Turn Off Ads?
Page 3 of 67 FirstFirst 12345671353 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 996

Thread: The Cozart decision

  1. #31
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    21,143

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    I agree with this, which is why the Reds may not offer it. But I think it's a mistake. I just don't see Cozart accepting it.
    You also don't see anyone being surprised if Cozart gets a $100+ contract.
    "This isn’t 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

  2. Likes:

    Edd Roush (10-13-2017),Raisor (10-13-2017)

  3. Turn Off Ads?
  4. #32
    RaisorZone Raisor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    On Assignment
    Posts
    24,436

    Re: The Cozart decision

    If Cozart turns down the QO, it hurts his value as teams won't want to lose a draft pick, making it less likely he will get the 50M+ contract the Reds need to get a first round pick which makes it more risky to offer the QO.

    There is no way they offer the QO to him as there is little upside for the Reds.

  5. #33
    Member Kinsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,688

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Greg Holland has already turned down his $15M option, and made clear he will turn down a QO if offered by the Rockies.

    Holland plays a much less valuable position than Cozart, isn't nearly as good, never was as a good as Cozart is now. Is the same age, and has injury issues, having had a TJ surgery in 2015, plus lost time this season due to a cut on his pitching hand.

    If Greg Holland is turning down his $15M option and a $17M QO, then I think it's safe to say Cozart will turn down a QO, if offered.
    A healthy 32 year old shutdown closer's free agency contract capabilities are likely much stronger than a 32 year old, oft-injured, career year middle infielder's is.

    If Cozart's camp feels they can only find a 2 year deal in the 8-12M$ range this winter then he most definitely should take the QO. He's not gambling away much factoring in how much he could increase next offseason's contract if he were to repeat this production and stay healthy in 2018.

    If they think he can get a 3 or more year, 12M+ aav deal - then he should decline it, even with a strong year next year he probably wouldn't make a whole hell of a lot more more than that since he'll be one year older.

  6. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,649

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Z-Fly View Post
    JoJo is spot on.

    If they do sign Cozart, don't they basically have to trade Suarez, at that point.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kinsm View Post
    And why would they have to do that? Are you under the impression that Senzel can't play elsewhere (or he himself can't be traded, or continue to play in the minors)? Or that Suarez can't move positions either?

    Yeah, I'm with Kinsm here.
    1) -Senzel won't open the season on Major league roster no matter what, they'll want to give themselves the 10 day "Bryant Window" if nothing else. They are not necessarily committed to bringing him up any time in 2018.
    2) -Money aside, If the Reds compete for a playoff spot in 2018, I'm not sure a Senzel, Suarez, Peraza/Genett, Votto infield is truly more valuable than a Suarez, Cozart, Peraza/Genett, Votto one.
    2a) - Money aside, if the Reds don't compete for a playoff spot in 2018, then there's little harm in showcasing TWO tradeable assets to parlay into something more.

    Essentially, all a QO does is keep options open. If he accepts, that's not the worst thing in the world. If he doesn't then we're that much better off.
    Quote Originally Posted by BuckeyeRed27 View Post
    Honest I can't say it any better than Hoosier Red did in his post, he sums it up basically perfectly.

  7. Likes:

    mbgrayson (10-13-2017)

  8. #35
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    22,127

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Raisor View Post
    If Cozart turns down the QO, it hurts his value as teams won't want to lose a draft pick, making it less likely he will get the 50M+ contract the Reds need to get a first round pick which makes it more risky to offer the QO.

    There is no way they offer the QO to him as there is little upside for the Reds.
    Teams lose a 2nd or 3rd round pick from now on. It's not going to lower his value that much. He may not get $50M (I'm pretty sure he will), but he definitely will get enough more than $17M to guarantee that he turns down the QO.

    GREG HOLLAND IS TURNING DOWN TNE QO.
    “We’re going to get the pitching.” -Bob Castellini

  9. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    25,227

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    But the price for relievers is much lowee than the price for SS. The best reliever these days gets about half as much as the best SS. League average releivers get paid much less than league average SS.

    I'm sorry, but if Greg Holland is turning down a QO, then so is Cozart, no way to spin this, imo.
    The demand for starting shortstops this year is relatively low. And Cozart has an injury history. These factors could suppress offers for him. That could lead him to accept the QO.

    Holland, on the other hand, sees robust demand for his position. I’m assuming he’s a high quality reliever and isn’t an injury risk at this point.

    That could lead to different decisions.

    Assuming Holland in fact would reject a QO. We don’t know that. We also don’t know what specific informal indications of interest he may already have.
    Last edited by Kc61; 10-13-2017 at 09:54 AM.

  10. #37
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    22,127

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Kinsm View Post
    A healthy 32 year old shutdown closer's free agency contract capabilities are likely much stronger than a 32 year old, oft-injured, career year middle infielder's is.

    If Cozart's camp feels they can only find a 2 year deal in the 8-12M$ range this winter then he most definitely should take the QO. He's not gambling away much factoring in how much he could increase next offseason's contract if he were to repeat this production and stay healthy in 2018.

    If they think he can get a 3 or more year, 12M+ aav deal - then he should decline it, even with a strong year next year he probably wouldn't make a whole hell of a lot more more than that since he'll be one year older.
    Greg Holland is neither a shut down closer, nor healthy.
    “We’re going to get the pitching.” -Bob Castellini

  11. #38
    Member medford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    2,199

    Re: The Cozart decision

    perhaps its been asked in this thread, but is it possible for the Reds to come to an agreement with another team that would like cozart, but perhaps only for 1 season and doesn't want to part with a high draft pick, but is willing to part with a specific prospect that the reds like, and could trade with the Reds either before or after a QO is made? in other words, could a team exchange a prospect for 1 season of Cozart at the $18 mil number that i've seen thrown around?
    Posting in the clutch since twenty ought two.

  12. #39
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    21,143

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Teams lose a 2nd or 3rd round pick from now on. It's not going to lower his value that much. He may not get $50M (I'm pretty sure he will), but he definitely will get enough more than $17M to guarantee that he turns down the QO.

    GREG HOLLAND IS TURNING DOWN TNE QO.
    Point of clarification...what is a TNE QO?

    Also, point of clarification. Colorado has neither offered a TNE QO nor indicated that they wouldn't buy out his $15M option.
    "This isn’t 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

  13. #40
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    22,127

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    The demand for starting shortstops is relatively low. And Cozart has an injury history. These factors could suppress offers for him. That could lead him to accept the QO.

    Holland, on the other hand, sees robust demand for his position. I’m assuming he’s a high quality reliever and isn’t an injury risk.

    That could lead to different decisions.
    Holland had TJ surgery in 2015. He's a big injury risk. And he was rather average this year.

    Plus, I would say without looking, around the same number of teams need a closer as need a starting SS. And I'm pretty sure Cozart is an improvement over more team' and current SS, than Holland is an improvement over team's current closer.
    “We’re going to get the pitching.” -Bob Castellini

  14. #41
    Member Kinsm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,688

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Greg Holland is neither a shut down closer, nor healthy.
    I disagree with your opinion, I also disagree with your financial assessment of Cozart being worth 100M$ over 4+ years.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    Point of clarification...what is a TNE QO?

    Also, point of clarification. Colorado has neither offered a TNE QO nor indicated that they wouldn't buy out his $15M option.
    The Rockies 100% will offer Holland a QO five days after the world series ends, if he does in fact opt out of his contract. There is zero risk of him accepting it if he won't stay for 2M$ less.

  15. #42
    Member Z-Fly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    1,322

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Kinsm View Post
    Reds ownership was likely unable to pay down debt when they were running large salaries. Now, that they have reduced payroll - they can use "extra" income to pay down debt and perhaps even pay their minority share holders a dividend (something none of them has reportedly seen yet). New Marlins (and before them Astros) owners are going to do just that, gut their team and use their revenues to pay off the debt they took on to pay for those clubs.

    If they want to keep 2018 payroll the same as this year's then they only have about 5M$ to spend this winter after taking into account all raises (assuming they aren't able to offload anymore of it via trades). If they want an even smaller payroll, they may have no money to spend.

    Being able to move Cozart next year for anything of value definitely doesn't become any easier if he's owed 8M$ at the all-star break, that's for certain. This decision, whichever way they decide to go, should have already been made by now.
    That sounds reasonable. I think my point stands, whether they are pocketing money or paying players, the money should be there.
    WHEN DOES IT STOP!?!?

  16. #43
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    22,127

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Kinsm View Post
    I disagree with your opinion, I also disagree with your financial assessment of Cozart being worth 100M$ over 4+ years.
    It's a fact Holland is not healthy.

    And I never said Cozart was worth $100M over 4+ years. I said I wouldn't be surprised if he was offered such a contract, but that doesn't mean I think he's worth it.
    “We’re going to get the pitching.” -Bob Castellini

  17. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,696

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    If Cozart isn't nearly the injury risk that Holland is, then he is worth more to the team that signs him, and is more likely to get a big multi year contract, and thus more likely to turn down a QO. You can't have it both ways.
    It's not a black and white situation. Higher expected payday doesn't necessarily imply higher chance of turning down QO, because of the reasons I just explained and more. There are a lot of factors that will come into play, one being the fact both of these people are humans and have different motives, etc.

    Plus, I am talking catastrophic injuries, not nagging quads that land you on the DL 3 times a season. Any pitcher is at much more of a risk of a career ending injury than a position player. Holland would know this and it could lead him to taking the more risk averse path, get the largest sum of guaranteed money you can right now. Where Cozart doesn't carry the same career ending injury/ineffectiveness risk and can look to try and maximize his average annual salary from here on out. The QO at 17M is a nice AAV for one season.

    Say Holland is getting offers for 3/$30M and Cozart is getting offers for 3/$40M. Cozart is getting the better contract as you mentioned. To break even, Cozart can take the QO and have to get a 2/$23M contract or better next season. Holland can take the $17M and have to get an additonal contract of 2/$13M to break even. The odds of Cozart getting his 2/23 or higher deal after the QO is likely quite larger than Holland getting his 2/$15M. Cozart also carries the additional upside of getting paid $17M this year continuing his performance from last year and getting a huge payday. Holland will likely never do better than the $10M AAV.
    Last edited by Griffey012; 10-13-2017 at 10:08 AM.
    "Today was the byproduct of us thinking we can come back from anything." - Joey Votto after blowing a 10-1 lead and holding on for the 12-11 win on 8/25/2010.

  18. #45
    Member Z-Fly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    1,322

    Re: The Cozart decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Hoosier Red View Post
    Yeah, I'm with Kinsm here.
    1) -Senzel won't open the season on Major league roster no matter what, they'll want to give themselves the 10 day "Bryant Window" if nothing else. They are not necessarily committed to bringing him up any time in 2018.
    2) -Money aside, If the Reds compete for a playoff spot in 2018, I'm not sure a Senzel, Suarez, Peraza/Genett, Votto infield is truly more valuable than a Suarez, Cozart, Peraza/Genett, Votto one.
    2a) - Money aside, if the Reds don't compete for a playoff spot in 2018, then there's little harm in showcasing TWO tradeable assets to parlay into something more.

    Essentially, all a QO does is keep options open. If he accepts, that's not the worst thing in the world. If he doesn't then we're that much better off.
    1) I'm not sure why 10 days is a reason to sign or not sign Cozart

    2a) I'm not sure either. It would 100% depend on how well the Reds believe Suarez can play SS.

    2b) I thought the showcase showdown was over, and they are trying to align the pieces to start to win?
    WHEN DOES IT STOP!?!?


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | cumberlandreds | Gallen5862 | JaxRed | Plus Plus | Powel Crosley | RedlegJake | RedsfaninMT | The Operator