PDA

View Full Version : "One more year. One more year. I want one more year here."



Brutus
08-27-2009, 03:42 AM
So, we've found the secret to Bronson Arroyo's success: motivation.

Well, motivation and greenies. But motivation. Yeah that's it.

Reds' trade for Rolen convinces Arroyo of his desire to stay (http://www.daytondailynews.com/dayton-sports/cincinnati-reds/reds-trade-for-rolen-convinces-arroyo-of-his-desire-to-stay-268237.html?cxtype=twt_HalMcCoy_Reds)

Highlifeman21
08-27-2009, 08:06 AM
See, now I have a legitimate reason to dislike the Rolen trade.

Before this, I liked the trade.

paulrichjr
08-27-2009, 09:59 AM
See, now I have a legitimate reason to dislike the Rolen trade.

Before this, I liked the trade.


I understand his contract but why do you dislike him? The guy has been our only constant the last few months. His production would cost a lot to replace and I just to be frank don't trust Walt to find someone better than Arroyo. After all of the talk about players not wanting to come to Cincy....Why would we want to run someone out of town that is pretty good, signed for only one more year, and WANTS to be here?

BCubb2003
08-27-2009, 10:05 AM
We used to get on him for always talking about Boston. It's a nice change to hear him talk this way.

RANDY IN INDY
08-27-2009, 10:08 AM
I would like to see Arroyo on the pitching staff next season. The only way I want him gone is if it lands the Reds a major haul. Don't see that happening.

bucksfan2
08-27-2009, 10:08 AM
In the second half of the season Arroyo is pitching lights out. He has a 2.54 ERA. He is giving a good to great start every time he goes out. His K/BB ratio is at 2.50. He is pitching to or even above his contract for the second half of the season. You also can't discount him taking the ball every 5th day and the consistency that brings.

Chip R
08-27-2009, 10:15 AM
We used to get on him for always talking about Boston. It's a nice change to hear him talk this way.


Yeah. His first year here, people wanted to run him out of town every time he mentioned Boston because they thought he didn't want to be here badly enough. Now they want him to go even though he clearly wants to stay. :confused:

traderumor
08-27-2009, 10:23 AM
Yeah. His first year here, people wanted to run him out of town every time he mentioned Boston because they thought he didn't want to be here badly enough. Now they want him to go even though he clearly wants to stay. :confused:It's a love/hate relationship.

TRF
08-27-2009, 10:27 AM
I'd love BA if second half Arroyo spoke to first half Arroyo about pitching better.

traderumor
08-27-2009, 10:36 AM
I'd love BA if second half Arroyo spoke to first half Arroyo about pitching better.Wonder what he calls his little guy that he talks to? Maybe he talks to frozen Ted.

Unassisted
08-27-2009, 10:36 AM
Surprising that Hal didn't try to connect the dots between this and the timing of his unapproved supplement-use revelation. Maybe Hal's saving that for a future column?

And I agree that this talk is preferable to his pining for Boston.

HeatherC1212
08-27-2009, 10:49 AM
That's a nice change of pace to hear about a player actually wanting to be here. Bronson is a good guy and I wouldn't mind seeing him stick around for one more year. :)

savafan
08-27-2009, 11:04 AM
Bronson has been our best starting pitcher for the last 3 years cumulatively. I'd keep him around as long as he wants to stay.

Chip R
08-27-2009, 11:06 AM
It's a love/hate relationship.


More like a hate/hate relationship.

traderumor
08-27-2009, 11:38 AM
More like a hate/hate relationship.For a dozen starts "we love him, let's keep him" after the inevitable 12 runs in 1-1/3 innings shelling two or three times a year "we hate him, trade him for a Rookie League clubhouse attendant" for a couple/three starts

Blimpie
08-27-2009, 12:03 PM
Say whatever you want about his desire to be in Cincinnati, but at least you can count on Arroyo taking the bump every fifth day.

savafan
08-27-2009, 01:10 PM
His overall numbers look bad because of a handful of bad starts where he gets left in to pitch long after he should be pulled. He's a better pitcher than Redszone thinks.

redsfandan
08-27-2009, 01:14 PM
I'd like to keep him as a #3 but he makes too much.

BRM
08-27-2009, 01:17 PM
I'd like to see two new starters brought in that are good enough to push Arroyo to the 4/5. Pipe dream I know.

savafan
08-27-2009, 01:19 PM
I'd like to keep him as a #3 but he makes too much.

Too much for who? Not for you or I. He actually makes right about what his value should be. Understand, this team needs to pony up and pay guys money in order to ever be successful. As fans, it isn't our job to worry about the budget.

redsfandan
08-27-2009, 01:28 PM
Too much for who? Not for you or I. He actually makes right about what his value should be. Understand, this team needs to pony up and pay guys money in order to ever be successful. As fans, it isn't our job to worry about the budget.
I don't agree. He makes too much for the Reds to spend on a #3. And what the Reds need to do most to be successful, imo, is to make the farm system the best possible.

savafan
08-27-2009, 01:34 PM
I don't agree. He makes too much for the Reds to spend on a #3. And what the Reds need to do most to be successful, imo, is to make the farm system the best possible.

This is a nice thought, but how many World Series winners took this approach? Only the Marlins on their second title run. For all the talk about Moneyball, what has Oakland won? For all the talk about a strong farm system and having the kids all hit the majors and be superstars, it got the Rays to the World Series, but not to the champagne shower in the locker room.

Reds/Flyers Fan
08-27-2009, 02:00 PM
Can we send Arroyo to a sports psychologist? Or find some way to make him think that Opening Day is the All Star Game? I really don't feel like watching another half-season of Batting Practice Bronson until he turns it on in the second half again.

BCubb2003
08-27-2009, 02:39 PM
Can we send Arroyo to a sports psychologist? Or find some way to make him think that Opening Day is the All Star Game? I really don't feel like watching another half-season of Batting Practice Bronson until he turns it on in the second half again.

Maybe he should pitch winter ball and the WBC.

Highlifeman21
08-27-2009, 03:07 PM
I understand his contract but why do you dislike him? The guy has been our only constant the last few months. His production would cost a lot to replace and I just to be frank don't trust Walt to find someone better than Arroyo. After all of the talk about players not wanting to come to Cincy....Why would we want to run someone out of town that is pretty good, signed for only one more year, and WANTS to be here?

It's his contract that makes me dislike him, and as well as his inconsistency.

We're paying him to be a #1 (which he's been at times for us), but he's maybe averaged to be a #4. That's my dislike.

Brutus
08-27-2009, 04:03 PM
It's his contract that makes me dislike him, and as well as his inconsistency.

We're paying him to be a #1 (which he's been at times for us), but he's maybe averaged to be a #4. That's my dislike.

That is 100% my issue with it. I would like having Arroyo around as a 4/5 - if he were paid as such. But the Reds are not in a situation where it's prudent to be paying 4/5 starters like aces. That's the reason I've wanted to jettison Arroyo.

RANDY IN INDY
08-27-2009, 04:48 PM
The Reds aren't going to pay for a true #1 starter.

RED VAN HOT
08-27-2009, 04:50 PM
If he is not worth that much as a 4/5 to the Reds, he is probably not worth that much to a perspective trade partner either. I suspect any offers for Arroyo included the Reds picking up a chunk of what he is owed. That would leave the Reds with the task of picking up a pitcher better than Arroyo at less money than they are now paying Arroyo. With perhaps two legitimate AAA prospects for the starting rotation next year and already down one ML starter from this year, I suspect WJ decided that it would be wiser to keep Arroyo than take such an offer.

Put me in the camp that likes Arroyo. He gets by on guile and an assortment of pitches that run from 65 MPH dispsy doodles up to 90 MPH set up fast balls. He sets up the hitters nicely and pitches intelligently with good command. It is a plus that he is enthusiastic about staying in Cinci. I wonder how many are. Pencil in 200+ innings next year even with Carpel tunnel.

Brutus
08-27-2009, 05:08 PM
If he is not worth that much as a 4/5 to the Reds, he is probably not worth that much to a perspective trade partner either. I suspect any offers for Arroyo included the Reds picking up a chunk of what he is owed. That would leave the Reds with the task of picking up a pitcher better than Arroyo at less money than they are now paying Arroyo. With perhaps two legitimate AAA prospects for the starting rotation next year and already down one ML starter from this year, I suspect WJ decided that it would be wiser to keep Arroyo than take such an offer.

Put me in the camp that likes Arroyo. He gets by on guile and an assortment of pitches that run from 65 MPH dispsy doodles up to 90 MPH set up fast balls. He sets up the hitters nicely and pitches intelligently with good command. It is a plus that he is enthusiastic about staying in Cinci. I wonder how many are. Pencil in 200+ innings next year even with Carpel tunnel.

Depends on your budget. If a team deems him an effective pitcher, and has a larger payroll to pay a guy like Arroyo extra money, then it changes the value a bit. It seems like that's not the case, as the market has (at least in perception) been pretty dry. But the Reds' value of him is because of the financial limitations. Take those away, and in theory, perhaps some clubs would value that more. But admittedly, that does not seem to be the case right now.

Unassisted
08-27-2009, 05:32 PM
Can we send Arroyo to a sports psychologist? Or find some way to make him think that Opening Day is the All Star Game? I really don't feel like watching another half-season of Batting Practice Bronson until he turns it on in the second half again.The fact he cites his absence from the DL as a point of pride makes it sound like he'd rather be a dependable workhorse who makes every start than a Cy Young contender. I'm not sure there's much for a psychologist to work with if he's meeting his goal.

Maybe it just takes him half a season to find the right mix of nutritional supplements? ;)

mth123
08-27-2009, 09:32 PM
It's his contract that makes me dislike him, and as well as his inconsistency.

We're paying him to be a #1 (which he's been at times for us), but he's maybe averaged to be a #4. That's my dislike.

There are no number one starters with service time to qualify for free agency who make $11 Million per year. Arroyo is about $10 Million per year shy of getting number 1 money.

He's a 200+ inning starter who pitches league average ball over a season, never misses a start and because he has a few really bad outings, the rest of the time he actually pitches much better than his averages. On a game by game basis, Arroyo gives his team a chance to win games a lot more often than most starters. Take that away and you'll be running a lot of Josh Foggs, Dave Williamses and Joes Mayses out there to try and make up those innings.

Those horrid starts would make him a guy I'd shy away from in fantasy baseball. The Reds, fortunately, attempt to play real baseball.

IslandRed
08-28-2009, 01:44 PM
There are no number one starters with service time to qualify for free agency who make $11 Million per year. Arroyo is about $10 Million per year shy of getting number 1 money.

Yep. Go shopping for starting pitchers in free agency, $11 million per year might be the winning bid for a league-average innings-eater. It won't even get a true top-of-the-rotation starter's agent to return the phone call.

Mario-Rijo
08-28-2009, 02:58 PM
There are no number one starters with service time to qualify for free agency who make $11 Million per year. Arroyo is about $10 Million per year shy of getting number 1 money.

He's a 200+ inning starter who pitches league average ball over a season, never misses a start and because he has a few really bad outings, the rest of the time he actually pitches much better than his averages. On a game by game basis, Arroyo gives his team a chance to win games a lot more often than most starters. Take that away and you'll be running a lot of Josh Foggs, Dave Williamses and Joes Mayses out there to try and make up those innings.

Those horrid starts would make him a guy I'd shy away from in fantasy baseball. The Reds, fortunately, attempt to play real baseball.

:clap: Thank you for clearing that up Mth. A half dozen starts a year the guy is a train wreck but the rest of the year (20+ games) he's gonna keep you in games. His bad days are worse than most but beyond that he's well worth his salary, every year.

TeamBoone
08-28-2009, 10:48 PM
Say whatever you want about his desire to be in Cincinnati, but at least you can count on Arroyo taking the bump every fifth day.

Has anyone ever refused to do that?

Unassisted
08-29-2009, 01:56 AM
Has anyone ever refused to do that?I took the comment to mean as opposed to being unavailable to do so while on the DL.

WVRedsFan
08-29-2009, 03:01 AM
If Bronson Arroyo was on a pretty good team, he would be a 18-20 game winner. Same with Aaron Harang. Both have suffered through many 4-3 and 2-1 losses and had their share of stinkers too, but if you look at the league, they're not bad. Everyone seems to have a problem with what they are being paid (which seems to be a Cincinnati priority--get good performance on the cheap). I always think that you get what you pay for. It's not my job to worry about payroll. Yes, some of those big contracts inhibited us from doing some things, and some of the contracts awareded were simply horrible (I could name names, but you know who they are and who gave them the contracts). Huan judgment is sometimes flawed and things don't work out as they should. Stupidity, as my father used to say, is to the bone. No, both Harang and Arroyo shouldn't have received what they did, but the brain trust thought they did. Then it's up to the management to build a winning club given those circumstances. It's not my job, as Freddy Prince, Sr (sp?) used to say.

redsfandan
08-29-2009, 03:10 AM
On a better team they would have more wins but probably not THAT many. I'd just like to have players that aren't overpaid. That's all. I like the Freddy Prinze Sr reference though.

TeamBoone
08-29-2009, 12:38 PM
I took the comment to mean as opposed to being unavailable to do so while on the DL.

And I'm sure that's what it does mean. I was poking fun because I've seen it written on this board several times and heard it on tv and radio. Just strikes me funny every time, like anyone would say... "no, I'm not going to pitch every fifth day".

StillFunkyB
08-29-2009, 12:40 PM
I really don't understand the hatred of Bronson Arroyo.

He is what he is, don't hate the guy because he isn't the second coming of Sandy freakin Koufax.

BA is a #3 starter at best who has been forced into a TOR guy by injuries, and poor management.

Not his fault.

Highlifeman21
08-29-2009, 02:10 PM
I really don't understand the hatred of Bronson Arroyo.

He is what he is, don't hate the guy because he isn't the second coming of Sandy freakin Koufax.

BA is a #3 starter at best who has been forced into a TOR guy by injuries, and poor management.

Not his fault.

I guess it's also not his fault that we overpay him to be a #3 SP at best.

So, I'm not happy with who gave him his money, and I'm not happy with Arroyo for his inconsistency.

TRF
08-29-2009, 05:12 PM
honestly, i don't give one crap what anyone is paid as long as regardless of his salary, he performs.

Cordero is paid a ton. he performs.

Bronson turns it on in the second half. dunno why he is so much better in the second half, but clearly he is. His three year splits, 2006-2008 his second half ERA is a full run lower. His BAA is .030 points lower. In 2009 his second half era in nearly three runs lower.

He needs to put up those numbers in the first half. He frustrates the hell out of me.

M2
08-31-2009, 04:48 PM
I don't get the complaints about Arroyo. His cumulative performance in four years as a Reds pitcher has been quite good.

827.1 IP, 4.11 ERA, 111 ERA+, 80 QS (62% of all starts). Plus, he's never missed a start. When he's gone, he's going to leave some big shoes to fill. Getting somebody who can reliably deliver 200+ IP of generally solid work isn't easy.

nate
08-31-2009, 04:50 PM
I don't get the complaints about Arroyo. His cumulative performance in four years as a Reds pitcher has been quite good.

827.1 IP, 4.11 ERA, 111 ERA+, 80 QS (62% of all starts). Plus, he's never missed a start. When he's gone, he's going to leave some big shoes to fill. Getting somebody who can reliably deliver 200+ IP of generally solid work isn't easy.

The two problems with Arroyo are his guitar playing and his singing.

traderumor
08-31-2009, 04:52 PM
I don't get the complaints about Arroyo. His cumulative performance in four years as a Reds pitcher has been quite good.

827.1 IP, 4.11 ERA, 111 ERA+, 80 QS (62% of all starts). Plus, he's never missed a start. When he's gone, he's going to leave some big shoes to fill. Getting somebody who can reliably deliver 200+ IP of generally solid work isn't easy.Because when he's bad, he's really bad, even though its only 10% of the time, and those stand out more in folks' memories than the job he does 90% of the time. Sort of like the occasionally moody employee.

M2
08-31-2009, 04:59 PM
Because when he's bad, he's really bad, even though its only 10% of the time, and those stand out more in folks' memories than the job he does 90% of the time. Sort of like the occasionally moody employee.

I suppose, but you'd think fans of a franchise that has rarely found durable, generally good pitchers for four-year stretches during the past half-century would appreciate Arroyo as a pleasant rarity.

Chip R
08-31-2009, 05:00 PM
I suppose, but you'd think fans of a franchise that has rarely found durable, generally good pitchers for four-years stretches during the past half-century would appreciate Arroyo as a pleasant rarity.


You would think so, wouldn't you?

Brutus
08-31-2009, 05:02 PM
I don't get the complaints about Arroyo. His cumulative performance in four years as a Reds pitcher has been quite good.

827.1 IP, 4.11 ERA, 111 ERA+, 80 QS (62% of all starts). Plus, he's never missed a start. When he's gone, he's going to leave some big shoes to fill. Getting somebody who can reliably deliver 200+ IP of generally solid work isn't easy.

I have no problem with Arroyo's production. I think he brings a lot to any rotation - as a fourth or fifth starter. My only problem is that what you describe, while valuable, is not worth double-digit millions a year.

I like Arroyo. I think he's a valuable pitcher. I just don't think he's worth that kind of money.

M2
08-31-2009, 05:18 PM
I have no problem with Arroyo's production. I think he brings a lot to any rotation - as a fourth or fifth starter. My only problem is that what you describe, while valuable, is not worth double-digit millions a year.

I like Arroyo. I think he's a valuable pitcher. I just don't think he's worth that kind of money.

200+ IP of 111 ERA+ is exactly what a team like the Reds should be paying for. Sure, you'd like to see the team spend on a 120 ERA+ pitcher, but Arroyo's brand of dependability is hard to come by and more valuable to a small market club than a large one (which can afford to write off its unsuccessful ventures).

I don't get this business of grousing about guys who do their jobs because they make some money while attaching unreasonable hopes to a pack of kids and bit players who, if they were with another organization, nobody here would even know their names. Me, I'd take the guy who does his job and go from there.

OnBaseMachine
08-31-2009, 05:19 PM
200+ IP of 111 ERA+ is exactly what a team like the Reds should be paying for. Sure, you'd like to see the team spend on a 120 ERA+ pitcher, but Arroyo's brand of dependability is hard to come by and more valuable to a small market club than a large one (which can afford to write off its unsuccessful ventures).

I don't get this business of grousing about guys who do their jobs because they make some money while attaching unreasonable hopes to a pack of kids and bit players who, if they were with another organization, nobody here would even know their names. Me, I'd take the guy who does his job and go from there.

I agree 100%. Great post.

Brutus
08-31-2009, 05:21 PM
200+ IP of 111 ERA+ is exactly what a team like the Reds should be paying for. Sure, you'd like to see the team spend on a 120 ERA+ pitcher, but Arroyo's brand of dependability is hard to come by and more valuable to a small market club than a large one (which can afford to write off its unsuccessful ventures).

I don't get this business of grousing about guys who do their jobs because they make some money while attaching unreasonable hopes to a pack of kids and bit players who, if they were with another organization, nobody here would even know their names. Me, I'd take the guy who does his job and go from there.

I go back and fourth on him. I've re-warmed up to him lately. I do agree with the point you're making, I just don't know if I can rally behind the idea of paying $10-11 mil a year for that kind of pitcher. I agree every club needs a pitcher like Arroyo. I definitely think that's true. I'm just not sure that kind of pitcher is worth quite that much. Maybe it is, but I have a hard time justifying it.

nate
08-31-2009, 05:22 PM
I have no problem with Arroyo's production. I think he brings a lot to any rotation - as a fourth or fifth starter. My only problem is that what you describe, while valuable, is not worth double-digit millions a year.

I like Arroyo. I think he's a valuable pitcher. I just don't think he's worth that kind of money.

I think if salaries had continued along a similar trajectory, Arroyo's would be pretty middle of the road given his production. I think the deal was probably made with that in mind.

traderumor
08-31-2009, 05:23 PM
I suppose, but you'd think fans of a franchise that has rarely found durable, generally good pitchers for four-year stretches during the past half-century would appreciate Arroyo as a pleasant rarity.Preaching to the choir here. He reminds me of Tom Browning in that way. Drives you nuts, no idea how he gets the job done, seems like he gets hit hard, is incredibly lucky, but then you look at the numbers and he was a solid workhorse that gave his team a chance to win nearly every time he pitched.

traderumor
08-31-2009, 05:25 PM
I think if salaries had continued along a similar trajectory, Arroyo's would be pretty middle of the road given his production. I think the deal was probably made with that in mind.I have been noticing an increasing reluctance to fairly consider deflation when evaluating multi-year deals these days.

Brutus
08-31-2009, 05:27 PM
I think if salaries had continued along a similar trajectory, Arroyo's would be pretty middle of the road given his production. I think the deal was probably made with that in mind.

Oh, I don't question the rationale. I'm not looking to criticize the contract post-haste. I am simply trying to judge the value of the money as it currently stands. I can certainly understand why the Reds spent the money on him as they did and when they did. My contention is simply that the Reds can't cry over spilled milk.

They have to deal with what they have and what they could have, with and without that contract. I'm not sure that as of today, they're better off with that contract. I think they're a better team with Arroyo than without, but the question is - could they be a better team without the contract and replacing that money with a larger upgrade? Maybe not. I don't get paid to analyze that, but my hunch is that sum of money could be better spent.

nate
08-31-2009, 05:37 PM
my hunch is that sum of money could be better spent.

I think it might be possible to reach that conclusion about a plurality of deals for veteran players.

Brutus
08-31-2009, 05:45 PM
I think it might be possible to reach that conclusion about a plurality of deals for veteran players.

Such is the reason I've advocated trying to shed many of those same deals for this particular ball club, and breathe a new life of financial flexibility.

:cool:

Reds1
08-31-2009, 05:48 PM
Arroyo is getting it. He looks great and for what he's done the past 2 years has been great. Why not have him start 2010 and if the Reds still have a shot keep him - if not then we might be able to trade him to a contender. I bet teams - like the Dodgers - wish they had him. That's a great line up he took care of. He was a bad hop away from a victory.

M2
08-31-2009, 07:20 PM
Everybody wants to spend only for the Roy Halladays of the world. Yet there's only so many to go around. By the same token there aren't too many pitchers who can take the ball like Arroyo and deliver 200+ IP every season. You pay for dependability and performance. Arroyo delivers both. The GAB also obscures part of his performance. His ERA+ is pretty much the same as what you'd get from A.J. Burnett, but Burnett's pitched in friendlier parks and he gets big bucks as a result, even though Arroyo has been way more reliable.

Quite frankly, the Reds should be thrilled with what they're getting from Arroyo. He's been worth every penny.

HokieRed
08-31-2009, 07:29 PM
Agree on Arroyo and probably also on Harang. It's probably also true that if we could get back the full dollar amounts of their contracts we might be able to fill more of the team's needs. But I don't think the contracts were unreasonable when they were offered and I don't think we can get back the full dollar amounts now. So it seems to me pretty clear that the best course is to hold on to Arroyo and Harang and appreciate what they provide.

nate
08-31-2009, 07:37 PM
Everybody wants to spend only for the Roy Halladays of the world. Yet there's only so many to go around. By the same token there aren't too many pitchers who can take the ball like Arroyo and deliver 200+ IP every season. You pay for dependability and performance. Arroyo delivers both. The GAB also obscures part of his performance. His ERA+ is pretty much the same as what you'd get from A.J. Burnett, but Burnett's pitched in friendlier parks and he gets big bucks as a result, even though Arroyo has been way more reliable.

Quite frankly, the Reds should be thrilled with what they're getting from Arroyo. He's been worth every penny.

Good points, M2. I think Arroyo is actually paid the least of all the guys on this list:


Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers,
From 2006 to 2009,
(requiring IP>=800 and ERAp>=100),
sorted by greatest SO

Cnt Player **SO** IP ERA+ From To Ages G GS CG SHO GF W L W-L% SV H R ER BB ERA HR BF HBP
+----+-----------------+--------+------+----+----+----+-----+----+---+---+---+---+---+---+-----+---+----+----+----+----+------+---+-----+---+
1 Johan Santana (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/santajo02.shtml) 832 853.2 148 2006 2009 27-30 126 126 5 3 0 63 35 .643 0 731 308 277 208 2.92 100 3466 15
2 C.C. Sabathia (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/sabatc.01.shtml) 790 879 143 2006 2009 25-28 125 125 22 9 0 63 35 .643 0 812 343 307 189 3.14 73 3579 29
3 Javier Vazquez (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/v/vazquja01.shtml) 789 803.2 112 2006 2009 29-32 124 123 5 0 0 49 45 .521 0 767 386 366 202 4.10 94 3346 30
4 Danny Haren (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/harenda01.shtml) 754 849.2 133 2006 2009 25-28 128 128 6 2 0 58 38 .604 0 789 347 316 169 3.35 96 3484 23
5 Aaron Harang (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/haranaa01.shtml) 729 812.2 113 2006 2009 28-31 126 124 11 5 0 44 48 .478 0 846 395 368 201 4.08 115 3437 22
6 Roy Halladay (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/hallaro01.shtml) 642 881.1 138 2006 2009 29-32 123 122 25 4 0 65 31 .677 0 853 345 313 146 3.20 71 3559 24
7 Roy Oswalt (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/o/oswalro01.shtml) 604 802.1 129 2006 2009 28-31 124 122 9 2 1 53 30 .639 0 797 314 299 183 3.35 72 3334 31
8 Bronson Arroyo (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/a/arroybr01.shtml) 600 827.1 111 2006 2009 29-32 130 130 8 3 0 49 49 .500 0 855 415 378 252 4.11 115 3539 32
9 Mark Buehrle (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/buehrma01.shtml) 442 801.2 115 2006 2009 27-30 123 123 6 2 0 48 41 .539 0 879 397 363 180 4.08 105 3356 21

IslandRed
08-31-2009, 08:13 PM
You pay for dependability and performance.

More to the point, if a guy has reached the free-agency threshold, you overpay for it according to metrics equating salary to performance. That's just how baseball's pay structure works, and it's the problem folks have when claiming Arroyo's salary could be/could have been spent more efficiently filling other needs -- if the alternate plan involves signing free agents, good luck being more efficient. Bang for the buck is difficult to find in free agency except in the scratch-and-dent section, and spinning that roulette wheel is the opposite of paying for dependability.

The Reds have a weird mix going on right now. The highly-paid players in 2010 aren't stars but they're not dead money, either, which is kind of odd for a team that's going to finish with the record we will. Underperformances big and small, injuries, a manager whose lineup preferences don't match the talent on hand. It's like losing by a thousand cuts.

nate
08-31-2009, 08:23 PM
More to the point, if a guy has reached the free-agency threshold, you overpay for it according to metrics equating salary to performance. That's just how baseball's pay structure works, and it's the problem folks have when claiming Arroyo's salary could be/could have been spent more efficiently filling other needs -- if the alternate plan involves signing free agents, good luck being more efficient. Bang for the buck is difficult to find in free agency except in the scratch-and-dent section, and spinning that roulette wheel is the opposite of paying for dependability.

The Reds have a weird mix going on right now. The highly-paid players in 2010 aren't stars but they're not dead money, either, which is kind of odd for a team that's going to finish with the record we will. Underperformances big and small, injuries, a manager whose lineup preferences don't match the talent on hand. It's like losing by a thousand cuts.

I'd just like to add...nothing!

Well said!

Jpup
08-31-2009, 08:40 PM
I kept thinking Bronson would be traded today. Oh well.

GAC
09-01-2009, 07:33 AM
The Reds aren't going to pay for a true #1 starter.

Bingo!

Arroyo is Arroyo. I'm not his biggest fan, and you're going to get that stinker out of him on occasion; but the guy has shown consistency over the last three years in matching his career numbers..... a .500 pitcher who will be out there every 5th day - how many times has this guy been on the DL? - who will give you 200+ innings/year, an ERA around 4.4, and a 1.35 Whip.

He made 10M this season. Next year it goes to 11M.

People want to complain? Take a look at Harang and Cordero's contracts. Harang makes 11M this year, and it goes up to 12.5M next season. Cordero makes 12M.

With Volquez lost for next season, and some uncertainty in the farm system arms, I wouldn't be so quick to trade away Bronson. One of the other two above yeah. But I don't see that happening either.

I guess we can always fall back on Lehr, Wells, or Maloney. ;)

Or maybe we can pry Suppan from the Brewers? :p:

GAC
09-01-2009, 07:37 AM
Such is the reason I've advocated trying to shed many of those same deals for this particular ball club, and breathe a new life of financial flexibility.

:cool:

Even when they do have financial flexibility - they shed some payroll at the end of last season in just Dunn, Jr, and Milton alone - look how they spend it?