PDA

View Full Version : How Long Do You Give Votto to Sign Extension (From ORG)



dMaus14
12-08-2011, 11:35 PM
Joey is obviously my favorite player. Love the guy. I feel he will always work on his game to be one of the best unlike some superstars who take their talent for granted. He is not one of those type of guys.

But Pujols walked in free agency and other than some draft compensation, the Cardinals got nothing for him. Sure, they got years of success because of him. But they got nothing in return for him otherwise. Unless their draft picks turn into something special, again, they got nothing but years of success which they can be thankful for.

If the Reds won 2 or 3 championships and then Joey walked in free agency, it would be easier to handle.

Sooooo............you try and sign Joey to a LTC, but at what point do you cut your losses, and trade him for some return, knowing he won't sign with the Reds?

And then the problem is that he's only 2 years away and after next season, one season away........and could you get anything for him at that point anyway?

What do you think?

The DARK
12-09-2011, 12:09 AM
Too early to say. Are we contenders next season, or the season after? If so, why deal for prospects when we could build a championship team around him, as Milwaukee did with Fielder? You have to get a better feel for this before you can start setting deadlines, especially for a team that underachieved last season.

LeDoux
12-09-2011, 03:15 AM
Too early to say. Are we contenders next season, or the season after? If so, why deal for prospects when we could build a championship team around him, as Milwaukee did with Fielder? You have to get a better feel for this before you can start setting deadlines, especially for a team that underachieved last season.

Ditto.

Even if you are convinced he will not return in 2011, why would trade Votto? Unless the return you get is instant (another MVP/CY level player), or the Reds are out of contention 2013 - why part with your top hitter before his contact is up?

will5979
12-09-2011, 08:58 AM
An extension for Phillips need to be at 3-4 years max.

For Votto 5-7 years.

NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT COSTS, our greedy bastard owners have the money, they just don't want to spend it.

dMaus14
12-09-2011, 11:25 AM
Well the only way to possibly keep Votto (he's leaving either way unless we are the highest bidder) is build around him to prove we are serious about winning which will cost more money too. Cueto, Chapman, Bruce, Phillip's possible extension and Votto's possible contract will put us around $60M for 5 players. Even if we bump payroll to $110M, we have $50M to spend on 20 players with the average salary being $3.1M in 2011. What I suggest we do is trade him now with another piece for 2 ML players and 2 prospects to solve other holes we have: SP, SS, 3B, RP, LF; then since he is hell bent on testing the market which is obvious with him not giving up any FA years, we try and sign him during FA.

FireDusty
12-09-2011, 11:29 AM
Ditto.

Even if you are convinced he will not return in 2011, why would trade Votto? Unless the return you get is instant (another MVP/CY level player), or the Reds are out of contention 2013 - why part with your top hitter before his contact is up?

Well...the answer to your "Why Trade Votto?" goes something like.....we have a guy who will produce similiar numbers and what we would get for Votto is a top of the rotation starter.

We ain't gettin' James Shields for Yonder Alonzo.

texasdave
12-09-2011, 11:32 AM
It's a moot point since our esteemed GM has seemingly forgotten how to make trades.

brm7675
12-09-2011, 01:14 PM
Votto is not going to sign an extension. He is going to test the free agent market because that is the smart thing to do.

brm7675
12-09-2011, 01:24 PM
An extension for Phillips need to be at 3-4 years max.

For Votto 5-7 years.

NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT COSTS, our greedy bastard owners have the money, they just don't want to spend it.

Well actually there is no truth to that at all. What Reds player have we lost due to not paying them?

will5979
12-09-2011, 01:30 PM
Well actually there is no truth to that at all. What Reds player have we lost due to not paying them?

Pete Rose-1979
Ron Gant/David Wells-1996
Eric Davis-1997
Greg Vaughn-2000
Barry Larkin-almost in 2000 then 2005
Adam Dunn-2009

izzy's dad
12-09-2011, 01:38 PM
Joey Votto will cash in on the free agent market, be it here or someplace else. Whatever Prince Fielder gets will have a lot of influence on what Joey eventually signs for. I just don't see the Reds being able to pay what the market will demand for Joey.

Jefferson24
12-09-2011, 02:47 PM
An extension for Phillips need to be at 3-4 years max.

For Votto 5-7 years.

NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT COSTS, our greedy bastard owners have the money, they just don't want to spend it.

Having the money doesn't mean they are going to spend it, nor should they. If they feel as if signing to a very expensive long term contract will cause the Reds to run in the red every year then they should not do it. If they can swing it while the club's bottom line is still profitable then that is a good plan.

The bottom line is why make an investment if that investment does not pay off. I am not going to throw money into a deal unless that deal has good potential to be profitable.

The DARK
12-09-2011, 02:48 PM
Joey Votto will cash in on the free agent market, be it here or someplace else. Whatever Prince Fielder gets will have a lot of influence on what Joey eventually signs for. I just don't see the Reds being able to pay what the market will demand for Joey.

I don't think so either, but winning a world series or pennant would go a long way in terms of what the team would make from increased attendance and TV coverage. I think the Fielder discussion might have gone a bit differently if the Brewers had gone all the way.

Jefferson24
12-09-2011, 02:53 PM
Votto is not going to sign an extension. He is going to test the free agent market because that is the smart thing to do.

I agree because there is little chance the Reds could or would compete in the free agent market. Votto said he would only sign a contract through the years the Reds had control of him. Which means as soon as the Reds don't have control he will shop his services to the highest bidder.

It seems like this is the way most players are handling things right now. They are just chasing the money and don't seem to have any sense of loyalty to the teams they came up with.

LegallyMinded
12-09-2011, 03:05 PM
It seems like this is the way most players are handling things right now. They are just chasing the money and don't seem to have any sense of loyalty to the teams they came up with.

First, I wouldn't fault a player for taking a deal that pays more. Salary is a significant factor in any job decision, and I'm certain I and many others would chase the big, free agent pay day if offered the chance.

That being said, though, are you sure you're not overvaluing the effect of money? Remember, Pujols actually had a larger offer from the Marlins, but he took less money to play in LA. CJ Wilson similarly had a larger offer to play in Florida, but took less money because he wanted to play elsewhere.

And the list isn't just restrained to big name free agents like those two. Hiroki Kuroda could pull in 12 million or so if he stays in the US, but he hasn't signed yet because he might want to return to Japan. Aaron Harang's last two contracts were both impacted by his desire to be on the West Coast. Javier Vaszquez could certainly find a Major League deal, but may opt to retire instead. These are just some examples off the top of my head, and perhaps the list isn't really representative. Still, I think it's too easy to fault these guys for chasing the money or being greedy, and I think we lose sight of the other factors that impact their decisions.

dMaus14
12-09-2011, 03:21 PM
What equates into the "right" return for Joey Votto?

Jefferson24
12-09-2011, 03:41 PM
That being said, though, are you sure you're not overvaluing the effect of money? Remember, Pujols actually had a larger offer from the Marlins, but he took less money to play in LA.

Not true according to what I have read:


Despite initial reports that the team offered free agent first baseman Albert Pujols a nine-year deal worth $225 million, The Miami Herald reports the offer was for well below the $200 million mark.

Read more: http://aol.sportingnews.com/mlb/feed/2011-11/pujols-free-agency/story/marlins-offer-to-pujols-reportedly-is-less-than-200-million#ixzz1g4H3o7Rp

For most players it's all about the money. What exactly is it that 25 million a year can buy that 20 million a year can't? I think it is getting out of control.

Captain13
12-09-2011, 03:45 PM
Pete Rose-1979
Ron Gant/David Wells-1996
Eric Davis-1997
Greg Vaughn-2000
Barry Larkin-almost in 2000 then 2005
Adam Dunn-2009

Other than Dunn, these are all previous regimes, and as for Dunn "good-riddance". I mean, we think our LF numbers were bad. Did you see what Dunner did in 2011? Wow.

Captain13
12-09-2011, 03:46 PM
Not true according to what I have read:


Despite initial reports that the team offered free agent first baseman Albert Pujols a nine-year deal worth $225 million, The Miami Herald reports the offer was for well below the $200 million mark.

Read more: http://aol.sportingnews.com/mlb/feed/2011-11/pujols-free-agency/story/marlins-offer-to-pujols-reportedly-is-less-than-200-million#ixzz1g4H3o7Rp

For most players it's all about the money. What exactly is it that 25 million a year can buy that 20 million a year can't? I think it is getting out of control.

Of course, there is no state income tax in FL so less is more. If the Marlins offered me the Major League minimum, I would sign immediately and become the worst 1B in the history of MLB.

brm7675
12-09-2011, 04:59 PM
Pete Rose-1979
Ron Gant/David Wells-1996
Eric Davis-1997
Greg Vaughn-2000
Barry Larkin-almost in 2000 then 2005
Adam Dunn-2009

And of those listed, who were on teh roster with our present owner? Please name one Red who was allowed to leave that we didn't pony up the money for that was a "loss" for the franchise.

Jefferson24
12-09-2011, 05:00 PM
Of course, there is no state income tax in FL so less is more. If the Marlins offered me the Major League minimum, I would sign immediately and become the worst 1B in the history of MLB.

I would play for free if they would just take care of the room and board. The thought of playing the outfield as a not-that-fast anymore 40 year old sounds good to me.

But really when is enough enough? I have heard the "it's about respect" argument and that is just plain crap, its about the money.

I realize these guys want to financially set themselves for life after their playing days are over, nothing wrong with that. But is there a point at which it's more about greed than anything else?

brm7675
12-09-2011, 05:01 PM
I agree because there is little chance the Reds could or would compete in the free agent market. Votto said he would only sign a contract through the years the Reds had control of him. Which means as soon as the Reds don't have control he will shop his services to the highest bidder.

It seems like this is the way most players are handling things right now. They are just chasing the money and don't seem to have any sense of loyalty to the teams they came up with.

Why should they? The teams have no loyalty to them.

brm7675
12-09-2011, 05:05 PM
I would play for free if they would just take care of the room and board. The thought of playing the outfield as a not-that-fast anymore 40 year old sounds good to me.

But really when is enough enough? I have heard the "it's about respect" argument and that is just plain crap, its about the money.

I realize these guys want to financially set themselves for life after their playing days are over, nothing wrong with that. But is there a point at which it's more about greed than anything else?

this whole idea of "I would play for free" is laughable. Do you work at your present job for free? If not, why not? Playing baseball is a job and any smart person would maximize it to the biggest paycheck.

Jefferson24
12-09-2011, 05:10 PM
this whole idea of "I would play for free" is laughable. Do you work at your present job for free? If not, why not? Playing baseball is a job and any smart person would maximize it to the biggest paycheck.

I meant at my present age and ability. Of course if I was good enough to make it through the system and end up on a big league roster I would want paid and paid fairly. That is very reasonable.

I wasn't suggesting players should play for free.

Krawhitham
12-09-2011, 06:07 PM
What do you think?

I think HGH was a 10-5 man and they could not trade him