Aging ballplayers... should we resign a 30 year old Votto?

[cincrazy]

http://joeposnanski.si.com/2012/02/1...2_a1&eref=sihp

I think this is a wonderful article by Joe Posnanski breaking down how ballplayers age, and I feel any Reds fan should read this with the Joey Votto situation looming. Votto will be entering his age 30 season in the first year of his NEW long term contract. Studying some of the numbers and looking at baseball history, should the Reds REALLY lock up Votto long term, even if they get a "discount"? I'd be interested to hear some of your responses. Do we follow our hearts or our brains when it comes to this contract discussion? Obviously, this could also apply to Phillips.

[dougdirt]

I am against signing anyone at 30 or older to more than a 4 year deal. It simply doesn't pay off well. Toss in a small market team with limited funds.... and its a no brainer.

[mattfeet]

I am against signing anyone at 30 or older to more than a 4 year deal. It simply doesn't pay off well. Toss in a small market team with limited funds.... and its a no brainer.

That said, I think Votto is the player that won't want a much longer contract. that, or he'll demand a long deal since it might be his last. Two ways to view it.

Matt

[dougdirt]

That said, I think Votto is the player that won't want a much longer contract. that, or he'll demand a long deal since it might be his last. Two ways to view it.

Matt

Votto is going to get one big contract. You can be he will be asking for 9 years and will probably get at least 7 from someone.

[CySeymour]

Votto is going to get one big contract. You can be he will be asking for 9 years and will probably get at least 7 from someone.

There's no other way to think about it. Someone is going to pony up tons of cash for a lot of years. As much as I love Votto, do so just wouldn't be in the Reds best interest.

[Vottomatic]

Joey is my favorite player. But more and more I'm ready to let him walk. I don't like watching a superstar decline at age 37 and 38, and they're still getting paid ridiculous amounts of money. It just makes me bitter.

Part ways when it's time and go young again.

[vic715]

4-5 years at the most.I'll almost bet in 5 years the Angels are going to regret signing Puljos to 10 years.

[Phhhl]

He's my favorite player in a lot of years too. Dead serious, smart, professional. Works hard, stays out of trouble and, most importantly, produces. He is everything I would want a Cincinnati Red to be. But, I'm not going to let all the garbage we are about to hear bother me this year, or next. Votto is going to be in someone's column or television commentary every day for the next two years, and it's all going to be about what's going to happen two years from now. Well, we already know for certain that he is going to be in another uniform.

It is the same thing that happened with Fielder. It went on for two years, and it was the most boring topic in baseball. Then, one day, the Tigers stepped up like drunken sailors and blew all their money on a guy who is as likely to eat himself into a diabetic coma as win a world championship there in the next 10 years. Fielder right now is not as good a player as Votto, and Sir Cumpherence is not worth even close to what the Detroit Tigers are paying him. What do you think Joey is going to get? Frankly, I am just glad the club recognizes what the window of this franchise is and is trying to capitolize on it to some extent.

But, even if the Cubs or Cardinals invest the type of money he is bound to get, I can't imagine that type of contract ever working out for the vast majority of all teams in baseball, and would never want to see the Reds cripple themselves that way in a fit of meloncholy.

[757690]

Three points on this matter:

1) This is the strongest argument against the DH rule in my opinion. The DH allows the American League to nab all the superstars at this point in their career, because they can afford to put them at DH at the end of these long contracts, allowing them to offer more years than any National League team. Until the DH is eliminated, the NL will always be inferior for this very reason.

2) Votto currently has all the earmarks of being one of the anomalies. First, he already is at 1B, the least valuable defensive position, and still has top value. He's not going to lose much defensively, as most of his value come from offense. He is in great shape, and has a good body type for aging well, not too big or small. Most importantly, he is an extreme professional, who is driven to be the best. Of course, injuries are unpredictable, but if Votto can steer clear of any major injuries, he should be able to stay better for longer than most MLB players.

3) He doesn't need to be a 7 or 6 win player for the entire contract in order for it to be worth it overall. Let's assume a natural regression of production from Votto from age 30-36, the length of a 7 year contract after 2013.

Age - WAR
30 - 7
31 - 6.5
32 - 5.5
33 - 4.5
34 - 3.5
35 - 3
36 - 3

That adds up to 33 WAR over the length of the contract. At around $5M per win, that's $165M of value, or $23.5M a season on average. More importantly, that gets the Reds an MVP caliber bat in the middle of the lineup for around 3-4 more seasons. Add in the extra money from being competitive all those seasons, and I think it makes sense.

[Phhhl]

Three points on this matter:

1) This is the strongest argument against the DH rule in my opinion. The DH allows the American League to nab all the superstars at this point in their career, because they can afford to put them at DH at the end of these long contracts, allowing them to offer more years than any National League team. Until the DH is eliminated, the NL will always be inferior for this very reason.

2) Votto currently has all the earmarks of being one of the anomalies. First, he already is at 1B, the least valuable defensive position, and still has top value. He's not going to lose much defensively, as most of his value come from offense. He is in great shape, and has a good body type for aging well, not too big or small. Most importantly, he is an extreme professional, who is driven to be the best. Of course, injuries are unpredictable, but if Votto can steer clear of any major injuries, he should be able to stay better for longer than most MLB players.

3) He doesn't need to be a 7 or 6 win player for the entire contract in order for it to be worth it overall. Let's assume a natural regression of production from Votto from age 30-36, the length of a 7 year contract after 2013.

Age - WAR
30 - 7
31 - 6.5
32 - 5.5
33 - 4.5
34 - 3.5
35 - 3
36 - 3

That adds up to 33 WAR over the length of the contract. At around $5M per win, that's $165M of value, or $23.5M a season on average. More importantly, that gets the Reds an MVP caliber bat in the middle of the lineup for around 3-4 more seasons. Add in the extra money from being competitive all those seasons, and I think it makes sense.

Of all these good points, I love the one about the DH. It does address why Pujols and Fielder migrated to the AL the first chance they got. In Pujols' case in particular, coming off a World Championship and being mentioned in the same breath as Stan Musial, it had to be a difficult choice. This salient point speaks to just another thing that is wrong with baseball. And, as much as we love it, it would be remiss to overlook anything that renders it less than perfect. I totally agree!

I think the problem with signing Votto long term simply has less to do with what he is able to do individually than what the effect of a gargantuan contract like that has on the rest of the roster over the course of it. If you project his numbers based on what he does over a 150-160 game sample size over the next seven years, your logic is inherintly flawed from the start. Unless he is Lou Gehrig, he is going to require more time off as he ages. If he happens to be Lou Gehrig, he is still going to have his career cut short by some kind of unforseen anamoly by the end of these terms. In short, the chances of the stars aligning to allow Votto to continue on the arc his playing time has provided during the first half of his career are astrologically stacked against him. It is actually refuted by your first point.

I just think we should all resign ourselves to the fact that Votto is on a two year deal. And, btw, let's pray to God that he performs well enough over those two years to truly make it impossible to sign him for any more than that.

[dougdirt]

3) He doesn't need to be a 7 or 6 win player for the entire contract in order for it to be worth it overall. Let's assume a natural regression of production from Votto from age 30-36, the length of a 7 year contract after 2013.

Age - WAR
30 - 7
31 - 6.5
32 - 5.5
33 - 4.5
34 - 3.5
35 - 3
36 - 3

That adds up to 33 WAR over the length of the contract. At around $5M per win, that's $165M of value, or $23.5M a season on average. More importantly, that gets the Reds an MVP caliber bat in the middle of the lineup for around 3-4 more seasons. Add in the extra money from being competitive all those seasons, and I think it makes sense.

If contracts were structured that way, they would make sense. But Votto will be getting paid for 5-6 wins each year and is going to kill payroll the second half of that contract. Teams like the Reds, unfortunately, can't handle things like that.

[mth123]

Three points on this matter:

1) This is the strongest argument against the DH rule in my opinion. The DH allows the American League to nab all the superstars at this point in their career, because they can afford to put them at DH at the end of these long contracts, allowing them to offer more years than any National League team. Until the DH is eliminated, the NL will always be inferior for this very reason.

2) Votto currently has all the earmarks of being one of the anomalies. First, he already is at 1B, the least valuable defensive position, and still has top value. He's not going to lose much defensively, as most of his value come from offense. He is in great shape, and has a good body type for aging well, not too big or small. Most importantly, he is an extreme professional, who is driven to be the best. Of course, injuries are unpredictable, but if Votto can steer clear of any major injuries, he should be able to stay better for longer than most MLB players.

3) He doesn't need to be a 7 or 6 win player for the entire contract in order for it to be worth it overall. Let's assume a natural regression of production from Votto from age 30-36, the length of a 7 year contract after 2013.

Age - WAR
30 - 7
31 - 6.5
32 - 5.5
33 - 4.5
34 - 3.5
35 - 3
36 - 3

That adds up to 33 WAR over the length of the contract. At around $5M per win, that's $165M of value, or $23.5M a season on average. More importantly, that gets the Reds an MVP caliber bat in the middle of the lineup for around 3-4 more seasons. Add in the extra money from being competitive all those seasons, and I think it makes sense.

Unfortunately, the best incentive that the Reds could offer Votto would have been to include 2012 and 2013 in the deal in place of his current contract. 2012 and, to a lesser extent, 2013 are the years where Votto will be making much less than market and bumping those years to market level would seem to be the only motivation for Votto to sign outside of sheer loyalty and happiness here. He'll get his money in 2014 and beyond and he knows it.

[muddie]

It is the same thing that happened with Fielder. It went on for two years, and it was the most boring topic in baseball. Then, one day, the Tigers stepped up like drunken sailors and blew all their money on a guy who is as likely to eat himself into a diabetic coma as win a world championship there in the next 10 years. Fielder right now is not as good a player as Votto, and Sir Cumpherence is not worth even close to what the Detroit Tigers are paying him.

Good post. I agree with you entirely. I am a Detroit fan in the American League and this signing made me sick. It was stupid and uncalled for. Detroit will indeed regret this in a couple of years. If Cabrera has the problems at third I anticipate, they'll regret it this year!

[redsmetz]

If contracts were structured that way, they would make sense. But Votto will be getting paid for 5-6 wins each year and is going to kill payroll the second half of that contract. Teams like the Reds, unfortunately, can't handle things like that.

I've come to wonder why some agent doesn't come to a solution of structuring a contract like a mountain - it raises to it's peak and then lessens as it moves to its conclusion. Arrive at the total dollar amount agreed to and structure it this way.

It's the same reason I wonder about some players not just going into a free agency year towards the end of their career and accept a salary that's commensurate with what they bring now, not what their histories been. Usually this involves a players staying with their existing club, as it happens more and more as players move on (see the example of Roy Oswalt - his market clearly has adjusted). The truth is, even the reduced number is going to be a lot of dough.

[MartyFan]

I know this will sound ridiculous but I was not in favor of moving prospects for Latos since we are in the one yer window.

Lets be realistic...The Reds are NOT going to resign Phillips...and I cannot blame them, he is 30+ and at 2B. His value is arguably higher now than it ever will be and though I want the Reds to win, I think they need to do it with a younger core and a few crafty veterans who are able to play but still serve as a mentor in the process.

If a deal was out there that could have brought league average hitting and good defense at 2B and LF power/contact hitter along with a legit pitching prospect or two, I would have traded both Phillips and Votto this off season..yes, the Reds fans would have been TICKED but now we have a one year window.

In the new era of baseball, we need to let go of the idea of a player staying with a team their entire career and instead look to sign great young talent, utilize it while it is cheap, develop it further and trade it away when the value is highest...like Votto and Phillips now.

Putting a system like that in place would allow the Reds to be in the hunt for the wildcard and division several times instead of banking on a one year window the team has now.