Bruce willing to sign long term with Reds

[FlyerFanatic]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/1...nn-willis.html


Agent Matt Sosnick appeared on the Diamond Hoggers' Baseball Show today, and spoke at length about how he became involved in baseball, his experiences in the sport, and a few of his clients. Here are the highlights from the discussion, which you can listen to here:

Jay Bruce is open to signing a long-term contract with the Reds. "If the Reds felt the same way," Sosnick said. "We'd be open to doing something that was five or six years."
Sosnick acknowledged that locking up Joey Votto would likely be a higher priority for the club, but cited deals signed by Justin Upton and Troy Tulowitzki as potential starting points for a Bruce extension.

[New York Red]

Bring on Jay. Hopefully longterm.

[bshall2105]

Wow, if the Justin Upton deal is a starting point for Bruce then the Reds are going to be coughing up a lot of cash. I'd honestly want him locked up before Votto, though.

[mroby85]

Originally Posted by bshall2105

Wow, if the Justin Upton deal is a starting point for Bruce then the Reds are going to be coughing up a lot of cash. I'd honestly want him locked up before Votto, though.

Has Bruce produced similar to Upton and Tulo? I'm pretty sure they had much better numbers, but I could be wrong. I'd be much more interested in locking up Votto. He's a franchise player that you can build around for years. I like Bruce but I think Votto is much more of a priority.

[Alpha Zero]

Originally Posted by mroby85

Has Bruce produced similar to Upton and Tulo? I'm pretty sure they had much better numbers, but I could be wrong. I'd be much more interested in locking up Votto. He's a franchise player that you can build around for years. I like Bruce but I think Votto is much more of a priority.

I actually think that signing Bruce is more of a priority. The guy plays a tough defensive position very well and hit .281/.353/.493 in a season where his power was clearly sapped early on due to his '09 wrist injury. He's 3 years younger than Votto.

Bruce also hasn't yet emerged as a legitimate superstar, so the Reds may be able to get a solid discount. On the other hand, Votto's stock can't get much higher than it is right now, so there's likely less to gain in terms of a discount by signing Votto long term.

I like both guys and want them both to be Reds for life, but in terms of actual financial benefit to the organization, I think that signing Bruce should be the higher priority.

[Girevik]

I don't think it's either / or. If Bruce is willing to talk long term deal now, and you can work something out that you think is good for the team, then do it regardless of what Votto wants to do right now.

[Hey Meat]

Originally Posted by FlyerFanatic

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/1...nn-willis.html


Agent Matt Sosnick appeared on the Diamond Hoggers' Baseball Show today, and spoke at length about how he became involved in baseball, his experiences in the sport, and a few of his clients. Here are the highlights from the discussion, which you can listen to here:

Jay Bruce is open to signing a long-term contract with the Reds. "If the Reds felt the same way," Sosnick said. "We'd be open to doing something that was five or six years."
Sosnick acknowledged that locking up Joey Votto would likely be a higher priority for the club, but cited deals signed by Justin Upton and Troy Tulowitzki as potential starting points for a Bruce extension.

Yippee. Glad to hear this. I know he will keep growing as a franchise player.

[swaisuc]

Win/Win IMO. Bruce could use the security and not having to wait to make any real money. He also gets to play for a team that looks plenty competetive for the near future.

The Reds get a very good player on the rise as he enters the prime of his career hopefully at a price they can afford. Plus, Jay actually wants to be here.

Make it happen.

[bshall2105]

Originally Posted by mroby85

Has Bruce produced similar to Upton and Tulo? I'm pretty sure they had much better numbers, but I could be wrong. I'd be much more interested in locking up Votto. He's a franchise player that you can build around for years. I like Bruce but I think Votto is much more of a priority.

Votto is the better player right now. But Bruce acts like he wants to be with the Reds for a long time. With his potential, that's enough for me consider him the higher priority.

[mroby85]

Originally Posted by Alpha Zero

I actually think that signing Bruce is more of a priority. The guy plays a tough defensive position very well and hit .281/.353/.493 in a season where his power was clearly sapped early on due to his '09 wrist injury. He's 3 years younger than Votto.

Bruce also hasn't yet emerged as a legitimate superstar, so the Reds may be able to get a solid discount. On the other hand, Votto's stock can't get much higher than it is right now, so there's likely less to gain in terms of a discount by signing Votto long term.

I like both guys and want them both to be Reds for life, but in terms of actual financial benefit to the organization, I think that signing Bruce should be the higher priority.

I see your point in terms of finances for the organization, and agree that vottos stock won't rise much more, if at all. However, the more seasons he has like this year consistently I think that will help raise his price. Another thing that I think is majorly ignored, but is a reality is the fact that however many years you lock him up beyond his arbitration years now it takes the option of free agency away from him, and takes the opportunity away from teams like the yankees of wooing him with more $, and if nothing else driving his price up higher.

[AintlifeGrande]

We all love Bruce,but thinking that it would be better to have Bruce long term over Joey Votto is insane.

[bshall2105]

Originally Posted by AintlifeGrande

We all love Bruce,but thinking that it would be better to have Bruce long term over Joey Votto is insane.

When Bruce turns out to be just as good, maybe even better than Votto, you won't be saying that.

[webbbj]

Originally Posted by bshall2105

When Bruce turns out to be just as good, maybe even better than Votto, you won't be saying that.

until that happens i would much rather have joseph votto

[NorrisHopper30]

I'd rather have Bruce for 5 years than Votto for 5 years at this point. I love Votto, but you never know with his head if something will go wrong and he'll miss an extended period of time or if he will regress as he ages.

[757690]

Originally Posted by webbbj

until that happens i would much rather have joseph votto

It was only two months, but the last two months of last season, Bruce was better than Votto:

.377 .459 .798 1.257

It might have been a nice streak or it could have been him turning the corner and living up to his talent. When you consider that he had a .950 OPS last season if you don't count July (which you normally shouldn't do) I think the odds are that he turned it around.

And when you add in his Gold Glove caliber defense, I would say with a .950 OPS for the season, he can be better than Votto.

That said, I don't the Reds are ever going to have to choose between the two. They can afford both of them, as long as they are producing. What this team cannot afford are players who are not producing, no matter what they get paid. The secret to a successful mid market team is not keeping payroll low, it's making sure you get the most out of it. Willie Taveras was far more damaging to this team in 2009 than Aaron Harang was.