Re: What Would it Take To Get You to Trade Votto?
Originally Posted by kaldaniels
In a vacuum you are right. But let me bring up three things.
1) With deals like the Swisher deal going down, at some point I'd wager the Votto contract will be more team friendly vis a vis market value. A forward thinking GM who needed a 1B would consider that.
2) I wouldn't give up much for a market value player. But there are probably some GMs who would, especially for debatably the best bat in the league.
3) Reverse your point you made. Since Votto is on the books for market value, should the Reds look to deal him for a player with a below market deal?
Paying a player market value salary wise while giving up additional resources to do so is a significant overpay. So it comes down to the ability to leverage the production the player brings....I.e does it significantly increase the chances of significant post season revenue etc. for instance, it probably didn't make much sense for the Reds of the lost decade to trade minor league Votto and Cueto for AROD.
Concerning point 3, there's an argument for trading Votto for Trout + the estimated $100M of payroll difference even though the Reds seem poised to contend over the next several seasons. But I don't think a scenario where the Reds trade down (get less production for substantial savings) makes much sense right now. You collect promise when you're lost in the desert not when you're at the edge of the river Jordan.
"This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner