Jon Heyman reporting, but I don't have the link.
Jon Heyman reporting, but I don't have the link.
Is he looking for more money after the stellar season he had?
Heyman says that he wants a job where he's guaranteed to close.
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/blog/jo...-job-elsewhere
Reds held the option.
We were never bringing him back for the incremental 8.5M required to keep a guy coming off TJ surgery. He'd be cray to turn that down. I also doubt someone is going to give him a guaranteed closing position. He's going to have to compete.
IIRC correctly I think it was actually a mutual option. Either way, I would assume the Reds declined, not the other way around.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
So, if it was a mutual option (it was per Cots), why would the Reds have to "buy out" an option that the player declined? It seems like the Reds would only be on the hook for $2.5 Million if the team was the declining party.
All my posts are my opinion - just like yours are. If I forget to state it and you're too dense to see the obvious, look here!
Simply put, those are the terms of the contract. Had Madson been eligible for arbitration, the Reds could've offered. There's also the likely possibility that the Reds were planning on turning down the option but let Madson save face by turning it down first. And although Madson might face competition for the closer role elsewhere, his odds are much better if Aroldis Chapman isn't his competition.
Get MLBtraderumors Reds updates on Facebook.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Reds-R...33794710005587
http://i.imgur.com/1bCKpaH.jpg
Makes sense. I'm not seeing Madson being a big factor in 2013 though. His surgery was in April. Will he even be ready by opening day? Tommy John usually takes 12 to 18 months to get back into pitching in the big leagues and another season or so to get back effectiveness. Some guys have gone faster than that, but if I was given the job of handing out the cash, I woudn't give much guaranteed to a guy coming off Tommy John until the surgery was 24 months or so in the past. I'm glad that the Reds seem to be allowing somebody else to pay for Madson's rehab season. I'd be happy to have him back on a minor league deal that guarantees $1 Million or so with some incentives, but if he's looking for a big league deal for multi-millions guaranteed, I'd just as soon spend that money on somebody who isn't coming off of Tommy John.
All my posts are my opinion - just like yours are. If I forget to state it and you're too dense to see the obvious, look here!
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
How do guys like Wainwright and Carpenter come back so fast, but it's going to take Madson an entire year?
Wainwright had surgery on February 28, 2011, came back on April 7, 2012 and wasn't really very good until July. If Madson (surgery date 4/11/2012) follows a similar timeline, he'd come back in Mid to late May and spend June, July and into August not being very good. The Reds are in uncharted waters, as far as the payroll goes, with a couple of holes that still need to be filled. They can't really afford to invest in such a questionable proposition, IMO, unless it comes at a really cheap price.
Carpenter's recent injury wasn't Tommy John. Not sure about his missed 2003 season or what the exact dates were.
All my posts are my opinion - just like yours are. If I forget to state it and you're too dense to see the obvious, look here!
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. |