Reds 2021-22 Offseason Rumors Thread

[Old school 1983]

As I stated in another thread, that particular offseason spending spree was an outlier and a directive from ownership (in this case, Cast, IMO) following the botched rebuild. It's not something we should expect on even a semi regular basis moving forward.

In other words, Dan 's main point about risk aversion still stands, IMO.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

Maybe maybe not. It’ll be interested to see how they spend next time they have a big chunk of change to spend to add to young talent.

[Bourgeois Zee]

I think the one thing we all forget about the Reds is that they're paralyzingly fearful of any risk. If a move is risky, they won't take it. And that's a recipe for this mediocre garbage we're getting each season.

I disagree slightly with your assessment, pointing to Shogo and Moustakas as risky free agents. (Miley too, though for less cash.) Castellanos was risky too.

The issue is that they don't take enough risks for their market size. Perpetually, they risk a little, then no more.

[HokieRed]

It seems the only risks this franchise will accept involve retaining their own players (Bailey, Votto, Suarez etc.). But you're right, they seem to shy away from risk-taking when it involves changing the status quo, especially when the current status quo is on the downside, which is alarming, IMO.

Sent from my SM-T560NU using Tapatalk

Agree with your first point entirely, which is why I find the decisions on Barnhart and Miley very interesting. Typically they'd have been scared to death to lose these valuable assets (much like most of the board here, frankly).

[NeilHamburger]

Reds hope to be the first MLB club next year to pay 26 guys league minimum:

https://twitter.com/JonHeyman/status...28696564269060

[757690]

Reds hope to be the first MLB club next year to pay 26 guys league minimum:

https://twitter.com/JonHeyman/status...28696564269060

Again, the wording is important.

“The Reds are signaling…”

My guess is that Heyman is considering the Barnhart and Miley moves as the evidence that “The Reds are signaling…” and nothing else.

He did this last year too, and admitted it. Last year the exact same rumors were everywhere and nothing came from them.

[oregonred]

Again, the wording is important.

“The Reds are signaling…”

My guess is that Heyman is considering the Barnhart and Miley moves as the evidence that “The Reds are signaling…” and nothing else.

He did this last year too, and admitted it. Last year the exact same rumors were everywhere and nothing came from them.

This is just dumb and lazy from a so called national pundit and Cubs fan (I think, not sure...)

The Reds have been between 12-20 in payroll 80% of the time since 2007. Consistently higher than the Reds market size and gate attendance dictates

[Coopdaddy67]

Again, the wording is important.

“The Reds are signaling…”

My guess is that Heyman is considering the Barnhart and Miley moves as the evidence that “The Reds are signaling…” and nothing else.

He did this last year too, and admitted it. Last year the exact same rumors were everywhere and nothing came from them.

I think some of you underestimate how connected guys that work for MLB Network are. He wasn't the only one to report it from there either.

I have zero doubt the Reds were open to trading him last year, they just wanted a massive return that no team was ever going to give them. This offseason? Price is down.

Also, it's common sense. He has 2 years left of control. If you're not committed to winning, which the Reds are clearly indicating, it makes no sense not to trade him and others before they turn into rentals.

[M2]

I think some of you underestimate how connected guys that work for MLB Network are. He wasn't the only one to report it from there either.

I have zero doubt the Reds were open to trading him last year, they just wanted a massive return that no team was ever going to give them. This offseason? Price is down.

Also, it's common sense. He has 2 years left of control. If you're not committed to winning, which the Reds are clearly indicating, it makes no sense not to trade him and others before they turn into rentals.

Yep, the Reds are getting swept up in the pull of the inexorable logic flowing from their noncompetitive decisions.

[REDREAD]

I think some of you underestimate how connected guys that work for MLB Network are. He wasn't the only one to report it from there either.

I have zero doubt the Reds were open to trading him last year, they just wanted a massive return that no team was ever going to give them. This offseason? Price is down.

Also, it's common sense. He has 2 years left of control. If you're not committed to winning, which the Reds are clearly indicating, it makes no sense not to trade him and others before they turn into rentals.

yep, you know ownership just HATED the fact that they had to add salary in July last year (bullpen arms) because it would be too humilating to not do it.
Well, ownership is going to get that money back, and then some this winter.
It's almost as if going into 2021, they were thinking... "Well, the fans had their playoff appearance in 2020, that will keep them happy for awhile, time to stop spending for another 5-6 years"
After the next rebuild is done (2026?), I wonder if the owners will remember the fan anger from 2021 and not even have a 2019-like spending spree.. I am serious, because it seems like 2019
was just about trying to rebuild the gate revenue. No real plan to build something competitive, beyond one year. And that whole Covid excuse is BS, IMO.

[757690]

I think some of you underestimate how connected guys that work for MLB Network are. He wasn't the only one to report it from there either.

I have zero doubt the Reds were open to trading him last year, they just wanted a massive return that no team was ever going to give them. This offseason? Price is down.

Also, it's common sense. He has 2 years left of control. If you're not committed to winning, which the Reds are clearly indicating, it makes no sense not to trade him and others before they turn into rentals.

My guess is Heyman saw the Morosi tweet and felt he needed to get in on it. Nothing in his tweet shows any inside information, my guess is he has none, it was super lazy, as oregonred pointed out.

You would be surprised at how competitive and incestious these reporters are. If they see one story getting clicks, they all jump on it.

Btw, I don't see anything changing from last year to this year. Remember last year so many here and so many writers were convinced the Reds were not committed to winning and were going to trade everyone who made money. The same thing is happening this year, without anymore reason to think it. I honestly think it will be like last off season, no big additions, but no more major subtractions either.

Kc61 pointed out that the non-tender deadline will be the biggest clue. If they tender Cessa and Naquin, they are trying to compete this season. If they don't then they likely will be trading others.

[Kc61]

My guess is Heyman saw the Morosi tweet and felt he needed to get in on it. Nothing in his tweet shows any inside information, my guess is he has none, it was super lazy, as oregonred pointed out.

You would be surprised at how competitive and incestious these reporters are. If they see one story getting clicks, they all jump on it.

Btw, I don't see anything changing from last year to this year. Remember last year so many here and so many writers were convinced the Reds were not committed to winning and were going to trade everyone who made money. The same thing is happening this year, without anymore reason to think it. I honestly think it will be like last off season, no big additions, but no more major subtractions either.

Kc61 pointed out that the non-tender deadline will be the biggest clue. If they tender Cessa and Naquin, they are trying to compete this season. If they don't then they likely will be trading others.

A big point of departure in this discussion is the phrase "committed to winning."

The Reds didn't trade every major salary last off-season. But were they committed to winning?

Expectations differ in large group discussions. Some think it's a victory if Reds stay about status quo. With a .500 type team, sometimes lightening strikes.

Some of us, myself included, are looking for meaningful improvement that will elevate the Reds to the next tier up.

[757690]

A big point of departure in this discussion is the phrase "committed to winning."

The Reds didn't trade every major salary last off-season. But were they committed to winning?

Expectations differ in large group discussions. Some think it's a victory if Reds stay about status quo. With a .500 type team, sometimes lightening strikes.

Some of us, myself included, are looking for meaningful improvement that will elevate the Reds to the next tier up.

I agree on most of this. I too want commitment to improvement and not just staying the same.

But I don’t think the Reds will be the sellers this off season that the writers and many here are convinced they are.

[WrongVerb]

Not a Reds rumor, but I wanted to point out that it isn't just the Reds who are "listening." The A's are as well...

Jon Heyman
@JonHeyman

A’s are willing to listen to trade inquiries on their veterans, including pitching stars Chris Bassitt, Frankie Montas and Sean Manaea. Should be huge interest.
1:52pm · 9 Nov 2021 ·

Rumor is the Marlins are also willing to trade pitching for hitting.

[CaiGuy]

Don't all front offices "listen" to trade offers? Isn't that what they do all day?

[oregonred]

I suspect there will be more sellers than buyers this offseason given the gate shortfalls the last two years, uncertainty for corp/luxury boxes post COVID, remote work trends and expiring CBA. I think the gate and corp box issue is more of an issue in the smaller and mid-markets.

The Brewers went from $136M payroll in 2019 to $99M last year. Mariners did an even a larger cut going from $144M to under 84M. Yet the Brewers improved on an 89-win 2019 and the Mariners are fifteen games better.

Cutting payroll is smart if done with a plan and enabling payflex