Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 47

Thread: Reds Arb Eligibles

  1. #16
    I hate the Cubs LoganBuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,171

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Quote Originally Posted by cinreds21 View Post
    That is false.
    Didn't Ondrusek use options this year, last year, and in 2010?

    Edit, I guess he didn't use one in 2011. I stand corrected. Thanks. Bring him back then!
    Last edited by LoganBuck; 10-25-2012 at 10:16 PM.
    The Sox traded Bullfrog the only player they've got for Shottenhoffen. Four-eyes Shottenhoffen a utility infielder. They've got a whole team of utility infielders.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    -The Insider-
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,871

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Quote Originally Posted by LoganBuck View Post
    Didn't Ondrusek use options this year, last year, and in 2010?
    He has only used one option, in 2010. If you recall he broke with the club but was sent down for over a month, that used up an option. He was not sent down in 2011. And this year he was only sent down for 11 days, thus not using up an option year, so he has two options left come March.

  4. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,675

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Quote Originally Posted by LoganBuck View Post
    I let Stubbs, Heisey, and Valdez walk.
    Why would you let players like Stubbs and Heisey walk when we have no viable replacements in the system and, more importantly, each has trade value.

    According to Fangraphs Stubbs had a WAR of 1.3 this year, the lowest of his career. Still, it equated to a salary value of $6M.

    Dumping Heisey for nothnig is equally perplexing. He's consistently posted a WAR of between 1.2-1.6 and will get paid about $1.4M (or whatever). That's great value for a very productive 4-5 OF who can actually play CF.

  5. #19
    Administrator Boss-Hog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    6,074

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig
    According to Fangraphs Stubbs had a WAR of 1.3 this year, the lowest of his career. Still, it equated to a salary value of $6M.
    Here's an honest question: do you feel Drew Stubbs would get $6 million on the open market?

  6. #20
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,297

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    Why would you let players like Stubbs and Heisey walk when we have no viable replacements in the system and, more importantly, each has trade value.

    According to Fangraphs Stubbs had a WAR of 1.3 this year, the lowest of his career. Still, it equated to a salary value of $6M.

    Dumping Heisey for nothnig is equally perplexing. He's consistently posted a WAR of between 1.2-1.6 and will get paid about $1.4M (or whatever). That's great value for a very productive 4-5 OF who can actually play CF.
    How much of Stubbs' WAR is defense related, which may or may not be a reliable measure?

  7. #21
    I hate the Cubs LoganBuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,171

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Drew Stubbs and Chris Heisey are -0.2 and -0.3 for WAR at Baseball-Reference. I know there are a lot of Fangraphs fans, but I prefer BR. I am not paying for negative WAR. No team should. Certainly not what MLBTR has predicted here. The only way around that is to sign them long term. Who really wants that?
    The Sox traded Bullfrog the only player they've got for Shottenhoffen. Four-eyes Shottenhoffen a utility infielder. They've got a whole team of utility infielders.

  8. #22
    I hate the Cubs LoganBuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,171

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    It should be noted, that I am only fine with bringing Chris Heisey back if he is in a defined role as a "Bench" player, not a platoon, not a starting player in any way, shape, or form. He is a hacktastic player, who has many of the same warts as Drew Stubbs(with noticeably lesser defense), yet somehow or other has escaped the publics' wrath.
    The Sox traded Bullfrog the only player they've got for Shottenhoffen. Four-eyes Shottenhoffen a utility infielder. They've got a whole team of utility infielders.

  9. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,643

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Quote Originally Posted by Boss-Hog View Post
    Here's an honest question: do you feel Drew Stubbs would get $6 million on the open market?
    Alter the question to "Do I think Drew Stubbs could get 6 million in the open market?" and the answer is....maybe.

    Alter the question to "Do I think Drew Stubbs could get 3 million in the open market?" and the answer is absolutely without a doubt.
    "Even a bad day at the ballpark beats the snot out of most other good days. I'll take my scorecard and pencil and beer and hot dog and rage at the dips and cheer at the highs, but I'm not ever going to stop loving this game and this team and nobody will ever take that away from me." Roy Tucker October 2010

  10. #24
    Flash the leather! _Sir_Charles_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,374

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Of the players listed, the only one I let walk is Valdez.

    Homer should be extended. Period. Even thinking of trading him is beyond insane IMO.

    Leake I go year to year with for now. I still think he's going to become a VERY valuable pitcher. But if I'm proved wrong, he'll still be a pretty good trade chip. But trading him is the last option.

    Bray, Simon and Ondrusek I bring back. If we end up stashing them in Louisville, so be it. But they're viable 'penners. But I'd certainly have zero problems including any/all of them in a trade. Bullpen arms we've got.

    Latos I look to lock up just like Homer. Arms like that don't come around too often.

    That leaves Stubbs and Heisey. Looking at the FA market, I don't see us finding a solution to CF/leadoff there. Now if the FO works out a trade for a legitimate improvement, fine (think Choo). Otherwise I'm bringing both back. I like Heisey as a 4th outfielder/bench bat. And Stubbs...I'm sorry, but the way I'm looking at it is he's got nowhere to go but up. He's a freaking walking tool shed and I'd hate to see him put it all together for someone else. So basically I'm open to trading either/both but if it's not a real improvement...I bring them back.
    2014 predictions:
    99-63 WS champs (Cards take 2nd WC, Mil 3rd, Pit 4th, Chi 5th)
    Bruce/Votto neck and neck MVP race (neither takes it)
    Bailey CYA winner
    Hamilton ROY & GG

  11. #25
    Member mdccclxix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Crown
    Posts
    3,777

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Quote Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_ View Post
    Of the players listed, the only one I let walk is Valdez.

    Homer should be extended. Period. Even thinking of trading him is beyond insane IMO.

    Leake I go year to year with for now. I still think he's going to become a VERY valuable pitcher. But if I'm proved wrong, he'll still be a pretty good trade chip. But trading him is the last option.

    Bray, Simon and Ondrusek I bring back. If we end up stashing them in Louisville, so be it. But they're viable 'penners. But I'd certainly have zero problems including any/all of them in a trade. Bullpen arms we've got.

    Latos I look to lock up just like Homer. Arms like that don't come around too often.

    That leaves Stubbs and Heisey. Looking at the FA market, I don't see us finding a solution to CF/leadoff there. Now if the FO works out a trade for a legitimate improvement, fine (think Choo). Otherwise I'm bringing both back. I like Heisey as a 4th outfielder/bench bat. And Stubbs...I'm sorry, but the way I'm looking at it is he's got nowhere to go but up. He's a freaking walking tool shed and I'd hate to see him put it all together for someone else. So basically I'm open to trading either/both but if it's not a real improvement...I bring them back.
    You've got 69 million committed to 10 guys already. Arroyo's deferred 5 million, so maybe it's 64 million.

    Signed - 64M
    Joey Votto $17M
    Brandon Phillips $10M
    Jay Bruce $7.5M
    Johnny Cueto $7.4M
    Aroldis Chapman $2M
    Bronson Arroyo $11.5M (5 mil deferred)
    Sean Marshall $4.5M
    Nick Masset $3.1M
    Ryan Hanigan $2.05M
    Jose Arredondo $1.2M

    Free Agents - 3M in buyouts
    Ryan Ludwick $500k[FA-*] - 7 million?
    Ryan Madson $2.5M [FA-*] - 3 million?

    Arb 3 - 1.5M
    Bill Bray Arb-3 - 1.5 million

    Arb 2 - 6.1M
    Homer Bailey Arb-2 - 5.1 million
    Wilson Valdez Arb-2 - 1 million

    Arb 1 - 12.5M
    Mat Latos Arb-1 4.6 million
    Drew Stubbs Arb-1 - 2.9 million
    Mike Leake Arb-1 -2.9 million
    Chris Heisey Arb-1 - 1.3 million
    Alfredo Simon Arb-1 - .8 million

    Pre Arb - 2.5M
    Logan Ondrusek Pre-Arb-3 -.5 million
    Sam LeCure Pre-Arb-3 -.5 million
    Todd Frazier Pre-Arb-2 - .5 million
    Zack Cozart Pre-Arb-2 -.5 million
    Devin Mesoraco Pre-Arb-2 -.5 million


    95M to bring everyone but Madson and Valdez back - 23 players
    Maybe add Didi and a FA platoon guy for 1 million to bring the total to 96.5?

    Or looking at it by position:

    C: Ryan Hanigan $2.05M
    1b: Joey Votto $17M
    2b: Brandon Phillips $10M
    SS: Zach Cozart $.5M
    3b: Todd Frazier $.5M
    LF: Ryan Ludwick $500k[FA-*]
    CF: Drew Stubbs Arb-1 - 2.9 million
    RF: Jay Bruce $7.5M

    Johnny Cueto $7.4M
    Bronson Arroyo $11.5M (5 mil deferred)
    Mat Latos Arb-1 4.6 million
    Homer Bailey Arb-2 - 5.1 million
    Mike Leake Arb-1 -2.9 million

    CL: Aroldis Chapman $2M
    LHRP: Sean Marshall $4.5M
    RHRP: Nick Masset $3.1M
    RHRP: Jose Arredondo $1.2M
    LHRP: Bill Bray Arb-3 - 1.5 million
    Alfredo Simon Arb-1 - .8 million
    Logan Ondrusek Pre-Arb-3 -.5 million
    Sam LeCure Pre-Arb-3 -.5 million
    RHRP:Ryan Madson $2.5M [FA-*] - 3 million?

    Bench:
    Devin Mesoraco Pre-Arb-2 -.5 million
    Chris Heisey Arb-1 - 1.3 million
    Wilson Valdez Arb-2 - 1 million

    In all it's a pretty tall order. Perhaps they can afford 96 million. I don't know.

  12. #26
    Future Fame of Holler WildcatFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    1,171

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Bear with me; I'm sorting this out in my head as I type.

    So of that list, here's who I bring back from the non-signed group:

    Bailey (and extend him, giving you some relief from that $5.1 m projection)
    Latos (same as above)
    Stubbs
    Leake
    Heisey
    Simon
    LeCure
    Frazier
    Cozart
    Mesoraco

    Based on the above projections, and ballparking $3.4m for Latos and Bailey (that was Cueto's first contract year salary, seems fair), is $16.2m, bringing you up to $88.2m after buyouts.

    That leaves them short 1 or 2 relievers, depending on what you think happens with Aroldis and what the deal with Masset is. You could probably give Donnie Joseph a shot to fill the last bullpen spot and figure out your closer in ST.

    Still need a starter in left and two infielders. Didi could easily take one of those infield positions, as could HankRod. But I know Dusty likes experience on the bench, and it's hard to blame him. So you're probably looking for one veteran backup infielder. Would cost $2m at the most, putting you at about $91m.

    So what does that mean for left field? Probably that barring a surprising payroll increase, he's got to be cheap, and he's most likely got to come via trade.
    "I never argue with people who say baseball is boring, because baseball is boring. And then, suddenly, it isn't. And that's what makes it great." - Joe Posnanski

  13. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Amarillo,Texas
    Posts
    4,368

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Bailey and Latos- might go to arbitration. The Reds may or may not be able to sign them to private deals. I think all the rest agree to private deals or enter FA. The Reds just don't seem to take a lot of cases to arbitration.

  14. #28
    I hate the Cubs LoganBuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,171

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Bailey and Latos will win in arbitration. As much as we as fans think the team will get the best deal, both of these guys are a pitch away from never pitching in the big leagues again. They will want whatever they can get. The comp to Cueto is probably not there for either of them. Latos is a better pitcher through his age 24 season. Bailey's a different story all together. He isn't the pitcher Cueto had been, he doesn't have the track record of durability, and he is entering his age 27 season. However his numbers from this season put him squarely in the "middle of the rotation" pay scale. Add to that whatever argument can be made for the momentum going forward about his second half of the season, and I don't see how the Reds avoid paying.
    The Sox traded Bullfrog the only player they've got for Shottenhoffen. Four-eyes Shottenhoffen a utility infielder. They've got a whole team of utility infielders.

  15. #29
    Member mdccclxix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Crown
    Posts
    3,777

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    I think Bailey is a worthy sell high candidate because his peripherals were the same last year and the results were widely different. I think Bailey is a 3.90-4.40 ERA player, not worth paying for at more than 5-7 per year, especially with young pitchers coming on soon enough. He also has an injury history. His no-hitter came against a crushed and defeated Pirates team, a team he happens to dominate anyway (which is good reason to keep him too). There are times when a sell high moment feels right, and most likely you're not really selling high, you just think you are. This is a sell high moment that kind of hurts, but that means you're really dealing, as most trades of meaning kind of hurt for both teams. If you find a top 40-ish prospect that is ready now for Bailey, go for it. I insist it must be for a ready player for 2013. I think a Span + a B- prospect for Bailey and Heisey would be a good trade.

  16. #30
    I hate the Cubs LoganBuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,171

    Re: Reds Arb Eligibles

    Quote Originally Posted by mdccclxix View Post
    I think Bailey is a worthy sell high candidate because his peripherals were the same last year and the results were widely different. I think Bailey is a 3.90-4.40 ERA player, not worth paying for at more than 5-7 per year, especially with young pitchers coming on soon enough. He also has an injury history. His no-hitter came against a crushed and defeated Pirates team, a team he happens to dominate anyway (which is good reason to keep him too). There are times when a sell high moment feels right, and most likely you're not really selling high, you just think you are. This is a sell high moment that kind of hurts, but that means you're really dealing, as most trades of meaning kind of hurt for both teams. If you find a top 40-ish prospect that is ready now for Bailey, go for it. I insist it must be for a ready player for 2013. I think a Span + a B- prospect for Bailey and Heisey would be a good trade.
    I could certainly get in line with this kind of reasoning and trade.
    The Sox traded Bullfrog the only player they've got for Shottenhoffen. Four-eyes Shottenhoffen a utility infielder. They've got a whole team of utility infielders.


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