Printable View
Kind of boring being a Reds fan when Jockety keeps his dealings under wraps, but have to admit it is great having someone in charge that really has a clue on how to build a franchise both short term and long term. I'm sure he has a good grasp on what the Reds need to improve and when it is all said and done he will make the right moves.
Wish we had more money to spend, he does a good job with what he has but he's handcuffed in some of the moves he can potentially do.
Yep. Walt does an amazing job at keeping things secret. It's a little boring for us, but I'm sure it gives the other teams in the division a headache. Hell, its not just with trades and free agency either. Even Votto's injury this season was well guarded. Aside from some dude in West Virginia, no one had a clue what was really going on. There's usually something on Twitter about trades, injuries, clubhouse disputes etc from multiple sources long before anything is ever released, but not in Cincinnati. And you know that after spending hours a day, every day on the road surrounded by competitive guys, there's arguments, fights, trash talking etc, but it hardly makes it to the media in Cincinnati. Look at how stuff like that spirals out of control at places like Boston. Also, John Fay being willing to look the other way instead of reporting that kind of stuff helps too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HometownHero
As stated in another post, the Reds are receiving about 25 million a year in revenue sharing. (And they couldn't print it if it wasn't true. :laugh:) They used 10 years worth to ink the Votto and Phillips deals, allegedly.
So, if in fact that is all true, are they getting another 25 million this year? And next year? And so on? It seems like this would be the ideal time to expand that payroll. The window is wide open. We will see.
My guess is that $25M is what will pay Votto's salary for the next 9 years.
This is what Fay had on his blog. He is quoting Bill Madden.Quote:
Originally Posted by dMaus14
The way I read that is past revenue-sharing money was used to pay for Votto. I could be wrong.Quote:
Quote:
Say this for Reds owner Bob Castellini: He took a big market risk on Votto, who would have surely commanded a Pujols-like deal when he hit free agency after 2013, but did so by using the $25 million per year revenue sharing money he’s been saving up over the last 10 years.
If we could spend that much more we would, we have terrible attendance for a winning team and some of the cheapest tickets in baseball and we spent 88M last year. We are at our spending limit to keep our guys and if people dob;t start coming to the park one or two of those guys are going to be moved.
With the renegotiated broadcast contract on the way in a few years, I do wonder if the Reds would ever be forced into making subtractions from their roster. I think you are dead on about additions, though, especially in the form of free agency. Free agency is about to get crazier and crazier.Quote:
Originally Posted by HometownHero
That's why I still contend that despite conventional wisdom and recent history on long contracts, the Reds did the right thing with Bruce, Votto and Phillips. It was a good gamble with their limited resources. Things certainly aren't going to get cheaper and I think market value on free agents is about to spike at unprecedented levels as more of these TV deals are inked around the league in the next few years.
Victorino just got 3yrs at 13 million per. That makes the Votto deal look like a bargain.