PDA

View Full Version : So the Reds clinched a losing season today



Tom Servo
09-24-2011, 10:57 PM
feels bad man :(

The Voice of IH
09-25-2011, 09:44 AM
dislike.

mdccclxix
09-25-2011, 04:36 PM
Despite what the crowd who says, "who cares, prepare for next year" says, I feel like this result is very bad from a morale standpoint for the team and the fans.

KronoRed
09-25-2011, 06:12 PM
So the losing hasn't stopped?

;)

MikeThierry
09-26-2011, 12:27 AM
I just curious but where do the Reds go from here and what are the moves that need to be made in the off season? I know probably getting a more reliable 3rd baseman is on the agenda but what other moves do you all see?

Edskin
09-26-2011, 12:49 AM
Despite what the crowd who says, "who cares, prepare for next year" says, I feel like this result is very bad from a morale standpoint for the team and the fans.

Totally agree. While this poor season may not necessary signal doom for 2012 and beyond, it does crush the momentum we built in 2010, and certainly hurts the perception of the fanbase, etc. It is as if the Reds didn't even give their fans a chance to embrace a winner before they started to stink again.

To me at least, 2010 seems surreal... Like it was a dream. It's as if it never happened... Ten years of misery, 2010, then back to misery. It's an odd feeling.

Not the "worst" season in my lifetime as a fan, but easily the most disappointing.

Ron Madden
09-26-2011, 02:45 AM
Everyone would rather win more games than they lose in any season.

I just don't believe finishing this season with an 82-80 record would be any less disappointing.

remdog
09-26-2011, 03:40 AM
Everyone would rather win more games than they lose in any season.

I just don't believe finishing this season with an 82-80 record would be any less disappointing.

Yep.

Rem

mth123
09-26-2011, 04:12 AM
2010 was a losing season too. It may have offered more hope for winning than say 2005, but a losing season it was. The Reds last had a winning season in 1990. 1976 was the last one before that.

GAC
09-26-2011, 04:19 AM
I just curious but where do the Reds go from here and what are the moves that need to be made in the off season? I know probably getting a more reliable 3rd baseman is on the agenda but what other moves do you all see?

I think they'll stay the course for the most part and continue to develop the younger players. I don't think you'll see any monster moves in the off-season.

mth123
09-26-2011, 04:24 AM
I think they'll stay the course for the most part and continue to develop the younger players. I don't think you'll see any monster moves in the off-season.

And they'll finsih third again if they do that.

They need a "monster move" to add a starting pitcher of fairly high caliber. If that move involves Votto, Bruce or Alonso going the other way, then they'll need a bat too.

As far as 3B goes, I'm ok with Rolen, Francisco and a touch of Frazier and Cairo. The Reds have bigger needs.

Sea Ray
09-26-2011, 09:53 AM
I just curious but where do the Reds go from here and what are the moves that need to be made in the off season? I know probably getting a more reliable 3rd baseman is on the agenda but what other moves do you all see?

3rd base isn't one of their bigger holes. Rolen says he feels better than he has in 4 yrs and after him they have Juan Francisco. LF is the likliest position to be addressed in the off season along with some help for the bullpen.

More than anything they'll need more money to consistently compete with your Cards. We as fans can say what we want but at the end of the day, St Louis has an extra $30mill to spend that our Reds don't.

Tony Cloninger
09-26-2011, 11:13 AM
2010 was a losing season too. It may have offered more hope for winning than say 2005, but a losing season it was. The Reds last had a winning season in 1990. 1976 was the last one before that.

You mean winning a WS? not a winning season. They had more than a few winning seasons from 1976-1990 and a few more from 1990 until 1999.

Danny Serafini
09-26-2011, 11:29 AM
Everyone would rather win more games than they lose in any season.

I just don't believe finishing this season with an 82-80 record would be any less disappointing.

There's a huge psychological difference between 82-80 and 80-82. Yes, the season is still a disappointment, but being able to salvage a little pride and call yourself a winning team is a whole lot better than the knowledge that you were losers that year.

mdccclxix
09-26-2011, 11:37 AM
2010 was a losing season too. It may have offered more hope for winning than say 2005, but a losing season it was. The Reds last had a winning season in 1990. 1976 was the last one before that.

Only one team has one of your "winning seasons", but many others are able to foster a winning atmosphere for their fans and organization. Year after year in some cases. That way, you are always in the mix and always ready to seize the chance to win the championship. This year was a set back in more ways than not winning a championship, or even a division, or a wild card, or a won/loss record. Attendance and fan interest is the life blood of the Reds and the future, one in which you'd like to "win a season", depends on it.

Edskin
09-26-2011, 11:39 AM
There's a huge psychological difference between 82-80 and 80-82. Yes, the season is still a disappointment, but being able to salvage a little pride and call yourself a winning team is a whole lot better than the knowledge that you were losers that year.

Disagree... Don't think it matters one bit. Had we gotten ourselves into a pennant race and played meaningful games in September and fallen short I might view that as a positive, but random wins after things have long been decided do nothing for the future IMO

Roy Tucker
09-26-2011, 12:32 PM
So, I don't know if I'm a curmudgeon or what. This comment really got me fired up today:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110925/SPT04/309250017/Cubs-veteran-Ramirez-encourages-young-Francisco?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|



CREDITING CARDS: Baker gave the St. Louis Cardinals credit for their run.

"They didn’t throw in THE towel," Baker said. "They said, ‘let’s reload.’

"They had the money to do it. ... They turned over a third of their roster."


Why didn't the Reds do this? Something I've admired about the Cards and LaRussa is their absolute cut-throat buring desire to win games. Yeah, everyone wants to win, but they *really* want to win. They don't give up in games, their front office doesn't give up, nobody in the organzation gives up.

It was just 2-3 weeks back when Baker said the goal was to beat St. Louis for second place. Well, the Cardinals battled their way back. I didn't think they had a chance. But obviously they didn't see that and feel that way. And now look.

Whereas the Reds pretty well just gave up. From the front office on down. Baker alluded they bought their way back in but I think that's lazy thinking. It's a culture thing. And the Reds don't have it.

RichRed
09-26-2011, 12:50 PM
So, I don't know if I'm a curmudgeon or what. This comment really got me fired up today:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110925/SPT04/309250017/Cubs-veteran-Ramirez-encourages-young-Francisco?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|



Why didn't the Reds do this? Something I've admired about the Cards and LaRussa is their absolute cut-throat buring desire to win games. Yeah, everyone wants to win, but they *really* want to win. They don't give up in games, their front office doesn't give up, nobody in the organzation gives up.

It was just 2-3 weeks back when Baker said the goal was to beat St. Louis for second place. Well, the Cardinals battled their way back. I didn't think they had a chance. But obviously they didn't see that and feel that way. And now look.

Whereas the Reds pretty well just gave up. From the front office on down. Baker alluded they bought their way back in but I think that's lazy thinking. It's a culture thing. And the Reds don't have it.

I'm with you, Roy. Some teams say they want to win, while others show they want to win.

dfs
09-26-2011, 12:53 PM
Despite what the crowd who says, "who cares, prepare for next year" says, I feel like this result is very bad from a morale standpoint for the team and the fans.

Curiously enough attendance was UP compared to the last 6 games of last year.

What's really odd about that is at several of those games, scalpers were desperate to get rid of their seats. Practically what that means is that folks bought season tickets based on last years results. ....ergo we would expect season ticket sales to take a slight hit despite happy talk about payroll expanding.

To go just a bit further....There are a bunch of folks on the reds that I hope are unhappy about their years. I hope that Drew Stubbs is unhappy enough with the last couple of months that he works ( on some very specific things) this winter. Same with Jay Bruce. I want Juan Francisco to realize how close he is to becoming a major league regular and working on his plate discipline during winter ball. ....It goes on and on....

I hope those guys have bad morale and are staring in the mirror thinking...what can I do to improve.

mdccclxix
09-26-2011, 01:14 PM
Curiously enough attendance was UP compared to the last 6 games of last year.

What's really odd about that is at several of those games, scalpers were desperate to get rid of their seats. Practically what that means is that folks bought season tickets based on last years results. ....ergo we would expect season ticket sales to take a slight hit despite happy talk about payroll expanding.

To go just a bit further....There are a bunch of folks on the reds that I hope are unhappy about their years. I hope that Drew Stubbs is unhappy enough with the last couple of months that he works ( on some very specific things) this winter. Same with Jay Bruce. I want Juan Francisco to realize how close he is to becoming a major league regular and working on his plate discipline during winter ball. ....It goes on and on....

I hope those guys have bad morale and are staring in the mirror thinking...what can I do to improve.

Yep, the Reds are back on "show me" status with the fans next year. They must get to August within striking distance to make that change. Then, to Roy Tucker's point, they will have to carry that through September because the fans and team and organization didn't fully believe after Aug 1 this year, either. I guess that's what a crappy rotation will do, demoralize.

As for the players, I think one of them, or Walt, was quoted as saying how it is/was "good" for the team to realize they couldn't just show up and be given the NL Central title in 2011. I don't know, but a take away like that from a season is kind of bittersweet, they should have known.

RANDY IN INDY
09-26-2011, 01:29 PM
Heard a question posed to Steelers coach Mike Tomlin about winning and losing before Sunday Night Football last night. They asked him, "Does losing feel worse than winning feels good?" He answered, "No doubt about it." I would concur.

Sea Ray
09-26-2011, 02:22 PM
So, I don't know if I'm a curmudgeon or what. This comment really got me fired up today:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110925/SPT04/309250017/Cubs-veteran-Ramirez-encourages-young-Francisco?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|



Why didn't the Reds do this? Something I've admired about the Cards and LaRussa is their absolute cut-throat buring desire to win games. Yeah, everyone wants to win, but they *really* want to win. They don't give up in games, their front office doesn't give up, nobody in the organzation gives up.

It was just 2-3 weeks back when Baker said the goal was to beat St. Louis for second place. Well, the Cardinals battled their way back. I didn't think they had a chance. But obviously they didn't see that and feel that way. And now look.

Whereas the Reds pretty well just gave up. From the front office on down. Baker alluded they bought their way back in but I think that's lazy thinking. It's a culture thing. And the Reds don't have it.

I give the Cards credit too but as Dusty alluded to, the Cards have a lot more money to work with...$30 mill more and that's significant

Ghosts of 1990
09-26-2011, 04:34 PM
Everyone would rather win more games than they lose in any season.

I just don't believe finishing this season with an 82-80 record would be any less disappointing.

well said.

MikeThierry
09-26-2011, 07:27 PM
3rd base isn't one of their bigger holes. Rolen says he feels better than he has in 4 yrs and after him they have Juan Francisco. LF is the likliest position to be addressed in the off season along with some help for the bullpen.

More than anything they'll need more money to consistently compete with your Cards. We as fans can say what we want but at the end of the day, St Louis has an extra $30mill to spend that our Reds don't.

Not to be very critical here but if the Reds are planning on Scott Rolen being healthy for even 110 games, I think it is a flawed plan. In my opinion, there has to be a solid back up plan for him and an overall plan to replace what you can get from him offensively and defensively.



I give the Cards credit too but as Dusty alluded to, the Cards have a lot more money to work with...$30 mill more and that's significant

Its not like the Cards went gang buster with the money this year. Yeah they added Berkman which represented an 8 million extra in payroll but other than that, they didn't go out and spend a ton of extra money that wasn't already allocated to players that were on the club. Even if you look at the trades, the Cards didn't pick up a lot of extra money. For example, in the Furcal trade they gave up an insignificant prospect and only picked up 1.4 million of his salary. He has been one of the reasons why the Cards are in the position they are in right now. Even going to next year, the Cards give Berkman 12 million but they re-signed Carpenter for about 4-5 million less so giving Berkman more money was almost a neutral gain in the payroll. To me, there are just a lot of smart moves that the GM made without adding too much to the overall payroll. I'm not trying to go on a Cards rant here but adding important pieces can be done without breaking the bank. It just seems like the small market mantra is overplayed sometimes. Not saying it isn't a factor but putting a winning team together can be done with a tight budget.

mth123
09-26-2011, 07:29 PM
You mean winning a WS? not a winning season. They had more than a few winning seasons from 1976-1990 and a few more from 1990 until 1999.

If your into consolation prizes I guess. I want a team that wants to win it all. When the goal is 90 wins or "be competitive and hope the breaks go your way" or some other secondary goal, you'll end up on the outside watching the post season a lot of times and if a couple things go wrong you end up with a season being over in July. The organization took its foot off the gas and coasted instead of striving for the ultimate prize. Everything else is losing.

Sea Ray
09-26-2011, 08:37 PM
Not to be very critical here but if the Reds are planning on Scott Rolen being healthy for even 110 games, I think it is a flawed plan. In my opinion, there has to be a solid back up plan for him and an overall plan to replace what you can get from him offensively and defensively.



Well given the contract they signed him to, I'd say yes, they are planning on 110 games out of Rolen. I know that doesn't sound prudent now given that he's on the DL but we'll see next year whether that was a good move.

They do have a minor leaguer who is a natural 3B, Juan Francisco. That's about all you can hope for in covering 3B. A St Louis Cardinal fan should understand that 3B is not an easy position to fill. There aren't wonderful options at your local Walmart

MikeThierry
09-26-2011, 11:35 PM
Well given the contract they signed him to, I'd say yes, they are planning on 110 games out of Rolen. I know that doesn't sound prudent now given that he's on the DL but we'll see next year whether that was a good move.

They do have a minor leaguer who is a natural 3B, Juan Francisco. That's about all you can hope for in covering 3B. A St Louis Cardinal fan should understand that 3B is not an easy position to fill. There aren't wonderful options at your local Walmart

True but it just seems like a flawed plan if no one is brought in as an adequate replacement.

mth123
09-26-2011, 11:44 PM
True but it just seems like a flawed plan if no one is brought in as an adequate replacement.

Juan Francisco will be fine as Rolen's alter ego. He may even be better than Rolen.

GAC
09-27-2011, 05:36 AM
And they'll finsih third again if they do that.

They need a "monster move" to add a starting pitcher of fairly high caliber. If that move involves Votto, Bruce or Alonso going the other way, then they'll need a bat too.

I agree. But with a payroll that stands at $80, this organization has no flexibility at all to go out and simply acquire what they need. None, zilch. Now there are a few modest raises due in 2012, and then there's the issue of Cordero and his $12M option. If they can bring him back for less money, which I'd do, that could save them some. But even then that's still not enough for what they need to do.

IMO, it's going to have to involve a trade, and possibly a slobber knocker of one at that, to accomplish it. That's why I'd turn Votto over in a heart beat for a trade involving a dependable, high caliber pitcher, and put Alonso at 1B.

We have to improve this pitching staff period! Any other move they make will mean very little if this FO doesn't seriously address this. And if Castellini and Jocketty can't see this, or think that simply putting Chapman in the rotation will solve this problem - and I'm not opposed to it, but nothing is a proven there - then get ready for another mediocre finish in 2012.

But I'm telling you - you're going to see a FO that is going to go into 2012 more dependent upon (with fingers crossed) on some of their youth proving themselves.....

Cozart at SS. Francisco and/or Frazier backing up Rolen. Mesoraco as part of the catching tandem with RH gone. And OF? A crapshoot between Heisey, Sappelt, and Alonso, to see who steps it up in LF.

IMO, that is going to be your 2012 Reds. But yeah, I'd love to see a bold move. I'll just be surprised if this FO does it.

mth123
09-27-2011, 06:03 AM
I agree. But with a payroll that stands at $80, this organization has no flexibility at all to go out and simply acquire what they need. None, zilch. Now there are a few modest raises due in 2012, and then there's the issue of Cordero and his $12M option. If they can bring him back for less money, which I'd do, that could save them some. But even then that's still not enough for what they need to do.

IMO, it's going to have to involve a trade, and possibly a slobber knocker of one at that, to accomplish it. That's why I'd turn Votto over in a heart beat for a trade involving a dependable, high caliber pitcher, and put Alonso at 1B.

We have to improve this pitching staff period! Any other move they make will mean very little if this FO doesn't seriously address this. And if Castellini and Jocketty can't see this, or think that simply putting Chapman in the rotation will solve this problem - and I'm not opposed to it, but nothing is a proven there - then get ready for another mediocre finish in 2012.

But I'm telling you - you're going to see a FO that is going to go into 2012 more dependent upon (with fingers crossed) on some of their youth proving themselves.....

Cozart at SS. Francisco and/or Frazier backing up Rolen. Mesoraco as part of the catching tandem with RH gone. And OF? A crapshoot between Heisey, Sappelt, and Alonso, to see who steps it up in LF.

IMO, that is going to be your 2012 Reds. But yeah, I'd love to see a bold move. I'll just be surprised if this FO does it.

They have the money. Keep Chapman in the pen, let Cordero and Willis walk, deal Masset, forget the luxury of a veteran back-up for SS, let Ramon and Renteria go, deal Volquez, non-tender Burton and if the payroll rises to the $85 Million range, as rumored, they could add nearly $20 Million from the outside.

The Roster Below would cost a little over $65 Million with Sappelt, Phipps, Valaika, Grandal, Fisher, Horst, Maloney, Smith, Boxberger and maybe Janish (or a similar journeyman glove) in AAA for depth and really only needs a starter and a cheap veteran reliever. These figures include salaries and any bonus money's due in 2012. Even if you'd choose to fund Arroyo's deferral with $5 Milion the team would have $15 Million to spend. I just wouldn't piss away $3 Million on Masset, $4 or $5 Million on Cordero, a couple Million on a veteran SS and those types marginal additions. I'd do what I need to get a play-off caliber starter and then see how much is left. If I have to deal Alonso, then I'd use the left over money for a middle of the order LF. After that I'd put whatever money may be left for a bullpen vet, a back-up SS and those other non-critical additions.




# Pos Name $
1 P Johnny Cueto 5.40
2 P Open Spot 0.00
3 P Bronson Arroyo 7.00
4 P Homer Bailey 1.00
5 P Mike Leake 0.60
6 P Travis Wood 0.42
7 P Sam Lecure 0.50
8 P Jose Arredondo 1.00
9 P Logan Ondrusek 0.50
10 P Bill Bray 2.00
11 P Open Spot 0.00
12 P Aroldis Chapman 3.25
13 C Ryan Hanigan 1.20
14 C Devin Mesoraco 0.42
15 1B Joey Votto 11.00
16 2B Br Phillips 12.00
17 SS Zach Cozart 0.42
18 3B Scott Rolen 7.80
19 IF Juan Francisco 0.42
20 IF Miguel Cairo 1.00
21 LF Yonder Alonso 1.00
22 CF Chris Heisey 0.50
23 RF Jay Bruce 5.00
24 OF Drew Stubbs 0.60
25 U Todd Frazier 0.42

Ex $ Injury add ons 1.50
Ex $ Cordero 1.00


Total Payrol 65.95

Redhook
09-27-2011, 07:32 AM
I just wouldn't piss away $3 Million on Masset, $4 or $5 Million on Cordero, a couple Million on a veteran SS and those types marginal additions. I'd do what I need to get a play-off caliber starter and then see how much is left. If I have to deal Alonso, then I'd use the left over money for a middle of the order LF. After that I'd put whatever money may be left for a bullpen vet, a back-up SS and those other non-critical additions.


Great post and I agree 100%. Spend the big money first on a difference maker, then fill in the cracks. Sadly, the Reds seem think backwards in these situations. They claim there's no more money when, in fact, there is if they spent it more wisely.

Sea Ray
09-27-2011, 09:18 AM
True but it just seems like a flawed plan if no one is brought in as an adequate replacement.

Let me break it to you...teams with sub $100mill payrolls can't always "bring someone in as an adequate replacement". Sometimes we have to go with what our minor leagues produce and Juan Francisco is it. Have you ever seen him play or do you know anything about him?

remdog
09-27-2011, 12:49 PM
Let me break it to you...teams with sub $100mill payrolls can't always "bring someone in as an adequate replacement". Sometimes we have to go with what our minor leagues produce and Juan Francisco is it. Have you ever seen him play or do you know anything about him?

:thumbup: LOL

Rem

Patrick Bateman
09-27-2011, 01:08 PM
Juan Francisco will be fine as Rolen's alter ego. He may even be better than Rolen.

Not to mentiond Todd Frazier. The Reds actually have some reasonable 3rd base depth of guys who can at least semi-adequately provide some production during a Rolen abscence. It is very difficult for the Reds to improve on 3rd base without going out and getting a star level player which just doesn't make sense with the money committed to Rolen and the depth.

The Reds are going to have to ignore any perceived issues with 3rd base and throw more resources at the pitching. As Sea Red said, we have a $75M payroll. You don't allocate money to get 3 replacements for 3rd base. That's silly. Not sure if Mike is fully up to date with the Reds depth charts.

BuckeyeRedleg
09-27-2011, 01:12 PM
Agree, mth.

A team that has payroll constraints can't afford to shell out $4 to $6M on avearge relief pitchers. Fill in the bullpen from the system (Boxberger, etc.) and go cheaper ($2M) if you have to go with a FA bullpen addition.

The last thing I want to see is the Reds bring back Cordero for $5-$6M and then whine about how little they have to spend to make this team better. Same with Reteria and Hernandez. Time to say good bye. And no more Fred Lewis types. Wasting a million here and a million there on replacement to below replacement-level talent adds up quickly.

GAC
09-28-2011, 07:57 AM
They have the money. Keep Chapman in the pen, let Cordero and Willis walk, deal Masset, forget the luxury of a veteran back-up for SS, let Ramon and Renteria go, deal Volquez, non-tender Burton and if the payroll rises to the $85 Million range, as rumored, they could add nearly $20 Million from the outside.

The Roster Below would cost a little over $65 Million with Sappelt, Phipps, Valaika, Grandal, Fisher, Horst, Maloney, Smith, Boxberger and maybe Janish (or a similar journeyman glove) in AAA for depth and really only needs a starter and a cheap veteran reliever. These figures include salaries and any bonus money's due in 2012. Even if you'd choose to fund Arroyo's deferral with $5 Milion the team would have $15 Million to spend. I just wouldn't piss away $3 Million on Masset, $4 or $5 Million on Cordero, a couple Million on a veteran SS and those types marginal additions. I'd do what I need to get a play-off caliber starter and then see how much is left. If I have to deal Alonso, then I'd use the left over money for a middle of the order LF. After that I'd put whatever money may be left for a bullpen vet, a back-up SS and those other non-critical additions.




# Pos Name $
1 P Johnny Cueto 5.40
2 P Open Spot 0.00
3 P Bronson Arroyo 7.00
4 P Homer Bailey 1.00
5 P Mike Leake 0.60
6 P Travis Wood 0.42
7 P Sam Lecure 0.50
8 P Jose Arredondo 1.00
9 P Logan Ondrusek 0.50
10 P Bill Bray 2.00
11 P Open Spot 0.00
12 P Aroldis Chapman 3.25
13 C Ryan Hanigan 1.20
14 C Devin Mesoraco 0.42
15 1B Joey Votto 11.00
16 2B Br Phillips 12.00
17 SS Zach Cozart 0.42
18 3B Scott Rolen 7.80
19 IF Juan Francisco 0.42
20 IF Miguel Cairo 1.00
21 LF Yonder Alonso 1.00
22 CF Chris Heisey 0.50
23 RF Jay Bruce 5.00
24 OF Drew Stubbs 0.60
25 U Todd Frazier 0.42

Ex $ Injury add ons 1.50
Ex $ Cordero 1.00


Total Payrol 65.95


While you mention some of them, and there are many more that need to be included, you're excluding from your payroll the financial commitments to numerous minor league players, and that includes Janish (who will be retained as a backup). You're looking at approximately another $5M among those players total. And while I'm not that clear on some of the rules, and I realize, due to ML service, the Reds have control over numerous young players on their roster, I'm not so sure that a kid like Leake, who had a solid year, as well as Stubbs, are only going to make .6M next year.

As for Arroyo's deferred monies, which is 15M, I'm not sure on the entire details. Do they start paying him that deferred monies after 2013, and through 2021 (8yrs = 1.875M/yr), or are they already setting aside monies now? Don't know.

Overall, I have no problem with what you're presenting. But IMO, this FO is not going to give up on Volquez (too cheap at 1.6M). They seem to want to retain Cordero, which tells me they're strongly leaning toward moving Chapman into the rotation. Who knows, with Coco they may do a similar "Arroyo" deal for 2 years and defer monies? But if they remove Masset and Chapman from the BP they are going to have to also spend money to replace that void created.

So I still say you're looking at a payroll guesstimate at somewhere around 75M, which would only give them around 10M to play with.

mth123
09-28-2011, 07:37 PM
While you mention some of them, and there are many more that need to be included, you're excluding from your payroll the financial commitments to numerous minor league players, and that includes Janish (who will be retained as a backup). You're looking at approximately another $5M among those players total. And while I'm not that clear on some of the rules, and I realize, due to ML service, the Reds have control over numerous young players on their roster, I'm not so sure that a kid like Leake, who had a solid year, as well as Stubbs, are only going to make .6M next year.

As for Arroyo's deferred monies, which is 15M, I'm not sure on the entire details. Do they start paying him that deferred monies after 2013, and through 2021 (8yrs = 1.875M/yr), or are they already setting aside monies now? Don't know.

Overall, I have no problem with what you're presenting. But IMO, this FO is not going to give up on Volquez (too cheap at 1.6M). They seem to want to retain Cordero, which tells me they're strongly leaning toward moving Chapman into the rotation. Who knows, with Coco they may do a similar "Arroyo" deal for 2 years and defer monies? But if they remove Masset and Chapman from the BP they are going to have to also spend money to replace that void created.

So I still say you're looking at a payroll guesstimate at somewhere around 75M, which would only give them around 10M to play with.

1. Minor Leaguers are accounted for in the $1.5 Million for injury replacements. While they are in the minors they aren't earning big league money and are not inthe baseline for this season either The cost will be the same as last year (less because the Reds had Alonso, Lehr and Miller making big league money in AAA).

2. As for the Reds fooling with Cordero, Janish and keeping Volquez around and other ways to prevent them from having the salary room to add a starter, I agree they pobably will do that. If that prevents the addition of a talented proven starter to add to the rotation, its mismanagement to the highest degree and frankly is exactly the kind of stupid offseason I'm expecting. The team has the opportunity to do what it needs to do IMO. If they spend it on junk we'll have another lost season.