John Fay Kidnapped By Aliens...

[TheNext44]

... and replaced with a Pod Person who actually has some good ideas, and rational analysis.

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/200...ips-or-arroyo/

I know we’re living in a Bengal, Bearcat, prep football world these days. But I went ahead and wrote a Sunday Insider anyway. Here’s a free preview:

I’d tried to get a hold of Bob Castellini last week. But he was out of the country. You know how absorbent the international cell phone rates are. We’re kidding there, but money is tight in Redsland these days.

How tight? Only Castellini can answer that. He’s the CEO. The final budget is his call.

The fact that the Reds pushed a long-time employee like Wilma Mann to retire and aren’t replacing others who leave tells you the club is counting pennies in business in which it takes millions of dollars to win.

It’s telling that when asked last week if he needed to cut player payroll to balance the budget, general manager Walt Jocketty said “not yet.”

The implication is that could happen. It probably depends on how season-ticket renewals go. I’m told that early renewals are promising.

But if that trend doesn’t continue, and the Reds have to slash payroll to make budget, it means they’ll have to trade Brandon Phillips or Bronson Arroyo.

Here’s my logic on that:

Let’s say the payroll is going to be $65 million, down from $73.5 million last year. The Reds already have $59.25 million committed to six players for 2010: Aaron Harang ($12.5 million), Francisco Cordero ($12 million), Scott Rolen ($11 million), Bronson Arroyo ($11 million), Brandon Phillips ($6.75 million), Willy Taveras ($4 million) and Arthur Rhodes ($2 million).

Even if all 18 of the other players on the roster make the $400,000 minimum, they’ll account for $7.2 million. That added up to $66.45 million.

The Reds aren’t going to trade Rolen – they just got him. Harang’s value is so far down, the Reds would probably have to pay half of his salary just to get another club to take him. Cordero is so expensive, only a handful of teams could afford him. As far as Taveras, do I really have to explain why he’d be hard to trade.

That leaves Phillips and Arroyo.

My advice in both cases is don’t do it. One caveat: If the Marlins want to trade Hanley Ramirez for either, do it. But I think trading either for prospects – or even young, unproven big leaguers – would be foolish.

Sportswriters love to spend owners money under the you’ve-got-to-spend-money-to-make-money premise, which rings pretty hallow coming from guys who never really made money.

But, in this case, I think you’re risking further alienating the fans over $5.5 or $3.375 million. That’s half of what Arroyo or Phillips will make.

I’d start the season with both on the roster and see how it goes. If it goes well, the fans will start buying tickets to help balance the budget. If it goes bad, Arroyo and Harang can be moved at the deadline.

This club is close enough to competing that 2010 could be the year. The Reds were 27-13 over the last 40 games of the season. The addition of Rolen made the club better.

Homer Bailey was the best pitcher in baseball over the last six weeks of the season (6-1, 1.70 ERA). Johnny Cueto went 3-1 with a 3.63 over his last six starts. He should be better after an offseason of rest.

Jay Bruce started to live up to his potential after coming back from the broken wrist.

The Reds have a good bit of talent in minors that is close to big-league ready.

Of course, it’s easy to make the argument the other way. The Reds have big questions in the leadoff and the second spot in the order. Left field is still a big question mark.

Drew Stubbs played well after his call-up, but he’s a guy who hit .269 in 1,588 minor league at-bats.

But, again, if it goes bad, have your fire sale in July. But trading your best starter (Arroyo) or your best all-round player (Phillips), in December makes selling tickets in January very difficult.

Unless, of course, the Marlins offer Ramirez.

[Falls City Beer]

A bunch of young players performed when the games no longer mattered? That never happens in Redsland. And neither does banking on those performances carrying over and lasting through 162 game seasons

[Ltlabner]

You know how absorbent the international cell phone rates are. We’re kidding there, but money is tight in Redsland these days.

Absorbent? I think he meant exorbitant (as in very expensive).

Originally Posted by Falls City Beer

A bunch of young players performed when the games no longer mattered? That never happens in Redsland. And neither does banking on those performances carrying over and lasting through 162 game seasons

Yep. Disappointment made easy is counting on small sample sizes to translate over larger time periods.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Ltlabner

Yep. Disappointment made easy is counting on small sample sizes to translate over larger time periods.

The difference is, it wasn't bad players playing well.... it was just different players playing.

[MWM]

Small budget clubs should not get rid of players who actually perform to the value of their contract unless it's huge money. That's why it seems crazy to me that they'd consider trading Brandon Phillips unless they were made an offer they couldn't refuse.

Arroyo is a great target to trade if they find a take who will take his entire salary. Harang is another guy worht dangling, but not if they have to pay much of his salary at all.

But trading away affordable players who actually produce is just dumb for an organization like the Reds. Phillips at less than $7MM is EXACTLY the type of player the Reds need. There's a misconception that lower budget teams shouldn't have more expensive players. What they shouldn't have is awful players making average money. THAT is what kills teams like the Reds.

[BCubb2003]

Sportswriters love to spend owners money under the you’ve-got-to-spend-money-to-make-money premise, which rings pretty hallow coming from guys who never really made money.

He probably meant hollow, too, but the Pod Person is probably new at the language.

[fearofpopvol1]

Originally Posted by Falls City Beer

A bunch of young players performed when the games no longer mattered? That never happens in Redsland. And neither does banking on those performances carrying over and lasting through 162 game seasons

of course, this ignores the fact that many of the teams the Reds were playing during that time were playing in meaningful games. but, if you want to cherrypick facts, go for it.

[Unassisted]

Originally Posted by Ltlabner

Absorbent? I think he meant exorbitant (as in very expensive).

Someone must be insisting that Fay use a spell checker for his blog. Apparently it's set on awe toe pie let.

[TheNext44]

Originally Posted by MWM

Small budget clubs should not get rid of players who actually perform to the value of their contract unless it's huge money. That's why it seems crazy to me that they'd consider trading Brandon Phillips unless they were made an offer they couldn't refuse.

Arroyo is a great target to trade if they find a take who will take his entire salary. Harang is another guy worht dangling, but not if they have to pay much of his salary at all.

But trading away affordable players who actually produce is just dumb for an organization like the Reds. Phillips at less than $7MM is EXACTLY the type of player the Reds need. There's a misconception that lower budget teams shouldn't have more expensive players. What they shouldn't have is awful players making average money. THAT is what kills teams like the Reds.

I agree completely.

However, I just don't see why anyone would take any of the big three pitchers without the Reds kicking in at least half their salaries.

With the baseball economy where it is right now, we will see a lot of productive players, maybe even some as good as Arroyo, simply non-tendered. And this glut on the free market will cause salaries to drop even further.

I think if Arroyo were to be on the open market this off-season, he might get a 2 year deal worth what his 1 year plus option deal is worth now, and maybe not even that much.

The good news for the Reds is that they will have a lot of cheap choices to fill some holes, the bad news is that they will have no money to spend to do it.

[TheNext44]

Originally Posted by Ltlabner

Absorbent? I think he meant exorbitant (as in very expensive).

Okay, so maybe it is the real Fay after all.

[Falls City Beer]

Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1

of course, this ignores the fact that many of the teams the Reds were playing during that time were playing in meaningful games. but, if you want to cherrypick facts, go for it.

Doesn't change the fact that the Reds' players were playing with a nothing-to-lose mindset; something contending teams don't have the luxury of doing. When the games mattered for the Reds, they were conspicuously ineffective.

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by Falls City Beer

Doesn't change the fact that the Reds' players were playing with a nothing-to-lose mindset; something contending teams don't have the luxury of doing. When the games mattered for the Reds, they were conspicuously ineffective.

They were unwatchable in July and August and they were close to last place. That's about as out of it as you can get.

[paulrichjr]

This kind of stuff is the exact reason why my mouth fell open when the Rolen trade was made. Not to beat a dead horse but they had to know then that the budget for 2010 was tight. They had to know then that Rolen could have been picked up cheaper in the winter of 2009 than in the summer of 2009. If trades are made to save $5 million or so then you have to wonder about Walt and Bob even more than you already do taking into account that trade.

[WVRedsFan]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

The difference is, it wasn't bad players playing well.... it was just different players playing.

Yes. The last part of the season where the Reds were way over .500 were encouraging to me. Was it meaningless games? No. Janish played an adequate shortstop, albeit without much hitting, but he defense helped. Rolen was a godsend at third. His defense saved runs and hit hitting, though not tremendous, was steady with a solid OBP. Traveras was out and Stubbs was in. Anyway you look at that, it was a win. Gomes, Nix, and others manned the outfield adequately. All this with a pitching staff that was crippled by the loss of Harang and Volquez. Maloney pitched well. Wells was even adequate. And Arroyo was magnificent. I like 2010 and what it brings for the Reds.

[Scrap Irony]

I realize it's a small sample size, but the Reds played .600 ball at the end of last season. Consider:

They got rid of a HUGE black hole at 3B (one reason I like the Rolen deal-- it obviously improved the team, no matter the cost).

They got rid of another in CF with Stubbs.

They got rid of a third black hole in the fourth starter spot with Bailey, who can now be counted on as a solid starter rather than a gigantic question mark. (Any team in baseball would want Bailey in its rotation at this point, something that certainly couldn't be said before July.)

Gomes provided an above average bat for LF and Bruce got better in RF. Not only that, Francisco hit well in an extremely short try-out and he and Heisey should provide some depth at the minor league level in case someone goes down.

True, their fifth and sixth black holes (SS and C) haven't been addressed. Too, it's also possible Gomes is non-tendered and either Dickerson, Heisey, or Francisco end up in LF rather than as bench and/or AAA depth.

But this isn't the team they played with in the middle of the summer. It's a much better product.