$22.5 Million dollars

[RedsManRick]

There's every reason to believe that his contract has already become prohibitive. The way I see it, he is now untradeable unless the Reds eat the lion's share of the contract. I doubt any other team in baseball would take over Bronson's contract as it stands now. Because of that, it was a bad move on WK's part

I'd disagree. If the Reds put Arroyo on the market, I think we'd have a number of teams interested. Again, let's not overcomplicate this. Arroyo is a 31 year old pitcher coming off two years of 225 IP and a sub 4.00 ERA. He's signed through 2010 for a total of $24.45M including this year. There's an $11M team option for 2011. That has value.

Now maybe this is blaspheme, but fiscal freedom doesn't win ballgames. There are a limited number of pitchers capable of pitching 200+ IP a year and allowing something around a 4.50 ERA. If you want to win in MLB, you have to have a few of those guys -- and there aren't enough for every team to have enough.

Who are you spending Arroyo's money on? Now remember that, in the spirit of this thread, you already have $11M to spend from the other contracts which magically went away. The Reds aren't pinching pennies. They have significant production coming from very little cost over the next 2-3 years both in the pitching staff (Cueto, Volquez, Bailey, Burton, Bray) and the lineup (Votto, Bruce, EE, Phillips to some extent).

How do you intend not just to shed salary, but to get more production from that salary -- because fiscal freedom is just a means to an ends. If the idea is to replace Arroyo's production with Bailey, Fogg, Shearn, or who knows who else, I don't see the point.

Again, I'm not against trading Arroyo away. I just need a little more logic than shedding salary for the sake of it or adding Brandon Inge.

[RedsManRick]

I agree to a point.

Every decline starts somewhere. Obviously you believe that BA's hasn't begun. Some think this is it.

Obviously you haven't read my posts. I DO think his decline has begun. I just don't think that his decline looks like this:

2006: Star
2007: Decent
2008: Replacement level player with a prohibitive contract

I happen to think that he has some value and that he will pitch better, but not enough for this team to drop $22MM on over the next two years. Especially when they will probably be ready to take that serious step towards contention in his last year or the year after.

If they can get some solid long-term value for him now I would hop on it qithout thinking twice. But I think that the task is rather large, since there is some doubt in his effectiveness and he is owed a good chunk of change over the next 2 years.

Again, I agree with the basic concept -- IF we can get some good long term value. But trading him for a spare part, or for a maybe prospect, just doesn't do it for me.

"Some doubt of his effectiveness" -- again what do you think his decline looks like and, aside from this tiny 4 start sample, what is your concept of his decline rooted in?

[redsrule2500]

Maybe so, but you gotta believe that all these HRs will only turn into longer HRs when the weather heats up.

I think the guy is a bad fit for the Reds' park.

What the heck? If he does what he did in 2006 or even 2007 he is a decent starter, and worth having on the team. The pay might be a little high, but he will pitch a ton of good innings.

[Sea Ray]

What the heck? If he does what he did in 2006 or even 2007 he is a decent starter, and worth having on the team. The pay might be a little high, but he will pitch a ton of good innings.

That's a big if. Those two years were among the best in his career. I hope you're right but I foresee him pitching like a 4th or 5th starter while paying him like an ace in 2009 and 2010 and that's not a recipe for success in a market like this.

If I'm WK I don't give him this extension. I try to sign him for about 2 yrs/$15mill and if he decides to walk I take the draft pick compensation and say thanks for the 3 good years.

At the very worst you can likely replace him with a Jose Silva type FA but hopefully you're smart and you can land a guy like Justin Germano.

[mth123]

That's a big if. Those two years were among the best in his career. I hope you're right but I foresee him pitching like a 4th or 5th starter while paying him like an ace in 2009 and 2010 and that's not a recipe for success in a market like this.

If I'm WK I don't give him this extension. I try to sign him for about 2 yrs/$15mill and if he decides to walk I take the draft pick compensation and say thanks for the 3 good years.

At the very worst you can likely replace him with a Jose Silva type FA but hopefully you're smart and you can land a guy like Justin Germano.

Except, $11 Million per year is not paying him like an ace. Its the going rate for solid mid-rotation vets these days and that is what Arroyo is until he goes longer without being effective.

[RedsManRick]

That's a big if. Those two years were among the best in his career. I hope you're right but I foresee him pitching like a 4th or 5th starter while paying him like an ace in 2009 and 2010 and that's not a recipe for success in a market like this.

Not that my personal projection of Arroyo is any more prescient than yours, but based on what exactly?

If I'm WK I don't give him this extension. I try to sign him for about 2 yrs/$15mill and if he decides to walk I take the draft pick compensation and say thanks for the 3 good years.

At the very worst you can likely replace him with a Jose Silva type FA but hopefully you're smart and you can land a guy like Justin Germano.

If a team has an equally capable, but cheaper starter on it's hands, why would they trade us him for Arroyo? And if you're going to FA, what kind of starter do you think you can get to replace him (who's actually going to be a FA) and at what cost?

I would suggest that the $20M over two years we have committed to him in 2009 and 2010 is hardly "ace" money in today's market. It's mid-rotation starter money -- you know, exactly what Arroyo is and likely will continue to be over the next 2.5 years. That doesn't mean I think the extension was a great idea. We had a bargain and gave it away; I've argued the "trade Arroyo" side of this conversation before. But there's no need to artificially inflate the risk of a collapse of production or to suggest that we could definitely get a better return on that investment elsewhere without providing any reasonable scenarios in which that actually happens.

This whole conversation reeks of grass-is-greener hand wringing over something that isn't really a problem. The money spent on Arroyo isn't the most efficient, but it's hardly "prohibitive". This team doesn't lack cash -- and hasn't lacked cash. It's lacked talent and it's lacked production. Trading away production for cash isn't a position I would quickly get behind. And suggesting that Arroyo is going to suddenly stop giving us production is chicken littlesque. If we're going to worry about a contract given to a 30 year old starter on the basis that he's likely to collapse in the near future, we should be probably dump Harang now too. What if HE collapses -- then we're in big trouble. Better flip him for a useful piece.

The reality of the situation is that this conversation is borne out of a sub-par four start run to start the season. If he had allowed 3 ER less over the 4 starts, and carried a 4.23 ERA in to today, he wouldn't have been cited in the opening post of this thread and this entire conversation wouldn't be happening. That should suggest just a bit how exaggerated the "run before it blows" argument is.

[TRF]

Who are you spending Arroyo's money on? Now remember that, in the spirit of this thread, you already have $11M to spend from the other contracts which magically went away. The Reds aren't pinching pennies. They have significant production coming from very little cost over the next 2-3 years both in the pitching staff (Cueto, Volquez, Bailey, Burton, Bray) and the lineup (Votto, Bruce, EE, Phillips to some extent).

Who says you have to spend it? It's not how much you spend, but rather how. 3/5 of the Reds rotation makes 1 mil or less. Arroyo would likely be replaced by Bailey, so that makes it 4/5. Now you can be competitive in in the FA market for either a SP if any of the cheap 4 don't impress enough or go after top tier BP talent. Since it's likely Griffey comes off the books, maybe you go after a RF, if there is no one in the system ready. there is nothing wrong with having cheap young talent.

[Sea Ray]

I disagree with you Rick that we're not paying him ace money. He's the 14th highest paid starting pitcher in baseball: http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/200...contracts.html

He's now 23-28 as a Cincinnati Red and you've already admitted that his decline has begun. I don't see how you can see him as being anything but an albatross to this team's payroll in the next couple of years.

If he's say 9-12 with a 4.50 ERA in the future then we can't afford him at $25mill for two years. Remember this thread Rick. I hope you're right and I'm dead wrong but I think time will show you to be the cockeyed optimist on this one.

[GAC]

IMHO, BA pretty much peaked in 05 and 06. He didn't have a bad year last year, and was a victim of this BP quite a bit. He was 0-2 last April in 5 starts, had an ERA of 2.86, and was the victim of not getting any run support. But this April looks different in that he is only lasting 5 inning/start, and his ERA is more then double compared to last April.

I agree with FCB in that Arroyo is not really suited for GABP. He has given up 6 Hrs in 21.1 innings. If that pace continues, then it's not a pretty sight for 2008. It seems to me, just from an observation standpoint, that he is struggling with consistency when it comes to his breaking stuff, which is causing him to rely more on a fastball that just isn't there. And that is where he is getting hurt.

I didn't agree with the extension by WK at the time, though I can understand WK doing it coming off that '06 season and the fact we were starving for quality starting pitching. He gets 4.5 mil this year, and then it escalates to 9.5 next year, and 11 mil in 2010, with an option for 2011. Pecota stated BA was worth 15.5 mil in 2009/2010.

I just wonder if WK, in all honesty, regrets that extension.

[*BaseClogger*]

I disagree with you Rick that we're not paying him ace money. He's the 14th highest paid starting pitcher in baseball: http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/200...contracts.html.

That is a bit misleading, as he will make $11M in 2009, and there are a lot of pitchers making very close to that ($9M or more). He's probably in the group of the 30 highest paid pitchers in MLB, which means he is likely making too much. However, you can afford to overpay a little bit if it means you are getting lots of innings.

He's now 23-28 as a Cincinnati Red and you've already admitted that his decline has begun. I don't see how you can see him as being anything but an albatross to this team's payroll in the next couple of years.

If he's say 9-12 with a 4.50 ERA in the future then we can't afford him at $25mill for two years. Remember this thread Rick. I hope you're right and I'm dead wrong but I think time will show you to be the cockeyed optimist on this one.

9-12 with a 4.50 ERA sounds about right... with 200 innings. That's big, and we most certainly can afford him, especially with the pitchers we have had around here recently. A guy who I would expect to put up similar numbers in GABP, Derek Lowe, will likely fetch a similar contract this season at age 36. That contract is the going rate these days for league-average pitching. It sucks. I think Rick would feel differently if this was a five year contract, but it only runs through 2010...

[RedsManRick]

I disagree with you Rick that we're not paying him ace money. He's the 14th highest paid starting pitcher in baseball: http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/200...contracts.html

He's now 23-28 as a Cincinnati Red and you've already admitted that his decline has begun. I don't see how you can see him as being anything but an albatross to this team's payroll in the next couple of years.

If he's say 9-12 with a 4.50 ERA in the future then we can't afford him at $25mill for two years. Remember this thread Rick. I hope you're right and I'm dead wrong but I think time will show you to be the cockeyed optimist on this one.

If he gives us 200 IP per year and a 4.50 ERA over the rest of his contract, he's worth the money, easy. You can't have a bargain at every spot on the roster and still have enough talent to compete. You have to pay for some of it. Arroyo isn't a bargain and may be over paid moving forward. But again, the bottom line here is wins and losses (team, not pitchers'), not how efficiently you get them. Over the next 2-3 years, the Reds have Cueto, Volquez, and Bailey dirt cheap. They're going to get Junior off the books. Money simply isn't the be-all, end-all. It's production. If you're asking me if I'd pay 25M for a rotation of Harang, Cueto, Volquez, Arroyo, Bailey in 2009 and 2010 versus 15M and swapping out Arroyo for Tom Shearn, Matt Belisle, or bargain FA guy, I'll take the former. Arroyo's contract simply doesn't preclude us from doing anything that we need to do to win -- and I'm a lot less confident than you are that his production can be so easily replaced.

It shocks me how willing people are to give up a reliable league average starter for financial flexibility. I guess I'd rather a bird in hand than a bush full of dollar bills and maybe an egg. If you can convince me that trading Arroyo actually makes us a better team, not just a richer one, I'd be a little more receptive to the argument. The "trade away production for money and prospects" argument only works when you have good confidence in the prospects and/or a very clear plan for turning that cash back in to production.

[Sea Ray]

9-12 with a 4.50 ERA sounds about right... with 200 innings. That's big, and we most certainly can afford him, especially with the pitchers we have had around here recently. A guy who I would expect to put up similar numbers in GABP, Derek Lowe, will likely fetch a similar contract this season at age 36. That contract is the going rate these days for league-average pitching. It sucks. I think Rick would feel differently if this was a five year contract, but it only runs through 2010...

I seriously doubt that Derek Lowe will get a $10mill+ contract from a small market team. Our Reds have to be managed differently than the LA Dodgers or the Bosox. Those teams can afford the luxury of pouring that kind of money into a # 4 or 5 starter. We can't.

[Kc61]

Is it correct that Patterson has only K'd 4 times this year? If that's so, I would expect the hits to start falling for him soon against righty pitching.

[Sea Ray]

If you can convince me that trading Arroyo actually makes us a better team, not just a richer one, I'd be a little more receptive to the argument. The "trade away production for money and prospects" argument only works when you have good confidence in the prospects and/or a very clear plan for turning that cash back in to production.

I am confident that the Reds can wave around 2yrs/$25mill and attract a better pitcher than Bronson and we haven't even touched the possibility of injury when committing to a pitcher long term like they have with Arroyo.

This is not a risk I'd have taken were I running this team.

[*BaseClogger*]

I seriously doubt that Derek Lowe will get a $10mill+ contract from a small market team. Our Reds have to be managed differently than the LA Dodgers or the Bosox. Those teams can afford the luxury of pouring that kind of money into a # 4 or 5 starter. We can't.

Like the KC Royals (Gil Meche) or the Milwuakee Brewers (Jeff Suppan)? Or the money we poured into a closer?

Oh, and Derek Lowe is much better than a #4 or #5...