$22.5 Million dollars

[RedsManRick]

I disagree that the Reds don't have that many big contracts. They have quite a few for a small market team. Harang, Dunn, Griffey,Cordero, Phillips and Arroyo is quite a bit for Cincinnati to handle. I don't see such top heavy contracts for Cleveland, Minnesota, Oakland and Milwaukee.

		2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Harang		6.75	11.0	12.5	12.75	----
Cordero		8.5	12.0	12.0	12.0	----
Arroyo		6.45	9.5	11.0	11.0	----
Dunn		13.0	----	----	----	----
Griffey		12.5	4.0*	----	----	----
Phillips	2.75	4.75	6.75	11.0	12.0
Total		49.95	53.75	42.25	46.75	12.0

*buyout

Again, it's about production. You can't win on bargains alone -- and if you do manage to do it, you certainly can't sustain it.

Question 1: How many of those long term deals are bad deals? Cordero is a stretch. Harang is a bargain. Arroyo is a bit steep. Dunn is gone after 2008. Griffey is likely gone after 2008. Phillips is a bargain through 2010.

Question 2: What else do we need 10's of millions for? A payroll in the $75M range is fully sustainable. We have a lot of production coming from guys who won't start getting expensive for a few years yet, meaning we won't be forced in to shedding production in order to manage payroll. We're actually in pretty good shape fiscally. As these deals start to come off the books, they will likely be replaced by deals to EE, Cueto, Voqluez, Votto, Bruce, Bailey.

As has been pointed out in the first post, the real problem comes from guys who eat payroll and provide zero production. Yes, some big ticket guys have slumped a little to start 2008. But there's reason to believe that by the end of the year, each of these guys will have earned that money. What will be the difference this year is the amount of production we get, or don't get, from the guys not getting paid millions and the guys getting paid just a few million.

[Sea Ray]

		2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Harang		6.75	11.0	12.5	12.75	----
Cordero		8.5	12.0	12.0	12.0	----
Arroyo		6.45	9.5	11.0	11.0	----
Dunn		13.0	----	----	----	----
Griffey		12.5	4.0*	----	----	----
Phillips	2.75	4.75	6.75	11.0	12.0
Total		49.95	53.75	42.25	46.75	12.0

*buyout

Again, it's about production. You can't win on bargains alone -- and if you do manage to do it, you certainly can't sustain it.

Question 1: How many of those long term deals are bad deals? Cordero is a stretch. Harang is a bargain. Arroyo is a bit steep. Dunn is gone after 2008. Griffey is likely gone after 2008. Phillips is a bargain through 2010.

Question 2: What else do we need 10's of millions for?

My answer to question #1 is Griffey and Arroyo.

As to question #2 I'd like to have money for a centerfielder and maybe a catcher and another starter.

[RedsManRick]

My answer to question #1 is Griffey and Arroyo.

As to question #2 I'd like to have money for a centerfielder and maybe a catcher and another starter.

Which CF, which C, and which SP? Look at the 2009 FA pool, who would you target and at what price range?

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/1...lb-free-a.html

[*BaseClogger*]

Based on my thinking that Arroyo will decline over the next couple of years and Cueto and Volquez will improve. Do you disagree with that projection? How do you project Arroyo vs Harang, Cueto and Volquez in say 2010? Where do you project Bronson to fall among those 4?

So... If we had a rotation of Peavy, Santana, Webb, Beckett, and Harang that would mean Aaaron Harang is a #5? I don't think you can force pitchers into certain roles based on their team. This is like saying Mark Hendrickson is a #1. We know he's not. It's based on the rest of the league. In that case, a #1 has rougly a 3.50 ERA, a #2 has a 4.00 ERA, a #3 has a 4.50 ERA, and son on. In that case Arroyo has historically been somewhere between a #2/#3, and should continue to pitch like a #3 considering his home environment...

[Sea Ray]

In that case, a #1 has rougly a 3.50 ERA, a #2 has a 4.00 ERA, a #3 has a 4.50 ERA, and son on. In that case Arroyo has historically been somewhere between a #2/#3, and should continue to pitch like a #3 considering his home environment...

I hope you're right. I don't share your optimism

[Sea Ray]

Which CF, which C, and which SP? Look at the 2009 FA pool, who would you target and at what price range?

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/1...lb-free-a.html

It's too early to argue about specifics. At this point we're just guessing when deciding who will be available in a trade or free agency. If we start going back and forth on those possibilities this thread will go on for days...

[RedsManRick]

It's too early to argue about specifics. At this point we're just guessing when deciding who will be available in a trade or free agency. If we start going back and forth on those possibilities this thread will go on for days...

Did you follow the link? Can you give me even 1 ideal scenario?

[Sea Ray]

Did you follow the link? Can you give me even 1 ideal scenario?

In fairness to WK, this decision was made over a year ago. There's no way he could have known what the market would look like two years in advance. I'm on record as saying I would not have given this contract to Bronson. Even if the market is empty this fall, I believe this was not a good risk to take.

My thinking is that there's always a Randy Wolf type FA available and that's probably the direction I'd go.

[RedsManRick]

In fairness to WK, this decision was made over a year ago. There's no way he could have known what the market would look like two years in advance. I'm on record as saying I would not have given this contract to Bronson. Even if the market is empty this fall, I believe this was not a good risk to take.

The FA market for starting pitching NEVER looks good for small market teams. Any good to decent pitcher gets snapped up by the big boys. The smaller market teams have to overpay to get decent pitching -- see Meche and Suppan.

That's really my point. The failure of last year was not having the balls to trade him when he still had a sweetheart of a contract. But given that he has a contact, it's really not that bad of one. It's short and close to FA market price for a #3 starter (which he is until he proves otherwise). If we were to pursue a guy in FA, we couldn't likely get more for less, particularly in regards to the risk associated with the years involved.

So, is the contract ideal? Hardly. Was it a good idea at the time? Maybe, maybe not. But bottom line is that the Reds were desperate for pitching and had the opportunity and the money available to spend on a reliable mid rotation starter. You can have a roster full of bargains and lose 100 games. Arroyo isn't a bargain, but he's a solid starter and his contract isn't the reason the Reds are short on talent. There are at least 6 or 7 bigger fish to fry along those lines.

[MartyFan]

Upset? I guess it is a little early to be upset.

But it doesn't change the fact that Wayne jumped the gun on the extension. I thought it was odd at the time to extend someone when they had 2 years left on their contract at such a cheap price. Too much risk with pitchers who are hitting their 30s with the track record of a middle of the road pitcher.

I thought it was a strange thing too but I actually thought it was motivated more by Mr. C than Special K at the time.

I've always thought Arroyo was overrated, even when he signed the deal with the Red Sox he was overrated...the fact that we got one GREAT year and the potential of a couple good years from him is more than Wily Mo Pena ever offered to this team...and more than he will deliver to the Nationals or whever other team he plays for in the future. With that in mind even though Arroyo is overrated, I still view him as a plus over Wily Mo and anything else the team could have put in the rotation at the time...it isn't like he is blocking some CAN'T MISS prospect or keeping the team from signing a key top of the rotation FA pitcher.

[REDREAD]

I disagree that the Reds don't have that many big contracts. They have quite a few for a small market team. Harang, Dunn, Griffey,Cordero, Phillips and Arroyo is quite a bit for Cincinnati to handle. I don't see such top heavy contracts for Cleveland, Minnesota, Oakland and Milwaukee.

That's true, but overpaying a bit for say Dunn, Arroyo and Cordero isn't going to hurt them as badly as having to eat a few contracts every year.

They've already wasted about 4 million this year by eating Stanton and Castro's contracts. I don't think Arroyo is being overpaid by 4 million. That was my point, I guess. If the Reds are having problems with payroll efficiency, they are much better served if they stop giving out dumb contracts and extensions. Overpaying good players does less harm to the club.

[REDREAD]

If they'd not extended Arroyo he'd still be here this year. You'd still get his production this year. The contract only comes into play starting in 2009. As for where we'd spend the money, we'll have to see who's on the market next winter.

If we didn't extend Bronson, he probably gets bad feelings and is going to bolt the team after this year. Given at the time, we only had one other reliable starting pitcher (Harang), it was the right move, IMO.

Also, I am not positive, but Bronson might've had enough seniority to demand a trade after year 1 because he was traded in the middle of a multiyear contract. I don't know if Bronson qualified for that (as NEagle did) or not.

[GAC]

but let's go back to the time Arroyo was extended. Arroyo was one of two starting pitchers pitching well for us. He felt as though he had gotten the shaft by getting traded here after signing a low contract (and I can see his point of view on this). Then he sees Harang get a big pay day.

That is all true RR, but it's not the Red's fault that he signed a lowball deal with Boston, got the shaft, and we somehow should make amends for that. Yes, he pitched well for us in 2006. That's one year. Look at his resume/history prior to that. IMO, doesn't justify that extension. Everyone pretty much agrees that it was a risky maneuver by this FO.... so why take the risk when it wasn't necessary? That's my point. We had him signed at a discount price for the next two years. Let it play out, at least for another year, and see how things go.

Harang warranted it. In fact, he signed a below market contract to stay with the Reds.

At this point, the Reds have to reach out with an extension to Arroyo or pretty much accept that he's going to walk when his contract is up (which would've been the end of this year).

If he continues to pitch like he has, then how would that have been a bad thing? Yeah, he's worth the 4.5 mil we're paying him in '08. But IMHO, he's going to show he's not worth the 9.5 next year, or the 11 mil in 2010 (or 2011).

I'd much rather see them overpay Arroyo by 3-4 million/year than waste money on the Stantons and Gonzos of the FA world. That's what's killing us financially, IMO.

Unnecessarily spending money can kill too.

If BA has a rough 2008, then would people be upset if we hadn't extended him, and he was allowed to walk? The way the situation is now though, it doesn't matter what he does because we're still obligated to not only pay him but pay him more then double of what he is currently making. No, that doesn't make sense IMO.

[Aronchis]

The extension was completely not necessary. Wayne's poor spending habits are a downside he brings. Arroyo's 2006 was a fluke and he has nowhere to go but down. Why resign somebody to a extension after a career year is amazingly poor GMing.

[mth123]

In fairness to WK, this decision was made over a year ago. There's no way he could have known what the market would look like two years in advance. I'm on record as saying I would not have given this contract to Bronson. Even if the market is empty this fall, I believe this was not a good risk to take.

My thinking is that there's always a Randy Wolf type FA available and that's probably the direction I'd go.

Why do you think Wolf or the like would take your money as opposed to some one else's? Its likely that an even worse deal would need to be handed out to get an even remotely comparable pitcher. Your other choice would be to dumpster dive for a cheap gas can like say Josh Fogg.