PDA

View Full Version : Reds mgmt still interested in lee?



Billy Hamilton's Legs
12-06-2010, 10:14 PM
I found this article today and was surprsied http://rangersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/12/a-possible-destination-for-cli.html

Thoughts?

R_Webb18
12-06-2010, 10:31 PM
do I think we get him no but if we did amazing.

Vottomatic
12-07-2010, 02:06 AM
I hear they're trying to sign Cliff Lee, and trade for both Greinke and Felix Hernandez.

Management wants to have 3 aces going into postseason play.

Chris Sabowned
12-07-2010, 10:22 AM
I'm sure we're interested in him, but unless the Yankees and about 3 or 4 other teams decide they don't want him, we have no shot.

Girevik
12-07-2010, 10:51 AM
All the article says is that this guy thinks the Reds might be a likely spot because they make the biggest splash last year signing Chapman. Pretty flimsy thinking, if you ask me. That's basically a garbage artical based on this one guy's speculation.

FlyerFanatic
12-07-2010, 10:52 AM
"Cincinnati gets some consideration because it "pulled one of the biggest off-season surprises a year ago, signing Cuban left-hander Aroldis Chapman to a six-year, $30.25 million contract."

Again, Rosenthal didn't have any inside information about these teams. These items are just food for thought."

pretty important part of the article there. his reasoning isnt too logical either. because the reds made a surprise splash in giving an unknown talent at 30 mill, all of a sudden they might shock everyone and give a known stud in lee 150 mill all of a sudden? i think that article was just trying to fill up space with words.

757690
12-07-2010, 01:36 PM
Most of the Chapman money came out of the Development part of the budget, not the payroll. Huge difference.

Now, there are reports that one mystery team has offered Lee 7 years at over $20M a season. It's not the Yankees, Rangers or Nats, who have been his biggest suitors so far. It can't be the Reds, they simply can't afford that. But I wonder who it is?

Billy Hamilton's Legs
12-07-2010, 04:56 PM
Yea, this article was a little misleading. Overtime I've noticed that Rosenthal doesn't always have good logic to support his speculation.

Hondo
12-07-2010, 06:56 PM
You noticed how all the Great Baseball Minds, reporters, Gammons, Rosenthal, Buster Olney all called the Jayson Werth to Washington Nationals.

It is kind of like the South Park episode about the BP Oil Spill with the reporter turned superhero, "Captain Hindsight"

http://cliqueclack.com/tv/2010/10/27/south-park-captain-hindsight-is-our-protector-and-guardian/

http://www.southparkstudios.com/guide/episodes/s14e11-coon-2-hindsight

Not one of them called Werth to Washington... Not one...

I like Mitch Williams and Harold Reynolds on MLB Network... They generally tell it like it is...

I know they aren't rumor or gossip reporters but Olney, Rosenthal, Gammons are all like 5'4" and Just Guess...

Now they are on Pavano to Washington...

Let me tell you this:

If Washington signs Carl Pavano to "ANY" kind of Deal. That will mark them as the stupidest and incompetent franchise in MLB.

Vottomatic
12-07-2010, 07:18 PM
If they would sign Lee as a free agent, that's one major acquisition that didn't cost them trading chips/prospects/players. Which allows them to trade for other parts they need such as a leadoff hitter.

scott91575
12-07-2010, 07:34 PM
Rumors are Lee's current offers are in the 7 year, $20 million per year range. Does anyone think the Reds will suddenly pull that kind of deal out of their butt, and would anyone be happy with the Reds making that kind of deal for a soon to be 32 year old pitcher?

Hondo
12-07-2010, 09:24 PM
Rumors are Lee's current offers are in the 7 year, $20 million per year range. Does anyone think the Reds will suddenly pull that kind of deal out of their butt, and would anyone be happy with the Reds making that kind of deal for a soon to be 32 year old pitcher?

Ya know I would like them too... He carried the Rangers though the playoffs, just couldn't get it done against the Giants...

While Votto is under team control for 3 more years...

How about the Reds win for 3 More years...

He would probably have a great impact on guys like Leake and Wood too!

Hondo
12-07-2010, 09:25 PM
If they would sign Lee as a free agent, that's one major acquisition that didn't cost them trading chips/prospects/players. Which allows them to trade for other parts they need such as a leadoff hitter.

We agree on something Twice!

;)

Vottomatic
12-07-2010, 10:01 PM
Ya know I would like them too... He carried the Rangers though the playoffs, just couldn't get it done against the Giants...

While Votto is under team control for 3 more years...

How about the Reds win for 3 More years...

He would probably have a great impact on guys like Leake and Wood too!

People forget that if Lee continues to be the pitcher he has been, he can always be on the trading block if the Reds would return to mediocrity. Say the Reds pay him the next 3 or 4 years and Cliff Lee is still pitching at a high standard.........surely one of the big market teams would grab him at the deadline if the Reds were stumbling badly and wanted to unload him.

And he's got a rubber arm style of pitching. I think he will hold up better than alot of pitchers will. He's mixing up pitches and pinpoint location.

I would be ecstatic if the Reds picked him up. And he's one guy I wouldn't worry about being saddled with his contract.

If the Reds signed Cliff Lee and traded with the Indians for Choo, I will order tickets for 10 to 20 games as soon as they come on sale. That is the impact it would have on me as a fan.

scott91575
12-07-2010, 10:17 PM
Ya know I would like them too... He carried the Rangers though the playoffs, just couldn't get it done against the Giants...

While Votto is under team control for 3 more years...

How about the Reds win for 3 More years...

He would probably have a great impact on guys like Leake and Wood too!

You guys act like the Reds are printing money, and if they overspend it won't have an impact throughout the organization.

They have pretty much stated the team has been up against the budget max in the last year. It is not jumping $20 million in one year, and the young players are not getting any cheaper.

scott91575
12-07-2010, 10:23 PM
If the Reds signed Cliff Lee and traded with the Indians for Choo, I will order tickets for 10 to 20 games as soon as they come on sale. That is the impact it would have on me as a fan.

Unless you pay $30 million for those tickets I don't think any of that will happen.

Once again, you guys think about the perfect scenario and assume the Reds are just printing money. Lee has had injuries in the past (multiple times). You also assume teams will line up for a contract that they are not willing to top right now, and Lee continues at the same pace. Both are huge ifs. Plus even small market teams that sell a ton of tickets are maxing out around $100 million a year (Minnesota and St. Louis). Lee puts the Reds right up near that number, and that is before any of the arbitration stuff. You are expecting the Reds tickets to jump 15,000 a game thanks to Lee and Choo. Not happening. Plus, the Indians are not just going to hand Choo out for the best offer. It will take a lot, and if the don't get it they still have a really good, young OFer who is locked up for 3 more years.

No offense, but you guys really need to step away from fantasy land.

Vottomatic
12-08-2010, 09:15 AM
Unless you pay $30 million for those tickets I don't think any of that will happen.

Once again, you guys think about the perfect scenario and assume the Reds are just printing money. Lee has had injuries in the past (multiple times). You also assume teams will line up for a contract that they are not willing to top right now, and Lee continues at the same pace. Both are huge ifs. Plus even small market teams that sell a ton of tickets are maxing out around $100 million a year (Minnesota and St. Louis). Lee puts the Reds right up near that number, and that is before any of the arbitration stuff. You are expecting the Reds tickets to jump 15,000 a game thanks to Lee and Choo. Not happening. Plus, the Indians are not just going to hand Choo out for the best offer. It will take a lot, and if the don't get it they still have a really good, young OFer who is locked up for 3 more years.

No offense, but you guys really need to step away from fantasy land.

Maybe you need to re-read some of the posts you are criticizing.

I said "IF".

I've never said it would be easy.

And sometimes I get tired of the small market mentality.

I've also pointed out that Lee would be very tradeable even at his price. For example.........if Felix Hernandez were available right now, every team that could afford his $20M price tag would jump at him in a heartbeat. The same will be true of Cliff Lee.

How is Cleveland going to rebuild? I guess you think other teams are going to line up and trade for their "bad" players? Dream on. If they want to rebuild, they need to trade their "good" players while adding multiple players in return. They traded several key components at the deadline last year - Westbrook ($11M), Peralta ($5M), Russell Branyan and Kerry Wood ($10M). Fausto Carmona was on the trading block last year too. You think if they couldn't get a good return for Choo that they wouldn't trade him? You need to step back from Fantasy Land. :eek:

Hondo
12-08-2010, 05:18 PM
You guys act like the Reds are printing money, and if they overspend it won't have an impact throughout the organization.

They have pretty much stated the team has been up against the budget max in the last year. It is not jumping $20 million in one year, and the young players are not getting any cheaper.

The Reds need a NEW Owner then because when a Team like Minnesota is spending 100 Million on its payroll... Locking up 2 young stars like Morneau & Maur up...

Why shouldn't the Reds, a REAL Baseball town be able to do it...

scott91575
12-08-2010, 05:26 PM
The Reds need a NEW Owner then because when a Team like Minnesota is spending 100 Million on its payroll... Locking up 2 young stars like Morneau & Maur up...

Why shouldn't the Reds, a REAL Baseball town be able to do it...

Check the attendance numbers and you will have your answer why they can afford $20 million more a year.

Plus, the Reds may be looking to spend money on the young stars on the team. They are not going to go out and spend $20+ million a year on a pitcher already in his 30's.

scott91575
12-08-2010, 05:29 PM
Maybe you need to re-read some of the posts you are criticizing.

I said "IF".

I've never said it would be easy.

And sometimes I get tired of the small market mentality.

I've also pointed out that Lee would be very tradeable even at his price. For example.........if Felix Hernandez were available right now, every team that could afford his $20M price tag would jump at him in a heartbeat. The same will be true of Cliff Lee.

How is Cleveland going to rebuild? I guess you think other teams are going to line up and trade for their "bad" players? Dream on. If they want to rebuild, they need to trade their "good" players while adding multiple players in return. They traded several key components at the deadline last year - Westbrook ($11M), Peralta ($5M), Russell Branyan and Kerry Wood ($10M). Fausto Carmona was on the trading block last year too. You think if they couldn't get a good return for Choo that they wouldn't trade him? You need to step back from Fantasy Land. :eek:

You may be tired of the small market tag, but the Reds are spending like a mid market team and you are asking them to spend at the level of Minnesota or St. Louis (the biggest of the mid market teams) with attendance numbers over 1 million less. How many time does Walt have to say this team is already spending near the max for it to sink in? It's not happening.

On top of that, Cliff Lee is 8 years older than Felix Hernandez. You think people are lining up for Johan Santana right now? That is a much closer comparison. Could very well happen to Lee. In fact, it's not far fetched. Huge contract, injuries, and went from dominant to only good. The Mets would have to eat a huge portion of that contract to deal him.

You really think 1) they are not going to get a good offer or 2) they will just give him away for the best offer if it's not much? Plus, teams don't just hand away good, cheap talent even if they suck (well, teams not named the Pirates). I am sure the Indians are not thinking "well, we are 4 years away." No one thinks that way, and least no team that actually wants to win. All the guys you listed are big money guys, free agents to be, and/or overpaid (Carmona never got dealt, doesn't that back up my point?). Choo is none of those thing. If every rebuilding team did that, they would end up like the Pirates. Sorry, you are the one in fantasy land.

Vottomatic
12-08-2010, 09:38 PM
We shall see what happens, Mr. Fantasyland.

scott91575
12-09-2010, 12:24 AM
We shall see what happens, Mr. Fantasyland.

You already did, and even brought it up. Carmona was not dealt for the sake of being dealt. Pretty much proves my point.

Soo may be dealt, but it will have to be a pretty good package. If they don't get it, he stays an Indian (see Carmona).

Plus the Reds are not going after any free agent on the market near the cost of Lee. You can take that one to the bank. They may sign some internal guys to long, expensive contracts. Yet are not going for a guy like Lee.

texasdave
12-09-2010, 12:12 PM
The Yankees have increased their offer to superstar free-agent pitcher Cliff Lee, to seven years. It isn't known yet if the dollar amount is changing. It makes sense for the Yankees to offer seven years, given that the other top two players on the market, Jayson Werth and Carl Crawford, both got seven-year contracts.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/baseball/mlb/12/09/winter.meetings.thursday/index.html#


Sabathia and Lee are gonna make a formidable 1-2. If it happens, of course.

bounty37h
12-09-2010, 12:21 PM
Check the attendance numbers and you will have your answer why they can afford $20 million more a year.

Plus, the Reds may be looking to spend money on the young stars on the team. They are not going to go out and spend $20+ million a year on a pitcher already in his 30's.

The first part of your post bothers me; do you work for the team, or they just have you brainwashed? Minn is small market team too, they get the attendance because they have put the product out there to back it up for many years. Reds fans came more as the season wore on and the team seemed legit (not to wether it needs to be, but there is a lot of losing to overcome to win fans back). We have had too many losing seasons to draw people to spend their hard earned money. There should be a huge increase in attendanc this year as long as the fans see we are still trying and staying competetive. Let the team breakdown and there will be empty seats once again. Gotta spend money (smart of course, thats a whole different post) to make money. But dont fall for this small team mentality that is accepted too often.

Hondo
12-09-2010, 01:14 PM
The first part of your post bothers me; do you work for the team, or they just have you brainwashed? Minn is small market team too, they get the attendance because they have put the product out there to back it up for many years. Reds fans came more as the season wore on and the team seemed legit (not to wether it needs to be, but there is a lot of losing to overcome to win fans back). We have had too many losing seasons to draw people to spend their hard earned money. There should be a huge increase in attendanc this year as long as the fans see we are still trying and staying competetive. Let the team breakdown and there will be empty seats once again. Gotta spend money (smart of course, thats a whole different post) to make money. But dont fall for this small team mentality that is accepted too often.

Bravo Sir!

I wanted to make this exact response when he said the attendance comparison...

Good Post... You recieve a Gold Star for the Day! :clap:

Vottomatic
12-09-2010, 01:50 PM
You already did, and even brought it up. Carmona was not dealt for the sake of being dealt. Pretty much proves my point.

Soo may be dealt, but it will have to be a pretty good package. If they don't get it, he stays an Indian (see Carmona).

Plus the Reds are not going after any free agent on the market near the cost of Lee. You can take that one to the bank. They may sign some internal guys to long, expensive contracts. Yet are not going for a guy like Lee.

I'm sure you wrote the Reds off for Chapman too.

You're probably too young to remember that Walt Jocketty signed McGwire and Edmunds and other superstars while with the Cardinals.

Never say never, Mr. Fantasyland. :rolleyes:

scott91575
12-09-2010, 01:57 PM
The first part of your post bothers me; do you work for the team, or they just have you brainwashed? Minn is small market team too, they get the attendance because they have put the product out there to back it up for many years. Reds fans came more as the season wore on and the team seemed legit (not to wether it needs to be, but there is a lot of losing to overcome to win fans back). We have had too many losing seasons to draw people to spend their hard earned money. There should be a huge increase in attendanc this year as long as the fans see we are still trying and staying competetive. Let the team breakdown and there will be empty seats once again. Gotta spend money (smart of course, thats a whole different post) to make money. But dont fall for this small team mentality that is accepted too often.

and when the Reds get those numbers, they will increase the payroll.

and no, as the season went along the numbers actually decreased in September.

The Twins did not spend money to make money. They got a winning team through young players, and then spent money on those young players as attendance grew. They did not just go out and spend money wildly on big name free agents.

The Reds simply do not have the revenue near the Twins right now. Deal with it. When the Reds average close to 30,000 a game you will see a jump, and then near 35,000 another jump (like the Twins).

BTW...the owner doesn't give a **** if you fall for it or not (assuming this is even some big ruse....do you people even remember the previous owners?). Demanding them to buy big name free agents doesn't change anything. You know what happens then? This owner, who has shown willing to pay more than others in the past, will sell this team to an owner who cares even less about winning because there is more money in losing while drawing revenue sharing.

The delusion on this board is palpable. You guys go on and keep demanding this team buy free agents like Lee, when no even the Twins (who you guys love to use as an example) would not even do that.

texasdave
12-09-2010, 02:00 PM
From 2002-2009 the Twins won their division 5 times and finished no lower than 3rd. They only had one losing season. During that time they averaged around 2.1 million fans. Their average payroll for that period? About 60 million. Only one time did they exceed 70 million. In 2010 they had a huge boost in attendance due to playing in a new park. In 2010 they jumped their payroll considerably. I think the payroll hike had more to do with the new stadium than from years and years of winning. I would guess that if they hadn't moved in to a new ballpark their attendance, and correspondingly, their payroll would have remained about the same.

scott91575
12-09-2010, 02:02 PM
I'm sure you wrote the Reds off for Chapman too.

You're probably too young to remember that Walt Jocketty signed McGwire and Edmunds and other superstars while with the Cardinals.

Never say never, Mr. Fantasyland. :rolleyes:

No, I didn't. Go ahead. Search posts. Chapman did not cost $20+ million. I was surprised, but the Reds are showing they are willing to spend a fair amount on really young players. Yet those are not in the $20 million dollar range. It's what small markets have to do, and I am glad the Reds are spending in that area.

What the hell does McGwuire and Edmonds have to do with any other this? The owner determines the payroll, Walt works inside of it.

You guys are beyond nuts. The Reds will not sign Lee, or any free agent anywhere near his price range this year. Deal with it.

Choo could be had, but the Indians are not just going to hand him out for the best deal if that deal is not really good.

All this is common sense, and you guys live in a fantasy land. Don't worry, you can continue to complain like little girls while I get to keep saying "I told you so" like I have done with Werth and Crawford. Everyone here was saying "oh, the Reds can get them!" "They are only going to max out around $15 million a year" while I kept saying the Reds were in no way going to pursue them and were going to get much more than $15 million a year.

There is what you want, and there is reality. Walt has said multiple times this team is up against the budget. I believe him (just look at the prorated contracts....teams with plenty of money to spend this year don't do that). Until attendance makes a jump to near 30,000 per game, this is the team's salary. The Reds will not spend money in the hopes of that happening. They will see if it happens, then make the jump. Until then, this is what you get.

BTW...no, I am not too young. I was there when the Reds clinched the pennant in 1990. I have been going to the ballpark since the early 80's. I remember Johnny Bench manning 3rd base and 1st base (do you?). I am too young for the Big Red Machine of the 70's, but I am not too young for some late 90's happenings that have no bearing on the current situation.

edit: In case you were wondering, here is my take on Chapman....


This is the kind of a thing a small market team has to do in order to compete. When you find a guy with huge upside, you sign him in hopes you get a deal. He could end up being better than $10 million pitchers. If the Reds went out and spent $6 million a year on a mlb free agent pitcher you get an average pitcher at best, and more than likely below average. That ensures you that your payroll will dictate your success - a below average payroll means a below average team. Yet if you go out and take risks, maybe you can have a team full of players that are overplaying their contracts. The first way is through the draft, of course. Yet the other way is paying for Latin American players, and outbidding the Red Sox, Yankees, and Angels of the world while you still can.

In other words, for the Reds, this is a great deal. He may end up being a bust, but I like the attitude the organization is taking. It's finally a logical approach to make a winner out of a small market team in a league without a salary cap. Anyone that hates this deal must like sub par baseball and zero hope....aka Pandora's box fan.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79896&page=3


You can't buy extra draft picks with that money, and any other young player you can buy with that money will be a lesser recruit. Plus they have addressed those areas with younger players. So no need to spend more money there.

If you want it spent on free agents, who is your list of free agents that will take a $5 million a year contract spread over 10 years? They are going to be mediocre at best, and probably in their 30's. So that means the current less than mediocre team adds another older, less than mediocre player. Yep, sounds like a sound strategy to win the world series.

In case you were wondering what $5 million per year gets you in the free agent market...

Garrett Atkins 3B - 30 year old after a bad year with Rockies inflated stats (above average a few years ago...who knows what you get)

Danys Baez P - 32 year old below average pitcher (that is being kind)

Jamey Carrol 2B - 35 year old utility infielder who couldn't kill a fly with hit bat

Coco Crisp OF - 30 years old, and hasn't hit worth a crap in about 5 years

Pedro Feliz 3B - 34 years old, average at best and on the way down

Nick Johnson 1B - 31, Decent stats but below average for a 1st basemen

Jason Kendall C - 35, Laughable.

Adam LaRoche 1B - 30, and about the only guy you could say "hey, move Votto to LF and put this guy at first." Even then, he is still a first baseman.

Ivan Rodriguez C - Preparing for a dirt nap

So there you have it. Take your pick of the missing piece to this team. Any other trade that frees up money can be done with or without this move, and last time I checked no one is handing out young, MLB ready SS's or OF's for aging high contract pitchers (at least not ones like Harang and Arroyo).

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79910&page=2

scott91575
12-09-2010, 02:11 PM
From 2002-2009 the Twins won their division 5 times and finished no lower than 3rd. They only had one losing season. During that time they averaged around 2.1 million fans. Their average payroll for that period? About 60 million. Only one time did they exceed 70 million. In 2010 they had a huge boost in attendance due to playing in a new park. In 2010 they jumped their payroll considerably. I think the payroll hike had more to do with the new stadium than from years and years of winning. I would guess that if they hadn't moved in to a new ballpark their attendance, and correspondingly, their payroll would have remained about the same.

Thank you.

Even before the new stadium they averaged around 30,000 per game (which allowed the initial bump). Their payroll was slightly higher than where the current Reds stand. Get to 30,000 per game, and I bet the Reds bump to near $90 million. Get to 35,000-40,000 and I bet the Reds get in the $100 million ballpark. If it doesn't change, then we can revisit this. Until then, a team that hadn't had a winning season in almost a decade had the 18th highest payroll after being 27th in attendance. They are now 20th in attendance, the payroll will make a jump again after arbitration. Overall the Reds are not underspending (plus, while they jump salary they keep losing revenue sharing). Signing a guy like Lee (who is going to get around $22 million a year, just watch) would put the Reds over $100 million with lots of young guys continuing to gain salary through arbitration. You just can't expect that with what the Reds get in revenue.

This is not rocket science people. You want the team to spend more money, then spend more on the Reds. Minnesota and the Cardinals get more people to go to games, and can afford higher salaries. The Reds are not the Pirates or the Marlins. They are spending a fair amount for the revenue they get. I am in no way upset with the way this team spends in comparison to similar markets and what the Reds draw to the stadium.

Vottomatic
12-09-2010, 07:14 PM
Me thinks we have gotten under Scott's skin.

We did our job well. :D

scott91575
12-10-2010, 12:05 AM
Me thinks we have gotten under Scott's skin.

We did our job well. :D

Don't flatter yourself. You guys never get under my skin. I just like to continue to provide facts. The most emotion you got out of me was rolling my eyes as I called you nuts.

If you want to believe you got to me, go right ahead. Whatever makes you feel better.

Vottomatic
12-10-2010, 01:53 AM
Don't flatter yourself. You guys never get under my skin. I just like to continue to provide facts. The most emotion you got out of me was rolling my eyes as I called you nuts.

If you want to believe you got to me, go right ahead. Whatever makes you feel better.

You've been had. Don't flatter yourself.

Hondo
12-10-2010, 03:15 AM
Wouldn't you guys flip a biscuit if the Reds were the "Sleeper" Team for Lee...

I hope they don't sign him, but this Bruce deal makes the Reds seem like they are doing things behind closed doors...

scott91575
12-10-2010, 04:43 AM
You've been had. Don't flatter yourself.

I'm sorry I didn't see through your stupidity. My bad. From now on I will know you try to act like an idiot.

bounty37h
12-10-2010, 09:43 AM
and when the Reds get those numbers, they will increase the payroll.
and no, as the season went along the numbers actually decreased in September.

The Twins did not spend money to make money. They got a winning team through young players, and then spent money on those young players as attendance grew. They did not just go out and spend money wildly on big name free agents.

The Reds simply do not have the revenue near the Twins right now. Deal with it. When the Reds average close to 30,000 a game you will see a jump, and then near 35,000 another jump (like the Twins).

BTW...the owner doesn't give a **** if you fall for it or not (assuming this is even some big ruse....do you people even remember the previous owners?). Demanding them to buy big name free agents doesn't change anything. You know what happens then? This owner, who has shown willing to pay more than others in the past, will sell this team to an owner who cares even less about winning because there is more money in losing while drawing revenue sharing.

The delusion on this board is palpable. You guys go on and keep demanding this team buy free agents like Lee, when no even the Twins (who you guys love to use as an example) would not even do that.

I never said a word about free agents, etc-I even commented to spend wisely, meaning free agents, draft, trades etc-and realize what is ideal and not for us. I was referring to those that fall for the small market excuse and it's relation to attendance. Do you go to a grocery store that has empty shelves with them making a promise that once they get more customers they will start stocking more merchandise, or do you go somewhere else? Its up to the owners to put out the product to bring in customers. I know Minn doesnt make the big free agent signings either, I was pointing out their attendance is where it is because they havent gone decades with losing teams that drive fans away. The blaming fans is an excuse; this is a business and if your not willing to put money into it you shouldnt expect to get money out either. And I am not even bashing our owners, they have to spend smart and do best for the team, but the small market thing is overused. I guess it will be as long as there are some out there that still fall for it...

PeteRoseBelongs
12-10-2010, 09:49 AM
I never said a word about free agents, etc-I even commented to spend wisely, meaning free agents, draft, trades etc-and realize what is ideal and not for us. I was referring to those that fall for the small market excuse and it's relation to attendance. Do you go to a grocery store that has empty shelves with them making a promise that once they get more customers they will start stocking more merchandise, or do you go somewhere else? Its up to the owners to put out the product to bring in customers. I know Minn doesnt make the big free agent signings either, I was pointing out their attendance is where it is because they havent gone decades with losing teams that drive fans away. The blaming fans is an excuse; this is a business and if your not willing to put money into it you shouldnt expect to get money out either. And I am not even bashing our owners, they have to spend smart and do best for the team, but the small market thing is overused. I guess it will be as long as there are some out there that still fall for it...

good pt Im glad to see someone has the nads to point it out.

bounty37h
12-10-2010, 09:51 AM
Thank you.

Even before the new stadium they averaged around 30,000 per game (which allowed the initial bump). Their payroll was slightly higher than where the current Reds stand. Get to 30,000 per game, and I bet the Reds bump to near $90 million. Get to 35,000-40,000 and I bet the Reds get in the $100 million ballpark. If it doesn't change, then we can revisit this. Until then, a team that hadn't had a winning season in almost a decade had the 18th highest payroll after being 27th in attendance. They are now 20th in attendance, the payroll will make a jump again after arbitration. Overall the Reds are not underspending (plus, while they jump salary they keep losing revenue sharing). Signing a guy like Lee (who is going to get around $22 million a year, just watch) would put the Reds over $100 million with lots of young guys continuing to gain salary through arbitration. You just can't expect that with what the Reds get in revenue.

This is not rocket science people. You want the team to spend more money, then spend more on the Reds. Minnesota and the Cardinals get more people to go to games, and can afford higher salaries. The Reds are not the Pirates or the Marlins. They are spending a fair amount for the revenue they get. I am in no way upset with the way this team spends in comparison to similar markets and what the Reds draw to the stadium.

I think your fighting yourself. The post you responded to started with the sentence "Minn won 5 division titles". That explains why they had crowds. How many division titles did the Reds win in that time? Hmm, Still wonder why attendance was lower for them in the same time frame? I am not complaining about this team and owners, and I am not one that thinks we should sign every big name that comes around each year or take on crazy contracts-thats a different discussion. I am simply arguing that attendance should not be used an excuse when the low attendance is historically the teams fault, not the fans, and the temas responsibility to continue to work towards fixing/improving.