Reds nearing deal with Leake

[Benihana]

Agreed.
No way they let him walk, and no way he goes back in the draft or plays for the St. Paul Saints next year...

I think Leake will be up at some point in 2010, possibly earlier than September. A lot of folks think he could be a #3 in very short time. I think he could make the rotation pretty quick, esp. if Arroyo and Harang are dealt and we get no other FA's.

I saw him pitch in the CWS, he was dominant early, although he seemed to wear out after the 5th or 6th, probably a long season for him and some tendinitis rumblings, basically he just didn't have his top control. Dude throws 4 pitches with plus plus command. I really think he can step in very soon.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

I really hope not. If he is with the big club inside of a year, it will be a mistake by the Reds.

As far as WJ's comments, I'm sure it is just posturing. However, if it's not- things continue to get worse...

For those of you that think it could be a blessing to not sign Leake and have two picks inside the Top 10 next year, think again. The Reds will almost certainly pooch punt at least one (if not both) of those picks and go the very cheap, signability route. No way they pay for two legitimate Top 10 talents in the same draft (especially if one of them is Top 3- as it's looking like it could be the way they are playing.)

[chicoruiz]

If I were Leake, I'd negotiate a September call-up this year. I bet the Reds would go for it; he'll get an ML contract anyway, and it's not like the Reds have a zillion other options once the rosters expand.

[mac624]

The hold up really could be him wanting a Major League contract and the Reds not wanting to do that. I think Leake is in a pretty good position to demand that and IMO, Walt was a little cocky going public that they were close, thus Leake's agent playing the game a little harder.

Again, it will get done.

[Caveat Emperor]

If we don't sign Leake this year, then we'll just have two better players (it is considerd to be a stronger draft) to avoid signing next year, right?

Not quite.

You can't pick two studs, since your "comp" pick has to be someone virutally guaranteed to sign (since the "comp" pick goes away if it isn't used) with no other options.

The comp pick gets tons of leverage in those situations, so you almost have to reach and give someone first round money who wasn't expected (and won't in the future) get that opportunity.

[flyer85]

the holdup is likely twofold
1) there is no rush to get him back on the mound
2) his agent wants every last penny and the reds want to pay something less than that

it would be a shock if he doesn't sign but IMO it is very likely to go to the last day.

[BuckeyeRedleg]

It would really be stupid to not sign as he'll have less leverage next year as a senior.

[Edd Roush]

It would really be stupid to not sign as he'll have less leverage next year as a senior.

Am I off-base or isn't it true that once a player is drafted and signs with an agent, he can not go back to school the next year? I was under the impression that he would have to play independent ball if he were not to sign this season and then pray that he stays healthy. Sounds like a risky proposition to me.

[Benihana]

Am I off-base or isn't it true that once a player is drafted and signs with an agent, he can not go back to school the next year? I was under the impression that he would have to play independent ball if he were not to sign this season and then pray that he stays healthy. Sounds like a risky proposition to me.

Not in baseball- they call agents "advisers" until the player signs.

[RED VAN HOT]

It would really be stupid to not sign as he'll have less leverage next year as a senior.

I agree. And yet, neither Crow nor Scheppers has yet signed. To me, they have virtually no leverage. I can't imagine how those negotiations are going.

[dougdirt]

Not in baseball- they call agents "advisers" until the player signs.

Same thing in other sports. However its not until the player signs a pro contract, its until the player signs a contract with the agent. Once they sign the contract with the agent, they can't return to school. No clue if Leake has signed with an agent though, but I would imagine he has.

[Edd Roush]

Same thing in other sports. However its not until the player signs a pro contract, its until the player signs a contract with the agent. Once they sign the contract with the agent, they can't return to school. No clue if Leake has signed with an agent though, but I would imagine he has.

Thanks doug, that's what I thought.

[HokieRed]

As bad as the Reds are, and having just traded Stewart, it will seem like a disaster if the Reds don't sign Leake (and even Boxberger). I'd call that leverage, it's on Leake's side, and his agent would be stupid not to get as much out of it as he can. I predict he'll sign, near the last day, and pretty much for his figure.

[Captain Hook]

It certainly would be par for the course to not get our top picks signed considering how 2009 has gone but I believe that the Reds will get deals done for both Leake and Boxberger.It would be a major failure not to and our front office knows this.They'll get it done.

[Kc61]

As bad as the Reds are, and having just traded Stewart, it will seem like a disaster if the Reds don't sign Leake (and even Boxberger). I'd call that leverage, it's on Leake's side, and his agent would be stupid not to get as much out of it as he can. I predict he'll sign, near the last day, and pretty much for his figure.

Good point, although don't sell the Reds short. They are certainly capable of not signing Leake and then blaming the system, the player, the agent, etc.

It would be an embarrassment but at this point it's hard to know what to expect from these guys.

I still go back to Dunn and Griffey. The Reds had two "name" players, let them go, and didn't replace them. (I don't view the acquisition of Rolen as replacing Griffey and Dunn, although others might argue differently.) I can't imagine most winning teams losing those guys and not getting a major outfielder the next off-season.

The team is obviously very concerned with finances and is trying to put a representative team on the field without messing up the balance sheet too much. Consistent with this, I wouldn't be shocked if they let either Leake or Boxberger slide.

[HokieRed]

Kc, I'd certainly distinguish Griffey from Dunn; IMO, it was long past time to move Jr., as great as he was, and his performance since has borne that out. Dunn was a great loss; I just assume he was committed to trying the free agent market and there wasn't a whole lot to be done. I took WJ's comments about how "we were looking for a right handed bat" to mean "we know there's no chance to sign Adam and so this is the spin to put on it." I really wouldn't infer anything from those moves to this situation.