Printable View
The Moustakas deal pushed the payroll to previously unknown heights. The payroll this year is ~$40MM…Quote:
Originally Posted by OesterPoster
They absolutely should spend money. They should look for good value, but if that’s not there - they should spend money for the sake of spending money. Having a young, cheap, competitive team and not spending money to supplement your roster is unacceptable.
Missouri is the Show Me State....Iowa is a bunch of Idiots Out Walking Around.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kc61
Get outta here Phil.Quote:
Originally Posted by OesterPoster
I don't care about how much they spend, I just want them to bring in good MLB players.Quote:
Originally Posted by OesterPoster
Incidentally, good MLB players cost money.
Reds spent something like 7 years collecting prospects in order to finish above 500 last year.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
Yes, it worked for one year.
Meanwhile, the Cardinals tried to win every year, so they were not rewarded with top draft picks that netted Greene, Lodollo, etc
Cards did not do a vet sell off until last year (when it made sense).
So they did not have years of dumping off vets to collect prospects like Steer, etc.
That's why the Reds had a better year, the system is set up to reward tanking.
You give a team enough high draft picks, eventually they will stumble into being good.
I mean seriously, who wants to bet that the Reds have a better winning percentage over the Cards over the next 10 years?
Reds have a huge head start as of now.. Reds have a good shot to be better than the Cards in 2024... So who's taking that bet?
It's delusional to think that the Reds have finally found "the answer" while the Cards suddenly got stupid.
No, Reds finally tanked their way to enough high draft picks and made a few good trades and got to 500.
Then they proceeded to do basically nothing at the trade deadline when they were in first place, squandering their year of good fortune.
- - - Updated - - -
No, they weren't the better run organization last year. If the Reds were the better run organization, they would have gotten pitching at the trade deadline.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
No, the trend is that when the Reds are close to the playoffs, they don't make a big move to get them there.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
They didn't replace Ludwick when he was hurt (even when Byrd was waived and IIRC, the total cost would have been under a million)
They didn't make a move last year when they were in first place at the end of July.
The Cards consistently make moves to improve the team. The Cards ownership wants to win, the Reds ownership doesn't.
The Cards front office makes bold moves. The Reds front office hordes prospects way too long in hopes of keeping costs down (this has been an issue with every GM other than Walt and Williams in recent history)..
Thus, we keep guys like Robert Stephenson, Reed, Senzel, etc WAY too long , give them way too much playing time. Reds have their writers put out stories about how "This is the year things are going to click for this guy".. when in reality, the guy flopped. Reds just keep giving the guy playing time because it's cheap.
I'm not saying it isn't justified to some degree, but this thread has become wildly pessimistic and angry. Good lord.
They had no chance of signing Sony Gray. He pretty much said that he picked the Cardinals before he even filed for FA.Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
That's probably why there were so many rumors of him going to StL.
Just because some bozo writer says "The Reds almost got Gray" does not mean it's true.
The Reds will "almost" get ERod and maybe Shotani too.
Why would you trust any of those reports, though?Quote:
Originally Posted by 757690
Just 2 years ago the Reds were in on every SS in baseball and didn't sign one of them. The FO came out in November and literally said they were going to use the money saved to sign a SS. Never did it.
The Birds Pooping on a Stick signed Lance Lynn, the equivalent of the Reds bringing back Cueto, and a guy who hasn’t been really that good in 3 years. They did land Gray though. Solid signing if he stays healthy and his performance doesn’t dip too drastically. I heard his HR/FB ration last year was abnormally low.
But yeah. The first two guys, if the Reds signed their equivalent and not the Cards it’d be taken as trolling the fan base for nostalgia and overpaying for a guy who isn’t that good. Maybe those two will bounce back, but I see that as a big fat whatever.
And the year before that they were in on every free agent in baseball and brought in a ton. There’s evidence in recent history that cuts both ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedTeamGo!
As far as the guys citing 30 years of evidence, Schott and Linder have nothing to do with this. Castellini has shown himself willing to spend money when the time is right. He did in the 2010-2013 run and he did in 2019-2020. I wish he would every year, but, for the most part, when they say they are going to spend, they do
It does not matter who the owners are (and many of the current owners (26) have been in this for the duration of those thirty years) the Reds are not a splashy FA team, not ever and likely not in the future. "Spending" is a soft term, I can go out to buy a car and the market might say oh... he's gonna buy a 70K car, when in reality I'm looking at used 20K cars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Old school 1983
Both approaches can be defined as "spending" Last winter the Reds claimed they would not spend recklessly, which in MLB is paying 30 year old guys 5 year contracts to throw a baseball. I tend to have to lean on the Reds 130-year old history of being a cheaper organization in most aspects, including spending on FA talent
Maybe its from years and years of having the team you root for being irrelevant most of the time and when they are relevant they manage to do things like get no hit in the playoffs.Quote:
Originally Posted by NebraskaRed
The most likely reason why the Reds did that big FA spending spree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Old school 1983
1. Dick Williams actually wanted to win, he had the owner's ears, they decided to give it a try.
2. Attendance was bad from all those years of tanking. Reds drew 2.4 million fans in 2015. After tanking, attendance was at 1.6 in 2018 and 1.8 in 2019. At the time, the farm system had no help on the horizon. Reds had a few solid players like Castillo, etc on the roster. It made finanical sense to make some moves in the offseason and get the fanbase energized again.
So let's look at this offseason.
1. Krall has not shown a desire to win. He most likely had money to spend at the trade deadline (since he had money to sign those waiver guys), but he was too timid to make a move. Until proven otherwise, Krall is firmly in the "horde prospects forever" camp instead of "Win now". Krall said the Reds were "definitely buyers" at the deadline, yet he basically did nothing. This winter, he's been very evasive when asked about making moves.. Other than some vague "we have some money to spend". It's not really encouraging.
2. Reds drew over 2 million last year on a shoestring budget. There's really no business case to add a lot of payroll if you are the owners. Most likely, they can do nothing over the winter and still sell about 2 million tickets next year. Now, if the 2024 team regresses, that will hurt 2025 sales, but I bet they are comfortable with that risk.
I'm hearing reports that you've been talking to the Ferrari people about swapping a 2010 Corolla for a lightly used 2022 RomaQuote:
Originally Posted by westofyou