PDA

View Full Version : A Plan Emerging?



bucksfan2
08-13-2007, 05:42 PM
The more and more I think about the reds the more and more I can start to see a plan develop. I started thinking about an overall plan when I was reading through the Keppinger and Hopper threads. I think there is something to say when the reds management wants Votto to get some starts in LF as well as playing Keppinger in LF the other day. I would be willing to bet as the season goes on Keppinger will play a few more times in left. Keppinger can basically play every infield position however the only infield position that has an opening right now is 3rd competing with Edwin. 2nd is secured up with Phillips and the reds seem intent on giving Gonzo playing time at SS. I also see the reds trade for Cantu (who is tearing the ball up in AAA) who is primarily a 1b, 2b, or 3b.

-These moves leave me to believe that Dunn's option will not be picked up and the reds will recieve draft picks for compensatoin. I think Votto and Keppinger will share the brunt of innings in LF with Hopper as a defensive replacement.

-I also believe that Hatty may be retained as a bench player only or traded in this offseason with Cantu and Votto splitting time at 1b.

-Phillips and Gonzo seem to have 2b and SS tied down with Edwin competing with Keppinger for the 3b position.

-Griffey probably will return because of sentimental value but I wouldn't be suprised that he will be traded when he hits #600.

-I think Bruce starts in AAA with Griffey, Freel, Hopper, and Ellison sharing the LF duties until Bruce is ready.

Does this make sense to anyone? Or an I just imagining too much?

dougdirt
08-13-2007, 05:49 PM
Dear God I hope I dont have to see any combo with Freel/Hopper/Ellison playing 2/3 of the outfield on any sort of regular basis.

I would say that if Adam Dunn doesn't have his option picked up that Jay Bruce will start for the Reds in April 2008 in CF with Hamilton in LF and Griffey in RF.

acredsfan
08-13-2007, 05:52 PM
The more and more I think about the reds the more and more I can start to see a plan develop. I started thinking about an overall plan when I was reading through the Keppinger and Hopper threads. I think there is something to say when the reds management wants Votto to get some starts in LF as well as playing Keppinger in LF the other day. I would be willing to bet as the season goes on Keppinger will play a few more times in left. Keppinger can basically play every infield position however the only infield position that has an opening right now is 3rd competing with Edwin. 2nd is secured up with Phillips and the reds seem intent on giving Gonzo playing time at SS. I also see the reds trade for Cantu (who is tearing the ball up in AAA) who is primarily a 1b, 2b, or 3b.

-These moves leave me to believe that Dunn's option will not be picked up and the reds will recieve draft picks for compensatoin. I think Votto and Keppinger will share the brunt of innings in LF with Hopper as a defensive replacement.

-I also believe that Hatty may be retained as a bench player only or traded in this offseason with Cantu and Votto splitting time at 1b.

-Phillips and Gonzo seem to have 2b and SS tied down with Edwin competing with Keppinger for the 3b position.

-Griffey probably will return because of sentimental value but I wouldn't be suprised that he will be traded when he hits #600.

-I think Bruce starts in AAA with Griffey, Freel, Hopper, and Ellison sharing the LF duties until Bruce is ready.

Does this make sense to anyone? Or an I just imagining too much?
I don't necessarily believe there is or should be a concrete plan. There are too many variables to take into consideration and everything would have to go exactly right for a concrete plan to work. Yeah, you can have a direction you want to head in, but that also can change in an instant. I've learned that I'm just happier watching what happens rather than try and predict what will happen. Yeah, that all makes sense, but Wayne's moves don't always go with what make sense to others. You can let Dunn go, but you already know what he will probably provide you. You can attempt to get draft picks for him, but those are risky. You can go ahead and depend on lesser known options in terms of production. Yeah, Jay Bruce is a stud of a prospect, but you can't project for sure what he can provide. You can't do that with Hamilton or Votto either. Maybe Dunn will stick around and Krivsky will try to ease the younger players in and try to trade Dunn around the trade deadline. Maybe they don't pick up the option and let the younger players dive right into the big leagues. Who knows? Sit back and enjoy the ride.

KronoRed
08-13-2007, 05:54 PM
The Reds won't just give Bruce a job, if Dunn isn't here expect a vet to come in to play the OF, I'm thinking Kenny Lofton

Strikes Out Looking
08-13-2007, 06:04 PM
I have nothing against Hopper and Keppinger and Votto and whomever, but not picking up Dunn's option on a contract agreed to by the current GM and only getting draft picks is just, well, it reeks of Kansas City and Pittsburgh. Pick up the option and trade him when you can, but don't just get draft picks, it doesn't work.

BRM
08-13-2007, 06:08 PM
The Reds won't just give Bruce a job, if Dunn isn't here expect a vet to come in to play the OF, I'm thinking Kenny Lofton

That's my thought. Bruce may be "given a shot" in spring training but no way do the Reds give him CF next year, regardless of what happens with Adam Dunn. I can definitely see Wayne bringing in a vet like Lofton to play CF if Dunn is traded. Bruce will start the year in Louisville even if he hits .500 in spring training.

dougdirt
08-13-2007, 06:11 PM
I have nothing against Hopper and Keppinger and Votto and whomever, but not picking up Dunn's option on a contract agreed to by the current GM and only getting draft picks is just, well, it reeks of Kansas City and Pittsburgh. Pick up the option and trade him when you can, but don't just get draft picks, it doesn't work.

You are now assuming that the Reds dont think they will get better value for their draft picks than they will for Dunn. I don't exactly agree with it, but that might be how they are looking at it.

StillFunkyB
08-13-2007, 06:27 PM
The Reds won't just give Bruce a job, if Dunn isn't here expect a vet to come in to play the OF, I'm thinking Kenny Lofton

If Kenny can keep hitting, I don't have a problem with that. That is if it's only until someone else is ready.

PuffyPig
08-13-2007, 06:28 PM
-These moves leave me to believe that Dunn's option will not be picked up and the reds will recieve draft picks for compensatoin. I think Votto and Keppinger will share the brunt of innings in LF with Hopper as a defensive replacement.


Does this make sense to anyone? Or an I just imagining too much?

I don't think it makes any sense.

I believe there is basically zero change of Dunn's option not being picked up.

Exercised and perhaps traded after June 15 may be possible.

If the option is not picked up, we have to offer Dunn arbitration to get draft picks. Maybe Dunn decides to get $15M+ from us in arbitration.

Playing Votto and keppinger in LF is just simply tryiing to make players more versatile.

If Dunn isn't in LF next year, then it will be Bruce or a 1 year FA acqusition.

Kc61
08-13-2007, 06:30 PM
At this point, I think they will pick up Dunn's option. Can't see them just letting him go for draft choices. It's a fair amount of money, but only one year. After next season, Griffey and Dunn will both be at the end of their deals (there's an option on Griff for '09, I believe) so a full-time slot will be open for Bruce by then. Maybe both corners will be open in the Reds' outfield, who knows. Reds might also trade Griff sooner, after he collects number 600.

I think the plan is to add more and more players from the minor leagues. The Reds AA and AAA teams have a lot of prospects. (Not so sure about the A-ball group, but it's early for them.) By opening day 2009 you will see many of these guys on the roster. Some may get traded for pitching.

While I'd like to see the Reds make a splash in the free agent market, which never happens, at least we can look forward to Bruce, Bailey, Cueto, Votto, Dickerson, Pelland, Maloney, Roenicke, McBeth, Salmon (again), maybe Guevera, all getting a shot soon, in addition to Livingston and Dumatrait who are up already. And any other kids they acquire. I think that's the plan.

dougdirt
08-13-2007, 06:33 PM
I don't think it makes any sense.

I believe there is basically zero change of Dunn's option not being picked up.

Exercised and perhaps traded after June 15 may be possible.

If the option is not picked up, we have to offer Dunn arbitration to get draft picks. Maybe Dunn decides to get $15M+ from us in arbitration.

Playing Votto and keppinger in LF is just simply tryiing to make players more versatile.

If Dunn isn't in LF next year, then it will be Bruce or a 1 year FA acqusition.

Thats not true. If he signs with another team before a certain date, the Reds get the draft picks whether they offer him arbitration or not.

nate
08-13-2007, 06:52 PM
Thats not true. If he signs with another team before a certain date, the Reds get the draft picks whether they offer him arbitration or not.

Right, but either way it doesn't seem like a "sure thing" to get draft picks by declining the option.

redsmetz
08-13-2007, 07:14 PM
I noticed the original poster doesn't even factor in Josh Hamilton. I agree with those who say the Reds will pick up Dunn's option. I think it will be too early for Bruce to come up at the beginning of 2008.

I like Keppinger and Hopper, but I like them alot off the bench, not as starters; in spite of Marty's undying devotion to both.

fearofpopvol1
08-13-2007, 07:29 PM
I'd hope the Reds pick up Dunn's option for next year, because the contract for next year given the projected salaries is doable.

PuffyPig
08-13-2007, 07:34 PM
Thats not true. If he signs with another team before a certain date, the Reds get the draft picks whether they offer him arbitration or not.


The number of players who sign before the arbitration date are pretty few. And those that do are generally sure bets to be offered arbitration.

Is Dunn a sure bet to be offered arbitration?

Any team that declines what will be a below market option on Dunn, is not a sure bet to offer arbitration when the likely result could be expensive gamble gone wrong.

IslandRed
08-13-2007, 08:54 PM
As I've said before, I think the option will be picked up. From all reports, Krivsky set a high price in trade talks and wouldn't budge. That's not what you'd expect if the plan is to just dump the guy.

MartyFan
08-13-2007, 11:44 PM
I think the fact that the team didn't trade Dunn this season by the deadline says that they will pick up the option with an eye on trading him in the offseason or more than likely at the trade deadline next season.

Spitball
08-13-2007, 11:48 PM
The Reds won't just give Bruce a job, if Dunn isn't here expect a vet to come in to play the OF, I'm thinking Kenny Lofton

I can see Cory Patterson in a Reds uniform and playing centerfield next season if Dunn isn't in Cincinnati next season. I believe Boras would agree to a reasonable one year deal for his client with the hope that the Great American Ballpark would help Patterson have the kind of season that could be parlayed into a Gary Matthews' type contract.

SteelSD
08-14-2007, 01:32 AM
I think the fact that the team didn't trade Dunn this season by the deadline says that they will pick up the option with an eye on trading him in the offseason or more than likely at the trade deadline next season.

If the option is picked up, Adam Dunn cannot be traded until June 15th 2008. Any attempt to deal Dunn prior to that date would mean that he'd need to waive that no-trade clause. Considering that Dunn is the guy who agreed to that contract in large part because he believes in Castellini and Krivsky, I'd say good luck on that without significant financial incentive.

KronoRed
08-14-2007, 02:36 AM
If Kenny can keep hitting, I don't have a problem with that. That is if it's only until someone else is ready.

Indeed, he gets on base and can still steal a base, leadoff hitter :cool:

Ron Madden
08-14-2007, 03:57 AM
I really enjoy and appreciate the great work done in the Minor League Talk forum here at RedsZone.

I believe the draft is very vital to the success of any MLB Club.
We must rememeber the fact that each and every draft pick is nothing more than a roll of the dice, no matter how good your scouting dept is.

The way I see it, Adam Dunn has proven to be a very produtive ML Player. To cast him away for the chance to roll the dice a couple of times is a bet that I wouldn't make. But that's JMHO.

redsmetz
08-14-2007, 06:45 AM
I really enjoy and appreciate the great work done in the Minor League Talk forum here at RedsZone.

I believe the draft is very vital to the success of any MLB Club.
We must rememeber the fact that each and every draft pick is nothing more than a roll of the dice, no matter how good your scouting dept is.

The way I see it, Adam Dunn has proven to be a very produtive ML Player. To cast him away for the chance to roll the dice a couple of times is a bet that I wouldn't make. But that's JMHO.

This is what I've thought every time this is mentioned. Draft picks in baseball are not the equivalent of draft picks in other major sports where players very often can be impact players right out of the chute. It's no accident that out of the thousands and thousands of players who have played Major League Baseball, only about 85 have first played in the majors without any time in the majors. And, while I didn't count them, most are well before the ML draft began in 1965. We all know that drafting ML players is no sure bet. Letting Adam Dunn walked for the proverbial draft picks is one of the longest of long shots. Here's the list I mentioned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_baseball_players_who_went_directly_to_the_ major_leagues

I've mentioned this before, but I recall reading some time this season when talk of trading Dunn first heated up that Dunn made the comment that his contract was set up the way it was for a reason. I took that to mean that they wanted to make it hard to trade him, that he wanted to stay a Red. Many here have correctly noted that Dunn at $13 Million next season is competitive in the structure of salaries in MLB. It's possible that once Dunn gets to the date in June when his no trade clause draws back, followed by a limited trade clause, that he could be moved, but I'm hoping to see Dunn play a long time with the Reds. All I keep thinking about is Paul O'Neill and how he flowered in New York. Few remember him as a Red. I want Adam Dunn remembered as a Red.

bucksfan2
08-14-2007, 09:34 AM
I noticed the original poster doesn't even factor in Josh Hamilton. I agree with those who say the Reds will pick up Dunn's option. I think it will be too early for Bruce to come up at the beginning of 2008.

I like Keppinger and Hopper, but I like them alot off the bench, not as starters; in spite of Marty's undying devotion to both.

I fully expect Hamilton to be back and in CF next season so that is why I didn't mention him.

I hope Dunn is back next season I just see some things that lead me to think that he will not be back next season.

Heath
08-14-2007, 09:49 AM
All this is under the assumption that Wayne Krivsky is around next year.

If another GM wanders into the office, you can bet they want to 'do their own thing'.

RedLegSuperStar
08-14-2007, 12:10 PM
Dunn.. if not traded by September 1st.. should have his option picked up. With revenue, the loss of LaRue, Cormier, and Milton's contracts should help pay the 3 (could be 6 million with incentives) million raise Dunn receives. Receiving draft picks shows this team doesn't want to win now.. but are planning for the future. The draft picks are not a sure thing either.. they're so many ifs with plucking talent out of a draft and with this organization whos 1st round draft looks this the last 10 years:


Two are in the majors: Austin Kearns 1998 and Ryan Wagner '03.

Three are out of baseball: Brandon Larson '97, Ty Howington '99 and Chris Gruler '02.

Five are in the minors: David Espinosa '00, Jeremy Sowers '01, Homer Bailey '04, Jay Bruce '05 and Drew Stubbs '06.

The killer was Howington, Espinosa, Sowers, Gruler in consecutive years. Sowers didn't sign. The three others were busts.

Dunn is the perfect option for one year until Bruce is ready.

IslandRed
08-14-2007, 02:02 PM
I've mentioned this before, but I recall reading some time this season when talk of trading Dunn first heated up that Dunn made the comment that his contract was set up the way it was for a reason. I took that to mean that they wanted to make it hard to trade him, that he wanted to stay a Red. Many here have correctly noted that Dunn at $13 Million next season is competitive in the structure of salaries in MLB. It's possible that once Dunn gets to the date in June when his no trade clause draws back, followed by a limited trade clause, that he could be moved, but I'm hoping to see Dunn play a long time with the Reds. All I keep thinking about is Paul O'Neill and how he flowered in New York. Few remember him as a Red. I want Adam Dunn remembered as a Red.

Of course, it's an open question as to whether he still feels the same way 18 months later.

Not talking to you specifically, but I think the board as a whole sometimes forgets that what the Reds want is only half the equation now. We can pick up Dunn's option for 2008, but that's the end of our control. Beyond that, he's like any free agent to be; he'll only come back if he wants to. If he doesn't, there will be no contract extension, he's just going to walk. And history suggests we won't replace his value via a trade or the draft picks. C'est la vie.

RedsManRick
08-14-2007, 02:06 PM
We can trade him before the deadline next year and he will be in demand. Not resigning him this year is quite possibly the stupidest thing we could do.

redsmetz
08-14-2007, 02:38 PM
Of course, it's an open question as to whether he still feels the same way 18 months later.

Not talking to you specifically, but I think the board as a whole sometimes forgets that what the Reds want is only half the equation now. We can pick up Dunn's option for 2008, but that's the end of our control. Beyond that, he's like any free agent to be; he'll only come back if he wants to. If he doesn't, there will be no contract extension, he's just going to walk. And history suggests we won't replace his value via a trade or the draft picks. C'est la vie.

No question about that. If he's not signed to a long term deal, he'll be dealt by the deadline next season. and you're right, there are many here in Cincinnati who have not made him feel much love, to say the least. Of course, if Bruce is tearing it up, we might be alright moving him. But it would be insane to not pick up the option this year. This is not the year you let him walk.

camisadelgolf
08-14-2007, 02:44 PM
If the Reds pick up Dunn's option, then they won't have much to spend on new players. I think Dunn's option will be picked up, but I also think a lot of moves will come in the offseason to clear room for a free agent or two.

RedsManRick
08-14-2007, 02:49 PM
The thing is Camisa, that it's pretty hard to spend $13M in free agency any better than signing Adam Dunn to a 1 year $13M contract. In fact, that's pretty much a slam dunk of a good deal. If the Reds were trying to replace his value in FA, be it as pitching or hitting, they're not going to find a better deal, or one that carries less risk.

My concern is that a plan is emerging and that plan I see emerging scares the crap out of me.

Redsland
08-14-2007, 03:11 PM
If the Reds pick up Dunn's option, then they won't have much to spend on new players.
The following salaries come off the books after this season:

Eric Milton: $9 million
Kyle Lohse: $4.2 million
Jason LaRue: $2.95 million (cash to KC)
Rheal Cormier: $2.25 million
Kirk Saarloos: $1.2 million
Chad Moeller: $700,000
---------------------------
Total: $20.30 million

Rumor has it that Conine ($1.7 million) will retire after the season. Hatteberg ($1.65 million) may not get his option picked up. That's $23.65 million of '07 salary that would be freed up for '08.

With an opening day '07 payroll of $68 million, that would mean that 1/3 of this season's payroll is going to be freed up this offseason, just using the players above. If Stanton can be moved, or Valentin's option isn't picked up, that figure could grow.

KronoRed
08-14-2007, 03:22 PM
Unless "attendance issues" force the team to cut payroll

Hey..old owners did it.

Redsland
08-14-2007, 03:28 PM
Attendance is up this year versus last year (26,508 per game ty/26,353 ly).

dfs
08-14-2007, 03:37 PM
Total: $20.30 million
That's an interesting figure, but it's mildly dishonest. Phillips will get an arbitration bump. IIRC Arroyo's salary escalates at a nice clip as well.

Still that brings back Ross and Valentine. They've got Hatteberg and Votto at first paid for. Phillips, EE and A-gon back around the horn. Junior, Dunn and Hamilton in the OF. PLUS Freel, Keppinger and Dino. Back come Harang, Bronson, and the young pitchers

20 million to JUST buy pitching. hmmm.

camisadelgolf
08-14-2007, 04:17 PM
C Ross 2.525
1B Hatteberg 1.85
2B Phillips 2.5 ???
3B Encarnacion 0.45
SS Gonzalez 4.625
LF Dunn 13.0
CF Freel 3.0
RF Griffey 12.5
C Valentin 1.325
1B Votto 0.4
IF Castro 0.975
IF Keppinger 0.4
OF Hopper 0.4
OF Hamilton 0.4
SP Harang 6.75
SP Arroyo 6.45
SP Bailey 0.4
SP Ramirez 0.4
SP Belisle 1.2 ???
RP Coffey 0.925
RP Stanton 3.0
RP Weathers 2.75
RP Bray 0.4
RP Coutlangus 0.4
RP Majewski 0.4

That's a total of 67.375.

RedLegSuperStar
08-14-2007, 04:45 PM
That's an interesting figure, but it's mildly dishonest. Phillips will get an arbitration bump. IIRC Arroyo's salary escalates at a nice clip as well.

Still that brings back Ross and Valentine. They've got Hatteberg and Votto at first paid for. Phillips, EE and A-gon back around the horn. Junior, Dunn and Hamilton in the OF. PLUS Freel, Keppinger and Dino. Back come Harang, Bronson, and the young pitchers

20 million to JUST buy pitching. hmmm.

If you're referring to Chris Denorfia he was dealt earlier in the year to Oakland Athletics.

We do have Hopper.. who i've grown real fond of with his ability to bunt for hits and able to move runners over.

mth123
08-14-2007, 08:22 PM
C Ross 2.525
1B Hatteberg 1.85
2B Phillips 2.5 ???
3B Encarnacion 0.45
SS Gonzalez 4.625
LF Dunn 13.0
CF Freel 3.0
RF Griffey 12.5
C Valentin 1.325
1B Votto 0.4
IF Castro 0.975
IF Keppinger 0.4
OF Hopper 0.4
OF Hamilton 0.4
SP Harang 6.75
SP Arroyo 6.45
SP Bailey 0.4
SP Ramirez 0.4
SP Belisle 1.2 ???
RP Coffey 0.925
RP Stanton 3.0
RP Weathers 2.75
RP Bray 0.4
RP Coutlangus 0.4
RP Majewski 0.4

That's a total of 67.375.

This is why Stanton, Freel and Gonzalez should go. That is over $10 Million and no way that Belisle is back at $1.2 Million (no more than $400K or he's a non-tender IMO) and I'd be cutting loose Hatte (option invoked and traded) and Javy and there is the needed $15 Million or so.

RedsManRick
08-14-2007, 08:52 PM
According to The Hardball Times, Belisle was one of the unluckiest starters in baseball and had a FIP ERA of 4.53. Consider the DER behind Belisle was .670. At a million bucks, he's just fine for a #5 starter. I'll take him over either of the soft tossing lefties.

Fielding Independent Pitching, a measure of all those things for which a pitcher is specifically responsible. The formula is (HR*13+(BB+HBP)*3-K*2)/IP, plus a league-specific factor (usually around 3.2) to round out the number to an equivalent ERA number. FIP helps you understand how well a pitcher pitched, regardless of how well his fielders fielded. FIP was invented by Tangotiger.

Redsland
08-14-2007, 09:27 PM
That's an interesting figure, but it's mildly dishonest.
The hell it is.

I stated that those '07 salaries will not be on the books in '08, and they won't. All of those contracts expire at the end of the season. Nothing can change that. And Phillips and Arroyo and everyone else you named have nothing to do with that.

Dishonest? Please.

Kc61
08-14-2007, 09:43 PM
According to The Hardball Times, Belisle was one of the unluckiest starters in baseball and had a FIP ERA of 4.53. Consider the DER behind Belisle was .670. At a million bucks, he's just fine for a #5 starter. I'll take him over either of the soft tossing lefties.

regardless of how well his fielders fielded. FIP was invented by Tangotiger.

I won't repeat Belisle's BAA, ERA, hits/inning, extra base hits allowed this year. They are set out in a number of other threads.

Some other stats: Lifetime major league WHIP is 1.49. Lifetime major leagues allowed 321 hits in 269 innings. Lifetime 4.81 ERA in majors. Belisle's last season used as a starter was 5.26 ERA, 192 hits in 162 innings (at AAA). This season as a starter 5.40 (sorry, said I wasn't repeating that one) with 167 hits in 135 innings.

camisadelgolf
08-14-2007, 09:48 PM
The hell it is.

I stated that those '07 salaries will not be on the books in '08, and they won't. All of those contracts expire at the end of the season. Nothing can change that. And Phillips and Arroyo and everyone else you named have nothing to do with that.

Dishonest? Please.

I think that $20.3M number is "dishonest" in the sense that it doesn't account for all of the salaries coming on the books. Picking up Dunn's option would add $2.5-$5.5M. Phillips and Belisle are arbitration eligible. Gonzalez will get $1M+ more. Arroyo will get nearly $3M more. Freel almost doubles his salary. David Weathers gets $500k more. Stanton gets a $1M raise. Ross will earn about $1M more. I can keep going. 2009 is when you'll really see salary come off the books. (There are currently only seven players in the organization who are likely to make $1M+ in 2009. There have been 16 so far this year, and there are due to be about 14 in 2008.)

RedsManRick
08-14-2007, 09:55 PM
I won't repeat Belisle's BAA, ERA, hits/inning, extra base hits allowed this year. They are set out in a number of other threads.

Some other stats: Lifetime major league WHIP is 1.49. Lifetime major leagues allowed 321 hits in 269 innings. Lifetime 4.81 ERA in majors. Belisle's last season as a starter, at AAA was 5.26 ERA, 192 hits in 162 innings. This year as a starter 5.40 (sorry, said I wasn't repeating that one).

I don't think we're disagreeing here. Belisle isn't that great. He's an average at best #4, solid #5 starter. However, as a live arm capable of giving us innings, I'll take him as an organizational asset at $1M. Look at what the Dodgers gave up for Scott Proctor. Don't think Belisle could do that in middle relief -- and be worth something to somebody in a trade? You don't non-tender players with value. He'll be better than Dumatrait and I'd be surprised if he wasn't better than Livingston too. Certainly a better use of the money than Stanton, Castro, Cormier, etc.

Kc61
08-14-2007, 10:22 PM
I don't think we're disagreeing here. Belisle isn't that great. However, as a live arm capable of giving us innings, I'll take him at $1M. He'll be better than Dumatrait and I'd be surprised if he wasn't better than Livingston too. Certainly a better use of the money than Stanton, Castro, Cormier, etc.

We really do disagree on Dumatrait and, to some extent Livingston. We've been through this in the minor league forum but Dumatrait is a low hit pitcher -- after a breakin period at AA and AAA he had low WHIPs, fewer hits than innings. Dumatrait is not a soft tosser and he did better as a AAA starter this year than Belisle in his last AAA season. Matt gives up high hit totals and his overall WHIPs are also high. Hard to have a good ERA giving up that many hits.

Livingston is a closer call, he gave up a high hit total at AAA, but he could be effective as a fifth starter with limited innings. I don't see him as a 200 innings man. He is deceptive though.

Belisle had the highest BAA, .308, of any NL starter with 100 innings other than Wells who was DFA'd. Maybe Belisle can make adjustments while at AAA, I hope so because he has a good arm with good velocity. I still think he is better suited to the pen because he doesn't walk guys and can throw ground balls.

I also think people are unrealistic on the salary structure. All teams make some bad deals and the Reds bad contracts are relatively small potatoes for next year. The sad truth is that if the Reds continue to spend 26 million a year on two corner outfielders, they will have a hard team fielding a winner, absent some great cheap players or an expanded payroll. (Wouldn't we love an expanded payroll!)

mth123
08-14-2007, 10:43 PM
We really do disagree on Dumatrait and, to some extent Livingston. We've been through this in the minor league forum but Dumatrait is a low hit pitcher -- after a breakin period at each minor league level he had low WHIPs, fewer hits than innings. Dumatrait is not a soft tosser and he did better as a AAA starter than Belisle. Matt gives up high hit totals and his overall WHIPs are also high. Hard to have a good ERA giving up that many hits.

Livingston is a closer call, he gave up a high hit total at AAA, but he could be effective as a fifth starter with limited innings. I don't see him as a 200 innings man. He is deceptive though.

Belisle had the highest BAA, .308, of any NL starter with 100 innings other than Wells who was DFA'd. Maybe Belisle can make adjustments while at AAA, I hope so because he has a good arm.

I also think people are unrealistic on the salary structure. All teams make some bad deals and the Reds bad contracts are relatively small potatoes. The sad truth is that if the Reds continue to spend 26 million a year on two corner outfielders, they will have a hard team fielding a winner, absent some great cheap players or an expanded payroll.

I wonder what a Freel/Belisle package could bring. If Horacio Ramirez can net a Rafael Soriano...

As for the Salary structure, I think we agree more than you realize. I think the window of opportunity is 2009 to 2011. Why?


1. There should be a number of young cheap players making big contributions by then (Bruce, Votto, EdE, Bailey, Cueto, Hamilton, other pitchers who fill in the pen, etc.)

2. The Reds will no longer have 2 corner OF making $26 Million. Even if the Reds keep Dunn (which I think they should do), Griffey should be gone. By 2009, Dunn, if he's kept around, will be the only big money position player on the roster. As a matter of fact, Gonzalez will be the 2nd highest paid position player by 2009. Its why he needs to be moved.

Kc61
08-14-2007, 10:49 PM
I wonder what a Freel/Belisle package could bring. If Horacio Ramirez can net a Rafael Soriano...

As for the Salary structure, I think we agree more than you realize. I think the window of opportunity is 2009 to 2011. Why?


1. There should be a number of young cheap players making big contributions by then (Bruce, Votto, EdE, Bailey, Cueto, Hamilton, other pitchers who fill in the pen, etc.)

2. The Reds will no longer have 2 corner OF making $26 Million. Even if the Reds keep Dunn (which I think they should do), Griffey should be gone. By 2009, Dunn, if he's kept around, will be the only big money position player on the roster. As a matter of fact, Gonzalez will be the 2nd highest paid position player by 2009. Its why he needs to be moved.

Other than moving Gonzo, we do agree. (I like Gonzo at short and offensively at GABP). I think the 2009-2011 thing is the plan, just as you say.

camisadelgolf
08-14-2007, 11:15 PM
I don't mean to take away from your point (because I agree with you), but EdE probably won't be all that cheap in 2009. Also, Brandon Phillips might be making more than AGon by then. By my estimates, the Reds have about $20M available for 2009. What's incredible is that the core of the team will still be together (i.e. Harang, Arroyo, Bailey, Cueto, Ross, AGon, EdE, Phillips, Votto, Hamilton, Freel, Bruce, etc.).

dfs
08-15-2007, 01:10 AM
The hell it is.

I stated that those '07 salaries will not be on the books in '08, and they won't. All of those contracts expire at the end of the season. Nothing can change that. And Phillips and Arroyo and everyone else you named have nothing to do with that.

Dishonest? Please.
I certainly didn't mean to imply you were being deceitful. I apologize if I offended. That was not my intent.

Camisadelgolf did a reasonable job of stating what I meant. There IS money coming off the books, but there are also commitments coming on as well.

mth123
08-15-2007, 07:19 AM
I don't mean to take away from your point (because I agree with you), but EdE probably won't be all that cheap in 2009. Also, Brandon Phillips might be making more than AGon by then. By my estimates, the Reds have about $20M available for 2009. What's incredible is that the core of the team will still be together (i.e. Harang, Arroyo, Bailey, Cueto, Ross, AGon, EdE, Phillips, Votto, Hamilton, Freel, Bruce, etc.).

I agree that EdE and Phillips will be getting increases, but Gonzalez will be making $5.375 Million in 2009. I'd guess EdE will still be less than $3 Million and I'm guessing that Phillips shoud be in the $4 to $5 Million Range, but its possible that he'd be going higher.

Redsland
08-16-2007, 11:42 AM
There IS money coming off the books, but there are also commitments coming on as well.
Of course, but that isn't what my post was about. My post was in reply to:

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf
If the Reds pick up Dunn's option, then they won't have much to spend on new players.
As I showed, nearly one-third of the '07 opening day payroll is coming off the books at the end of the year. That's a whole heap of money any way you slice it. And the figure could easily grow by trading away players that are under contract.

Bottom line, money is not the issue. This ownership group has never cried about money, this GM has never cried about money, and John Allen hasn't cried about money since Castellini took over.

dfs
08-16-2007, 12:29 PM
Bottom line, money is not the issue.
We're in agreement about this. Players are investments. You pick the right investments and you end up with seats in the seats for a current revenue stream in addition to the franchise appreciation where the real money is.


This ownership group has never cried about money, this GM has never cried about money, and John Allen hasn't cried about money since Castellini took over.
We are less in agreement about this. While you are right that current ownership has never cried about money to the press. I'm not convinced that it's not an issue to them. I sincerely hope that you are correct.

I don't think the press even talks to Allen anymore. Didn't Bob give him a gag order shortly after coming on board?

Redsland
08-16-2007, 12:48 PM
Didn't Bob give him a gag order shortly after coming on board?
Not exactly. Under the previous regime, John Allen, in his capacity as the COO, was the mouthpiece of the ownership, and the guy to press would go to when they needed ownership's take on things, or simply wanted a point of view about something that needed to come from somone at a higher pay grade than Bowden/Kullman/O'Brien.

Under the current regime, John Allen has no say in the day-to-day operation of the Baseball Operations Department, which Wayne Krivsky is ultimately responsible for. Ownership expects the press to go to Wayne for any information related to baseball operations. Furthermore, this ownership group makes itself more available to the press than the previous regime did. All of which means that there are fewer things for the press to go ask Allen about.

Here's (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2299959) a note from the presser in which Castellini reshuffled the responsibilities of the GM and COO.

Castellini's first move was to change the front office's structure. Chief operating officer John Allen will stay but will focus on the business side of the ballclub. General manager Dan O'Brien will run the baseball side, reporting directly to Castellini.

Under previous owner Carl Lindner, Allen ran the entire operation and reported directly to the owner.

camisadelgolf
08-16-2007, 01:06 PM
Of course, but that isn't what my post was about. My post was in reply to:

As I showed, nearly one-third of the '07 opening day payroll is coming off the books at the end of the year. That's a whole heap of money any way you slice it. And the figure could easily grow by trading away players that are under contract.

Bottom line, money is not the issue. This ownership group has never cried about money, this GM has never cried about money, and John Allen hasn't cried about money since Castellini took over.

C Ross 2.525
1B Hatteberg 1.85
2B Phillips 2.5 ???
3B Encarnacion 0.45
SS Gonzalez 4.625
LF Dunn 13.0
CF Freel 3.0
RF Griffey 12.5
C Valentin 1.325
1B Votto 0.4
IF Castro 0.975
IF Keppinger 0.4
OF Hopper 0.4
OF Hamilton 0.4
SP Harang 6.75
SP Arroyo 6.45
SP Bailey 0.4
SP Ramirez 0.4
SP Belisle 1.2 ???
RP Coffey 0.925
RP Stanton 3.0
RP Weathers 2.75
RP Bray 0.4
RP Coutlangus 0.4
RP Majewski 0.4

That's a total of $67.375M. The only way it could be lower would be if they paid the buyouts of Javier Valentin ($75,000), Scott Hatteberg ($150,000), and Adam Dunn ($500,000), which would save about $15.5M. Anyway, my point was that if the Reds pick up Dunn's option, they won't have much money to spend on free agency, and I'll stand by that.

In response to trading players as a way of saving money, I don't think it's so easy. First of all, the bullpen is desperate, so the Reds won't trade Weathers and Stanton soon because they're too valuable if the Reds want to compete next year. No one wants Juan Castro. The Reds won't have anyone to play catcher if they trade Dave Ross. Alex Gonzalez was signed as a free agent, which pretty much means the Reds out-bid everyone to get him, so I don't think he's going anywhere. Ryan Freel is a huge injury risk and would probably have to play for a while to show that he's fully recovered from his concussion and surgery. Not many teams are in need of a pinch-hitter who's making seven digits, so I don't think Javier Valentin would be too easily traded. It would be crazy to trade Brandon Phillips. Matt Belisle is worth every penny he's making and probably won't go anywhere. Todd Coffey could go, but that wouldn't even shed a million dollars. Edwin Encarnacion is still dirt-cheap next year. It makes no sense to trade under-paid starting pitching (Harang, Arroyo). Everyone else will be making the minimum or close to it, so that won't save any money.

However, after 2008, there might be no Hatteberg, Dunn, Griffey, Castro, Weathers, Stanton, etc. As I said, that is when you'll actually see a noteworthy amount of money coming off the books. Any way you slice it, baseball is a business. Those people in the organization who aren't crying are probably just being accepting of their situation and professional--not smiling all the way to the bank. I'm sure BoCast would be willing to lose a couple million dollars if it meant having a first place team, but realistically, the Reds aren't in position to do that just yet.

Redsland
08-16-2007, 01:40 PM
Anyway, my point was that if the Reds pick up Dunn's option, they won't have much money to spend on free agency, and I'll stand by that.
Again, people can assert this all they want, but that doesn't make it true.

What if the payroll goes up to $75 million? What if Griffey's $12 million contract gets traded away? What if both happen? What if seat prices go up, or advertising rates rise? What if FSN adds more games to its schedule at $50,000 per? What none of those things are necessary because the Forbes' valuations are correct and the club's operating income tops $20 million a year, giving it much deeper coffers than MLB would like to admit?

This ownership group doesn't cry about money. Until it does, there's certainly no reason for us to. That's just Lindner/Allen brainwashing.

RedsManRick
08-16-2007, 02:15 PM
Reds pick up Dunn's option, they won't have much money to spend on free agency, and I'll stand by that.

Setting aside for a moment the actual truth of that statement, if the Reds had Dunn's 13.5M to spend in FA, they'd have to spend at least that much and likely more to replace the production they'd be losing.

Sure, Reds pitching needs to improve. But if you allow 40 fewer runs at the cost of 50 runs scored, you're losing ground.

Both sides of the RS vs. RA equation matter. Gaining money to spend in FA only helps if it results in a net gain of production. Fact is that if Dunn were on the FA market, and we could sign him to a 1 year $13.5M deal, it would be the best FA investment we could make.

Besides not only is that production valuable in and of itself, but it carries very little risk and the upside of still being able to trade him next July if we're not in the race. There is no good argument for letting Dunn walk.

camisadelgolf
08-16-2007, 02:15 PM
Are you saying you want to hear complaining? By the way, Griffey isn't very tradeable (injuries, salary, no-trade clause, etc.). Not only that but the fans who show up for Griffey (especially during his hunt for homerun number 600) won't be buying his merchandise. I'm sure the team is constantly looking into raising prices and bringing in more advertising, and they do that when they feel it's appropriate. If the Reds go up to $75M in payroll, it'll be the difference of adding two marginal players or one slightly impactful player. If FSN adds the games they don't already cover, it'll be the difference of less than one million dollars.

nate
08-16-2007, 02:26 PM
By the way, Griffey isn't very tradeable (injuries, salary, no-trade clause, etc.). Not only that but the fans who show up for Griffey (especially during his hunt for homerun number 600) won't be buying his merchandise.

Why not?

KronoRed
08-16-2007, 02:54 PM
If JR can be moved you move him in the offseason assuming he gets to 600 hrs, I don't buy for that attendance will tank next season with JR gone, the Reds will still be in the bottom half with or without him.

camisadelgolf
08-16-2007, 02:55 PM
What I mean is that if he's traded before he hits number 600, people will be buying the merchandise of his new team. It's a moot point, though, since there is close to a 0% chance of Griffey being traded before then.

Redsland
08-16-2007, 03:01 PM
Look, this is the point we're debating:

Anyway, my point was that if the Reds pick up Dunn's option, they won't have much money to spend on free agency, and I'll stand by that.
So let me try to state my position more bluntly:

Unless you've seen the Reds' books, you have no idea what you're talking about, because you don't know how much money the Reds have to spend.

dfs
08-16-2007, 03:25 PM
By the way, Griffey isn't very tradeable (injuries, salary, no-trade clause, etc.).

I would think Junior is probably about as tradable as he has ever been in cinci.

He's a devastating lefthanded bat that can cover a corner outfield or DH.

Given current contract values, his salary is not extravagant and it so old that it doesn't extend so far out into the future that it kills you.

He's healthy as he's been as a red.

What's left is the no-traded clause. I would have to think that given a chance to win or a chance to watch Bobby Livingston, Phil Dumatrait and Matt Belisle get relieved by Mike Stanton, Todd Coffey and Kirk Saarloos, that junior might think about getting a ring in the next couple of years.

camisadelgolf
08-16-2007, 03:39 PM
Look, this is the point we're debating:

So let me try to state my position more bluntly:

Unless you've seen the Reds' books, you have no idea what you're talking about, because you don't know how much money the Reds have to spend.

Granted, I don't know the exact figure, but I'd like to think I have some idea based on what I've read. If you've read as much about the situation as I have, and I'm not sure you have or haven't, you would theoretically know as little as me.

Just as an example, anyone who wanted to know could know that last year's payroll was approximately $60M (but it ended up being slightly more because more people showed up than expected). This year, we knew a raise was coming from the FSN agreement. Next year, I wouldn't be surprised to see a slight increase due to other factors. If that means I have no idea, then having a slight idea probably means I know how much each player's rent is.

camisadelgolf
08-16-2007, 03:43 PM
I would think Junior is probably about as tradable as he has ever been in cinci.

He's a devastating lefthanded bat that can cover a corner outfield or DH.

Given current contract values, his salary is not extravagant and it so old that it doesn't extend so far out into the future that it kills you.

He's healthy as he's been as a red.

What's left is the no-traded clause. I would have to think that given a chance to win or a chance to watch Bobby Livingston, Phil Dumatrait and Matt Belisle get relieved by Mike Stanton, Todd Coffey and Kirk Saarloos, that junior might think about getting a ring in the next couple of years.

I agree that he's as tradeable as ever, but I don't see him being traded until after homerun number 600. It's slightly possible he could be traded next year, but many things, many of which are highly improbable, would have to line up for him to be traded. Ken Griffey seemed barely willing enough to accept a move to right field, so I don't see him willing to be a DH just yet.

bucksfan2
08-16-2007, 04:27 PM
Granted, I don't know the exact figure, but I'd like to think I have some idea based on what I've read. If you've read as much about the situation as I have, and I'm not sure you have or haven't, you would theoretically know as little as me.

Just as an example, anyone who wanted to know could know that last year's payroll was approximately $60M (but it ended up being slightly more because more people showed up than expected). This year, we knew a raise was coming from the FSN agreement. Next year, I wouldn't be surprised to see a slight increase due to other factors. If that means I have no idea, then having a slight idea probably means I know how much each player's rent is.

The thing you have to consider is at what payroll can the reds operate in the black. True the reds payroll sits at 60M but how much revenue comes in from Fox, Fox Sports, ESPN, WLW, Luxery Taxes, etc. I would almost be willing to bet a team like the Marlins could not sell 1 single ticket yet still remain profitable because of all the revenue sources. IMO last offseason really wasn't the time to open up the pockets and sign a big FA. The two biggest FA pitchers were Schmidt and Zito and neither are worth what their contract was. I want the reds to open up their pocket books when Cueto, Bailey, Bruce, and Votto are all ready to contribute at a productive level. In order to be a successful club you need to know when to spend and when not to spend.

Cedric
08-16-2007, 04:29 PM
I don't know about a plan, but I sure like Burton, Bray, and Coutlangus as a young bp nucleus.

camisadelgolf
08-16-2007, 04:42 PM
I don't know about a plan, but I sure like Burton, Bray, and Coutlangus as a young bp nucleus.

I'm not trying to pick a fight, but are you being sarcastic? If you're not, I'm with you (I also like McBeth). The reason I ask is because I feel so alone in that I'm not pessimistic about the bullpen's future.

redsmetz
08-16-2007, 05:34 PM
I'm not trying to pick a fight, but are you being sarcastic? If you're not, I'm with you (I also like McBeth). The reason I ask is because I feel so alone in that I'm not pessimistic about the bullpen's future.

Camis, I don't think you're alone. A number of us have been noting that we have over the last year or so gradually accumulated quite a number of promising young pitchers via trades, waiver claims, minor league free agents, etc. Now, of course, the proof will be in the pudding, but it's not as bleak as some would paint it.

Redsland
08-16-2007, 05:48 PM
I would almost be willing to bet a team like the Marlins could not sell 1 single ticket yet still remain profitable because of all the revenue sources.
Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/33/07mlb_The-Business-Of-Baseball_Income.html?thisSpeed=10000) would probably agree with you.

They estimate the Marlins had an operating income of $43.3 million in '06, which was far and away the most of any team. (The Reds are 7th on their list at $22.4 million.)

During '06, the Marlins drew 1.164 million fans at an average ticket price of $17, for a total gate of $16 million, according to baseball-reference (http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/FLA/attend.shtml) and Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/33/07mlb_Florida-Marlins_336786.html). (Yes, I see the discrepancy, too.)

Subtract that $16 million from the $43.3 operating income, and you still have over $27 million (before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) without a selling a single seat.

nate
08-16-2007, 08:59 PM
I'm not trying to pick a fight, but are you being sarcastic? If you're not, I'm with you (I also like McBeth). The reason I ask is because I feel so alone in that I'm not pessimistic about the bullpen's future.

I'm with you too! Don't let the Socs get you down!

Stay golden, Ponyboy!