Originally Posted by jojo
Paying a player market value salary wise while giving up additional resources to do so is a significant overpay. So it comes down to the ability to leverage the production the player brings....I.e does it significantly increase the chances of significant post season revenue etc. for instance, it probably didn't make much sense for the Reds of the lost decade to trade minor league Votto and Cueto for AROD.
Concerning point 3, there's an argument for trading Votto for Trout + the estimated $100M of payroll difference even though the Reds seem poised to contend over the next several seasons. But I don't think a scenario where the Reds trade down (get less production for substantial savings) makes much sense right now. You collect promise when you're lost in the desert not when you're at the edge of the river Jordan.
And a guy like Votto probably brings enough leverage is all I'm saying. Also, there are 29 other teams with 29 different consequences should they acquire Votto. I bet a few would bite at the chance to trade for him.
Just because it would be an overpay doesn't mean I believe it wouldn't happen.
Again this is all hypothetical so it just makes for some good discussion, nothing more.