PDA

View Full Version : should Bruce be given a long term contract like Votto



icehole3
11-15-2012, 12:17 PM
he wants one :)

http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/mlb/381936/bruce-wants-to-be-a-red-his-entire-career



Jay Bruce's agent Matt Sosnick has approached the Reds front office about another contact extension.
Bruce signed a six-year deal in December 2010, but he'd like to make an even longer commitment to the Reds organization. "He made it clear that he wants to be a Red his entire career," Sosnick told MLB.com on Thursday. "[Joey] Votto is in his wedding in a couple of weeks and he wants to play with him. He has a lot of friends there. He and his fiancee are very comfortable in Cincinnati. Jay asked me to approach the team and see if something is there. We'll see if the team has any interest."

mattfeet
11-15-2012, 12:27 PM
Id be all about it. However, it should be nowhere NEAR the $ value of Votto's deal, IMO.

Here's his current contract:

2013: $7.5MM
2014: $10MM
2015: $12MM
2016: $12.5MM
2017: $13MM*

*2017 is $13MM team option with $1MM buyout.

PuffyPig
11-15-2012, 12:31 PM
If he wants to extend the $13M for a number of more years, why not? Even $15M is likely a bargain by then. But with 5 years to go, he'd have to take a discount to get an extension now. If Bruce gets to the next level, he'll be worth quite a bit more than his current contract.

But I really like to hear he likes to play here.

RedEye
11-15-2012, 12:39 PM
Regardless of whether he gets this contract, it is great news that players want to remain with the Reds so badly. Says a lot about what a culture of winning and a committed front office and ownership group will do for a franchise.

mattfeet
11-15-2012, 12:41 PM
I'd be ok with a 5yr/$75MM extension above his current deal. That'll give him team control through 2022 (pick up $13MM team option in 2017), at which point he'll be "only" 35. If his bat continues to improve every year (at least HR totals), he could become quite a force in just 1-2 more years.

-Matt

kaldaniels
11-15-2012, 12:46 PM
Jay seems to be a down to earth guy. I like the head on his shoulders.

MrRedLegger
11-15-2012, 12:50 PM
Hearing that Bruce wants to stay in Cincinnati makes me :D

It's honorable that he believes in the franchise and his teammates. He's not an ego that the sport must deal with unlike a lot of players in all sports. Things like Bruce's Battalion & Bruce's Buddys make him a class act.

He's 25 and I firmly believe he will do wonders for this franchise. His best is yet to come...

mattfeet
11-15-2012, 12:58 PM
I'd be ok with a 5yr/$75MM extension above his current deal. That'll give him team control through 2022 (pick up $13MM team option in 2017), at which point he'll be "only" 35. If his bat continues to improve every year (at least HR totals), he could become quite a force in just 1-2 more years.

-Matt
After thinking about this, I think it's realistic to even do a 5yr/$100MM extension on top of his current deal. Think about it, in 2016 Reds will have a brand new TV contract, in addition to the additional money from MLB revenue-sharing, $20MM/yr will not be a lot of money (lol - I cant type that with a straight face) in 2018 - 2022.

_Sir_Charles_
11-15-2012, 01:08 PM
If he wants to extend the $13M for a number of more years, why not? Even $15M is likely a bargain by then. But with 5 years to go, he'd have to take a discount to get an extension now. If Bruce gets to the next level, he'll be worth quite a bit more than his current contract.

But I really like to hear he likes to play here.

This. I wouldn't even hesitate to extend him further. His age and his production...he'll most likely be a huge bargain once he hits his prime.

Dan
11-15-2012, 01:12 PM
Is he asking for full no-trade clause? I'd think that would be worth something in terms of $$ as well. I like the 5/$75 added idea, too.

Benihana
11-15-2012, 01:24 PM
I don't know, I may hold off on this. The Reds have a lot of money tied up in the Votto deal from 2016-2022. and there is obviously a tremendous amount of risk that goes along with that- risk that you're willing to take so you can get Votto locked up for the next 5 years. Right now we already have Bruce locked up for the next 5 years (which I love). I see no reason to double our risk in the out years when we don't need to.

Let's see what happens with Cueto, Latos, Bailey and Chapman over these next two years. More than likely we'll need to give a big extension to at least one of them. If we still have room for Bruce after that, I'd look to extend him then. We'll also have a better idea of his performance at that point and how he projects from 2017-2022.

Keep in mind, Bruce will be on the wrong side of 30 when his current contract is up. There should be a sizeable discount for that, at least if its going to be extended with 3-4 years remaining on his current deal. If he performs at Pujols-like levels for the next 5 years, maybe there is no discount. But if he performs at Pujols-like levels for the next 5 years, I won't be too sad about anything the Reds did or didn't do in the 2012 offseason.

Benihana
11-15-2012, 01:28 PM
This. I wouldn't even hesitate to extend him further. His age and his production...he'll most likely be a huge bargain once he hits his prime.

He should be hitting his prime during the contract he already has. He could very well be done with his prime or at least nearing the twilight of it by the time he hits the "extension" part.

Patrick Bateman
11-15-2012, 01:37 PM
If he wants to extend the $13M for a number of more years, why not? Even $15M is likely a bargain by then. But with 5 years to go, he'd have to take a discount to get an extension now. If Bruce gets to the next level, he'll be worth quite a bit more than his current contract.

But I really like to hear he likes to play here.

I think so too.

Have to magine that his prime years with the bat will only improve upon what he's at now. Presumably some .900 OPS seasons ahead of him.

Still, has to be favourable dollars wise considering the lack of necessity in extending him right now. IIRC, his agent seems to be more about helping his players finding a comfortable lifestyle... kind of like the anti-Boras. People like to use him because they trust him, and the agent wants to find a good fit for what the player and the family will make them happiest. Considering Bruce is already making 7 figures, it seems sensible that he wouldn't be looking to maximize his next contract.

_Sir_Charles_
11-15-2012, 01:46 PM
He should be hitting his prime during the contract he already has. He could very well be done with his prime or at least nearing the twilight of it by the time he hits the "extension" part.

True, but I was also thinking that if we extend him further now, we could re-negotiate the current part making it slightly lower now. Making it easier to extend both Homer and Mat.

And the "post-prime" part of his contract would still most likely be a bargain as the market cost still seems to be rising every year.

mdccclxix
11-15-2012, 01:59 PM
I would pass right now, just because 2017 is so far away. I still think there is a buy low opportunity now due to his K rates and lower OBP, but his HR totals are really nice. Fact is, that there are still a lot of ways to K Bruce.

LoganBuck
11-15-2012, 02:06 PM
Yes, but it has to be on the Reds' terms.

jhu1321
11-15-2012, 02:29 PM
If he accepts a hometown discount it's a no brainer. If he won't right now I don't think the Reds would be inclined to offer 15 + million a year.

It's fantastic to hear him saying he wants to be a Red his whole career. I now have a man crush on Jay.:)

Benihana
11-15-2012, 02:34 PM
Unfortunately, I could see a 2017-2022 Bruce extension having more in common with the Vernon Wells or Alex Rios contracts than I do with the 2011-2017 Bruce contract. No need to take the plunge right now.

Chip R
11-15-2012, 02:36 PM
I think I'd wait a couple of years. He just signed a very generous deal not two years ago that won't expire for a few more years. It sets a bit of a bad precedent.

lollipopcurve
11-15-2012, 02:42 PM
Too soon, unless he's willing to do so on very generous terms.

JaxRed
11-15-2012, 03:47 PM
I believe in 5 years the Votto contract may be considered the worst contract in baseball (vying with Pujols). So, no, I don't want to give him a contract like Votto.

jhu1321
11-15-2012, 04:03 PM
I believe in 5 years the Votto contract may be considered the worst contract in baseball (vying with Pujols). So, no, I don't want to give him a contract like Votto.

Blasphemy! :thumbdown:

Steve4192
11-15-2012, 04:18 PM
I love me some Jay Bruce .... but hell no I wouldn't extend him right now. In another two or three years, sure, I would be open to talking extension. But with five years left? Not interested. Too many things can happen between now and 2017 that would radically change his market value.

Signing players a decade out into the future almost always bites the team in the ass before the contract is up.

PuffyPig
11-15-2012, 05:52 PM
The big difference to extending Bruce now for 5 more years is it only takes him to about age 35. If you wait another year or two to do so, and he has that monster season, an extension might start costing $20M per season by then.

If he'll sign another 5 at say $15M as suggested, it might be hard to pass that up.

Degenerate39
11-15-2012, 06:10 PM
I'd love love love to see Jay and Joe spend their whole careers here in Cincy

Unassisted
11-15-2012, 06:11 PM
I believe in 5 years the Votto contract may be considered the worst contract in baseball (vying with Pujols). So, no, I don't want to give him a contract like Votto.Or this time next year. Remember that Votto hasn't homered since June. What if he doesn't hit one out before June 2013?

I'm concerned that Bruce's hot streaks at the plate will become fewer and farther between after age 30, the range he's asking the Reds to extend his deal into. Not sure that Reds fans will want the hitter that lurks below the mean, between the torrid stretches, if that guy becomes Jay's new normal in his thirties.

Benihana
11-15-2012, 06:36 PM
The big difference to extending Bruce now for 5 more years is it only takes him to about age 35. If you wait another year or two to do so, and he has that monster season, an extension might start costing $20M per season by then.

If he'll sign another 5 at say $15M as suggested, it might be hard to pass that up.

Not for me it wouldn't. Way too much risk for a potential "reward" of $5MM per year, discounted back (present value) 6-10 years.

traderumor
11-15-2012, 06:50 PM
I believe in 5 years the Votto contract may be considered the worst contract in baseball (vying with Pujols). So, no, I don't want to give him a contract like Votto.Unsubstantiated opinion alert.

Bill
11-15-2012, 06:52 PM
Exactly what Steve said.

Patrick Bateman
11-15-2012, 07:35 PM
Not for me it wouldn't. Way too much risk for a potential "reward" of $5MM per year, discounted back (present value) 6-10 years.

As said, it might be $20M during his age 36+ seasons by doing the extension closer to his free agency. Just something to consider.

PuffyPig
11-15-2012, 07:43 PM
Not for me it wouldn't. Way too much risk for a potential "reward" of $5MM per year, discounted back (present value) 6-10 years.

If we don't sign him for an extra 5 years today, he might cost $20M per season for another 10 years at age 30.

It's likley never bad getting premium players signed only to the age 35. Those last 5 years is what generally kills the value of FA.

Wonderful Monds
11-15-2012, 08:50 PM
I believe in 5 years the Votto contract may be considered the worst contract in baseball (vying with Pujols). So, no, I don't want to give him a contract like Votto.

There isn't even the remotest chance of that. Salaries are about to explode given the money about to pour into baseball. Joey's contract might be on the edge of the upper echelon in a few years.

Wonderful Monds
11-15-2012, 08:51 PM
Or this time next year. Remember that Votto hasn't homered since June. What if he doesn't hit one out before June 2013?

I'm concerned that Bruce's hot streaks at the plate will become fewer and farther between after age 30, the range he's asking the Reds to extend his deal into. Not sure that Reds fans will want the hitter that lurks below the mean, between the torrid stretches, if that guy becomes Jay's new normal in his thirties.

You don't think that might have something to do with not playing for 2 months and not being close to 100% when he returned, do you?

REDREAD
11-15-2012, 10:01 PM
Not unless it's very generous on the Reds' terms..
Realistically, he's going to expect a bump from the 13 million he's going to make in the last season of his current deal.
Not sure I want to risk that. We already have Bruce locked down for a long time. Why add risk at this point? Even though position players are less likely to get injured, all it takes is a hamstring injury like Jr had.

HeatherC1212
11-15-2012, 11:11 PM
I don't think I'd sign Jay to an extension this offseason unless it was a really good deal from the Reds perspective but I love hearing that he wants to be a Red for his whole career and that Joey is in his wedding. That's true friendship right there! Weddings can be a pain in the behind for the attendants. I've been in eight of them myself (all of them were totally insane) and I'm not even married so none of them were mine, LOL :laugh:

Superdude
11-16-2012, 03:52 AM
I'd love love love to see Jay and Joe spend their whole careers here in Cincy

Bruce 'wants to be a Red his entire career'

That headline makes me giddy. It definitely adds unnecessary risk to an already team friendly team friendly contract, but we're also talking about sustaining a pretty impressive amount of goodwill towards the organization. If Jay Bruce wants to hang up the wishbone C at the end of his career, I'd be more than happy to let him do it at a fair contract.

GAC
11-16-2012, 04:15 AM
I think I'd wait a couple of years. He just signed a very generous deal not two years ago that won't expire for a few more years. It sets a bit of a bad precedent.

Agree. You've got him signed through 2016 (2017 w/ club option).

Cooper
11-16-2012, 08:31 AM
Things have changed in the last 3 or 4 years. I think our perception that a player could continue to produce at a high level was clouded by the use of steroids. Players are starting to lose a lot of their value at age 32 again. 32 was always considered the age cliff - steroids changd that and guys produced into their upper 30's. This is not occurring near as often anymore. Anything past 32 and the risk sky rockets (maybe that's why the mlb didn't do much about the steroid problem -it brought continuity/stability to a payroll and allowed the front office one less thing to have to worry about).

Signing a player past the age of 32 now has a major risk assigned to it. I think i'd pass and gather more data.

mdccclxix
11-16-2012, 08:54 AM
While I agree players can't play for as long as before, I don't mind 32 years old. It's 37 when I expect players to completely empty out. I think 32-37 are years where there might well be decline, but it's acceptable and still substantial enough to justify.

Cooper
11-16-2012, 09:53 AM
You pick 10 average major leaguers at age 32....by age 34 half of them are out of the league. The other 5 lose 30-50% of their peak value. Keep in mind that pre- and post steroid era. They just don't hold up well and the ones that do lose an awful lot of value.

This next part is a guess - you pick 10 average major leaguers age 30 ...by age 37 i would venture to guess all of them except 1 would be gone and out of the major leagues.

With the advent of better testing re: steroids - guys are dropping of the radar much sooner than they were- steroids make you young. Without them old man time gets ya.

WildcatFan
11-16-2012, 10:07 AM
Bruce 'wants to be a Red his entire career'

That headline makes me giddy. It definitely adds unnecessary risk to an already team friendly team friendly contract, but we're also talking about sustaining a pretty impressive amount of goodwill towards the organization. If Jay Bruce wants to hang up the wishbone C at the end of his career, I'd be more than happy to let him do it at a fair contract.

Agree wholeheartedly.

I love that between Jay and Joey we have two of the classiest in the game wearing my team's jersey for years. It doesn't hurt that they can sting the ball as well as anyone.

mdccclxix
11-16-2012, 10:45 AM
You pick 10 average major leaguers at age 32....by age 34 half of them are out of the league. The other 5 lose 30-50% of their peak value. Keep in mind that pre- and post steroid era. They just don't hold up well and the ones that do lose an awful lot of value.

This next part is a guess - you pick 10 average major leaguers age 30 ...by age 37 i would venture to guess all of them except 1 would be gone and out of the major leagues.

With the advent of better testing re: steroids - guys are dropping of the radar much sooner than they were- steroids make you young. Without them old man time gets ya.

I won't contest the numbers, but we're talking about the Votto's of the world, so I think it applies differently than the average guy. I agree the average guy won't stick very often past 30.

Ghosts of 1990
11-16-2012, 10:47 PM
They're not going to do it, and the reason is Joey Votto's contract.

kaldaniels
11-17-2012, 01:13 AM
They're not going to do it, and the reason is Joey Votto's contract.

The EXACT same thing could have been said about BP's deal.

redsmetz
11-26-2012, 09:18 AM
Interesting news this morning that would seem appropos to Bruce's situation. The Rays have extended Evan Longoria's contract, $100M over five years with an option for the 2023. His current contract ran through 2016 with the final three years of that having been club options. I'm not suggesting the Reds rethink their present position, although my guess is they'll revisit it next year or the year after.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/11/rays-extend-evan-longoria.html

Ghosts of 1990
11-27-2012, 09:54 AM
Interesting news this morning that would seem appropos to Bruce's situation. The Rays have extended Evan Longoria's contract, $100M over five years with an option for the 2023. His current contract ran through 2016 with the final three years of that having been club options. I'm not suggesting the Reds rethink their present position, although my guess is they'll revisit it next year or the year after.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/11/rays-extend-evan-longoria.html

It still might get done this offseason. This situation kind of mirroring when he signed the extension in 2010. Sosnick began talking about it late November of 2010 back then, and then it got done close to Christmas time after Jocketty said in early December there'd been no talks.

kaldaniels
11-27-2012, 11:16 AM
It still might get done this offseason. This situation kind of mirroring when he signed the extension in 2010. Sosnick began talking about it late November of 2010 back then, and then it got done close to Christmas time after Jocketty said in early December there'd been no talks.

What has made you change your tune since post 43 of this thread?

Ghosts of 1990
11-29-2012, 10:35 AM
What has made you change your tune since post 43 of this thread?

I don't see it happening. But in 2010 when I talked to Jay's agent and he told me they were all for it, I thought it was one-sided and things remained quiet up until the point where it actually happened. I think Jocketty is pretty private in terms of doing stuff like this.

Still, don't see it happening. Bruce is under control and they still have time to do this extension in a year once there is a possible clearer picture of who in the starting rotation will get long-term deals. We can't keep everyone. I do hope Jay is who we keep because I know he'll take less than market value to stay here and I think he's safe to provide the value while pitchers are not as safe as corner outfielders over the long haul.

kaldaniels
11-29-2012, 11:58 AM
I would add that with Longoria signing for 17 million per, maybe that would put Bruce at 15 per. That 2.4 WAR from last season is concerning though. I'd want to know what Bruce wants before making a call here.