Reds sign Wilson

[Rojo]

Any wagers on the Washington team beating the Reds to the post-season?

[westofyou]

Any wagers on the Washington team beating the Reds to the post-season?

Different divisions skew that wager somewhat.

[deltachi8]

OK, I have been a supporter of Dan O's way of doing business. I know he gets piled on here alot, but I think the patient, developmental approach is what this organization lacked for far too long.

BUT...

This bothers me. The Reds overpaid IMHO. If you told me the Reds overpaid for Pavano or Clement or Perez...I would be fine with it, But Wilson?

Nice guy, decent pitcher, bad signing.

[Doc. Scott]

Any wagers on the Washington team beating the Reds to the post-season?

Now, that's harsh. Bowden's done more to hurt the Nationals long-term in his couple of weeks on the job than DanO has done to the Reds in his entire tenure.

Bowden has already: overpaid for a mediocre shortstop, overpaid for a mediocre-at-best and old third baseman, and traded one young player plus a very solid prospect for a guy who's only a small amount better (but way more expensive and a PR nightmare for a first-market-year team) than that one young player. He gave away one of his AAAA pitchers from his already poor depth for nothing and protected a slap-hitting, no-walking AA infielder instead. He even overpaid for his backup catcher.

If DanO came in and did those things to the Reds, I'd be storming GABP with lit torches. Signing Paul Wilson for market price for two guaranteed years is not that bad in context.

[johngalt]

I don't buy this. Good players sign with bad teams all the time.

I don't necessarily mean it just like that, though. There are a lot of guys who prefer teams on the West Coast or East Coast or other areas. Weather, area, etc. play factors for a lot of these guys.

On the baseball side, you may have some guys who don't want to be in a rotation with a bunch of youngsters. They might not want the pressure.

Take Cory Lidle last year for example. One of the major reasons he said he signed here was because of a solid bullpen in the past. After what happened last year, a lot of guys probably won't want to come here for the opposite reason.

Of course, GABP also has been playing recently as a pitcher's park, which should encourage guys to come here. But I think the stigma of it giving up a lot of homers is still out there for a lot of people too.

I'm just saying that it's not as easy as plunking down a bunch of money and bringing someone here. Circumstances matter too.

[Aronchis]

This comes as no surprise. If discussions were being held with the Clements etc, we would have known. I held no expectations of the Reds signing a competent pitcher. Lindner never has or will he give the money. He gave the money to get Griffey and as far as he's concerned, his money is spent (as long as JR is on the roster).

I believe the plan is to hope to be average while staying the in the black until Jr's contract exprires and during which they will build during the draft so as to be a contender by 2009 when they can sign that missing #1 pitcher with the freed money. Look at the bright side, at least signing Wilson as opposed to a Clement does not cost them a draft pick. It also moved M2 to use the rare emoticon.

Doesn't fit with DanO's time limit however. I think instead, the Reds hope for Griffey to retire, maybe a buyout so they can keep the younger players to longer deals(like Adam Dunn for example).

It is a organizational decision and if you want extra money, get a good GM who can improve the product like Beane did in Oakland without big payrolls intially, that is where Lindner's influence will be felt. Intill the limiteds either change views or are bought out, that is how they will attempt to rebuild the Reds.

Wilson is the father figure now, especially to the Claussen's Moseley's,Gardner's,Pauly's and what other 21-26 year olds come our way. As the rotation is built with young pitching, the Reds belief is a Paul Wilson can be mentor that can help quicken their development with the example of great character and work ethic. I wouldn't give the time or day to Hancock or Harang, fillers for sure. I wouldn't be surprised to see Moseley and possibly Gardner or Nelson get looks this year if they pitch well by mid-summer. With Pauly in 2006.

[M2]

Why (and I ask this seriously) would any of those guys want to hook up with the Reds at this point and time? They're rebuilding the left side of their infield, they don't have a large budget, they play in a division with 3 teams with bigger payrolls and 2 of them have really good starters.

Maybe someday, but the current state of the Reds (not to mention their history with Type A FA's) screams that this is all wishful thinking.

Grandma said, "If wishes were horses we'd all be riding now."

The Reds have a history with Type A free agents?

John Smiley, who was a great sign, and then I'm drawing a blank.

As for why sign with the Reds: A) They can pay what you think you're worth, B) Maybe you don't view them as a hopeless situation, C) They do a good job of selling you.

For instance, the Reds beat up pretty well on Matt Clement as a rule. He might look at the Reds as a place he can go and get gobs of run support. He might also like the idea of being the lead dog and, from what I've read, he's interested in being close to his western PA home. Now that's just one guy and the Reds could make every reasonable effort to land him and still miss, but I don't think players as a rule are binary about signing with winning clubs and avoiding losing clubs. The Mets and Orioles have had no problem finding people to take their money.

It was only a decade ago when Reds players actively recruited outside players to join the club because the believed Cincinnati was such a great place to play (iirc Smiley, Brantley and Larkin were the ring leaders of that operation). The pitch was something like "Do you want to spend more time on baseball and 75% less time on all the nonsense that swirls around the game? Do you want to live somewhere where you and your family can have a normal life?"

There's a lot about Cincinnati that should appeal to certain players. Others won't care for it, but I wouldn't throw a blanket assumption over the whole free agent market.

[Raisor]

Wilson is the father figure now, especially to the Claussen's Moseley's,Gardner's,Pauly's and what other 21-26 year olds come our way. As the rotation is built with young pitching, the Reds belief is a Paul Wilson can be mentor that can help quicken their development with the example of great character and work ethic..

Personally, I'd rather the Reds pay money for a good pitcher rather then a "mentor".

[PuffyPig]

Whether or not you like the signing or not, I suggest that the going rate for a pitcher like Wilson is about $3.5M per season

[westofyou]

The Reds have a history with Type A free agents?

John Smiley, who was a great sign, and then I'm drawing a blank.

Parker qualifies eh?

The Mets and Orioles have had no problem finding people to take their money.

You've never been to Cincinnati have you?

World of difference between the coasts and the Mid East, especially if a slow developing, small market team resides there and you're from another country or either of the coasts........... plus you have your choice of where to play.

[flyer85]

Dan O'Brien just signed a player who isn't as good as he thinks for a lot more money than he's worth.

We have a winner.

[flyer85]

This better not be the ONLY move

If you looking for a bigger signing for more money you better not hold your breath.

I can see the only other siginings being some relievers and a couple of position reserves.

[NC Reds]

I agree with the assessment that Wilson was paid his market value. In that sense, I won't bash the signing at all. I like Wilson too. He gained a lot in my eyes when he charged Farnsworth that time.

However, I hope we are all surprised by another FA signing or the miraculous dumping of an unwanted veteran's salary (Graves).

[traderumor]

The Reds have a history with Type A free agents?

John Smiley, who was a great sign, and then I'm drawing a blank.

As for why sign with the Reds: A) They can pay what you think you're worth, B) Maybe you don't view them as a hopeless situation, C) They do a good job of selling you.

For instance, the Reds beat up pretty well on Matt Clement as a rule. He might look at the Reds as a place he can go and get gobs of run support. He might also like the idea of being the lead dog and, from what I've read, he's interested in being close to his western PA home. Now that's just one guy and the Reds could make every reasonable effort to land him and still miss, but I don't think players as a rule are binary about signing with winning clubs and avoiding losing clubs. The Mets and Orioles have had no problem finding people to take their money.

It was only a decade ago when Reds players actively recruited outside players to join the club because the believed Cincinnati was such a great place to play (iirc Smiley, Brantley and Larkin were the ring leaders of that operation). The pitch was something like "Do you want to spend more time on baseball and 75% less time on all the nonsense that swirls around the game? Do you want to live somewhere where you and your family can have a normal life?"

There's a lot about Cincinnati that should appeal to certain players. Others won't care for it, but I wouldn't throw a blanket assumption over the whole free agent market.

After all, Mike Hampton liked the schools in Denver :mhcky21:

[Raisor]

I agree with the assessment that Wilson was paid his market value. In that sense, I won't bash the signing at all. I like Wilson too. He gained a lot in my eyes when he charged Farnsworth that time.

.

Would he be worth 5-million if he'd drilled Barry Bonds a couple of times?