To sign or....

[Mario-Rijo]

......not to sign, Jay Bruce prior to Opening Day? Consider the following.....

Longoria’s a different animal. His agent, Paul Cohen, ought to have a very, very short client list after negotiating that disaster of a contract for Longoria. The Rays control him through 2016, when he will still cost a maximum of $14,050,000. And that’s if he makes the All-Star team and fulfills incentives related to MVP voting. Of all the people listed so far, Longoria might represent the most valuable asset

Longoria LINK

Although Justin (Upton) will only earn $500,000 this year aside from his $1.25 million bonus, he has already earned longtime security after only two full MLB seasons. Justin will earn $14.5 million in the final year of his contract in 2015, the second largest contract in the history of the Diamondbacks (6 years 51.25 mill).

Upton LINK

I think you must sign these potential superstars to long term deals early to keep them. The timing of such a deal is the most important aspect of it all and I think now is the time before he goes thru the roof. These deals aren't for every prospect but Bruce I think is a special case. Using these prior deals shouldn't we try to nestle Bruce in between the 2 (say 7-8 years 55 million) before he explodes? Also let's not forget he is not far from arbitration and Ryan Howard got 10 million on his 1st year in arb.

[LoganBuck]

I love the idea of locking up young stars. I need more from Jay Bruce before I can endorse the Reds doing so. He has had 3 hot streaks since June 2008. June 2008, September 2008, and September 2009. No arguing the potential. I just want a little more information before I commit.

[edabbs44]

I said not sure, because we don't know what the terms would be. Would I sign him like he just had 2 years like Lincecum? Not in a million years. But if the terms were reasonable for the organization, I'd give it thought since you'd be buying low.

[Degenerate39]

I'd be more concerned with signing Votto long term

[bucksfan2]

Until Bruce shows more consistency I would hold off on extending him long term. If he shows a better overall plate approach then I would look into locking him up longer term this off season.

As mentioned above Votto would be my #1 priority.

[lollipopcurve]

Too soon.

[westofyou]

Money is an asset, don't throw it at folks until you have to.

[paulrichjr]

Originally Posted by Degenerate39

I'd be more concerned with signing Votto long term

Before I opened the thread I was thinking it would be about Votto. When I saw Bruce I thought, "Why?" He needs to prove himself a little more. Votto on the other hand was a special hitter last year. You have to start thinking about him.

[thatcoolguy_22]

After Votto's 2009 how cheap would a LTC now actually be? Longoria spent all of a week or so in the bigs before the Rays locked him up for pennies. After Bruce's 2009 his value might not ever be lower. Just another way of looking at it. Of course I want Votto signed first, but just saying.

[RANDY IN INDY]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Money is an asset, don't throw it at folks until you have to.

Now that makes too much sense.

[Mario-Rijo]

Hmm, early yet but I gotta say I'm surprised at the lack of vision. After this year he will cost us a ridiculous sum of money, comparitively speaking of course. Oh I know he hasn't done it yet and Loganbuck makes an interesting point I'll say that but I don't know why one would wait here. You have to be able to evaluate a player on what he is likely to do if you want to make the most of your dollar. And in this case you could save lots of that particular asset. Sans some kind of catastrophic injury I think Jay is a wise investment and signing him now may allow you to hold onto that one additional player. I think you now have to wait on Votto to have a bit of a down season to get any kind of bargain.

But with Bruce the time to strike is now IMO. Jay is 22 (23 in April) and Joey is 26 (27 in sept.), a 6 year deal for Jay right now (below the annual cost of Justin Uptons deal) does multiple things for ya. It buys ya 1 and 1/2 half years of his FA years and gives you cost certainty throughout the life of the deal. He's still in the middle of his prime (29) at the end of it and Votto is 33 and thru his prime. It allows for us to keep both thru their primes. You wait for him to break out and both will command top dollar soon and now you likely have to decide between the 2 of them IMO.

[westofyou]

Lack of vision?

The team controls him for a few more years, he hasn't produced a season that would be worth him going to arb, and if he does this year it will be exactly one season of production.

A smart GM knows what his players are worth relative to their position and the fact is as good as Bruce can be he's not even in the position to command a multi year big figure contract yet.

[Marc D]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Money is an asset, don't throw it at folks until you have to.

By the time you "know" you have to, you have to throw a lot more.

Overpaying for what they think is certainty is probably the most common mistake people make in any market.

[dfs]

Austin Kearns.

So you sign your young can't miss outfielder to a long term contract and nothing can go wrong.

If Jay wants to lock himself up at a gimme price? sure I'll listen to his agent talk and depending on the concession made maybe I'll even sign the contract. But bad things happen to young players all the time.

[Marc D]

Originally Posted by dfs

Austin Kearns.

So you sign your young can't miss outfielder to a long term contract and nothing can go wrong.

If Jay wants to lock himself up at a gimme price? sure I'll listen to his agent talk and depending on the concession made maybe I'll even sign the contract. But bad things happen to young players all the time.

You price the risk of him not panning out into your offer. There is no way to avoid risk completely.

Right now the Reds have the advantage with Bruce and can exploit the fact people hate to lose money more than they like to win it. A LTC can essentially be positioned like an insurance policy for him to his agent. If something goes wrong he has coverage. The big money he would be passing on as a FA (if he indeed gets to that position) is the premium he pays for that insurance policy.

Once he has a big season his agent is going to be operating more from the "hope for gain" mindset than the "fear of loss" and the reds lose some leverage. The agent will anchor to a bigger number in his head and that will now become the figure the Reds are negotiating from.

Also, lets say Bruce plays in 150+ games and OPS's over .900. Does that give us a guarantee of future performance? Does it eliminate injury risk? No it doesn't. All it does is drive the price for his services up without actually reducing risk at all. That line of thinking falls under representative bias i.e. past performance is a true indicator of future success.

I don't see the sense in avoiding risk cheaply now out of a fear of being wrong, for taking the same risk later at a higher price.