PDA

View Full Version : Ramon Hernandez Arbitration



Benihana
11-16-2011, 11:22 AM
He is a Type A FA, and because he is a "high" Type A, he doesn't look like he'll lose his status in the new CBA. If the Reds offer him arb and he declines, the Reds will get an extra first or second round pick depending on who signs him. I believe the deadline for the Reds to make that decision is coming up next week.

Will the Reds offer Ramon Hernandez, and should they?

marcshoe
11-16-2011, 11:43 AM
I voted no, but of course if they somehow knew he wouldn't accept, that would make it a yes.

I(heart)Freel
11-16-2011, 11:44 AM
Because I was incredulous that the club didn't trade him at the deadline for something/anything, I'm going to base my vote of "yes" on the assumption that they have a handshake agreement with Ramon to offer arb and he'll turn it down.

Granted, that still requires a team to offer Ramon a contract knowing they'll lose the picks.

Col_ IN Reds fan
11-16-2011, 11:48 AM
I say NO to arb offer. I would have thought he would have had some value at trade deadline, but who knows.

RedsManRick
11-16-2011, 11:53 AM
I think they will, but I wouldn't. If they do, I think he's a Red next year.

redsmetz
11-16-2011, 11:55 AM
While there is some risk involved in him accepting arbitration, I would still do it under the present CBA (which does expire on my birthday this year, 12/11) and assuming that the same structure still exists (guess there's a possibility that it might go away - not a talking point for this thread, I would assume). If he accepts, then you move Hanigan and have Ramon share time with Mez (who I think is ready). If he doesn't accept, then we've got the draft pick (again assume that still exists). As for the possibility that there could be a gentleman's agreement to refuse it, keep in mind, as Samuel Goldwyn always said, "an oral contract isn't worth the paper it's printed on." [which I once referenced in a written statement I made to the Interstate Commerce Commission and they mentioned it in a footnote in their decision - my only claim to any posterity in the Congressional Record!]

jojo
11-16-2011, 12:12 PM
I'd offer him arbitration. The Ms got Taijuan Walker as a supplemental pick for losing Beltre. It's worth the risk IMHO.

dunner13
11-16-2011, 12:38 PM
If he does accept arbitration is there anything that keeps us from trading him before the season begins?

MattyHo4Life
11-16-2011, 12:44 PM
I'm going to base my vote of "yes" on the assumption that they have a handshake agreement with Ramon to offer arb and he'll turn it down.

How does it benefit a Type A free agent to have such an agreement with his "former" team? Teams may not offer a player as much money because they will be losing a 1st or 2nd round draft pick. There are often fewer suitors which also drives down the total value of the contract. It also hurts the player's "new" team by taking away a valuable draft pick and gives it to the team that no longer wants him. Some players even include a clause in their contract that states that the team is not allowed to offer arbitration, because they know it could affect their future contract offers. I just don't see why a Type A player would agree to decline arbitration when it only hurts themselves.

lollipopcurve
11-16-2011, 01:24 PM
I'd offer him arbitration. The Ms got Taijuan Walker as a supplemental pick for losing Beltre. It's worth the risk IMHO.

Agreed. They can always trade Hanigan if they're stuck with Ramon. My guess is that he would not accept -- he knows Mesoraco is going to play, and that should be incentive enough to seek greener pastures.

savafan
11-16-2011, 01:47 PM
I think they will, but I wouldn't. If they do, I think he's a Red next year.

I would have to agree. If he turned down arbitration, I can't see any team signing him knowing that they'd lose draft picks.

lollipopcurve
11-16-2011, 02:03 PM
I can't see any team signing him knowing that they'd lose draft picks.

Even if the system stays the way it's been for this offseason, half of the teams in MLB would not lose any picks for signing Hernandez.

And it sounds like the system might change enough that no teams would lose picks. We'll know soon.

mdccclxix
11-16-2011, 02:13 PM
It looks like Ramon is the only type A free agent catcher.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/freeagents/_/position/c

JaxRed
11-16-2011, 02:17 PM
I'd like to see them take the chance and offer arb. But they don't seem to go that route.

MattyHo4Life
11-16-2011, 02:18 PM
Even if the system stays the way it's been for this offseason, half of the teams in MLB would not lose any picks for signing Hernandez.

How is that so? The top 15 picks are protected, but the team would then lose a 2nd round pick if they sign a Type A Free Agent.

mdccclxix
11-16-2011, 02:19 PM
He was only worth 2 fWAR. I just don't see a team giving up that much draft value to sign him. There are good catchers on most big market contenders. I'd have to vote decline. There is a thick strand of sentimentality that runs through Castellini's tenure, perhaps as a business model that treats people "the right way". I think that factored into keeping Ramon instead of adding some C+ prospect at the deadline. I don't know. Back then I was all for "going for it" even if it meant just a winning record. I stand by that, but I don't claim to know why Ramon couldn't have been dealt. We'll see.

mbgrayson
11-16-2011, 02:31 PM
I think they should make the offer.

If he declines, Reds stand to get draft picks.

If he accepts, the Reds need to trade him or Hanigan. I don't know how much return they would get, but if the trade happens before spring training, the cost would be nominal. Even a second tier minor leaguer is better than getting nothing back.

Why not get something back if we are going to lose Ramon?

lollipopcurve
11-16-2011, 02:33 PM
How is that so? The top 15 picks are protected, but the team would then lose a 2nd round pick if they sign a Type A Free Agent.

Oh, you're right -- my bad. Still, a 2nd round pick for a starting catcher is not bad. Plus, it's likely some of those teams will be receiving picks of their own for departed FAs, further softening the blow of signing a type A player.

MattyHo4Life
11-16-2011, 02:38 PM
Oh, you're right -- my bad. Still, a 2nd round pick for a starting catcher is not bad.

Wasn't Joey Votto a 2nd round pick? ;)

HokieRed
11-16-2011, 02:40 PM
I think Ramon's been a tremendous addition to this team, but it's time to move on. If we offer, I predict he accepts, we pay too much, Mes's playing time suffers, b/c I don't think they'll move Hanigan or be able to move an expensive Ramon.
This year's tandem ought to be, IMO, Mes--65% of the starts if he shows he can handle it, Hanigan, 35%.

lollipopcurve
11-16-2011, 02:44 PM
If we offer, I predict he accepts, we pay too much, Mes's playing time suffers, b/c I don't think they'll move Hanigan or be able to move an expensive Ramon.

There's no chance Mesoraco's PT will suffer due to the presence of Hernandez, IMO. The Reds develop these guys carefully, and when it comes time for their very top prospects to play, they play.

The only way Hernandez would accept arbitration is if he's willing to sit most of the time, and I think that's unlikely.

Dan
11-16-2011, 03:08 PM
If he accepts, the Reds need to trade him or Hanigan.

Just to be clear, a free agent that accepts arbitration can't be traded before June 1 of the next season. Unless that's changed in the new CBA.

REDREAD
11-16-2011, 03:17 PM
I'd offer him arbitration. The Ms got Taijuan Walker as a supplemental pick for losing Beltre. It's worth the risk IMHO.

How often do these supplemental picks actually pan out though?
Not very often. And if a team has the money to sign a supplemental pick, they have money to get talent later in the draft or internationally (and the chance of hitting a success there is roughly the same).


IMO, it's dumb to offer arbitration to a pending FA unless you want him to come back and feel safe the arbitrator isn't going to hose you. The Reds may feel this way with Ramon. Walt might have plans of bring him back next year.
The plan might be to go with Ramon/Hannigan to start the year and then bring up Mez later. However, I predict the Reds do not offer arb. If they want Ramon back, they will try to negotiate without arb.

jojo
11-16-2011, 03:30 PM
How often do these supplemental picks actually pan out though?
Not very often. And if a team has the money to sign a supplemental pick, they have money to get talent later in the draft or internationally (and the chance of hitting a success there is roughly the same).


IMO, it's dumb to offer arbitration to a pending FA unless you want him to come back and feel safe the arbitrator isn't going to hose you. The Reds may feel this way with Ramon. Walt might have plans of bring him back next year.
The plan might be to go with Ramon/Hannigan to start the year and then bring up Mez later. However, I predict the Reds do not offer arb. If they want Ramon back, they will try to negotiate without arb.

Supplemental picks are pretty valuable because they're good bets.

Kc61
11-16-2011, 03:33 PM
Just to be clear, a free agent that accepts arbitration can't be traded before June 1 of the next season. Unless that's changed in the new CBA.

It is inconceivable to me that the Reds would offer Ramon arbitration with an intention to trade him. It just doesn't happen that way. If they offer him arb, he will likely be on the team with Mes at AAA.

IMO the only way the Reds offer Ramon arb is if they don't think Mesoraco is ready.

Given budgetary constraints, I'm pretty confident the Reds will let RH go. They may then sign a AAA veteran catcher who can come up in case of injury, with Grandal getting most of the playing time at Louisville.

The Reds would want the draft choices, but I don't think they will take the risk that he accepts arbitration, which will cost them needed dollars.

PuffyPig
11-16-2011, 03:45 PM
Him being a type A sealed the deal on him not being offered arbitration.

Way too much risk he will would have to accept as teams will be reluctant to lose a pick. Plus, he would make lots more in arbitration.

757690
11-16-2011, 04:02 PM
Him being a type A sealed the deal on him not being offered arbitration.

Way too much risk he will would have to accept as teams will be reluctant to lose a pick. Plus, he would make lots more in arbitration.

Juan Cruz signed when he was type A free agent. If a team thinks that Hernandez can help them contend, they would gladly give up a draft pick for him. Let's put it this way, if the Reds didn't have Hanigan or Mez, I think they would give up a draft pick to get a catcher as good as Hernandez.

Plus, Hernandez won't get as much as people think in arbitration. He's been a part time player for the past three years. That factors heavily in how much he would get in arbitration.

I think it's a safe bet that he won't accept because he's going to want a multi-year deal, and want more playing time than the Reds can offer him. There are a lot of teams who need a catcher, who can offer him both.

osuceltic
11-16-2011, 05:07 PM
Juan Cruz signed when he was type A free agent. If a team thinks that Hernandez can help them contend, they would gladly give up a draft pick for him. Let's put it this way, if the Reds didn't have Hanigan or Mez, I think they would give up a draft pick to get a catcher as good as Hernandez.

Plus, Hernandez won't get as much as people think in arbitration. He's been a part time player for the past three years. That factors heavily in how much he would get in arbitration.

I think it's a safe bet that he won't accept because he's going to want a multi-year deal, and want more playing time than the Reds can offer him. There are a lot of teams who need a catcher, who can offer him both.

Agree with everything here. Ramon is drastically underrated here and, because so few at Redszone value him, they assume no one in baseball values him. I can assure you that isn't the case.

mth123
11-16-2011, 07:44 PM
I think they will, but I wouldn't. If they do, I think he's a Red next year.

Agreed. He'll eat up $5 Million+ of the payflex and leave the team with one too many catchers for the roster and not enough cash to fill other needs.

A better question might be: will it even matter when the new CBA is rolled out?

_Sir_Charles_
11-16-2011, 08:07 PM
Agreed. He'll eat up $5 Million+ of the payflex and leave the team with one too many catchers for the roster and not enough cash to fill other needs.

A better question might be: will it even matter when the new CBA is rolled out?

I've got no problem if they offer Ramon arbitration. Simply put, it gives us two options.

1. He agrees and re-signs. Then we deal off Hanigan and go with Ramon & Devin with Yasmani as the emergency back up (or even Corky).

2. He declines and signs elsewhere. Then we pick up the draft pick(s) and go with Ryan & Devin with Yasmani & Corky as emergency plans.

Where's the downside? If we go with option 1, Ramon goes with a 1 year deal and afterwards we have Devin and Yasmani as the back up. Otherwise we have Ryan to give Grandal more time in Louisville.

HokieRed
11-16-2011, 08:41 PM
There's no chance Mesoraco's PT will suffer due to the presence of Hernandez, IMO. The Reds develop these guys carefully, and when it comes time for their very top prospects to play, they play.

The only way Hernandez would accept arbitration is if he's willing to sit most of the time, and I think that's unlikely.

Your gamble then is that he refuses and we get the pick. I think this is always a pretty bad gamble. If he accepts, he'll play. He's still pretty good. As soon as Mes has a bit of a slump, Dusty will play Ramon. My sense is it's time to commit to Mes, clear the rest of the contenders out, and make it clear that Hanigan's role is as backup--for the remainder of his tenure as a Red. I've been a supporter of Ramon's since the deal, which I liked. He wasn't nearly as bad in Baltimore (which I am compelled to watch a lot on TV) as most RZers thought: he was just exhausted by the last month of the season and his OPS went into the tank. But, IMO, it's now time to pass it on to Mes. And I think you do that by letting Ramon go and his making the best deal he can for another several years of playing--which, in the right role, I believe he's good for.

mth123
11-16-2011, 08:47 PM
I've got no problem if they offer Ramon arbitration. Simply put, it gives us two options.

1. He agrees and re-signs. Then we deal off Hanigan and go with Ramon & Devin with Yasmani as the emergency back up (or even Corky).

2. He declines and signs elsewhere. Then we pick up the draft pick(s) and go with Ryan & Devin with Yasmani & Corky as emergency plans.

Where's the downside? If we go with option 1, Ramon goes with a 1 year deal and afterwards we have Devin and Yasmani as the back up. Otherwise we have Ryan to give Grandal more time in Louisville.

The downside is the $4 Million or so difference between Ramon and Hanigan probably prevents the Reds from getting the starter they need. Add that the staff performs much better with Hanigan behind the plate and Ramon retruning hurts the staff in both the preventing a potential addition as well as the negative impact on the holdovers. The Reds need to put all its available resources toward fixing the pitching and Ramon returning is counterproductive to that goal.

_Sir_Charles_
11-16-2011, 08:50 PM
The downside is the $4 Million or so difference between Ramon and Hanigan probably prevents the Reds from getting the starter they need. Add that the staff performs much better with Hanigan behind the plate and Ramon retruning hurts the staff in both the preventing a potential addition as well as the negative impact on the holdovers. The Reds need to put all its available resources toward fixing the pitching and Ramon returning is counterproductive to that goal.

Simply put, I don't see the Reds going out and "buying" a starter. They'll trade for one. And they can always make the numbers work out better by changing the prospects that they deal away for the opposing team to eat some of the contract coming back our way. I just have a VERY hard time seeing that difference being the straw that broke the camels back in terms of who we can and can't get.

mth123
11-16-2011, 08:53 PM
Simply put, I don't see the Reds going out and "buying" a starter. They'll trade for one. And they can always make the numbers work out better by changing the prospects that they deal away for the opposing team to eat some of the contract coming back our way. I just have a VERY hard time seeing that difference being the straw that broke the camels back in terms of who we can and can't get.

They have to be able to afford the guy they trade for. Right now they could add a $10 Million arm. If they keep Ramon they drop to a $6 Million guy. That is the difference between a strong number 3/borderline number 2 and a run of the mill number 4.

_Sir_Charles_
11-16-2011, 08:56 PM
They have to be able to afford the guy they trade for. Right now they could add a $10 Million arm. If they keep Ramon they drop to a $6 Million guy. That is the difference between a strong number 3/borderline number 2 and a run of the mill number 4.

Any pitcher we bring in, will almost assuredly have one of our current starters going the other way. So you can subtract the contracts going the other way. And if the budget is, say 85 million, and the trade has 4 million coming our way in cash to offset the contract...then it makes our budget 89 million in a way. Simply put, there are always ways to make a trade work into our budget...just have to be creative in who you include.

757690
11-17-2011, 01:41 AM
The downside is the $4 Million or so difference between Ramon and Hanigan probably prevents the Reds from getting the starter they need. Add that the staff performs much better with Hanigan behind the plate and Ramon retruning hurts the staff in both the preventing a potential addition as well as the negative impact on the holdovers. The Reds need to put all its available resources toward fixing the pitching and Ramon returning is counterproductive to that goal.

If Hanigan is traded, he will bring back a decent prospect or two, at least as good as the draft picks Ramon would bring if he signs elsewhere.

So here's the two outcomes if the Reds offer arbitration:

Ramon signs elsewhere, and the Reds get two picks, which they would have to spend around $2-3M to sign, with Hanigan splitting time with Mesaraco.

Ramon accepts arbitration. Even if he gets $5M which is far from certain, the Reds trade Hanigan and get prospects at least as good as the draft picks, and pay around $3.7M more to have Hernandez split time with Mesaraco.

The first one is definitey preferable, but not by much, imo.

fearofpopvol1
11-17-2011, 02:18 AM
I would take the gamble. It's late in his career and I'm sure he wants more than 1 year. With catching being hard to find, I think a team out there will offer him a deal.

mth123
11-17-2011, 02:27 AM
If Hanigan is traded, he will bring back a decent prospect or two, at least as good as the draft picks Ramon would bring if he signs elsewhere.

So here's the two outcomes if the Reds offer arbitration:

Ramon signs elsewhere, and the Reds get two picks, which they would have to spend around $2-3M to sign, with Hanigan splitting time with Mesaraco.

Ramon accepts arbitration. Even if he gets $5M which is far from certain, the Reds trade Hanigan and get prospects at least as good as the draft picks, and pay around $3.7M more to have Hernandez split time with Mesaraco.

The first one is definitey preferable, but not by much, imo.

Neither of those scenarios helps the pitching staff in 2012. I'd let Ramon go, let my top 10 prospect play and use the money for other needs. That's how all this "churning the roster to maintain the budget" stuff works. Get greedy in a play for draft picks and it gums up the works.

Hanigan is a very solid number 2 catcher. He's great with the staff and the pitchers pitch much better when he's the guy back there. He's a much better defender than Ramon and is signed very reasonably for his role in 2012 and 2013. About the time he's ready to walk, a very similar skillset in Tucker Barnhardt should be ready to take over as Mesoraco's understudy. Let Ramon walk, shop a very valuable Grandal for other improvements and let the back-up catcher be a back-up catcher. I think the team has a nice situation at Catcher. No need to risk overspending on the position by offereing arb when the money is needed elsewhere. The picks aren't really worth it IMO.

Again, until we see the new CBA, there may not even be picks involved anymore.

Ron Madden
11-17-2011, 03:15 AM
No way I offer Ramon arbitration.

I would have traded Hernandez to SF last summer.

There is no way I'd offer him arbitration. There isn't a club in MLB that would give up draft picks and offer him more than he would be awarded in arbitration.

IMHO Hanigan and Mesoraco would provide more value offensively and defensively than Hernandez would in 2012.

.

Griffey012
11-17-2011, 07:19 AM
I've got no problem if they offer Ramon arbitration. Simply put, it gives us two options.

1. He agrees and re-signs. Then we deal off Hanigan and go with Ramon & Devin with Yasmani as the emergency back up (or even Corky).

2. He declines and signs elsewhere. Then we pick up the draft pick(s) and go with Ryan & Devin with Yasmani & Corky as emergency plans.

Where's the downside? If we go with option 1, Ramon goes with a 1 year deal and afterwards we have Devin and Yasmani as the back up. Otherwise we have Ryan to give Grandal more time in Louisville.

I could not agree more. If we have Ramon it is not like he is going to play 85% of the time. He has been a part timer since he has been here and is up there in age. It would probably be a 50/50 or 40/60 splits between Mez and Ramon. That would be a productive catching duo.

mdccclxix
11-17-2011, 08:07 AM
I like Hanigan's defense more than Ramon's. I think there is a gamble involved with Ramon accepting arbitration, us paying him, what, 6 million? Then we have to trade Hanigan? If the preference is towards Hanigan, which for me it is, I further don't want to risk arb with Ramon. One wrinkle, which I know no one is eager to do, is to keep Ramon, or offer arb and maybe he declines or whatever, and use Mesoraco's premium level of value to command a #1 or #2 type pitcher that is cheap and durable. I don't know who that is, I'm just saying. If your offer Ramon arb and he accepts and half the free money for FA is gone and you still think you need a starter, you've got some surplus.

lollipopcurve
11-17-2011, 08:36 AM
I like Hanigan's defense more than Ramon's. I think there is a gamble involved with Ramon accepting arbitration, us paying him, what, 6 million? Then we have to trade Hanigan? If the preference is towards Hanigan, which for me it is, I further don't want to risk arb with Ramon. One wrinkle, which I know no one is eager to do, is to keep Ramon, or offer arb and maybe he declines or whatever, and use Mesoraco's premium level of value to command a #1 or #2 type pitcher that is cheap and durable. I don't know who that is, I'm just saying. If your offer Ramon arb and he accepts and half the free money for FA is gone and you still think you need a starter, you've got some surplus.

Right. Even if they offer arbitration and Hernandez accepts, there are a number of viable options for the Reds here, given their tremendous depth at the position. If they trade Mesoraco to bolster the rotation, they've got Grandal in the wings, possibly ready by 2013.

I just don't see how offering arbitration could result in leaving the Reds without a reasonable option to upgrade in some way by unloading catching depth.

REDREAD
11-17-2011, 10:34 AM
Supplemental picks are pretty valuable because they're good bets.

They cost about 900k or so to sign too.
Are they a better bet to succeed than a foreign signee for 900k or giving a late round college committed kid 900k to sign?
I guess that's what I am wondering.
A long time ago, someone made a list of all the supplemental picks and counted the ones that had beyond a cup of coffee in the big leagues.
Not many made it.. Although that is true for all draft picks.

Let's say the Reds don't want Ramon back. It's foolish to offer him arb and risk being on the hook for 4 million or whatever just for the sake of getting another draft pick, IMO. The Braves got burned when Maddux accepted arbitration. Other teams have to.

REDREAD
11-17-2011, 10:40 AM
Simply put, I don't see the Reds going out and "buying" a starter. They'll trade for one. And they can always make the numbers work out better by changing the prospects that they deal away for the opposing team to eat some of the contract coming back our way. I just have a VERY hard time seeing that difference being the straw that broke the camels back in terms of who we can and can't get.


Ok, but if Ramon accepts and the Reds have to toss in an extra prospect in a trade to make the money work.. isn't that a steep cost? The reward in offering Ramon arb is an extra draft pick. The risk is being stuck with paying a part time catcher 4-5 million. Not worth the risk. That supplemental pick has maybe a 20% chance of getting more than a cup of coffee in the bigs..
If someone knows the exact percentage of success on supplemental picks, please chime in.

I agree with mth.. money is super tight, we are trying to win. We can't put the fate of the season in an arbitrators hands. It's hard enough for the Reds to wheel and deal. Fortunately, I am pretty confident Ramon will not be offered arb. Redszone will be mad at Walt again (esp if Ramon signs elsewhere), but that's the right course of action.

_Sir_Charles_
11-17-2011, 10:42 AM
Neither of those scenarios helps the pitching staff in 2012. I'd let Ramon go, let my top 10 prospect play and use the money for other needs. That's how all this "churning the roster to maintain the budget" stuff works. Get greedy in a play for draft picks and it gums up the works.

Is there some reason that whatever we do with Hernandez has to affect the pitching rotation? It doesn't have to be either/or. And whether we have Ramon or Ryan...Devin will be the starter.

_Sir_Charles_
11-17-2011, 10:49 AM
Ok, but if Ramon accepts and the Reds have to toss in an extra prospect in a trade to make the money work.. isn't that a steep cost?

Not necessarily. Remember, we DO need to thin out our upper minors. We've got a LOT of guys all bunched up there with the same positions & skill sets. One way or another, we DO have to trade some guys...even if its just to make room for the kids in the lower/mid minors to move up. The guys we trade could (should) be the superfluous parts. And it doesn't have to be a "prospect" that we toss into a trade. It could be a current MLB'er who opens up a needed slot for a youngster AND frees up even more cash for the budget. Extra OF'ers, extra utility guys, extra bullpeners and even extra starters. We've got pieces to deal.

And all of this is just IF he accepts arbitration...which I highly think he WON'T do. He is coming off a very nice run with the Reds the past couple of years and he's most likely going to want a multiyear contract. Whether he's a Type A or not, there are LOTS of teams out there who will want him.

Benihana
11-17-2011, 11:09 AM
Wow, almost a 50/50 split after 47 votes. Interesting...

I would offer it to him, FWIW.

MikeS21
11-17-2011, 12:04 PM
I would offer arbitration.

Why let a good player walk away without any compensation at all? How is that good for baseball?

Best case is that he declines arbitration and you get the picks. Worst case is that he accepts. If that happens, you trade him for prospects to a team looking for catching.

_Sir_Charles_
11-17-2011, 12:14 PM
I would offer arbitration.

Why let a good player walk away without any compensation at all? How is that good for baseball?

Best case is that he declines arbitration and you get the picks. Worst case is that he accepts. If that happens, you trade him for prospects to a team looking for catching.

I don't think you CAN trade someone right after they accept arbitration. I think he can't be traded until like mid-season or something. If he does accept, then we deal Hanigan instead IMO.

PuffyPig
11-17-2011, 01:54 PM
And all of this is just IF he accepts arbitration...which I highly think he WON'T do. He is coming off a very nice run with the Reds the past couple of years and he's most likely going to want a multiyear contract. Whether he's a Type A or not, there are LOTS of teams out there who will want him.

He re-signed with the Reds last year for 1 year, so he must have felt that there wasn't going to be a multi-year offer to him then. Now he's 1 year older, and will cost some team a pick to sign him. Doubtful they sacrifice a pick to sign him for one year.

He might fetch $5-6M in arbitration.

He's a huge risk IMO to accept simply becuase it will be his best deal by far.

Hannigan is much cheaper and signed for 2 more years. He's the backup they want, not Hernandez at a large salary for one year.

757690
11-17-2011, 03:04 PM
I'm not so sure Ramon would get as much as people think in arbitration.

Here is list of catchers who are in their free agency years, their OPS over the last three years, the average number of games played over the last three years, their age and how much they made in 2011.


Martin 0.697 122 28 $4M
Shoppach 0.671 80 31 $3M
Pierzynski 0.725 132 34 $4M
Torrealba 0.717 91 32 $3M
McMann 0.827 136 27 $6.7M
Buck 0.747 106 30 $5M
Y. Molina 0.745 138 28 $5M
Iannetta 0.773 89 28 $2.5M
Ramon 0.761 90 35 $3M

Looking at this, it seems to me that Ramon, given his age, performance and games played, should be in the $3M range, especially when you consider that is what he agreed to last year, when he was a free agent. I don't see how he gets anywhere near $5M.

Kc61
11-17-2011, 03:41 PM
I'm not so sure Ramon would get as much as people think in arbitration.

Here is list of catchers who are in their free agency years, their OPS over the last three years, the average number of games played over the last three years, their age and how much they made in 2011.


Martin 0.697 122 28 $4M
Shoppach 0.671 80 31 $3M
Pierzynski 0.725 132 34 $4M
Torrealba 0.717 91 32 $3M
McMann 0.827 136 27 $6.7M
Buck 0.747 106 30 $5M
Y. Molina 0.745 138 28 $5M
Iannetta 0.773 89 28 $2.5M
Ramon 0.761 90 35 $3M

Looking at this, it seems to me that Ramon, given his age, performance and games played, should be in the $3M range, especially when you consider that is what he agreed to last year, when he was a free agent. I don't see how he gets anywhere near $5M.

$3 million, $5 million, it doesn't matter. The Reds will not arbitrate with RH.

If they offer him arbitration, which I doubt, it will be because he has agreed to a deal.

The idea of actually going to arbitration with Ramon is just not in the Reds playbook.

redsmetz
11-17-2011, 03:48 PM
$3 million, $5 million, it doesn't matter. The Reds will not arbitrate with RH.

If they offer him arbitration, which I doubt, it will be because he has agreed to a deal.

The idea of actually going to arbitration with Ramon is just not in the Reds playbook.

But the question isn't whether they'll go to arbitration with him, but rather whether they'll offer him arbitration. If they did and he were to accept, I doubt they end up in a hearing; they'll reach a deal. But the overarching question here is whether they'll offer arbitration.

Kc61
11-17-2011, 03:57 PM
But the question isn't whether they'll go to arbitration with him, but rather whether they'll offer him arbitration. If they did and he were to accept, I doubt they end up in a hearing; they'll reach a deal. But the overarching question here is whether they'll offer arbitration.

I take your point. But I don't think the Reds will take one ounce of risk that RH goes to arbitration. So I don't think they will offer it (except as a technicality upon signing him to a contract).

The two options I see is to let RH go or just sign him. I think they will let him go. It's possible, but unlikely, that they will just sign him.

But this Reds front office will not IMO offer him arbitration even if there is a one percent chance of a hearing. It's just not their way of doing business.

redsmetz
11-17-2011, 04:44 PM
I take your point. But I don't think the Reds will take one ounce of risk that RH goes to arbitration. So I don't think they will offer it (except as a technicality upon signing him to a contract).

The two options I see is to let RH go or just sign him. I think they will let him go. It's possible, but unlikely, that they will just sign him.

But this Reds front office will not IMO offer him arbitration even if there is a one percent chance of a hearing. It's just not their way of doing business.

The best scenario would be for someone to just sign him before the arbitration needs to be offered. I doubt that happens, but still, it would be nice.

I(heart)Freel
11-17-2011, 05:02 PM
How does it benefit a Type A free agent to have such an agreement with his "former" team? Teams may not offer a player as much money because they will be losing a 1st or 2nd round draft pick. There are often fewer suitors which also drives down the total value of the contract. It also hurts the player's "new" team by taking away a valuable draft pick and gives it to the team that no longer wants him. Some players even include a clause in their contract that states that the team is not allowed to offer arbitration, because they know it could affect their future contract offers. I just don't see why a Type A player would agree to decline arbitration when it only hurts themselves.

Said player may see his name in rumors and say to his front office, look, I don't want to pack up and move to another team for 2 months of the season, learn a new pitching staff and relocate my family. If you keep me for the rest of the year, I'll turn down arb in the offseason. Handshake.

Such a scenario is possible, especially for a toothy veteran.

mth123
11-17-2011, 07:54 PM
Is there some reason that whatever we do with Hernandez has to affect the pitching rotation? It doesn't have to be either/or. And whether we have Ramon or Ryan...Devin will be the starter.

Because the scarce resource here is not better than average role players who can play catcher. The scarce resource is money. If the Ramon accepts arb, the Reds blow half of the payflex they have by tieing it up in a part time catcher when one of the top ten prospects in baseball is ready to move in and take over his role.

The single most important thing this team can have is the payflex to add the arm it needs. Paying an extra $4 or $5 million to have Ramon in a part time role does nothing but harm that effort. Sure, it may allow the Reds to deal Hanigan, but IMO, they shouldn't spend any money on anything that isn't already committed for 2012 until they know what it will cost to add a starting pitcher who is on par with or better than Johnny Cueto.

Signing Ramon is like using the money you need for food to buy the 50" flat screen TV you want so you can watch it two hours each day instead of the 42" TV you already have. Nothing wrong with the TV in the least bit, but it doesn't keep the kids from starving. Getting the pitcher is like feeding your family when the stuff in the fridge is all spoiled and rancid.

_Sir_Charles_
11-18-2011, 09:48 AM
Because the scarce resource here is not better than average role players who can play catcher. The scarce resource is money. If the Ramon accepts arb, the Reds blow half of the payflex they have by tieing it up in a part time catcher when one of the top ten prospects in baseball is ready to move in and take over his role.

The single most important thing this team can have is the payflex to add the arm it needs. Paying an extra $4 or $5 million to have Ramon in a part time role does nothing but harm that effort. Sure, it may allow the Reds to deal Hanigan, but IMO, they shouldn't spend any money on anything that isn't already committed for 2012 until they know what it will cost to add a starting pitcher who is on par with or better than Johnny Cueto.

Signing Ramon is like using the money you need for food to buy the 50" flat screen TV you want so you can watch it two hours each day instead of the 42" TV you already have. Nothing wrong with the TV in the least bit, but it doesn't keep the kids from starving. Getting the pitcher is like feeding your family when the stuff in the fridge is all spoiled and rancid.

Sorry, agree to disagree. If we have 10 million to play with right now (just an example) and Ramon signs for 4 million, it leaves us 6 million to play with. This is what you're basically saying and I get that. But what I'm saying is that there is MORE to this equation than these 3 numbers. I'm saying that if this DOES happen, then we'll end up seeing Ryan or even Grandal traded to free up catching space. And that will increase that 6 million that's left to play with by the payroll amount of the players who depart. Sure, Ryan doesn't make much, but if we also trade off a pitcher or a superfluous outfielder in the deal as well...it adds even MORE to that 6 million payflex you're so worried about.

As for the importance of this payflex...it's only important if they actually have it AND they actually put it to use. We've got several players (important ones) who are due for raises (arbitration and such). These raises alone could easily eat up that all-important payflex. So could bringing back Cordero. And as for how they use that payflex...it all depends upon WHO they bring in as to whether that pitcher will be "feeding your family" or not.

My point is that offering arbitration to Ramon does not empty out our options. It doesn't even LIMIT our options. I simply CHANGES our options.

As for waiting on every bit of spending until they "know" what it'll take to get that pitcher you so desperately want...if they pass on deals that can improve the club in favor of focusing on this one goal, we could easily see us making zero changes. What if that one pitching target falls through and the deal never materializes? Then what? Well, we've passed on several other deals to fix things in other areas because we had to keep our payflex intact...and now there aren't any worthwhile candidates available to improve the club. Simply put, you don't pass on chances to improve the club in the hopes that a better opportunity MAY present itself further down the road.

lollipopcurve
11-18-2011, 09:51 AM
My point is that offering arbitration to Ramon does not empty out our options. It doesn't even LIMIT our options. I simply CHANGES our options.

Yes. IMO, the Reds have a surplus of a very valuable commodity -- quality catching, big league proven, big-league ready or near ready. Why give another team some of it for nothing?

Kc61
11-18-2011, 09:54 AM
My point is that offering arbitration to Ramon does not empty out our options. It doesn't even LIMIT our options. I simply CHANGES our options.

Reds just signed Hanigan to a team-friendly longer term deal. Highly doubt Reds are trading him to open a spot for Hernandez.

Grandal is a minor leaguer who earns no money. The issue here is use of dollars. Grandal isn't in that equation right now. Whether they keep Grandal or trade him has nothing to do with the Ramon $ issue.

The bottom line is this: it makes more sense financially to go with Hanigan and Mes next year. Ramon's salary is an obvious place to save a few dollars that can be used elsewhere.

The only issue is whether it is worth offering him arb to try and pick up the draft choices. I say no because Reds won't risk Ramon accepting.

lollipopcurve
11-18-2011, 10:02 AM
Reds just signed Hanigan to a team-friendly longer term deal. Highly doubt Reds are trading him to open a spot for Hernandez.

If Hernandez is back with the club, I think there's a real good chance it happens. Over the next 2 years, Hanigan is going to make 3-4 million, which is probably very close to what the Reds would pay Ramon this year. Plus, Hanigan's contract makes him very attractive on the trade market, a rock solid piece to package.

REDREAD
11-18-2011, 10:20 AM
Not necessarily. Remember, we DO need to thin out our upper minors. We've got a LOT of guys all bunched up there with the same positions & skill sets. .

See, I could make the argument that an extra part like Frasier could easily be traded for a low A prospect that is the equivalent of a supplemental pick.

I don't want an arbitrator deciding Ramon's salary.
If Walt decides to bring Ramon back at a mutally agreeable salary, that's fine.
I agree with Mth that money is just too tight to risk paying Ramon 4-5 million.

_Sir_Charles_
11-18-2011, 10:34 AM
Reds just signed Hanigan to a team-friendly longer term deal. Highly doubt Reds are trading him to open a spot for Hernandez.

Grandal is a minor leaguer who earns no money. The issue here is use of dollars. Grandal isn't in that equation right now. Whether they keep Grandal or trade him has nothing to do with the Ramon $ issue.

I wasn't referring to trading Grandal ALONE. I'm talking about trading off surplus to fill areas of need. If we do keep Ramon (and I highly doubt that we will), then we most definitely have a catching surplus. I firmly see Mes as the long term starter. That means Hanigan, Hernandez and Grandal are backups at best for the Reds. If they want to keep Ryan and end up stuck with Ramon...fine, then Grandal is trade bait. But IMO, if they are forced to keep Ramon if he accepts, the the best solution is to deal Ryan. While his contract IS team friendly...Grandal's is too, he's younger and has much more upside. The fact that Ryan's contract is so team-friendly is one of the reasons he'll be so attractive on the trade market.


The bottom line is this: it makes more sense financially to go with Hanigan and Mes next year. Ramon's salary is an obvious place to save a few dollars that can be used elsewhere.

The only issue is whether it is worth offering him arb to try and pick up the draft choices. I say no because Reds won't risk Ramon accepting.

Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with your "bottom line". That IS the best way to go. But to just let Ramon walk and get nothing in return...that's an awfully big pill to swallow. Personally, I think the odds are much more in favor of Ramon turning DOWN arbitration than accepting it. And with that in mind, the risk is much less. Add in the fact that the Reds have a very viable option in place in case that risk materializes itself by dealing a different catcher is all the more reason to take that risk.

After Ryan's contract is up...who do you want to be the backup catcher for Mesoraco? Grandal? Fluery? Barnhart? Personally, I think Grandal is wasted as a backup catcher. I think he's much better suited as a trade chip (if we're sold on Mes as the starter).

_Sir_Charles_
11-18-2011, 10:39 AM
See, I could make the argument that an extra part like Frasier could easily be traded for a low A prospect that is the equivalent of a supplemental pick.

I don't want an arbitrator deciding Ramon's salary.
If Walt decides to bring Ramon back at a mutally agreeable salary, that's fine.
I agree with Mth that money is just too tight to risk paying Ramon 4-5 million.

No way an arbitrator would determine Ramon's salary. The Reds wouldn't allow it. If for some reason he did accept arbitration...the Reds would settle on a contract.

And the money is too tight to risk paying Ramon 4-5 million IF NO OTHER DEALS ARE MADE. And I don't see that happening. I simply don't see the Reds going with 3 catchers.

And I agree with the dealing of some upper level guys for higher-ceilinged lower level guys. Those are the kinds of moves we're probably going to have to make sometime soon simply to clear out some space at the upper levels.

757690
11-18-2011, 02:59 PM
Ryan Doumit just signed with the Twins for $3M.

He has been almost exactly as productive the three years as Ramon, and is younger.

With this signing, I can't see Ramon getting more than $3M from arbitration.

Kc61
11-18-2011, 03:12 PM
Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with your "bottom line". That IS the best way to go. But to just let Ramon walk and get nothing in return...that's an awfully big pill to swallow. Personally, I think the odds are much more in favor of Ramon turning DOWN arbitration than accepting it. And with that in mind, the risk is much less. Add in the fact that the Reds have a very viable option in place in case that risk materializes itself by dealing a different catcher is all the more reason to take that risk.

After Ryan's contract is up...who do you want to be the backup catcher for Mesoraco? Grandal? Fluery? Barnhart? Personally, I think Grandal is wasted as a backup catcher. I think he's much better suited as a trade chip (if we're sold on Mes as the starter).

I have no idea what the shape of things will be when Hanigan's deal is up. I'm not too worried about the Reds getting a backup catcher from someplace if Mes is the starter by then.

I agree Grandal shouldn't backup Mes. More likely, Grandal will be traded. Reds need to pick the best time and the best deal.

As to the "big pill" of losing RH for nothing, unfortunately I just think it is inevitable. As I said, I don't think the Reds will take even a one percent chance that he accepts arbitration.

Ramon accepting arbitration is just an unacceptable result for the Reds. They won't want to risk the salary result. They won't want to pay Ramon when Mes can take his place for cheap.

Some folks may think it is "unlikely" that Ramon will accept arbitration. Even if true, I just don't think the Reds will take that risk.

And even if Doumit got $3 million. Reds won't risk being stuck paying Ramon $3 million. Just my opinion.

By the way, the Twins are always active with early signings of role players like Doumit. I admire their pro-active approach.

MattyHo4Life
11-18-2011, 03:40 PM
Personally, I think the odds are much more in favor of Ramon turning DOWN arbitration than accepting it.

I disagree, I think the odds are much more in favor of Ramon accepting arbitration if it's offered.

1) He is a 35 year old catcher, turning 36 just after the season starts. I don't think very many teams (if any) will want to give a multi year deal to a soon to be 36 year old catcher.

2) If he accepts arbitration, then he will likely get a raise which would be more than Ryan Doumit signed for with the Twins....1 year at $3Mil. Doumit is 5 years younger.

3) Ramon has been with the Reds for the last three years. Perhaps he likes the city and teamates, and not want to start over with a new team.

MattyHo4Life
11-18-2011, 03:43 PM
Ryan Doumit just signed with the Twins for $3M.

He has been almost exactly as productive the three years as Ramon, and is younger.

With this signing, I can't see Ramon getting more than $3M from arbitration.

Doumit is 5 years younger and only signed a 1 year deal. I doubt Ramon will find a multi year deal for $3Mil per year.

757690
11-18-2011, 05:42 PM
The reason why a player would choose arbitration over free agency is if they believe that they can make more money in arbitration. That happens when a another player who plays the same position, with similar stats, signs for more that what the original player could get in free agency. See David Weathers.

This isn't the case with Hernandez. The Doumit signing is just one of many in which a catcher with similar stats to Ramon's, signed for around $2-3M. One of those was Ramon himself last season.

I think Ramon gets the same money in arbitration as he would in free agency. So it really comes down to where he wants to play. Considering that the Reds can't offer him the playing time he wants, I would think he would like to see what others teams can offer him in terms of a role.

MattyHo4Life
11-18-2011, 06:59 PM
I think Ramon gets the same money in arbitration as he would in free agency.

Well...this is where we disagree. I think Ramon can get more in arbitration than he can in free agency. He won't get less than his current salary through arbitration. Chances are he will get more than $3Mil if they go through arbitration. Since Doumit, a catcher that as you said is very similar to Ramon, but 5 years younger signed for 3Mil, Ramon will likely get less in FA. Especially since the team would then surrender a 1st round or 2nd round draft pick. I think being a Type A FA really hurts Ramon in FA, being type B would be better for him. I don't see a team giving him 3Mil plus in addition to giving up a draft pick.

mth123
11-18-2011, 08:17 PM
Sorry, agree to disagree. If we have 10 million to play with right now (just an example) and Ramon signs for 4 million, it leaves us 6 million to play with. This is what you're basically saying and I get that. But what I'm saying is that there is MORE to this equation than these 3 numbers. I'm saying that if this DOES happen, then we'll end up seeing Ryan or even Grandal traded to free up catching space. And that will increase that 6 million that's left to play with by the payroll amount of the players who depart. Sure, Ryan doesn't make much, but if we also trade off a pitcher or a superfluous outfielder in the deal as well...it adds even MORE to that 6 million payflex you're so worried about.

As for the importance of this payflex...it's only important if they actually have it AND they actually put it to use. We've got several players (important ones) who are due for raises (arbitration and such). These raises alone could easily eat up that all-important payflex. So could bringing back Cordero. And as for how they use that payflex...it all depends upon WHO they bring in as to whether that pitcher will be "feeding your family" or not.

My point is that offering arbitration to Ramon does not empty out our options. It doesn't even LIMIT our options. I simply CHANGES our options.

As for waiting on every bit of spending until they "know" what it'll take to get that pitcher you so desperately want...if they pass on deals that can improve the club in favor of focusing on this one goal, we could easily see us making zero changes. What if that one pitching target falls through and the deal never materializes? Then what? Well, we've passed on several other deals to fix things in other areas because we had to keep our payflex intact...and now there aren't any worthwhile candidates available to improve the club. Simply put, you don't pass on chances to improve the club in the hopes that a better opportunity MAY present itself further down the road.

Except the Reds need the 10 Million plus the salaries of whoever they deal to get a pitcher. Say the Target is Wandy Rodriguez. He'll make 10 Million in 2012. Keep Ramon and there is only about $6 Million open. Who can they deal to make-up the difference? Stubbs? Less than $600K. Volquez? Agree that might get $2 Million. Masset? Maybe I'd do that and free $2.5 Million, but now we need to get a reliever. And what do we do with Mesoraco? Waste him in AAA while Ramon clogs the roster and the budget? If the Reds had Ramon under contract right now and they could sell him for $4 Million to make a deal for a pitcher fit in the budget, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Letting him walk is the same thing.

mth123
11-18-2011, 08:21 PM
I have no idea what the shape of things will be when Hanigan's deal is up. I'm not too worried about the Reds getting a backup catcher from someplace if Mes is the starter by then.

I agree Grandal shouldn't backup Mes. More likely, Grandal will be traded. Reds need to pick the best time and the best deal.

As to the "big pill" of losing RH for nothing, unfortunately I just think it is inevitable. As I said, I don't think the Reds will take even a one percent chance that he accepts arbitration.

Ramon accepting arbitration is just an unacceptable result for the Reds. They won't want to risk the salary result. They won't want to pay Ramon when Mes can take his place for cheap.

Some folks may think it is "unlikely" that Ramon will accept arbitration. Even if true, I just don't think the Reds will take that risk.

And even if Doumit got $3 million. Reds won't risk being stuck paying Ramon $3 million. Just my opinion.

By the way, the Twins are always active with early signings of role players like Doumit. I admire their pro-active approach.

Exactly. Even $3 Million is a big over pay when the Reds have a better player to do the job for the minimum.

marcshoe
11-19-2011, 10:52 PM
Ryan Doumit just signed with the Twins for $3M.

He has been almost exactly as productive the three years as Ramon, and is younger.

With this signing, I can't see Ramon getting more than $3M from arbitration.

I would guess that Doumit only got one year because of injury issues.

mth123
11-20-2011, 12:58 AM
I would guess that Doumit only got one year because of injury issues.

Don't forget that Doumit is a horrible defender. I'm on record as saying Ramon is average at best defensively (but probaby below average), but compared to Doumit, he's Johnny Bench back there.

Offensively, Doumit has a lot more upside. With the DH available to get his bat in there, he could have a big year. If I was looking for a bat that I could use to spell Mauer from time to time and keep both of them him in there at DH, Doumit is far preferable to Ramon. If I was looking for a primary Catcher, Ramon would be my guy (with the acknowledgement that I'd need a strong number 2 who could start 50+ games).

Kc61
11-20-2011, 07:27 PM
Am I right that this coming Wednesday night, the 23rd, is the deadline to offer arbitration to Ramon and Coco? That is how I read the calendar.

dougdirt
11-20-2011, 07:33 PM
Am I right that this coming Wednesday night, the 23rd, is the deadline to offer arbitration to Ramon and Coco? That is how I read the calendar.

At midnight, assuming the mlbtradeumors.com countdown is correct.

membengal
11-20-2011, 07:33 PM
It would be absolute lunacy to offer him arbitration.

cinreds21
11-23-2011, 01:35 PM
So am I reading this correctly that with the new CBA, the Reds do not have to offer arbitration to Hernandez or Cordero and will still receive compensation from the Type-B free agents?

_Sir_Charles_
11-23-2011, 01:58 PM
So am I reading this correctly that with the new CBA, the Reds do not have to offer arbitration to Hernandez or Cordero and will still receive compensation from the Type-B free agents?

Correct. The odds of us offering arbitration has now dropped to zero. It won't get offered. Period.

Kc61
11-23-2011, 03:08 PM
Correct. The odds of us offering arbitration has now dropped to zero. It won't get offered. Period.

I agree. Particularly if the Reds don't want these two. Clearly no reason to offer arbitration.

But what if the Reds still want to negotiate with Cordero or Hernandez?

It would seem that the Reds can continue to negotiate with them, even without offering arbitration. Is that correct?

Mario-Rijo
11-23-2011, 03:19 PM
It would be absolute lunacy to offer him arbitration.

I disagree I mean what is the downside to offering Ramon, in their eyes? I think they will take the stance that it wouldn't hurt to have Ramon back for one more season and perhaps if Mes forces their hand trade Ramon at midseason if they aren't in it. I guess money might be the one factor that would keep them from re-signing him but they don't seem to mind paying certain guys and he falls into that category.

Gallen5862
11-23-2011, 03:30 PM
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

Free Agent Arbitration Offer Tracker
By Tim Dierkes [November 23 at 12:46pm CST]

Please note that in the tracker I have marked Matt Capps, Francisco Cordero, Octavio Dotel, Ramon Hernandez, and Darren Oliver as having received arbitration offers even though they technically will not. As part of the new CBA, MLB and the players association agreed that these five players will change from Type A to B and the clubs will not have to offer arbitration to receive compensation. For the purposes of the tracker, I consider that an automatic arbitration offer, since compensation will still happen.

membengal
11-23-2011, 06:46 PM
I disagree I mean what is the downside to offering Ramon, in their eyes? I think they will take the stance that it wouldn't hurt to have Ramon back for one more season and perhaps if Mes forces their hand trade Ramon at midseason if they aren't in it. I guess money might be the one factor that would keep them from re-signing him but they don't seem to mind paying certain guys and he falls into that category.

Mes should have already forced their hand. There is zero reason for a budget strapped club to send Mes back to AAA yet again so they can light bundles of money on fire.

_Sir_Charles_
11-23-2011, 08:51 PM
I agree. Particularly if the Reds don't want these two. Clearly no reason to offer arbitration.

But what if the Reds still want to negotiate with Cordero or Hernandez?

It would seem that the Reds can continue to negotiate with them, even without offering arbitration. Is that correct?

Bingo. I don't think they're interested in Ramon to be honest, just the picks (which is why I thought they'd at least offer arbitration before the change to their status). But Cordero...I'd be surprised if they don't try to sign him to a lesser contract of a year or two.

_Sir_Charles_
11-23-2011, 09:39 PM
I agree. Particularly if the Reds don't want these two. Clearly no reason to offer arbitration.

But what if the Reds still want to negotiate with Cordero or Hernandez?

It would seem that the Reds can continue to negotiate with them, even without offering arbitration. Is that correct?

Bingo. I don't think they're interested in Ramon to be honest, just the picks. But Cordero...I'd be surprised if they don't try to sign him to a lesser contract of a year or two.

Ron Madden
11-24-2011, 06:00 AM
I'd say: Thank you Francisco Cordero and Ramon Hernandez we've enjoyed a few good times together but it's time to move on. We have made both of you guys very rich men and wish both of you continued professional and financial success. See Ya Later.