Phillips returning.

[Wheelhouse]

Per MLB Trade Rumors

[Benihana]

Well, that's good. [/Forrest Gump voice]

[Rojo]

Two plus a club option third? Would BP go for that?

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by Rojo

Two plus a club option third? Would BP go for that?

That would be an ideal bridge to Hamilton/Torreyes.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Benihana

That would be an ideal bridge to Hamilton/Torreyes.

I would be more concerned about bridging to HRod/Gregorius than guys in Low A.... I like the guys from Dayton, but they both have a long way to go in order to be what the guys from Dayton in 2010 have become.

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

I would be more concerned about bridging to HRod/Gregorius than guys in Low A.... I like the guys from Dayton, but they both have a long way to go in order to be what the guys from Dayton in 2010 have become.

Is Valaika a possible stop gap or will his bat not play? Could Frazier do a Jeff Kent and hit enough to make up for a lack of range?

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

Is Valaika a possible stop gap or will his bat not play? Could Frazier do a Jeff Kent and hit enough to make up for a lack of range?

Valaika has 1300+PA's in AAA with a sub .675 OPS. I wouldn't count on him at all. Frazier at 2B was a disaster. He couldn't figure out the footwork going the opposite way from what he was used to on the other side of the infield.

Personally, I would start both Henry Rodriguez and Didi Gregorius in AAA next year. I would watch their development and see where I felt things were in July before even considering talking to Phillips about an extension. And even then, he wouldn't like the years I would be willing to offer.

It could be pushing a guy like Gregorius slightly too quickly (he began the year on the DL with some kidney issues before splitting 363 PA's between A+/AA), but the Reds need to figure out what to do for 2013 and Gregorius has to be considered as an option unless they already have it in their heads that they are going out to get a free agent.

[mdccclxix]

I'm in for scrapping the 2012 contract and signing a 5/55 or 4/48 or 3/40. However, I often wish teams would FRONTLOAD their contracts to make sure they don't overpay an old guy. I don't think he'll age poorly. He's already lost a step on the bases and just put up a great year. He'll always hit .275 and play GG defense. He keeps in great shape, plays hurt, never had a drop of alcohol, and produces when healthy. This, I think, is the first year he's been fully healthy in 3-4 years. He hits up and down the lineup.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by mdccclxix

I'm in for scrapping the 2012 contract and signing a 5/55 or 4/48 or 3/40. However, I often wish teams would FRONTLOAD their contracts to make sure they don't overpay an old guy. I don't think he'll age poorly. He's already lost a step on the bases and just put up a great year. He'll always hit .275 and play GG defense. He keeps in great shape, plays hurt, never had a drop of alcohol, and produces when healthy. This, I think, is the first year he's been fully healthy in 3-4 years. He hits up and down the lineup.

Agreed completely. I don't think I'd go 5 years though. 2-4 should be plenty. If they go 2 years, I'd add on a year or two as optional.

[Dan]

Originally Posted by mdccclxix

I often wish teams would FRONTLOAD their contracts to make sure they don't overpay an old guy.

Me too. I wonder why clubs don't pursue this concept more. Having lower salaries later in contracts would enable much greater roster flexibility.

[Rojo]

Originally Posted by Dan

Me too. I wonder why clubs don't pursue this concept more. Having lower salaries later in contracts would enable much greater roster flexibility.

Because GM's don't know if they'll be around in five years.

[oneupper]

Originally Posted by Dan

Me too. I wonder why clubs don't pursue this concept more. Having lower salaries later in contracts would enable much greater roster flexibility.

Players who were outperforming their contracts would always want to renegotiate.

[15fan]

Originally Posted by Dan

Me too. I wonder why clubs don't pursue this concept more. Having lower salaries later in contracts would enable much greater roster flexibility.

The problem is that the flexibility is at the end of the contract. It hamstrings the club in the present.

Why pay big bucks now for a guy to be a centerpiece on a contender right now if it means you don't have the money to give him the supporting cast necessary to compete?

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by Dan

Me too. I wonder why clubs don't pursue this concept more. Having lower salaries later in contracts would enable much greater roster flexibility.

Becuase paying a dollar later is cheaper than paying a dollar today.

Back loading contracts is a way to pay less.

[kpresidente]

Originally Posted by Dan

Me too. I wonder why clubs don't pursue this concept more. Having lower salaries later in contracts would enable much greater roster flexibility.

Winning compounds itself.

If you win now, that's likely to increase revenues, which increases the likelihood of winning later (and thus even higher revenues - presumably offsetting the backloaded contract).