Castillo Traded to Mariners

[WildcatFan]

2. The Reds already have a strong rotation for next year.

Hoo boy, this is rosy.

[757690]

Hoo boy, this is rosy.

They really don’t need to spend $100M on a starter. They will need to add a back of the rotation starter or two, but adding a an ace is not what the Reds need right now, or in the near future.

- - - Updated - - -

Please define “significantly higher”.

Very close to what this season’s payroll was. You disagree, I know. We’ve had this discussion before, no need to do it again.

[LeatherPants]

They really don’t need to spend $100M on a starter. They will need to add a back of the rotation starter or two, but adding a an ace is not what the Reds need right now, or in the near future.

- - - Updated - - -



Very close to what this season’s payroll was. You disagree, I know. We’ve had this discussion before, no need to do it again.

The active payroll is currently under $30 million, add Votto and Moose to it gets it to ~$70 million. That leaves ~$45 million you think the Reds are going to spend in a rebuilding season? Good luck with that.

[WildcatFan]

They really don’t need to spend $100M on a starter. They will need to add a back of the rotation starter or two, but adding a an ace is not what the Reds need right now, or in the near future.

Take a peek at the rotations of the playoff contenders and take a guess at where the 2023 Reds rotation with two back of the rotation starters would rank in that group.

[westofyou]

The Reds don't have a 5 year plan - in 5 years Lodolo, India, Greene and Stevenson will all be "too expensive" and be gone - they are hoping to strike big in 2024 and then rebuild again.

Ahhh I didn’t say exactly what they were planning

[Kinsm]

1. I am rather certain the Reds will have a payroll significantly higher than $60M next year.
2. The Reds already have a strong rotation for next year.
3. The Reds need help in many other area’s next year besides starting pitching. Adding this contract would prevent them from helping area’s of true need.
4. It’s a 5 year deal. History tells us that Castillo will not be good for all of those 5 years. Odds are that he will either get hurt or decline during those 5 years.

Please, for the love of all that is holy, stop typing that. It's a 100 loss rotation as of now.

Buying out Castillo's first 4 FA years covering his age 31-34 seasons for that price is a steal. The Reds most definitely could have afforded it, especially given the fact that they have no current player on the roster set to make big time dollars over those years.

Odds are good that he does decline by the end of the contract, odds are also good at least 3/5ths of our current rotation is not in the rotation in 24 months time let alone 5 years.

You sound like Big Bob's cheerleader, makes my stomach hurt.

[Kinsm]

@75

You're basically saying the Reds are better off by not signing Castillo to a contract that looks like it's going to pay out something like...

15M for his final arb eligible season (his age 30 season)
22M per for 4 FA years (his age 31-34 seasons)
and a 5M option on a 5th year that could pay him 25M if it vests.

That is REDiculous!!!

Scherzer, Verlander, Strasburg, Cole making the likes of 40M$ per now as FA's but that would have been a bad investment for the Reds ???

[REDREAD]

Honestly, that's a steal for the Mariners.

If he waited until he was a FA and performs at the same rate, he's looking at double that total value.

With that said, it makes plenty of sense to just take $100 mil now and take the risk of injuries derailing your value off the table.

Makes me wonder what the Reds offered Castillo before they traded him...

We know the Reds had no interest in extending Castillo.. Just like they had no interest in keeping Winker, Castallnos or anyone else making significant money.. They wanted to burn the team down, have no long term contracts. The amount of talent on the team was a secondary concern to that.

[REDREAD]

The Reds don't have a 5 year plan - in 5 years Lodolo, India, Greene and Stevenson will all be "too expensive" and be gone - they are hoping to strike big in 2024 and then rebuild again.

Yep, no plan other than "Minimize payroll, maybe the farm system gets us into the expanded playoffs eventually"

[RedTeamGo!]

@75

You're basically saying the Reds are better off by not signing Castillo to a contract that looks like it's going to pay out something like...

15M for his final arb eligible season (his age 30 season)
22M per for 4 FA years (his age 31-34 seasons)
and a 5M option on a 5th year that could pay him 25M if it vests.

That is REDiculous!!!

Scherzer, Verlander, Strasburg, Cole making the likes of 40M$ per now as FA's but that would have been a bad investment for the Reds ???

Bruh you’re over analyzing 76’s posts.

With that said, would I have been glad the reds signed Castillo at this amount? Yes. However, we all thought the Homer Bailey signing was a steal as well.

[757690]

Please, for the love of all that is holy, stop typing that. It's a 100 loss rotation as of now.

Buying out Castillo's first 4 FA years covering his age 31-34 seasons for that price is a steal. The Reds most definitely could have afforded it, especially given the fact that they have no current player on the roster set to make big time dollars over those years.

Odds are good that he does decline by the end of the contract, odds are also good at least 3/5ths of our current rotation is not in the rotation in 24 months time let alone 5 years.

You sound like Big Bob's cheerleader, makes my stomach hurt.

Nearly every team would kill to have Greene, Lodolo and Ashcroft anchoring their rotation. Again, there is no need to add a top of the rotation starter for $100M to this team.

[LeatherPants]

Bruh you’re over analyzing 76’s posts.

With that said, would I have been glad the reds signed Castillo at this amount? Yes. However, we all thought the Homer Bailey signing was a steal as well.

Castillo’s contract has a nifty TJS clause in it.

[Kinsm]

Nearly every team would kill to have Greene, Lodolo and Ashcroft anchoring their rotation. Again, there is no need to add a top of the rotation starter for $100M to this team.

Sure they would, they'd also go out and find 2 more guys who have proven track records - you know guys who have pitched more than ~120 innings in a big league season.

The Reds are on pace to lose 100 games this year with those 3 and 1/2 season each from Luis and Tyler, they must get more starting pitching...proven starting pitching...GOOD proven starting pitching.

[757690]

Sure they would, they'd also go out and find 2 more guys who have proven track records - you know guys who have pitched more than ~120 innings in a big league season.

The Reds are on pace to lose 100 games this year with those 3 and 1/2 season each from Luis and Tyler, they must get more starting pitching...proven starting pitching...GOOD proven starting pitching.

I said that. They need some innings eaters to fill out the rotation. What they don’t need is a $100M top of the rotation guy.

[757690]

@75

You're basically saying the Reds are better off by not signing Castillo to a contract that looks like it's going to pay out something like...

15M for his final arb eligible season (his age 30 season)
22M per for 4 FA years (his age 31-34 seasons)
and a 5M option on a 5th year that could pay him 25M if it vests.

That is REDiculous!!!

Scherzer, Verlander, Strasburg, Cole making the likes of 40M$ per now as FA's but that would have been a bad investment for the Reds ???

The Reds will always be better off without a $100M dedicated to one starting pitcher over the age of 30.