK has done more than I gave credit for. I still hate the Geezers in the bullpen and the Conine deal and am only so so on Gonzo, but WK is winning me back.

The irony is that the three things you say you dislike (or are "so so" on) are actually working right now.

mth123
04-16-2007, 09:48 PM
The irony is that the three things you say you dislike (or are "so so" on) are actually working right now.

Yeah, but I'm not sure that anything that I see in 2 weeks of 40 degree weather will change my mind about the long term prospects of these guys based on years of track record. That also includes the guys struggling.

Baseball is a warm weather game and cold effects everything from how certain guys hit and how others grip the ball when pitching. Some guys are more impacted than others so I don't believe that anything so far is a trend just yet.

Gallen5862
04-16-2007, 11:30 PM
I like this extension of Freel. I think it was a steal only $7M for 2 years.

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 11:36 PM
If Freel has 2 more years like his last one, he might have gotten close to $7M in his last arbitration year alone, when you consider what those type of guys are getting now adays.


Why take the risk though.. Now the Reds have an almost 3 year commitment to him (this year + extension). Now we have to worry if he gets injuried. That's a huge risk for him.

If we aren't buying out free agent years and we're not likely to save money, why do it?

This doesn't make him any more attractive on the trade market, because it doesn't buy out any free agency years. It makes him less attractive, because of the guaranteed money and injury/performance risk.

I don't mind taking good risks or overpaying to lock up key players, but Freel is not a key player. As I said, he may not even be a starter by the end of the year.

The Reds complain about not having money to get impact players, but tie up a lot of money in bench players and mediocre relievers.

REDREAD
04-16-2007, 11:39 PM
Not a big Freel fan, but this is a good deal. As some one said, he's a better player than Juan Pierre and he's making a ton more.

The difference is that Freel was not going to have FA leverage in the next 2 years like Pierre did. It's a different set of rules. It's the same reason that Zito makes more than Harang.

Caveat Emperor
04-16-2007, 11:44 PM
If we aren't buying out free agent years and we're not likely to save money, why do it?

Beyond the traditional cost-certainty argument (which has validity, given the ever-increasing salaries of major league ballplayers), there's a decent argument to be made that this is an internal PR move from the front office to Freel.

Extending his contract keeps him happy and ready to soldier forward in a less prominant role than he'd otherwise have liked. If the team is set on playing more Hamilton then it will take ABs away from Ryan Freel. Now Freel doesn't have to worry that reduced PT will mean reduced money later when he is entering free agency as a bench player as opposed to a starter.

Plus all that other stuff -- plays 5 positions, gets on base at a .360 clip, brings speed to the lineup, yadda yadda...

roby
04-17-2007, 12:25 AM
At least we know where you stand.

My answer is...absolutely, positively, perhaps. :laugh:

mth123
04-17-2007, 05:33 AM
The difference is that Freel was not going to have FA leverage in the next 2 years like Pierre did. It's a different set of rules. It's the same reason that Zito makes more than Harang.

Yeah but now Contracts like Pierre's and Matthews raise the bar in Arbitration. I think Freel gets more than this in Arbitration even if he loses.

REDREAD
04-17-2007, 03:47 PM
Yeah but now Contracts like Pierre's and Matthews raise the bar in Arbitration. I think Freel gets more than this in Arbitration even if he loses.

I agree that's a possiblity. Obviously, we'll never know (one way or another).