Phil Castellini surprised that Opening Day tickets still unsold

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

Idk man, people really started to tune out during the last tank cycle. In 2018, by like June or so, it was rare to find a bar or restaurant with the game on around town. I think they’re at risk of that again depending how the next year or two go.

---

That's true. Columbus sports bars were even worse.
They would have random sports talk shows on and other filler during Reds games during the tank cycle.
In 2020 and 2021 when the Reds were more respectable, they started putting the games on again.
You had to ask a waitress to put the game on one of the 40 TVs.. even when there was almost no other sports even on.
I suspect that if the Reds take a nosedive, they will stop tuning them in again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfboy

Another poverty PR piece from the Enquirer: https://www.cincinnati.com/story/new...ry/9514001002/

They really want you to know that Bob doesn't have as much money as other people.

---

More nonsense.
The Reds revenue was cut due to covid.. yes.. but their expenses were dramatically cut too.. Prorated player salaries, no minor league expenses, other layoffs and cost cutting measurers.

So Bob is getting his puppets in the press to write more articles about how the Reds are just a poor small market team and he's putting back every cent he makes into the team.
Oh yea, and in 4-5 years, the team will be "rebuilt" again and maybe they will be good by then.
He just keeps going back to the same lies.
It will be interesting to see this years' attendance numbers.

Does this mean we'll be able to get a seat at the Moerlein House prior to the game?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by REDREAD

More nonsense.
The Reds revenue was cut due to covid.. yes.. but their expenses were dramatically cut too.. Prorated player salaries, no minor league expenses, other layoffs and cost cutting measurers.

So Bob is getting his puppets in the press to write more articles about how the Reds are just a poor small market team and he's putting back every cent he makes into the team.
Oh yea, and in 4-5 years, the team will be "rebuilt" again and maybe they will be good by then.
He just keeps going back to the same lies.
It will be interesting to see this years' attendance numbers.

---

Second one in the last week. Jason Williams had a predictably mediocre piece singing Bob's praises and warning of the bogeyman that is out-of-town ownership.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfboy

Second one in the last week. Jason Williams had a predictably mediocre piece singing Bob's praises and warning of the bogeyman that is out-of-town ownership.

---

They also had a puff piece from Andy Furman with the same boogeyman who will move the team crap.

Full court press on treating Cincinnati fans like idiots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KronoRed

They also had a puff piece from Andy Furman with the same boogeyman who will move the team crap.

Full court press on treating Cincinnati fans like idiots.

---

More like battered spouses, honestly.

Same exact playbook. We must tolerate the abuse. Because if the abuse isn't tolerated, the abuser might leave and then we'll be all alone. Seriously. That's the rhetoric in a nutshell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfboy

Another poverty PR piece from the Enquirer: https://www.cincinnati.com/story/new...ry/9514001002/

They really want you to know that Bob doesn't have as much money as other people.

---

Pretty funny no one was willing to put their actual name on the byline lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

It's the market that affects payroll. Not the ownership structure. We've got a $100mill payroll in a rebuild yr. We're not the kind of market that can handle a top ten payroll

---

This is just such nonsense on every level. The brainwashing these people have done to Reds fans is just a disgrace.

They are going to bring in close to $300 million of total revenue in 2022. In most of the last 16 years they’ve been able to afford spending 45-50% of revenue towards payroll. This year they are looking at ~35%. Maybe it might be worth going that low if they jumped it up to 55-60% for a few years (payflex), but they won’t do that because they are cheap idiots that a cutting off their own noses to save face.

Yes Castellini is one of the least wealthy MLB owners. That is pretty much fact. It doesn't excuse him being a poor ower.

I do believe they lost money due to the pandemic, it doesn't excuse what they did this off season.

Overall I think Castellini has been tone deaf in his moves and done a terrible job in communication.

FWIW the moves they made, the drafting they have done recently, and their international signings may very well build one heck of a club in the coming years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

Pretty funny no one was willing to put their actual name on the byline lol

---

I noticed that too, that has to be such a bad feeling for a journalist

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeatherPants

This is just such nonsense on every level. The brainwashing these people have done to Reds fans is just a disgrace.

They are going to bring in close to $300 million of total revenue in 2022. In most of the last 16 years they’ve been able to afford spending 45-50% of revenue towards payroll. This year they are looking at ~35%. Maybe it might be worth going that low if they jumped it up to 55-60% for a few years (payflex), but they won’t do that because they are cheap idiots that a cutting off their own noses to save face.

---

The Houston Astros are #10 at $172 million. What makes you think that we can afford the payroll of the 4th largest market in the country?

It's about positioning and communication plus having a competent GM that can articulate a plan. No one should realistically expect the Reds to be a top 15 spending franchise year in and year out. Frankly they haven't cut payroll enough over the last 15 years. They need to ebb and flow with payflex and hire everyone they can from the Rays, As, Brewers and Cleveland organizations.

Baseball has moved to young guns with insanely filthy stuff. Good to see the Reds going that direction with the pen and starters consistent with MLB and also the Reds minor league organization direction starting with Boody a few years back. Also like the team embracing the new pitch calling technology.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

The Houston Astros are #10 at $172 million. What makes you think that we can afford the payroll of the 4th largest market in the country?

---

Also noting the Rangers and Astros are now, by far, the two largest markets in baseball without a 2nd team siphoning the local revenue streams. This is why was thrilled to see the Astros move out of the NL Central and even better into the AL years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oregonred

It's about positioning and communication plus having a competent GM that can articulate a plan. No one should realistically expect the Reds to be a top 15 spending franchise year in and year out. Frankly they haven't cut payroll enough over the last 15 years. They need to ebb and flow with payflex and hire everyone they can from the Rays, As, Brewers and Cleveland organizations.

Baseball has moved to young guns with insanely filthy stuff. Good to see the Reds going that direction with the pen and starters consistent with MLB and also the Reds minor league organization direction starting with Boody a few years back. Also like the team embracing the new pitch calling technology.

---

You get it. Fans who insist this team can spend with the big boys are setting themselves up for endless disappointment and frustration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

Pretty funny no one was willing to put their actual name on the byline lol

---

It's typical not to have a byline with a series of charts like this, as opposed to an article written by a particular reporter.

The owners of the Washington Nationals are considering selling, and the owner of the Baltimore Orioles released a dubious statement to the fans about how the franchise deserves millions from the Legislature to redevelop Camden Yards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

You get it. Fans who insist this team can spend with the big boys are setting themselves up for endless disappointment and frustration.

---

As others mentioned, it should be cyclical. You spend up in years when things are coming together, then pull back as players age and after you win something, like at least a playoff series.

The Reds should have had a top-10 payroll for Joey Votto's prime years - say 26-33. Then pull back for a few years. This should always be the strategy when they manage to develop a generational player.

Instead, they fumble around year to year with no real plan beyond making money.

Let’s just say for the sake of argument. If the Reds started using their resources competently and built a winner, would anyone really care what the payroll was?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old school 1983

Let’s just say for the sake of argument. If the Reds started using their resources competently and built a winner, would anyone really care what the payroll was?

---

I mean kind of yeah. It’s sort of like the Rays are usually good, but they could probably perennially be Dodgers good with even a middle of the pack payroll. The ability to pay for good players is always going to make your team better, no matter what.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

I mean kind of yeah. It’s sort of like the Rays are usually good, but they could probably perennially be Dodgers good with even a middle of the pack payroll. The ability to pay for good players is always going to make your team better, no matter what.

---

The history of baseball, especially the FA era, is littered with high spenders who have crashed and burned. That’s why the competence means more to me than the dollar amount once it gets over a certain threshold. The Reds generally spend more than enough to have a winner. Assemble the team competently. If they start doing that and still aren’t able to get over the top ill say start spending more. The Reds generally spend near double of some teams that find consistent success. With a competent FO that sticks to a plan, the Reds could easily be that Dodgers version of the Rays you mentioned. They took that first step and trimmed the fat off the roster. People can go in circles all day about the moves, but the only real loss was Winker. The Reds now have a loaded farm and young players maturing at the MLB level as we speak. Couple that with payroll to spare in the coming years, and the Reds could very well be that team you mentioned.

Yeah, it's tough being the owner of a major league baseball team in these times. LMAO

I'm going to wait to see how this '22 version of the Reds does before I say anything about this owner (payroll). I'm getting tired of steppin' in it. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old school 1983

The history of baseball, especially the FA era, is littered with high spenders who have crashed and burned.

---

Feel free to compare the relative successes of those who spend on payroll and those who don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

The Houston Astros are #10 at $172 million. What makes you think that we can afford the payroll of the 4th largest market in the country?

---

Please explain the San Diego Padres.

Over the last five years (including the COVID years) , the Padres have averaged $247.6 million in revenue and the Reds have averaged $231.2 million in revenue. The Padres had an opening day payroll of $209 million.

Last year they were at $174 million.

They are actually doing what the Reds could be doing, using "payflex" money from when they were tanking and using it to make a run at contending.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old school 1983

The history of baseball, especially the FA era, is littered with high spenders who have crashed and burned. That’s why the competence means more to me than the dollar amount once it gets over a certain threshold. The Reds generally spend more than enough to have a winner. Assemble the team competently. If they start doing that and still aren’t able to get over the top ill say start spending more. The Reds generally spend near double of some teams that find consistent success. With a competent FO that sticks to a plan, the Reds could easily be that Dodgers version of the Rays you mentioned. They took that first step and trimmed the fat off the roster. People can go in circles all day about the moves, but the only real loss was Winker. The Reds now have a loaded farm and young players maturing at the MLB level as we speak. Couple that with payroll to spare in the coming years, and the Reds could very well be that team you mentioned.

---

I think the overall spending level is deceiving. They have one contract that was signed 10 years ago taking up 23% of the payroll and another that was signed in the Williams spending spree accounting for another 15%. Another 7% (also from the Willians spending spree) is going to a guy they just cut. That's roughly 45% of the payroll. I think you have to look player by player and see how much of the roster is filled with retreads and longshot kids. They have a decent cheap young core in Stephenson, India, Barrero, Senzel, Greene, Lodolo and Santillan. They have the two big contracts (one is a large negative at this point), they have Castillo and Mahle. They have a couple decent veteran role players in Naquin, Solano and Farmer. The rest are hired guns on the decline, retreads or kids who aren't really highly rated prospects. I think that kind of roster make-up has too much wishing and hoping involved. Wishing that declining vets (Pham, Moose, Minor) can have one more good season, the retreads (Moran, Strickland, Wilson, Garcia, Warren) have a career year and that you win the lottery multiple times with longshot kids (anyone with a couple years experience or less not already named). Some of those guys may pan out, but too many have to for this team.

They are adding more kids who might be part of the core in the next year or two (McLain, De La Cruz, Williamson) which should help but they need to spend on more solid veterans to fill holes for this to be a contending team.

Would this be too much to ask from ownership?

"We've Failed You. When we bought this team 16 years ago, we penned a letter promising you championship baseball. We promised you one of the most respected organizations in baseball. We have fallen well short on those promises. We also promised in that letter that we would not rest until you are happy. You are not happy and you shouldn't be. We have heard the calls to sell the team but we have unfinished business. We have broken your trust and we plan on gaining it back with our actions, not our words"

This "how dare you question us?" press tour is pretty unflattering

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bourgeois Zee

Feel free to compare the relative successes of those who spend on payroll and those who don't.

---

Thing is, that’s not a Bob Castellini problem. That’s an MLB issue. Of course teams like the Dodgers that have the ability to have payrolls the size of GDPs of some counties have an advantage. Until that’s dealt with, you live with the hand you are dealt and that’s a lower middle of the pack payroll. Spend the money competently. You still have more than the Rays or the As who seem to do decently well most years. The Brewers, the favorites in the central are only at 129M this year according to spotrac. The Reds have shown that they spend more than enough money to build a competitive team. The greater issue is with the competency in doing so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redsfaithful

As others mentioned, it should be cyclical. You spend up in years when things are coming together, then pull back as players age and after you win something, like at least a playoff series.

The Reds should have had a top-10 payroll for Joey Votto's prime years - say 26-33. Then pull back for a few years. This should always be the strategy when they manage to develop a generational player.

Instead, they fumble around year to year with no real plan beyond making money.

---

I sure can't defend their plan. But I think top ten payroll is a big ask. That doesn't happen in cities like Milwaukee, Cleveland, KC, Oakland and Tampa. Those teams have a plan. Can't expect us to do any better than those franchises

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeatherPants

Please explain the San Diego Padres.

Over the last five years (including the COVID years) , the Padres have averaged $247.6 million in revenue and the Reds have averaged $231.2 million in revenue. The Padres had an opening day payroll of $209 million.

Last year they were at $174 million.

They are actually doing what the Reds could be doing, using "payflex" money from when they were tanking and using it to make a run at contending.

---

Quote:

---

“We’re not a small-market franchise,” Seidler said in February. “We represent the eighth largest city in America, and that’s the kind of trust we have with our great city, our fans and the people that support us. We ping-pong back and forth with the city, meaning we hold up our end of the bargain. They’ve proven for years their support for this franchise. You talk about trust, that’s how I view it right now and for a long, long time to come.”

---

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...ights/2564744/

Our market is not comparable

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old school 1983

Thing is, that’s not a Bob Castellini problem. That’s an MLB issue. Of course teams like the Dodgers that have the ability to have payrolls the size of GDPs of some counties have an advantage. Until that’s dealt with, you live with the hand you are dealt and that’s a lower middle of the pack payroll. Spend the money competently. You still have more than the Rays or the As who seem to do decently well most years. The Brewers, the favorites in the central are only at 129M this year according to spotrac. The Reds have shown that they spend more than enough money to build a competitive team. The greater issue is with the competency in doing so.

---

Let's accept the fact that our Reds can't spend in the top half of MLB. You can still do a lot with players with under 6 yrs service time. The Reds have not done a good job with that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

I sure can't defend their plan. But I think top ten payroll is a big ask. That doesn't happen in cities like Milwaukee, Cleveland, KC, Oakland and Tampa. Those teams have a plan. Can't expect us to do any better than those franchises

---

Guardians 2018 134,000,000 payroll (worth $151,327,245.95 today)

Guardians 2017 $124,000,000 payroll (worth $143,524,738.90 today)

Royals 2016 $131,000,000 payroll (worth $154,857,133.33 today)

Royals 2017 143,000,000 payroll ( worth $165,516,432.77 today)


In that same time period, the Reds biggest payroll was 2019 $121,000,000 (worth $134 million today), so some of those teams your listing are doing way more than the Reds are doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MoneyInTheBank

Would this be too much to ask from ownership?

"We've Failed You. When we bought this team 16 years ago, we penned a letter promising you championship baseball. We promised you one of the most respected organizations in baseball. We have fallen well short on those promises. We also promised in that letter that we would not rest until you are happy. You are not happy and you shouldn't be. We have heard the calls to sell the team but we have unfinished business. We have broken your trust and we plan on gaining it back with our actions, not our words"

This "how dare you question us?" press tour is pretty unflattering

---

Rich people aren't generally into being humble. That's not a personality trait common with folks worth $400 million

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...ights/2564744/

Our market is not comparable

---

But the Revenue is comparable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GAC

Yeah, it's tough being the owner of a major league baseball team in these times. LMAO

---

Yep, I don't know how they manage to "Scrape by" :lol:
This year is so frustrating because they had money to keep some of the players, but instead spent it on Minor and some bench guys.
I don't know if that was part of a stupid plan by Krall, or ownership feeling the wrath of the fans and deciding to up the budget, but the
result is a sub 500 team. It's pretty good evidence that there is not a good plan in place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MoneyInTheBank

Would this be too much to ask from ownership?

"We've Failed You. When we bought this team 16 years ago, we penned a letter promising you championship baseball. We promised you one of the most respected organizations in baseball. We have fallen well short on those promises. We also promised in that letter that we would not rest until you are happy. You are not happy and you shouldn't be. We have heard the calls to sell the team but we have unfinished business. We have broken your trust and we plan on gaining it back with our actions, not our words"

This "how dare you question us?" press tour is pretty unflattering

---

The problem is, if ownership writes a letter like that, fans will remember it and then try to hold them accountable when it's "Business as Usual"
Ownership could care less if they only draw 1 million fans this year, as long as the TV money and other money keeps rolling in.
They aren't concerned with the longterm damage to their brand. And honestly from a business point of view, I can see why they don't care about the brand.
Carl Lindner nuked the brand, Bob ran the club well under Walt, fans came back, Bob started tanking, yet his investment has gone up roughly 3-4 times, plus he's taken profits from the club.. Owners can nuke their brand and get financially rewarded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeatherPants

Guardians 2018 134,000,000 payroll (worth $151,327,245.95 today)

Guardians 2017 $124,000,000 payroll (worth $143,524,738.90 today)

Royals 2016 $131,000,000 payroll (worth $154,857,133.33 today)

Royals 2017 143,000,000 payroll ( worth $165,516,432.77 today)


In that same time period, the Reds biggest payroll was 2019 $121,000,000 (worth $134 million today), so some of those teams your listing are doing way more than the Reds are doing.

---

The Reds were in that ballpark 2020. Their Opening Day payroll was $147 mill. 40 man payroll was $165mill.

https://legacy.baseballprospectus.co...ncinnati-reds/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeatherPants

But the Revenue is comparable.

---

If that's the case then SD is the exception rather than the rule. Without looking at their books, I don't know how they're doing it. Using your numbers, SD is spending far more than 50% of their revenue on player salaries. That's highly unusual

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old school 1983

Thing is, that’s not a Bob Castellini problem. That’s an MLB issue. Of course teams like the Dodgers that have the ability to have payrolls the size of GDPs of some counties have an advantage. Until that’s dealt with, you live with the hand you are dealt and that’s a lower middle of the pack payroll. Spend the money competently. You still have more than the Rays or the As who seem to do decently well most years. The Brewers, the favorites in the central are only at 129M this year according to spotrac. The Reds have shown that they spend more than enough money to build a competitive team. The greater issue is with the competency in doing so.

---

Reds ownership has a responsibility to put the best team they can on the field each year.
They told us they needed to tank awhile, then they would try to win.
That's the broken promise. Letting Miley go for nothing and trading off other good players for magic beans is another broken promise.
Spending the saved money on retreads instead is either poor planning or evidence of lack of a plan.
You can't tell me that the Reds are better off than they were at the end of last season.
India, Stephenson, and the other young players seem to be a good core, until you realize they will be dumped in 2-3 years for more kids..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

The Reds were in that ballpark 2020. Their Opening Day payroll was $147 mill. 40 man payroll was $165mill.

https://legacy.baseballprospectus.co...ncinnati-reds/

---

2020 was the pandemic year. Actual payroll was $55 million

If the Reds aren't putting +45% of their revenue towards payroll, they aren't doing everything they can to win. I'm not sure how that's a controversial statement.

Using 2022 numbers, that means at least a $130 million payroll. Personally, I'm sure they can spend more, but that can be a debatable figure. The 45% isn't really debatable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeatherPants

If the Reds aren't putting +45% of their revenue towards payroll, they aren't doing everything they can to win. I'm not sure how that's a controversial statement.

Using 2022 numbers, that means at least a $130 million payroll. Personally, I'm sure they can spend more, but that can be a debatable figure. The 45% isn't really debatable.

---

Exactly. Making arguments based upon yearly dollar numbers rather than payroll as a percentage of overall revenue just doesn't move the conversation forward.

The fact of the matter is the Reds have the ability to spend a higher percentage of revenue on payroll, but they choose not to. It's pretty easy to glean without a full balance sheet, just knowing what other teams take in. It's frankly one of the main reasons for fan outrage recently IMO.