PDA

View Full Version : Can the Reds Afford Votto in 2014 and Beyond?



camisadelgolf
01-19-2011, 02:18 PM
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2011/01/19/more-thoughts-on-vottos-deal/

After seeing the breakdown on the Joey Votto deal, I can see why the Reds didnít press for a four- or five-year deal.
I'm not convinced one way or the other on this, but if the Reds really wanted to, I think they could afford Votto at a price of $20MM per year.

$20MM Votto
$10MM Bruce

Players in arbitration:
Ryan Hanigan
Paul Janish
Chris Heisey
Drew Stubbs
Homer Bailey
Aroldis Chapman
Mike Leake
Travis Wood
Jose Arredondo
Bill Bray
Logan Ondrusek

How much would those guys earn in arbitration? $34MM or so?
In 2014, the only players amongst those who I could see getting a significant raise are Stubbs, Bailey, Chapman, Leake, and Wood.

That would leave you with about $20MM to spend on 12 players. That's probably enough money to afford Volquez, Cueto, and a bunch of cheap, in-house options. Here's where most of the savings would come:

Ramon Hernandez -> Devin Mesoraco
Brandon Phillips -> Billy Hamilton
Scott Rolen -> Todd Frazier
Edgar Renteria -> Zack Cozart
Miguel Cairo -> Chris Valaika
Jonny Gomes -> Chris Heisey
Fred Lewis -> Ryan LaMarre
Bronson Arroyo -> Mike Leake
Francisco Cordero -> Brad Boxberger
Nick Masset -> Donnie Joseph
Jared Burton -> Jordan Smith

So what do you think? Can the Reds keep Votto in Cincy for 2014 and beyond?

Razor Shines
01-19-2011, 02:24 PM
Nice post. Looks possible....would Joe sign for 20M per? That's a big part of the equation and something we're probably not gonna know for a while.

kbrake
01-19-2011, 02:31 PM
3 years from now the length of a deal might be more of a concern than the annual salary figure. I don't think it would be a great idea to commit 6 or 7 years to a 30 year old.

RedsManRick
01-19-2011, 02:45 PM
This is another example of where deals like the Arroyo, Phillips and Cordero ones look worst. All are good players, but they are replaceable. Votto? Not so much. By 2014, the payroll will look quite different. I just hope our ability to retain truly elite talent isn't harmed by our choice to retain the merely good.

edabbs44
01-19-2011, 03:22 PM
This is another example of where deals like the Arroyo, Phillips and Cordero ones look worst. All are good players, but they are replaceable. Votto? Not so much. By 2014, the payroll will look quite different. I just hope our ability to retain truly elite talent isn't harmed by our choice to retain the merely good.

Those 3 will likely be gone by the time 2014 rolls around.

Unassisted
01-19-2011, 03:31 PM
The answer depends less on the dollar amount and more on the percentage of the payroll that his next deal represents. I don't know what the tipping point is percentage-wise and we aren't ever going to be privy to the ceiling of the payroll.

The Griffey deal proved that the Reds can ill afford to put too many eggs into any player's basket. There are opportunity costs to overpaying.

We don't even know for sure that the Reds will have the same ownership in 2014.

RANDY IN INDY
01-19-2011, 03:55 PM
The answer depends less on the dollar amount and more on the percentage of the payroll that his next deal represents. I don't know what the tipping point is percentage-wise and we aren't ever going to be privy to the ceiling of the payroll.

The Griffey deal proved that the Reds can ill afford to put too many eggs into any player's basket. There are opportunity costs to overpaying.

We don't even know for sure that the Reds will have the same ownership in 2014.

Wow! Where'd that last part come from?

medford
01-19-2011, 05:13 PM
The answer depends less on the dollar amount and more on the percentage of the payroll that his next deal represents. I don't know what the tipping point is percentage-wise and we aren't ever going to be privy to the ceiling of the payroll.

The Griffey deal proved that the Reds can ill afford to put too many eggs into any player's basket. There are opportunity costs to overpaying.

We don't even know for sure that the Reds will have the same ownership in 2014.

I think one big difference b/w now and the Griffey era, which Cam's thoughts reflected, is that the team relied heavily on ML retreads, castoffs, and guys on the back of their career, cashing in on the 2-4 mil offer to fill the roster. 2-4 mil may not sound like much in baseball buget terms, but gather a couple of those together and it adds up pretty quick.

conversly, the 2014 reds should be able to count on a handful of players developing into cheap ML worthy talent. Guys like Mes, Grandal, Hamilton, Yorman, Duran, Fasier, Arias, Cozart, Guillen, Leake, Wood, Boxberger, Lotzkar, etc... will factor into the 2014 roster and keeping the ML buget in order. Some could become stars, some will have solid ML careers, some will have mostly forgetable ML careers, and others will never make it. Point is, there are enough guys that appear to have legit ML ability down the road, if not today that will help keep the buget cheap and require the front office to go outside of the organization too often to fill holes. There shouldn't be many holes.

On top of that, if you believe last season was no fluke, but a sign of things to come over the next 3+ years, there should be more butts in the seats at GABP. Continue to make the playoffs, and reap the rewards of postseason revenue, increased media contracts, merchandise sales, etc... Point is, this team has a real chance to inflate the buget unlike the teams surrounding Griffey did who often flamed out by the time the summer heat really sunk in.

kaldaniels
01-19-2011, 05:23 PM
If, and he will, Votto is going to command 20 Million a year, for the sake of the team, I would try to find a prospect that could come in and produce say 75% of what Votto does at 5 percent of the cost. Then, I'd take that 19,500,000 and spread it out around the rest of the club accordingly. I would spare no expense in making sure I hit the mark with my prospect that I acquired.

For 2011...

Would you rather....

A) Have Votto at 20 MM
B) Have had 20 MM in the offseason to upgrade spots all over the diamond

I'd take B, and that is no slight to the awesomeness of Joey Votto...just a result of the Reds payroll.

TheNext44
01-19-2011, 06:55 PM
The Reds can afford any salary as long as the player provides the production that justifies it. If Votto provides a 1.000+ OPS and average defense, the Reds can afford to pay him $20M+.

The problem arises when the player either gets hurt and/or drops in production. The Reds can afford a big contract. They just can't afford a bad contract.

Unassisted
01-19-2011, 07:14 PM
Wow! Where'd that last part come from?Stream of consciousness, while pondering the uncertainty of 2014. ;)

I really do expect that Castellini will stick around as owner for fewer than 10 years.

mth123
01-19-2011, 08:03 PM
The Reds can afford a big contract. They just can't afford a bad contract.

Sig-worthy;)

kaldaniels
01-19-2011, 08:07 PM
The Reds can afford any salary as long as the player provides the production that justifies it. If Votto provides a 1.000+ OPS and average defense, the Reds can afford to pay him $20M+.

The problem arises when the player either gets hurt and/or drops in production. The Reds can afford a big contract. They just can't afford a bad contract.

And I would agree. If Votto goes all Pujols the next 6 years, I'd be glad to see the Reds hand over 20 MM per. But counting on one guy to OPS 1.000 is a risky thing...and I don't know if I'd have the stomach to make the deal.

Interesting nugget from Fay's chat today...he has the odds at 3-2 in favor of Votto staying after the contract. My heart says otherwise, but my head would put them at 3-1 that he leaves.

RedsManRick
01-19-2011, 08:50 PM
The Reds have something like $70M in marginal payroll (assuming $10M of minimums) to pay for ~45 marginal wins. That breaks down to ~$1.5M/win. So long as you're getting a good chunk of those 45 wins at or near the major league minimum, you can certainly afford to pay market prices for some talent.

As TN44 said, paying a guy $24M for 6 wins of production isn't really a problem. Given our payroll, you probably can't have more than one of them, as they carry a good deal of risk and limit your flexibility. Paying a guy $13M for 1 win of production -- now that's a problem.

I think the better way to think Fay's position is that it would be fiscally irresponsible to place so many eggs in one basket -- too great a risk. Of course, if the choice is 6 wins for $24M or 2 2-win guys at $12M each, the choice is easy. That's what I getting at with the Arrroyo/Cordero comment. Sure, those guys will be gone by the time 2014 rolls around. I just hope we don't replace them with similar expensive-but-replaceable contracts and rather save some cash to pay for the type of talent you simply cannot replace.

Oxilon
01-19-2011, 08:57 PM
It's still 3 years away. If the Reds continue to contend over the next few seasons, I don't see how the Reds won't be able to afford Votto.

RedEye
01-19-2011, 09:14 PM
Those 3 will likely be gone by the time 2014 rolls around.

Good point--although a penny saved is a penny earned. In any case, let's hope that the FO shows more ability to discern, as RMR puts it, the elite from the merely good in the next few years. It is those decisions going forward that will determined whether or not they have a real shot at keeping Votto and others who can and should be the true anchors of the franchise the next decade or so.

TheNext44
01-19-2011, 10:16 PM
And I would agree. If Votto goes all Pujols the next 6 years, I'd be glad to see the Reds hand over 20 MM per. But counting on one guy to OPS 1.000 is a risky thing...and I don't know if I'd have the stomach to make the deal.

Interesting nugget from Fay's chat today...he has the odds at 3-2 in favor of Votto staying after the contract. My heart says otherwise, but my head would put them at 3-1 that he leaves.

There's the rub.

To me the question is not whether or not the Reds can afford a $20M+ player, but will Votto be worth $20M+ a season for the length of the contract that will be needed to keep him?

As RMR pointed out, that would mean he would have to be a 5-6 win player every season under that contract. There really aren't a lot of players who can provide that much production every year for many years. Votto has three seasons under his belt. I think it's way too soon to know for sure one way or the other right now.

redsfandan
01-20-2011, 08:26 AM
The Reds can afford any salary as long as the player provides the production that justifies it. If Votto provides a 1.000+ OPS and average defense, the Reds can afford to pay him $20M+.

The problem arises when the player either gets hurt and/or drops in production. The Reds can afford a big contract. They just can't afford a bad contract.
I wish I believed you but I don't. They can't afford either a really big contract or a really big mistake.

It's still 3 years away. If the Reds continue to contend over the next few seasons, I don't see how the Reds won't be able to afford Votto.
I can.

There's the rub.

To me the question is not whether or not the Reds can afford a $20M+ player, but will Votto be worth $20M+ a season for the length of the contract that will be needed to keep him?

As RMR pointed out, that would mean he would have to be a 5-6 win player every season under that contract. There really aren't a lot of players who can provide that much production every year for many years. Votto has three seasons under his belt. I think it's way too soon to know for sure one way or the other right now.

OR maybe it's will the Reds raise their payroll enough so that extending Votto at $20M-$25M/yr is even possible?

Or how much higher does the payroll need to be for extending Votto to become a realistic possibility?

hebroncougar
01-20-2011, 08:37 AM
By then, I will have won the lottery and started the Reds Entertainment Network. So revenue will be aplenty.

bucksfan2
01-20-2011, 09:24 AM
If, and he will, Votto is going to command 20 Million a year, for the sake of the team, I would try to find a prospect that could come in and produce say 75% of what Votto does at 5 percent of the cost. Then, I'd take that 19,500,000 and spread it out around the rest of the club accordingly. I would spare no expense in making sure I hit the mark with my prospect that I acquired.

For 2011...

Would you rather....

A) Have Votto at 20 MM
B) Have had 20 MM in the offseason to upgrade spots all over the diamond

I'd take B, and that is no slight to the awesomeness of Joey Votto...just a result of the Reds payroll.

Its not even close. I take Votto time and time again. The most difficult player to replace is an MVP caliber player in his prime. Votto even if he gets a 5 year deal he will be playing 31-35 at 1b which isn't as physically demanding as CF and I don't think you will see a huge decline.

The last MVP caliber player the Reds had was Barry Larkin. It has been around 10 years now and the Reds have yet to find a suitable replacement for Larkin. They have been spinning their wheels in trying to find a replacement. Drafts and FA signings haven't produced bonified replacement for Barry.

If the Reds are able to stay competitive during Votto's tenure his contract won't be all that difficult to swallow. Combine that with Bruce (if he develops) and you will have a large portion of your offense locked and loaded. You could use young players and FA signings to plug in the other holes.

Sea Ray
01-20-2011, 09:37 AM
If, and he will, Votto is going to command 20 Million a year, for the sake of the team, I would try to find a prospect that could come in and produce say 75% of what Votto does at 5 percent of the cost. Then, I'd take that 19,500,000 and spread it out around the rest of the club accordingly. I would spare no expense in making sure I hit the mark with my prospect that I acquired.

For 2011...

Would you rather....

A) Have Votto at 20 MM
B) Have had 20 MM in the offseason to upgrade spots all over the diamond

I'd take B, and that is no slight to the awesomeness of Joey Votto...just a result of the Reds payroll.

Right on. The Reds are a small market team revenue-wise. It doesn't work to retain guys like Votto. Sorry. Face it. This is one of the inequities of MLB. Paying Votto will hamstring the rest of the payroll. It won't work

Sea Ray
01-20-2011, 09:42 AM
If the Reds are able to stay competitive during Votto's tenure his contract won't be all that difficult to swallow. Combine that with Bruce (if he develops) and you will have a large portion of your offense locked and loaded. You could use young players and FA signings to plug in the other holes.

That's just it. If you give Votto $20mill, you make it difficult to keep guys like Bruce, Cueto, Chapman, Stubbs, Bailey etc.

Don't lose track of the reality that they need to fit about 30-40 guys into their total payroll. Usually pitching takes up the bulk of it. When you really start breaking down the numbers, it doesn't work.

bucksfan2
01-20-2011, 10:09 AM
That's just it. If you give Votto $20mill, you make it difficult to keep guys like Bruce, Cueto, Chapman, Stubbs, Bailey etc.

Don't lose track of the reality that they need to fit about 30-40 guys into their total payroll. Usually pitching takes up the bulk of it. When you really start breaking down the numbers, it doesn't work.

Bruce is kept and Chapman will be here for quite a few of those Votto extension years. Stubbs is another guy you could ink to a long term contract early and have him spend his peak years in Cincy. He may also be a guy who you want to run through arb and then trade because he is an older prospect.

As for guys like Cueto and Bailey you hope you can replace them. Lets be honest they have been nice pitchers during their time here but hardly world beaters. Operate like the Twins, they traded or lost guys like Santana and Hunter and still have remained in contention.

MikeS21
01-20-2011, 10:15 AM
Its not even close. I take Votto time and time again. The most difficult player to replace is an MVP caliber player in his prime. Votto even if he gets a 5 year deal he will be playing 31-35 at 1b which isn't as physically demanding as CF and I don't think you will see a huge decline.

The last MVP caliber player the Reds had was Barry Larkin. It has been around 10 years now and the Reds have yet to find a suitable replacement for Larkin. They have been spinning their wheels in trying to find a replacement. Drafts and FA signings haven't produced bonified replacement for Barry.

If the Reds are able to stay competitive during Votto's tenure his contract won't be all that difficult to swallow. Combine that with Bruce (if he develops) and you will have a large portion of your offense locked and loaded. You could use young players and FA signings to plug in the other holes.
The point is that I doubt the Reds can pay Votto $25 million and stay competitive. They won't be able to keep everybody at market rates.

Plus, we don't know if 2010 is a normal year for Votto, or a career year. Far to many players are cashing in on one good year they had five seasons earlier on the off chance they MIGHT repeat. Votto may never break the .950 OPS barrier again.

As much as I would love to see Votto remain a Red his entire career, I think the best course would be to shop him between the 2012-2013 season for a group of stud prospects who can fill several holes.

bucksfan2
01-20-2011, 10:38 AM
The point is that I doubt the Reds can pay Votto $25 million and stay competitive. They won't be able to keep everybody at market rates.

Plus, we don't know if 2010 is a normal year for Votto, or a career year. Far to many players are cashing in on one good year they had five seasons earlier on the off chance they MIGHT repeat. Votto may never break the .950 OPS barrier again.

As much as I would love to see Votto remain a Red his entire career, I think the best course would be to shop him between the 2012-2013 season for a group of stud prospects who can fill several holes.

Look at the Twins. They obviously felt the need to invest around Morneau and Mauer. You already have Bruce locked up and lest assume that you lock up Votto to a market/less than market value contract.

CF: Stubbs you hope to replace with Rodriguez
2B: Phillips you hope to replace with Hamilton
C: Two of your top 5 prospects are catchers in Grandal and Mesoraco
SS and LF really have no answers right now.
P: Here comes the issue. You have a plethora of young pitchers but as of right now no TOR arms. The key to sustaining a competitive club is the ability to flip some of the young guys when they get expensive or let them ride out their contract and hit with the comp picks.

Sea Ray
01-20-2011, 10:43 AM
Small markets just don't sign guys like Votto.

Now before anyone pipes up with the example of the Twins and Joe Mauer, do remember that the Twins are no longer a small market. They will have a payroll well over $100mill next year, twice what it was three yrs ago


Once finalized, the Pavano deal is expected to push the Twins' projected Opening Day payroll to about $115 million, which would more than double their Opening Day payroll from 2008http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/114182529.html?elr=KArksi8cyaiUqCP:iUiD3aPc:_Yyc:a UqCP:i_MDCi_LDEh7P:D_8O77U

TheNext44
01-20-2011, 10:54 AM
The Reds payed $25M to Cordero and Harang last season, got very little production from them, and won the division. imagine how good they would be if they spent that money on another player as good as Votto instead.

Sea Ray
01-20-2011, 11:39 AM
The Reds payed $25M to Cordero and Harang last season, got very little production from them, and won the division. imagine how good they would be if they spent that money on another player as good as Votto instead.

Cordero had 40 saves. They were shaky ones to be sure but 40 saves is productive.

Realistically speaking, they're going to have dead money most years. If you do sign Votto for $20mill plus, then you are kind of forcing them to hit on all their signings. The margin for error is razor thin

bucksfan2
01-20-2011, 12:19 PM
Cordero had 40 saves. They were shaky ones to be sure but 40 saves is productive.

Realistically speaking, they're going to have dead money most years. If you do sign Votto for $20mill plus, then you are kind of forcing them to hit on all their signings. The margin for error is razor thin

The margin is even more razor thin without Votto.

Look at all the silly, insane contracts that have been thrown around to good players over the past decade. Its easier said than done to replace Votto's production with 20M on the FA market. Look at the past ownership's big time contracts. Jr, Milton, Cordero, Harang, Arroyo, and Dunn. The only guys who has come close to earning their keep were Dunn and Arroyo. That is even considering Dunn was a DH/1b at the time playing LF and the Arroyo contract was maligned by many a Reds fan. The Jr. contract most of us would have done over and over again but it just didn't pan out. Harang looked good at the time but backfired as he got older and ineffective.

kaldaniels
01-20-2011, 12:32 PM
The margin is even more razor thin without Votto.

Look at all the silly, insane contracts that have been thrown around to good players over the past decade. Its easier said than done to replace Votto's production with 20M on the FA market. Look at the past ownership's big time contracts. Jr, Milton, Cordero, Harang, Arroyo, and Dunn. The only guys who has come close to earning their keep were Dunn and Arroyo. That is even considering Dunn was a DH/1b at the time playing LF and the Arroyo contract was maligned by many a Reds fan. The Jr. contract most of us would have done over and over again but it just didn't pan out. Harang looked good at the time but backfired as he got older and ineffective.

Looking back through history, how many 20 MM per year contracts have been worth it to the team?

MikeS21
01-20-2011, 01:09 PM
Look at the Twins. They obviously felt the need to invest around Morneau and Mauer. You already have Bruce locked up and lest assume that you lock up Votto to a market/less than market value contract.

CF: Stubbs you hope to replace with Rodriguez
2B: Phillips you hope to replace with Hamilton
C: Two of your top 5 prospects are catchers in Grandal and Mesoraco
SS and LF really have no answers right now.
P: Here comes the issue. You have a plethora of young pitchers but as of right now no TOR arms. The key to sustaining a competitive club is the ability to flip some of the young guys when they get expensive or let them ride out their contract and hit with the comp picks.
Exactly. And Votto may be the expensive guy they need to flip at the end of this contract. Nor do I want to build the entire team around only two guys. We tried that by building around Griffey and Larkin and where did that get us? And Bruce seems to accumulate a lot of DL time over the course of a season (Votto had his share in 2009).

The real issue is not even 2014. How LONG do you extend Votto for? Two years? Three years? Do you add mutual options? How much will options cost on Votto in 2015? He will only be 32-33 years old.

Chances are, the Reds will extend Votto for 2014 for probably $20 million. The real problem is going to be the 2015 or 2016 seasons when the Reds are looking at having to pay Votto $25+ million, and start planning on giving new contracts to Bruce and Chapman. Plus the very guys you mentioned (Rodriquez, Hamilton, Mesaraco, and others) will be entering their own arbitration years (looking for multi-year contracts like Bruce and Votto just signed). Even if the Reds won five straight World Series, I don't think they'd gain enough fan interest to generate enough income to pay all those folks.

And it may all be a moot point anyway. Joey Votto is saying with his mouth that he wants to stay in Cincy past 2013. But his actions are loudly saying something else all together.

This is the rub when it comes to a smaller market team creating a dynasty. About the time the Reds finally seem to be holding all the cards, they discover that everybody else has switched to checkers.

Scrap Irony
01-20-2011, 02:17 PM
The only players NOT under the Reds' control by 2014 will be: Cordero, Phillips, Hernandez, Rolen, Masset, Burton, Cueto, Volquez, and Bray.

Assuming one of three solid to above average prospects pan out (the Reds have been well above this average for four years now), and you'll also have some combination of the following for the roster:
Bailey
Wood
Leake
Maloney
LeCure
Chapman
Comment: Six starters, four with TOR possibility. Add in the prospects of Lotzkar and whatever young guns flourish-- it's a solid, solid group no one in the Central can match. (Nor come close, IMO.) The Reds are looking at keeping this group together for around $20 million total, a bargain for the probable production.

Arendondo
Fisher
Ondrusek
Thompson
Smith
Valiquette
Herrera
Joseph
Lotzkar
Comment: Crapload of guys who've already pitched in the upper minors or at the major league level. Perhaps only Joseph has a closer arm, however. Less than $10 million gets seven guys to pitch around league average. Add in prospects (Boxberger may move quickly and has closer stuff, for example) and cheap free agents, and you're looking at spending perhaps $15 million.

Mesoraco
Hanigan
Grandal
Denove
Fleury
Soto
Comment: Tons of possibilities at catcher, three of which look like great options at
one of the most difficult positions in baseball to fill. Hanigan is likely to be dealt if one of the younger guys blossoms. The catchers might not make $2 million between them in 2014.

Alonso
Hamilton
Cozart
Valaika
Janish
Frazier
Francisco
Negron
Gregorious
Henry Rodriguez
Puckett
Comment: Lots of middle infield possibiliites that will be young and cheap. The corner spots should also be fairly cheap, though not as productive as Cincinnati's 2010 corner infielders. At most, the Reds are looking at $10 million from this group (and that assumes Alonso and Janish turn into solid, above average major league starters.

Bruce
Stubbs
Sappelt
Yorman Rodriguez
Heisey
Perez
Comment: Again, the picture looks rosy. Bruce and Stubbs are verified major leaguers. Frazier might slide into LF. So could Heisey or Sappelt. Stormin' Yorman might move fast enough to be a cheap option as well. The entire OF will likely not cost $15 million.

If Votto is the only guy they choose to afford, it would only likely make the payroll around $85 million. Assuming the Reds compete for the next three years (NL Central crowns and a move to the next round or two, perhaps), the cash will be there not just for Votto, but for a couple more guys as well.

The question, then, isn't if they can afford him-- it's should they.

dfs
01-20-2011, 02:27 PM
....As much as I like Votto, This sounds a lot like folks complaining that the reds wouldn't be able to afford Aaron Harang after his current contract runs out and he wins a couple of Cy Young awards.

Things happened.

Votto is 26 and will be 30 when he is eligible for free agency.
Votto plays first base, so if he stops being a monster at the plate....he's not an asset.

Those are just things to keep in mind.
If Votto goes all Todd Helton on us and we can legitimately complain in 2014 that the reds didn't lock him up....a lot has gone right in order to get us there.

Sea Ray
01-20-2011, 06:00 PM
The margin is even more razor thin without Votto.

Look at all the silly, insane contracts that have been thrown around to good players over the past decade. Its easier said than done to replace Votto's production with 20M on the FA market. Look at the past ownership's big time contracts. Jr, Milton, Cordero, Harang, Arroyo, and Dunn. The only guys who has come close to earning their keep were Dunn and Arroyo. That is even considering Dunn was a DH/1b at the time playing LF and the Arroyo contract was maligned by many a Reds fan. The Jr. contract most of us would have done over and over again but it just didn't pan out. Harang looked good at the time but backfired as he got older and ineffective.


I agree with Kal Daniels response. With what you wrote above, I could swear you agreed with me. Big contracts are risky and that was very nicely documented with what you wrote

bucksfan2
01-21-2011, 09:24 AM
I agree with Kal Daniels response. With what you wrote above, I could swear you agreed with me. Big contracts are risky and that was very nicely documented with what you wrote

Big contracts are risky. But if I have the choice to lock up an MVP caliber player. One of the top tier players in the league I feel like I have a better shot at obtaining value than spending the 20M elsewhere in the FA market.

You build around great players, you don't trade them away.

Sea Ray
01-21-2011, 12:01 PM
Big contracts are risky. But if I have the choice to lock up an MVP caliber player. One of the top tier players in the league I feel like I have a better shot at obtaining value than spending the 20M elsewhere in the FA market.

You build around great players, you don't trade them away.

As a Reds fan I'm hoping the Cardinals give Pujols an unGodly amount of money rather than trading him for several prospects. I'd love to see them hamstrung with contracts to 30+ yr olds like Holliday, Pujols and Carpenter.

I can't remember the exact numbers but there was a stat going around where teams with one player making about 20% of the total team payroll don't generally do well.

In order to keep this thing going, we can't lose sight of who we are. We are not Chicago, NY or even St Louis. We can't keep our star players and that's one of the reasons MLB is not the equal of the NFL. If we start thinking we can keep guys like Votto this thing will unravel.

The formula is this:

Try to develop as many Vottos as you can. Enjoy them for about 6 yrs and then trade them for significant prospects in their FA yr. Wash, rinse, repeat

bucksfan2
01-21-2011, 12:03 PM
Try to develop as many Vottos as you can. Enjoy them for about 6 yrs and then trade them for significant prospects in their FA yr. Wash, rinse, repeat

Over the course of three decades the Reds have developed 2 MVP caliber players, Votto and Larkin. It sounds good and all but the reality is it is very difficult to find players of Votto's ilk and its even more difficult to replace them.

Sea Ray
01-21-2011, 12:15 PM
Over the course of three decades the Reds have developed 2 MVP caliber players, Votto and Larkin. It sounds good and all but the reality is it is very difficult to find players of Votto's ilk and its even more difficult to replace them.

No question, which is why MLB's system sucks.

Basically you're asking the Reds to sign Mark Texiera. Did you see the Reds bidding for him a few yrs ago?

IMO signing Votto for over $20mill/yr doesn't work in today's economic system for teams with an $85mill payroll. This site is generally rife with talk of signing the big guys like Holliday, Sabathia, Halladay, Greinke, Randy Johnson and others. I roll my eyes and attribute it to youthful posters still seeing MLB through rose colored glasses.

MLB is what it is and it's very unfair to markets like ours. The numbers are stacked against us bigtime. I wish it weren't so. Sign Votto to a big contract and there will still be talk of needing more parts like a TOR pitcher or whatever and there will be no money left to do it. There were naive posters who thought we'd have all kinds of money this year because contracts like Harang and Arroyo would drop off. Yet we're seeing that arbitration eligible guys like Bruce, Votto and Cueto are more than eating that up.