Originally Posted by kaldaniels
See I specifically try to avoid thinking like that. I'm all about what can you do for me going forward, and at what price. Of course you want to treat guys right so future players will want to sign.
But just because the team has been patient thru Bailey's struggles doesn't mean I think they should make it a point to keep him.
With Bailey, though, his struggles might make him more cost-effective going forward. At least, it seems like his early difficulties would help keep his salary down during his remaining arbitration years, such that it would be to the Reds' benefit to "reward" Baily by keeping him around.
Admittedly, however, I'm not too familiar with how much weight the arbitration process gives to earlier seasons, and so perhaps it's not particularly relevant.