PDA

View Full Version : Super Two Jay



flyer85
06-29-2010, 09:46 AM
I guess it isn't an exact science. However, when you are winning nobody will likely care.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/06/super-two-cutoff-less-than-expected.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


The top beneficiary of the reduced Super Two requirement is Reds right fielder Jay Bruce. After this season Bruce will have two years and 125 days, and MLBTR has confirmed he'll be the Super Two with the least amount of service time. The Reds delayed his MLB debut until May 27th back in 2008, but he's still going to arbitration four times

_Sir_Charles_
06-29-2010, 09:50 AM
If I'm understanding this correctly, it means Jay goes to arbitration one year earlier than we expected, correct?

I don't really care one way or the other about when they start arbitration, because I'd like to see the Reds sign both Jay and Joey to longer contracts BEFORE they go to arbitration. Those 2 kids should be the faces of this franchise for the better part of this decade IMO.

flyer85
06-29-2010, 10:08 AM
If I'm understanding this correctly, it means Jay goes to arbitration one year earlier than we expected, correct?
yes. He is a "Super Two"

Cyclone792
06-29-2010, 10:17 AM
If this is correct, then this year's cutoff is a massive aberration being six days earlier than it ever has been. Looking back on my calculations from 2008, I figured a few days grace period beyond the earliest Super Two day would have likely sufficed, and the Reds went beyond that by three additional days.

Looks like the Reds (and me two years ago) were snakebit in their calculations and missed the cutoff by one day, and that one day could cost them several million dollars in 2011. Maybe the new rule should be figure out the earliest possible date that's ever occurred ... then wait another 10 days beyond that point.

Of course, I look at this way: if that prevents the Reds from signing another Arthur Rhodes in 2011, then this hurts quite a bit. But if it prevents them from signing another Mike Lincoln, then it's a blessing in disguise. Of course, we may never know where Bruce's 2011 arbitration money will come from unless a player is shipped out to clear up salary space.

Ghosts of 1990
06-29-2010, 10:32 AM
If this is correct, then this year's cutoff is a massive aberration being six days earlier than it ever has been. Looking back on my calculations from 2008, I figured a few days grace period beyond the earliest Super Two day would have likely sufficed, and the Reds went beyond that by three additional days.

Looks like the Reds (and me two years ago) were snakebit in their calculations and missed the cutoff by one day, and that one day could cost them several million dollars in 2011. Maybe the new rule should be figure out the earliest possible date that's ever occurred ... then wait another 10 days beyond that point.

Of course, I look at this way: if that prevents the Reds from signing another Arthur Rhodes in 2011, then this hurts quite a bit. But if it prevents them from signing another Mike Lincoln, then it's a blessing in disguise. Of course, we may never know where Bruce's 2011 arbitration money will come from unless a player is shipped out to clear up salary space.

I look at it this way, a young talent like Bruce that is 'working out' at the big league level will probably make you that much money by butts he puts in the seats. He's worth every penny and it's pure silliness how the Reds wait to sign young talent like Votto and Bruce to long-term deals. They could build around these two and the young pitching and we could be set for a half decade or more.

bucksfan2
06-29-2010, 10:40 AM
I look at it this way, a young talent like Bruce that is 'working out' at the big league level will probably make you that much money by butts he puts in the seats. He's worth every penny and it's pure silliness how the Reds wait to sign young talent like Votto and Bruce to long-term deals. They could build around these two and the young pitching and we could be set for a half decade or more.

Jay Bruce is a nice player on a team that is playing good baseball right now. I would argue that he himself isn't putting people in the seats. He may have on his debut and the next few games but he is hardly the marque player on this Reds team.

What I do find disappointing is last year when Bruce was struggling mightily there was talk about sending him down to AAA to get the kinks worked out. The Reds didn't and that probably would have been the difference between him being a super 2 and not a super 2. It is somewhat unfortunate that he will be a super 2 because his development is still a work in process. I like the player Jay Bruce is becoming but just wondering what if.

dougdirt
06-29-2010, 11:05 AM
I wish all 'work in progress' players were on pace for nearly 4 wins as a player....

blumj
06-29-2010, 11:24 AM
If I'm understanding this correctly, it means Jay goes to arbitration one year earlier than we expected, correct?

I don't really care one way or the other about when they start arbitration, because I'd like to see the Reds sign both Jay and Joey to longer contracts BEFORE they go to arbitration. Those 2 kids should be the faces of this franchise for the better part of this decade IMO.

They'll still have to pay for it. His agent isn't going to let him sign a contract that pays him like he's not a super two when they know he is one. But, I would guess that an OFer probably would have to hit a lot of HRs and drive in a lot of runs or hit for a really high average and steal a lot of bases to get that much more from being super two.

bucksfan2
06-29-2010, 11:28 AM
I wish all 'work in progress' players were on pace for nearly 4 wins as a player....

The super two status will cost the Reds quite a bit of money. I am not saying that Jay is a bad player nor am I saying that I wouldn't invest in him for the long term. What I am saying is that these three awful months will cost the Reds.

2009
May .212/.276/.487
June .187/.292/.385
July .138/.138/.241

That right there is awful baseball. Time that Jay spent learning the game and developing. If he has spent one trip in AAA, which his numbers supported, the Reds wouldn't have been forced to pay him super 2 status.

Ghosts of 1990
06-29-2010, 11:35 AM
I look at it this way (and not that what the Dbacks do are the carbon copy of how to build your ballclub, but I do like what they did with Justin Upton).

Bruce is having a year this season similar to the year that Justin Upton had last season on the Dbacks. He's not going to finish with as many stolen bases, but everything else will be comparable and he's playing better defense by a long haul then Upton did last season.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/bruceja01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/u/uptonju01.shtml

If Bruce finishes out the year with comparable numbers, say, .280 with 80 RBI and 20 HR and 90 runs scored and he continues to play great defense in right field; playing every day.... I think you have to lock him up. I think you lock him up similar to the deal that Upton got (6 years, $51.25 million). Let's say it's something around 5-6 years and $38-45 Million. Don't you think that's a bargain if Bruce turns out to be what the Reds scouts, and scouts around baseball expected him to be? Then you focus around building the pitching staff, and keeping those guys and Joey Votto long-term and Bruce is already in the kitty through his early prime years. It would be a nice, nice move.

And while he isn't the Marquee player on the Reds, he's quietly a guy who is a VERY nice luxury to have hitting 5 or 6 hole every single day vs. rightie or leftie, OPSing over .820 and playing gold glove defense in right field at age 23. I don't think he's a finished product. I think he's just scratching the surface.

RedsManRick
06-29-2010, 11:43 AM
I would not be surprised to see the Reds move to long terms deals with both Votto and Bruce this offseason that take them through their arb years. Fiscal certainty is a big deal for an organization with a budget like ours.

nemesis
06-29-2010, 11:43 AM
Of course, I look at this way: if that prevents the Reds from signing another Arthur Rhodes in 2011, then this hurts quite a bit. But if it prevents them from signing another Mike Lincoln, then it's a blessing in disguise. Of course, we may never know where Bruce's 2011 arbitration money will come from unless a player is shipped out to clear up salary space.

If they declined the option on Harang and most likely Arroyo there is $22.5 Mil. Factor in the expiring contracts of Miles $2.5 Mil, Lincoln's $2.5 Mil and Rhodes $2 Mil, Nix $0.8, then the decision on options for Hernandez $3.5 Mil, Cabrera $4 Mil and Gomes $1.75 Mil the team will have an additional $28 - 34 Million of payroll space if ipayroll stays static. Factor in Phillips getting a $3 Mil raise next year and the arbitration numbers of the eligible players:

Cueto $4 to 6 Mil
Votto $5 to 8 Mil
Bray $1 Mil
Bruce $2 to 4 Mil

Payroll is still about $10 Million short of this years #... Figuring a younger roster of

Votto
Phillips
Rolen
Cozart
Heisey
Stubbs
Bruce
Hanigan

Sutton/Valakia
Janish
Francisco/Dorn/Frazier
Dickerson/Perez
Castillo/Denove/Miller

Volquez
Cueto
Leake
Chapman
Bailey

Owings
Ondrusek
Smith
Bray
Joseph
Massett
Cordero

Ghosts of 1990
06-29-2010, 11:57 AM
I would not be surprised to see the Reds move to long terms deals with both Votto and Bruce this offseason that take them through their arb years. Fiscal certainty is a big deal for an organization with a budget like ours.

Exactly. You'd think long-term contracts (5-years or more) would be something we'd do a lot more of when guys are at the stage of a Votto, a Bruce, or even a few years ago with Phillips; but Phillips only got 3-4 years if I'm correct and they called it 'long-term' even though in actuality it wasn't all that long.

Sea Ray
06-29-2010, 12:22 PM
My guess is they'll pick up Arroyo's option

camisadelgolf
06-29-2010, 12:23 PM
Just for reference, here are some other Reds who will likely be arbitration eligible following the season's end:
Bill Bray
Jared Burton
Johnny Cueto
Laynce Nix
Micah Owings
Edinson Volquez
Joey Votto

RedsManRick
06-29-2010, 12:37 PM
Good summary, nemesis. It's clear we'll have some wiggle room in 2011. But I think it's a virtual no-brainer that Gomes' option will be picked up -- even if they don't intend him to be the starter next year.

nemesis
06-29-2010, 12:46 PM
Good summary, nemesis. It's clear we'll have some wiggle room in 2011. But I think it's a virtual no-brainer that Gomes' option will be picked up -- even if they don't intend him to be the starter next year.

Agreed. He would be a value at 1.75 even if all he put up next year was the numbers he has already put up this year. I would like to see Heisey become the everyday LF though going into next year. I am afraid his option being picked up would block that.

Caveat Emperor
06-29-2010, 01:04 PM
My guess is they'll pick up Arroyo's option

Yup. I expect they'll re-negotiate to reduce the 2011 hit in exchange for more years on his deal (possibly 2 or 3). I suspect Arroyo would bite, for a number of baseball and non-baseball reasons.

I also agree that the Reds will try to buy out Bruce's arb years and Votto's arb years. Bruce will probably be fairly reasonable, but I expect Votto's contract will sting more than a little.

Ghosts of 1990
06-29-2010, 01:24 PM
I also agree that the Reds will try to buy out Bruce's arb years and Votto's arb years. Bruce will probably be fairly reasonable, but I expect Votto's contract will sting more than a little.

And the longer they wait the more each of them will sting. I hope some of the Reds brass reads tORG:thumbup:

Mario-Rijo
06-29-2010, 04:05 PM
And the longer they wait the more each of them will sting. I hope some of the Reds brass reads tORG:thumbup:

If they did they would have used their brains and signed him to a LTC before the season started (Bruce I mean) as I suggested they should do.

RZ thread (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80892&highlight=Jay+Bruce%2C+Long+Term+Contract)

Chip R
06-29-2010, 04:22 PM
Yup. I expect they'll re-negotiate to reduce the 2011 hit in exchange for more years on his deal (possibly 2 or 3). I suspect Arroyo would bite, for a number of baseball and non-baseball reasons.


That would be a pretty good idea. Like they did with Rolen.

Ghosts of 1990
06-29-2010, 04:26 PM
If they did they would have used their brains and signed him to a LTC before the season started (Bruce I mean) as I suggested they should do.

RZ thread (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80892&highlight=Jay+Bruce%2C+Long+Term+Contract)

Love your post from back before the season started. Not sure how I missed it the first time around.