Trading Deadline and the 2010 Payroll
Was about to post this in the Rolen thread, but I figured the info applies to any trade discussion and the Reds ability/inability to add payroll.
Certainly can't speak to what the payroll budget is/was for this year. But when they were within scratching distance of first a few weeks ago, Walt did characterize the club as "buyers." Not saying that means anything, especially now. But that to me says payroll expansion for this season isn't out of the question.
But what about next year? What's on the books?
Thanks to only 1-2 "bad" contracts and a whole lot of young/cheap talent, I think the team does have some flexibility to add a contract at this deadline, at least as it applies to 2010 (i.e. Rolen).
To wit, the Reds' 2010 payroll obligations (using Cot's):
Phillips 6.75
Encarnacion 5.175
Tavares 4
Harang 12.5
Arroyo 12
Cordero 12
Lincoln 2.5
Rhodes 2
TOTAL 56.925
There would also be buy-outs on AGon and Ramon's options, totaling 1.5 mill.
Call it right now, about $59 mill payroll if you don't pick up those two options and the Weathers option.
With Votto, Hanigan, Bruce, Janish, Dickerson, Volquez, Cueto, Owings and Bailey all working for league min, as well as the rest of the bullpen arms (presumably), there aren't *that* many holes to fill still. Obviously have to solve the 2nd catcher situation (renegotiate with Ramon?) and you need a shortstop if you don't give the job to Janish. There's also left field... but maybe Dickerson steps into that (with a platoon mate) if you have to keep Willy in center as your starter. Lots of pieces in play on that front.
But the point is, the Reds again hit the trading deadline with some payroll flex for next season. So taking on someone like Rolen does seem do-able. In fact, he represents a $6.5 mill increase over Edwin, if you're able to swap them somehow.
And that doesn't even start to address what the club could do if it sold off the Arroyo $12 mill contract before next season and inserted Bailey into the roto.
Just something to think about and consider as the trading winds blow these next few weeks.
Re: Trading Deadline and the 2010 Payroll
Quote:
Originally Posted by
I(heart)Freel
Was about to post this in the Rolen thread, but I figured the info applies to any trade discussion and the Reds ability/inability to add payroll.
Certainly can't speak to what the payroll budget is/was for this year. But when they were within scratching distance of first a few weeks ago, Walt did characterize the club as "buyers." Not saying that means anything, especially now. But that to me says payroll expansion for this season isn't out of the question.
But what about next year? What's on the books?
Thanks to only 1-2 "bad" contracts and a whole lot of young/cheap talent, I think the team does have some flexibility to add a contract at this deadline, at least as it applies to 2010 (i.e. Rolen).
To wit, the Reds' 2010 payroll obligations (using Cot's):
Phillips 6.75
Encarnacion 5.175
Tavares 4
Harang 12.5
Arroyo 12
Cordero 12
Lincoln 2.5
Rhodes 2
TOTAL 56.925
There would also be buy-outs on AGon and Ramon's options, totaling 1.5 mill.
Call it right now, about $59 mill payroll if you don't pick up those two options and the Weathers option.
With Votto, Hanigan, Bruce, Janish, Dickerson, Volquez, Cueto, Owings and Bailey all working for league min, as well as the rest of the bullpen arms (presumably), there aren't *that* many holes to fill still. Obviously have to solve the 2nd catcher situation (renegotiate with Ramon?) and you need a shortstop if you don't give the job to Janish. There's also left field... but maybe Dickerson steps into that (with a platoon mate) if you have to keep Willy in center as your starter. Lots of pieces in play on that front.
But the point is, the Reds again hit the trading deadline with some payroll flex for next season. So taking on someone like Rolen does seem do-able. In fact, he represents a $6.5 mill increase over Edwin, if you're able to swap them somehow.
And that doesn't even start to address what the club could do if it sold off the Arroyo $12 mill contract before next season and inserted Bailey into the roto.
Just something to think about and consider as the trading winds blow these next few weeks.
This raises some interesting questions. Here are some of my reactions:
1. Obviously, it would be great to dump Arroyo and his contract. Unfortunately barring some miracle turnaround, it doesn't look like that's going to happen (at least not at the deadline.) Maybe he has a decent second half like he did last year, and if Bailey continues to impress, you can trade Arroyo this offseason. But without significant improvement this year, Arroyo will be with the Reds in 2010.
2. If Dickerson and Taveras are 2/3 of the starting OF, 2010 will be as much of a lost cause as 2009- actually more so assuming the other NL Central teams improve at all next season. Dickerson is a CF and Taveras is not a starter. If the Reds think otherwise in 2010, they will not be contending. Taveras should be moved at all costs (including the $4MM owed to him next season.) With Stubbs and Heisey ready, there is no use for him on the roster, let alone in the starting lineup.
The emergence of Masset, Roenicke, and Fisher (and the assumed return of Burton and Bray) make the two following moves worthy of consideration:
3. I actually think this trade deadline would be the perfect time to trade Francisco Cordero. There are a lot of teams looking for bullpen help, and he is having a career year. Closers deteriorate rapidly when they start to go (BJ Ryan is the latest example.) Cordero will be 35 next year, and has $24MM still owed to him. If you can get another team willing to assume his contract and give you a couple of decent prospects in the process, now would be the perfect time to move him.
4. If you can't move Cordero, they should try to trade Weathers, who has also performed quite well considering his age. Weathers proved this past offseason that he is too risky a bet with arbitration. Let some other team shoulder that risk (and deal with his buyout.) The Marlins and Rockies are both looking for reliable bullpen arms, and there are a few guys on both teams in which I'd have an interest in exchanging for Weathers.
5. Unless there is a HUGE return, do NOT trade Aaron Harang. I would want at least one Top 25 prospect (at either SS, C, or LF) and a major league ready arm for Harang. Michael Taylor, JA Happ, Alcides Escobar, Matt Kemp, and/or Jesus Montero are all names I'd want to be in the conversation. Otherwise, I'm not dealing him- period.
6. Make a final decision on whether or not Zach Cozart is the SS of the future. If he's not, acquire a young 0-2 this offseason. Give up a multitude of prospects if necessary, but that is one hole that must be sewn up before next season- especially if Cozart isn't the long-term answer.
Re: Trading Deadline and the 2010 Payroll
I'm not so sure the Reds should move Cordero. Sure, he's overpaid, but not by that much. Sure, he's a risk, but 90% of the closers are a risk.
With the no trade provisions in Codero's contract, we'd be lucky to just get a team to assume his salary. We'd probaby have to eat some $$..
Then our bullpen goes from a strength to a question mark again (likely).
Are closers overrated? Yeah, a little bit, but I really don't want to see Burton, Weathers, Fisher, etc as the closer. I went through too many years when they tried to get by with Coffey, etc. Not a slam on Coffey, he was thrown into the fire out of necessity.
In summary, if we dump Cordero, we just blow another hole into the team. Sure, we have more payflex to overpay another FA that is looking for max payday, but that's kind of just running in place.
Re: Trading Deadline and the 2010 Payroll
Quote:
Originally Posted by
REDREAD
I'm not so sure the Reds should move Cordero. Sure, he's overpaid, but not by that much. Sure, he's a risk, but 90% of the closers are a risk.
I understand your hesitation. Of course getting rid of Cordero is a risk. Getting rid of any player is a risk in some way. However, IMO, good roster management involves knowing when to unload and sell high. As a 35 year-old closer who just made the All-Star team with a lights-out first half, Cordero's value will likely never be higher in the future. Replacement closers are also (relatively) easy to find. Heck, check out with the M's did with David Aardsma this year--just one more in a long list of bargain basement RP that has been acquired over the years. If the Reds deal Cordero for a good return and then make a savvy, low-budget move to replace his production, my estimation of the current FO will improve by leaps and bounds.
Re: Trading Deadline and the 2010 Payroll
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedEye
I understand your hesitation. Of course getting rid of Cordero is a risk. Getting rid of any player is a risk in some way. However, IMO, good roster management involves knowing when to unload and sell high. As a 35 year-old closer who just made the All-Star team with a lights-out first half, Cordero's value will likely never be higher in the future. Replacement closers are also (relatively) easy to find. Heck, check out with the M's did with David Aardsma this year--just one more in a long list of bargain basement RP that has been acquired over the years. If the Reds deal Cordero for a good return and then make a savvy, low-budget move to replace his production, my estimation of the current FO will improve by leaps and bounds.
I am not convinced that closers are easy to find. Sure, every season, there's a couple teams that have Jeff Shaw type closers that come out of nowhere and are very good.. Meanwhile, there's 28 or so other teams that fail to find a guy like that.
If Cordero could get a good return, I agree with trading at peak value. But if we are just going to dump him for salary relief (especially if we have to kick in money), why bother? I guess we have different ideas of Cordero's trade value. My perception is that we'd have to kick in maybe 4 million/year just to move him. Maybe more to get around that absurd no trade clause that the Reds gave him.
Re: Trading Deadline and the 2010 Payroll
Well if nothing else there is one team interested in some bullpen help.
Duquette from MLBtraderumors
Quote:
“If we’re assuming that everybody’s healthy from here on out, I would say that our top priority would be a bullpen piece, especially somebody with veteran stature. I think that would be No. 1. If we can find a starter that’s obviously better than who we have starting now, that would be No. 2. The number of names that have been tossed around out there that we’ve made contact with clubs that would definitively make our starting rotation better…it’s a very, very short list. It might be a longer list in the bullpen. We’re concentrating on both, and hopefully will be able to do one if not both between now and July 31.”
Re: Trading Deadline and the 2010 Payroll
Quote:
Originally Posted by
I(heart)Freel
Was about to post this in the Rolen thread, but I figured the info applies to any trade discussion and the Reds ability/inability to add payroll.
Certainly can't speak to what the payroll budget is/was for this year. But when they were within scratching distance of first a few weeks ago, Walt did characterize the club as "buyers." Not saying that means anything, especially now. But that to me says payroll expansion for this season isn't out of the question.
But what about next year? What's on the books?
Thanks to only 1-2 "bad" contracts and a whole lot of young/cheap talent, I think the team does have some flexibility to add a contract at this deadline, at least as it applies to 2010 (i.e. Rolen). ...
I think there's more then only 1-2 bad contracts on the books for 2010.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
I(heart)Freel
To wit, the Reds' 2010 payroll obligations (using Cot's):
Phillips 6.75
Encarnacion 5.175
Tavares 4
Harang 12.5
Arroyo 12
Cordero 12
Lincoln 2.5
Rhodes 2
TOTAL 56.925
Some would probably include Lincoln as well. But I think it's way too soon to expect someone to take over all of Cordero's contract especially if you want any kind of decent return. If a team did take over the contract without any help that would mean the prospect(s) we'd get wouldn't be worth as much. And if we included money it would make it easier to deal him but we'd be left with the question of whether the return would be worth the cost (a question mark at closer + the money we'd throw into the deal to make it work). For now I'm fine with keeping him because it would allow us to see if one of the other younger relievers could take over in that role. The soonest I'd expect a taker for that contract would be a year from now when there's only 1 year left on the contract and that's if a contender really needs a closer but I still wouldn't expect too much.
Arroyo should be dealt before next year for any kind of decent prospect(s). Unless Bailey bombs the rest of the year. That's possible but, right now, it doesn't look like it will happen. We don't need him to be a top of the rotation pitcher in 2010. He'd just have to be a decent #4 or #5.
Also, and I could be wrong on this, but I think both Volquez and Owings may be up for arbitration after the season so, if true, they wouldn't be paid close to league minimum. Arbitration, or avoiding it, for those two alone could bump up the projected budget another $2-$4m.
Re: Trading Deadline and the 2010 Payroll
This team is going to need a bat and a big bat at that now more then ever. Sure we don't know how bad Bruce's wrist injury is but one has to believe it will be at least a month before we see him in a Reds uniform. This team has been hampered with injuries and a on a bit of a downhill slide. If they want to compete (which is what we continue to hear from Castellini) then an offensive bat is a huge need.
I would like to see what the bounty would be for Nelson Cruz and Elvis Andrus?
Re: Trading Deadline and the 2010 Payroll
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedLegSuperStar
I would like to see what the bounty would be for Nelson Cruz and Elvis Andrus?
Too much. Way too much. I'm not sure that's relevant to the 2010 payroll though.
