Turn Off Ads?
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 63

Thread: Stuck in reverse

  1. #46
    He has the Evil Eye! flyer85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south of the border
    Posts
    23,858

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by Aronchis
    You should. Giving Griffey a 9 year contract was really stupid,
    Historically the best years for a player are 25-29 followed closely by 30-34 and a big dropoff after 35. There are exceptions to every rule(Molitor, Bonds, etc) but giving a 9 year deal was an enormous risk for a small market franchise. However, JB was more worried about the 15 minutes of fame he was going to get for being able to trade for and sign Jr.

    Trading for Jr was a good idea, nobody could forsee all the injury problems. Giving a 9 year deal was way too much risk.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #47
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    985

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by guernsey
    That assumes, of course, that Dunn would have been willing to sign a LTC coming off of a down year.
    I'm glad you brought that up, because that's the point that people seem to miss time and time again. Everyone's always saying the Reds need to sign Player X to a long-term deal or pick up Player Y as a free agent or extend this guy's contract. As the saying goes, it takes two to tango.

  4. #48
    Big Red Machine RedsBaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Out Wayne
    Posts
    22,821

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by flyer85
    Historically the best years for a player are 25-29 followed closely by 30-34 and a big dropoff after 35. There are exceptions to every rule(Molitor, Bonds, etc) but giving a 9 year deal was an enormous risk for a small market franchise. However, JB was more worried about the 15 minutes of fame he was going to get for being able to trade for and sign Jr.

    Trading for Jr was a good idea, nobody could forsee all the injury problems. Giving a 9 year deal was way too much risk.
    It should be remembered that Junior was signed at what was then a substantial discount from the going market rate. Junior signed a nine year deal for about $12 million a season or a total of $108 million; one year later A-Rod signed a ten year deal for $252 million, $25.2 million a year, and a number of other players have signed deals paying them $15-20 million a year.
    If the Reds had signed Junior to a six year deal for near market rates in early 2000, they could have been paying him $16 million a year, or $96 million over the life of a six year contract. This would have been buying Jnuior at market rates while he was ages 30 through 35. In short, I think the Reds got Junior at a substantial discount for the first half or two-thirds of his deal, while overpaying for his projected performance over the final three years of the contract.
    The projections just didn't work out. No sluggers other than Jimmie Foxx and Mickey Mantle have ever had their careers collapse so totally in their early 30s as has Junior.
    If anyone had the foresight at the time to question Junior's signing in early 2000, take a bow. I sure didn't read or hear of anyone having that foresight. We certainly didn't have trolls from Seattle posting here, crying about "Whiffey" not being "your savior", because Mariner fans thought the Reds had made a bad move. At the time, the overwhelming opinion was that the Mariners had suffered a big loss and had been forced to accept much less than Griffey was worth.
    "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."

  5. #49
    Churlish Johnny Footstool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Olathe, KS
    Posts
    13,790

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    It should be remembered that Junior was signed at what was then a substantial discount from the going market rate.
    It should also be remembered that, at the time, Mr. Lindner was the brand-new owner of the team. He opened his wallet for Griffey, which sent a signal to fans and front office alike that he was willing to spend money to acquire talent. The Larkin signing reinforced that theory. I think many of us believed that Lindner going to keep funding a mid-range payroll team.

    But then the purse strings tightened. Bowden was handcuffed and unable to take on salary, which meant that his greatest strength (the ability to acquire established talent via trade) was taken away from him, and his greatest weakness (the ability to draft and develop pitching) was exposed.
    "I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful

  6. #50
    Big Red Machine RedsBaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Out Wayne
    Posts
    22,821

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool
    It should also be remembered that, at the time, Mr. Lindner was the brand-new owner of the team. He opened his wallet for Griffey, which sent a signal to fans and front office alike that he was willing to spend money to acquire talent. The Larkin signing reinforced that theory. I think many of us believed that Lindner going to keep funding a mid-range payroll team.

    But then the purse strings tightened. Bowden was handcuffed and unable to take on salary, which meant that his greatest strength (the ability to acquire established talent via trade) was taken away from him, and his greatest weakness (the ability to draft and develop pitching) was exposed.
    Good point.
    "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."

  7. #51
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,410

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by TeamBoone
    Heck, when the Reds were doing well this past season, the fans were coming out in droves.

    Regarding ticket sales in 1999... my take (right or wrong) is that fans were still extremely disgruntled about the strike. Had that 1999 team been playing just as sucessfully in 2004, I think you'd have seen a huge spike in attendance much earlier in the season.
    Sure they were. Jr. going for #500 had a little to do with it as well.

    But my point is that acquiring Vaughn may have spiked the ticket sales at that time but it wasn't even close to what it was when Jr. was acquired. I think fans would be happy with a Matt Clement signing but I don't think acquiring him would spike ticket sales above and beyond the Vaughn acquisition. One of the reasons being that I don't believe most Reds fans have historically put much stock in pitching over hitting. IMO a mediocre to good Reds team with great hitting and so-so pitching would outdraw a mediocre to good Reds team with great pitching and lousy hitting. That's not to say they don't put a premium on good pitching. They would just rather see good hitting.
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rally-...24872650873160

  8. #52
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,022

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip R
    I'd say no because offense sells here, not pitching. Attendance in 1999 wasn' that great until September. The Vaughn trade may have temporarily spiked ticket sales but it was more likely people who would have bought tickets eventually.
    A couple of points though:

    A lot of people assumed Vaughn and Neagle were trade deadline bait. That was a prevalent theme in many of the writers' columns. It didn't help that the Reds told the fans to wait until 2003 to win. The fans were basically sold that it was going to be a rebuilding season, they did not expect a contending season.

    The winning 1999 season also helped the 2000 season attendence spike. It's impossible to separate how much of that rise was Jr vs. the 1999 season, but historically, a winning season is rewarded at the gate the following season. (Which is why it was dumb for Huzinga to completely gut his WS Marlin team immediately).

    In general, I agree with TeamBoone. Attendence was outstanding this year when the team was winning. If the team added Clement, another solid starter, and 2 solid bullpen arms, they'd be rewarded.

    But I tend to think Allen feels as you do (not an insult to you).. He saw good attendence in a 4th place season, so he feels all he has to do is BS the fans this winter about "trying to compete" and they'll buy tickets anyhow. Look for the offseason to consist of resigning Wilson and a minor acquision (Vanderwall-type bench guy or an average reliever).

    This city is hungry for a winner, too bad ownership won't step up.
    I do think they'd get excited about Clement. We haven't had a signing of that magnitude since Smiley was signed as a free agent. It's hard to say they wouldn't get excited, because nothing like it has happened in such a long time. I tend to think the fans are smart enough to know that a healthy Clement probably means an extra 8-10 wins in the standings over the bum he'd replace (assuming the pen was reworked not to blow all his leads).
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  9. #53
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,662

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD
    But I tend to think Allen feels as you do (not an insult to you).. He saw good attendence in a 4th place season, so he feels all he has to do is BS the fans this winter about "trying to compete" and they'll buy tickets anyhow.
    Do you really believe that or do your fingers just automatically type this out from rote?

  10. #54
    He has the Evil Eye! flyer85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south of the border
    Posts
    23,858

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsBaron
    It should be remembered that Junior was signed at what was then a substantial discount from the going market rate. Junior signed a nine year deal for about $12 million a season or a total of $108 million; one year later A-Rod signed a ten year deal for $252 million, $25.2 million a year, and a number of other players have signed deals paying them $15-20 million a year.
    If the Reds had signed Junior to a six year deal for near market rates in early 2000, they could have been paying him $16 million a year, or $96 million over the life of a six year contract.
    And right now the Reds would be better off for it they had paid $16M a year for 6 years. It's not like having $3.5M less would have made any difference

  11. #55
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,022

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor
    Do you really believe that or do your fingers just automatically type this out from rote?
    Actions speak louder than words, right?

    When has Allen done a thing to actively help us compete? He tried to torpedo the Guzman trade in 1999, among other things.

    When the 2005 season starts and no significant talent has been added, will you be convinced then?
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  12. #56
    He has the Evil Eye! flyer85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south of the border
    Posts
    23,858

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by SteelSD
    And frankly, considering that he inherited 9M in unspent PayFlex from the cessation of the 2001 Larkin deal, that's saying a lot.
    That would be true if the Reds hadn't cut payroll by about $15M in 2004.

  13. #57
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,333

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Quote Originally Posted by flyer85
    That would be true if the Reds hadn't cut payroll by about $15M in 2004.
    Oh, that wasn't a payroll cut. That was a calculated resource escrow plan designed to make the Reds stronger by allowing them to leverage payroll flexibility into player talent, translating into a more competitive ball club.

    PayFlex.

    Neato.

    Still waiting.

    Spend some.

    Can't.

    Would lose PayFlex.

    Sorry.
    "The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer

    "The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
    --Ted Williams

  14. #58
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    Why does everyone keep saying the Reds cut Payroll by $15MM? Their payroll for 2004 was about $46MM. I think it was less than $55M in 2003. I don't think that adds up to $15MM.
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  15. #59
    He has the Evil Eye! flyer85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south of the border
    Posts
    23,858

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    The offical stat I saw for the Reds 2004 payroll in the Cincy paper last week was $42.8M.

    A cut from 2003 that ate all of the Larkin savings and then some.

  16. #60
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,160

    Re: Stuck in reverse

    To be fair, the 2003 payroll, after in-season salary dumps and deferred cash gets factored in, wound up around $50M. So you're talking about a $7M cut.

    Now if they put that money back into the 2005 budget, combined with the $8.75M from Wilson/Haynes/Lidle, you'd be looking at a team with the opportunity to make a real splash.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.


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 | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25