What Would it Take To Get You to Trade Votto?

[kaldaniels]

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.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling

It makes perfect sense.

Yes, only one team outbid the others, which means they thought the player's value was higher than any other team thought it was. Likely one other team came somewhat close in order to drive the price up. But in the end the player's maximum value was set by the free market. What makes no sense is the opinion that a team would be willing to pay the mega-salary that they opted not to pay when they had the chance during the free agent bidding process and give up lots of talent too.

Except no one had the chance to bid for Votto.

If Votto had been a FA last season someone would have paid him $30M per season.

Look at Crawford, Gonzalex etc. They, according to you, were paid more than any other team was willing to give them.

Yet a short time later there was a team willing to give up decent prospects to take on there contracts, and take on the contract of Beckett to boot.

Votto could be moved today for prospects.

Your assumption that players go to he team that offers the most money is incorrect. Toronto took on some contracts of players which had the year before been paid the most possible money and gave up numerous propects to boot. This has been discused in detail, and I beleive that Patrick Batemen made the excellent point that Toronto spent the money and prospects becuase they weren't likely in the position to outbid teams to obtain those players (or similiar players) in the first place.

A number of teams would take on Votto's contract and give up value to do so, as they weren't in the position to do so in the first place.

Plus salaries and teams needs change every year.

[AtomicDumpling]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

Except no one had the chance to bid for Votto.

If Votto had been a FA last season someone would have paid him $30M per season.

Look at Crawford, Gonzalex etc. They, according to you, were paid more than any other team was willing to give them.

Yet a short time later there was a team willing to give up decent prospects to take on there contracts, and take on the contract of Beckett to boot.

Votto could be moved today for prospects.

Your assumption that players go to he team that offers the most money is incorrect. Toronto took on some contracts of players which had the year before been paid the most possible money and gave up numerous propects to boot. This has been discused in detail, and I beleive that Patrick Batemen made the excellent point that Toronto spent the money and prospects becuase they weren't likely in the position to outbid teams to obtain those players (or similiar players) in the first place.

A number of teams would take on Votto's contract and give up value to do so, as they weren't in the position to do so in the first place.

Plus salaries and teams needs change every year.

I think you are way off base on this one. Votto's $250 million dollar contract has nothing in common with those other players. It is another order of magnitude.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling

I think you are way off base on this one. Votto's $250 million dollar contract has nothing in common with those other players. It is another order of magnitude.

Except that Votto is a player everyone would want. If he had been a FA, the Reds would have lost him to a higher bidder if Votto choose the highest offer.

Guys like Crawford and Beckett had regressed since they signed their contracts. Yet they were still moved for value.