Mr. Castellini would you please buy the Bengals...

[*ochocincos*]

(01-27-2020, 03:26 PM)Big Boss Wrote: Why?  The Reds suck too.

Unlike the Bengals, the Reds have been willing to actually try to go all-in at times. While it's resulted in the same number of playoff advancements as the Bengals have had over the past two decades, at least it brings more optimism.

Also, the fan experience at GABP is far better than at PBS (IMO).

As you indicated, it's not like the Reds are winning championships, but it's still more enjoyable.

[Nicomo Cosca]

It’s almost like it takes more than just throwing money around to build a winner...

[fredtoast]

Amazed at how many fans care more about winning the offseason than winning actual games.

[Nicomo Cosca]

(01-27-2020, 04:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Amazed at how many fans care more about winning the offseason than winning actual games.

Yep. Just look at the paper champs in Cleveland this season...

[Shake n Blake]

(01-27-2020, 04:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Amazed at how many fans care more about winning the offseason than winning actual games.

(01-27-2020, 05:13 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Yep. Just look at the paper champs in Cleveland this season...

No one said winning free agency automatically = winning on the field, or that it's better than winning (although I think you guys know better than that). Just that it's nice to see an owner who is proactive and trying to improve his team via free agency. Nicomo, you bring up Cleveland...well we are the polar opposite of that. There is a lot of space between "insert bad team that won free agency" and "barely bringing in good free agents, like ever".

As for the Reds, we'll just have to see how it pans out. They went through a rebuild process and splurged on free agents at the correct time to do so. For every Cleveland Browns you bring up, I can counter with a team that used free agency properly and it worked out. The timing has to be right though.

[grampahol]

I mentioned in another thread that if the Brown family ever sells it'll be to some Pakistani guy who owns a giant chain of crappy convenience stores in food deserts around the country in ghettos.. YEY! off brand panty hose, crappy wigs and week old green bologna sandwiches!  Sounds about like a Brown family move.. hey, but at least you'd be able to get watered down gasoline for $4 a gallon in the Cincinnati area!

[Joelist]

The real question is how can the front office manage to both be middle of the pack-ish in spending AND be perceived by players, coaches and front office people around the league as miserly?

I think the answer is more in HOW they spend money as opposed to how much they spend. They come across as very passive and for want of a better term LAZY in their approach to the offseason. One reason the Glenn trade got such a positive initial reaction was it was for once proactive. Ditto when they actually traded up in the draft recently - it was so unusual for them.

Their typical approach is to be super passive about both free agency and the draft. They typically sit and wait until the quality starters are gone instead of actually doing the work of identifying desired players and then bringing them in and - yes- overpaying if needed to get them. In the draft they tend to sit wherever they are or trade down (Marvin did more than once) instead again of identifying their targets and trading up if needed to get them. Now this may also be the fault of having no scouting department to speak of really which overloads the coaches.

[*SHRacerX*]

(12-06-2019, 10:48 AM)spazz70 Wrote: That's all

I get it....the Reds have at least appeared to try and do things in FA, but they are in a very different situation.  Baseball is so screwed with guaranteed contracts and no salary cap (what is in place is laughable) and the so-called sabermetrics is now used everywhere.  

For the Reds to win, they are going to have to have a season where some of their young players click all at the same time and their pitchers all stay healthy.  

I actually have more optimism of the Bengals winning before the Reds (no one will want to admit it, but I think they had it in place in 2005 and in 2015) but in baseball, it is a lot harder.  

That being said, the Reds stadium and game experience is better.  Some of it could be weather related, but you can get great seats cheap and the food, etc is excellent.  But I like baseball.  Not many people do.  

[yellowxdiscipline]

If the Reds have a deep postseason run or win it all, and manage to boost attendance to over 30k avg. Mike Brown can't ignore that.

[Yojimbo]

While he would probably be better than MB regardless, the Reds spent the least amount of money on free agents from 2010-2019 than any other team in MLB. That’s less than teams like the Rays and Marlins. This year is an aberration from how Castellini normally operates.

“ I researched free-agent spending over the past decade and discovered the Cincinnati Reds had committed just $121.1 million in free agency during the 2010s, the lowest total of any team. Less than the Rays. Less than the Marlins. Less than the A's. The Reds do not spend in free agency.”

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28578785/who-team-beat-nl-central-just-cincinnati-reds

[Shake n Blake]

(01-28-2020, 03:51 AM)Joelist Wrote: The real question is how can the front office manage to both be middle of the pack-ish in spending AND be perceived by players, coaches and front office people around the league as miserly?

I think the answer is more in HOW they spend money as opposed to how much they spend. They come across as very passive and for want of a better term LAZY in their approach to the offseason. One reason the Glenn trade got such a positive initial reaction was it was for once proactive. Ditto when they actually traded up in the draft recently - it was so unusual for them.

Their typical approach is to be super passive about both free agency and the draft. They typically sit and wait until the quality starters are gone instead of actually doing the work of identifying desired players and then bringing them in and - yes- overpaying if needed to get them. In the draft they tend to sit wherever they are or trade down (Marvin did more than once) instead again of identifying their targets and trading up if needed to get them. Now this may also be the fault of having no scouting department to speak of really which overloads the coaches.

The problems:

1. They often keep players who under-perform their contracts. Think Leon Hall at the end when he was making over $9 million as our 4th-5th CB, or Cordy Glenn last year. I think part of the reason this happens is that the Bengals despise dead money, even if it's a small amount.

Cutting Glenn and redistributing that money in free agency could've helped last year.

We could've done so with only $2 million in dead cap. I'd say most teams would've pulled the trigger to improve the roster. The Bengals would rather keep the under-performing player and avoid the hassle of any dead money as well as having to possibly use free agency to fill that spot again.

---------------

2. Sometimes they overpay guys already on the roster, like Bobby Hart and Gio Bernard. Gio was (again) barely used even after becoming the 12th best paid RB in the league: https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/running-back/

His contract is totally ridiculous. I like Gio as a person, but yikes.

---------------

3. They treat free agency like it's a disease. Sometimes I wonder if the above problems exist because Mike Brown hates spending money in free agency that much. Or it could be vice versa. The problem could be that free agents often want high amounts of guaranteed money. This would be a problem for a team that loathes dead money.

----------------

Honestly, it's tough to figure out why the Bengals operate the way they do, because they're one of a kind...but I agree Mike is not miserly in cap spending. He could however, be considered miserly as far as utilizing free agency, and he's definitely miserly when it comes to spending on scouts, a GM and a practice facility.

[Shake n Blake]

(01-28-2020, 12:45 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: While he would probably be better than MB regardless, the Reds spent the least amount of money on free agents from 2010-2019 than any other team in MLB. That’s less than teams like the Rays and Marlins. This year is an aberration from how Castellini normally operates.

“ I researched free-agent spending over the past decade and discovered the Cincinnati Reds had committed just $121.1 million in free agency during the 2010s, the lowest total of any team. Less than the Rays. Less than the Marlins. Less than the A's. The Reds do not spend in free agency.”

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28578785/who-team-beat-nl-central-just-cincinnati-reds

To be fair, a big chunk of those years, the Reds were in a full-blown rebuild.

Rebuilding teams aren't prone to spend much in free agency for obvious reasons.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

Trade massive nepotism and incompetence for... large nepotism and incompetence with a desire to win.

At least the Reds got tired of losing and are doing something about it this offeseason, though. (*Cough*Free Agency*Cough*) Makes it much easier to cheer for the Reds when at least it seems like they care about the fans. Haven't had the on-field success, but the fan experience is great, the promotional events are good, the Reds Hall of Fame is top notch, there's always former Reds hanging around it seems......

[Yojimbo]

(01-28-2020, 02:34 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: To be fair, a big chunk of those years, the Reds were in a full-blown rebuild.

Rebuilding teams aren't prone to spend much in free agency for obvious reasons.

That all depends on how you rebuild. If you’re waiting on prospects to improve and reach the bigs, sure it takes awhile. You can also rebuild by going out and signing free agents.

[Shake n Blake]

(01-28-2020, 02:36 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Trade massive nepotism and incompetence for... large nepotism and incompetence with a desire to win.

At least the Reds got tired of losing and are doing something about it this offeseason, though. (*Cough*Free Agency*Cough*)  Makes it much easier to cheer for the Reds when at least it seems like they care about the fans. Haven't had the on-field success, but the fan experience is great, the promotional events are good, the Reds Hall of Fame is top notch, there's always former Reds hanging around it seems......

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/nfl/bengals/2015/07/28/mike-brown-lack--honoring-former-players-probably-my-fault/30789387/

Quote:Pleas for the Bengals to do more in honoring former players have not fallen on deaf ears. Mike Brown admitted on Tuesday he is reconsidering some type of way to honor past players around Paul Brown Stadium after years of resistance to the concept.


The Bengals are the only team in the NFL not to have a hall of fame, ring of honor, statues or annual ceremonies to celebrate former players.

"I understand the players," Brown said at the team's annual media luncheon. "They want to be remembered. I think it is a good thing to do that. We have never traded here on nostalgia. That's probably my fault. Because a little of it is a good thing. Fans like that sort of thing. What I'm saying is I'm stewing on it. I'm aware of the discomfort with our position."

The way he speaks is soooo frustrating. "I understand the players" and "Fans like that sort of thing". How about you wanting to do it because it's the right thing to do? "We don't trade here on nostalgia"? Who even speaks like that?

"That's probably my fault" - "I'm stewing on it"? While knowing full well it won't happen? Sometimes I wonder if this guy just enjoys sticking it to people.



Instead of a real HOF, ring of honor or anything meaningful, the Bengals held a fan vote on Bengals.com. What a high class organization.

[Shake n Blake]

(01-28-2020, 02:36 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: That all depends on how you rebuild. If you’re waiting on prospects to improve and reach the bigs, sure it takes awhile. You can also rebuild by going out and signing free agents.

I think it was a combo. Waiting on young players to be ready, then striking in free agency when they are.

Hence why we just splurged in free agency now. Lots of teams have done it the way the Reds just did it.

The Astros were terrible for years. Same with the Royals. They stock up on good prospects, then utilize free agency when the time is right.

[Yojimbo]

(01-28-2020, 03:04 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I think it was a combo. Waiting on young players to be ready, then striking in free agency when they are.

Hence why we just splurged in free agency now. Lots of teams have done it the way the Reds just did it.

The Astros were terrible for years. Same with the Royals. They stock up on good prospects, then utilize free agency when the time is right.

Yes, I understand how that version of rebuilding works. My point is, the other way is the way the big market teams like the Yankees do it. Trade those prospects for vets and sign a couple of big free agents. Not saying the Reds could do that every year, but if they wanted to open a window like they are doing now, they could have done it quicker at a higher cost. Instead they took the cheaper, saving money for a decade approach, like the Bengals.

[Wes Mantooth]

(01-28-2020, 03:51 AM)Joelist Wrote: The real question is how can the front office manage to both be middle of the pack-ish in spending AND be perceived by players, coaches and front office people around the league as miserly?

It's not a question to those who are able to look at the entite picture...

-Best stadium deal in league = No initial investment, and limited to no investment in operating costs. 

-No practice facility

-Smallest scouting department in the entire league.

-No GM

-Front office salaries are paid out to family and friends

-Numerous accounts of extreme frugility: Locking up Garorade, coach tickets to free agents, not supplying simple ammentities like shampoo and soap, or adequete sized towels, renting HDMI cables at training camp, coin-operated soda machine in locker-room, etc....

Team/Family history... The NFLPA was initially formed as a result of Paul Brown's unfair contract negotiations, Paul and Mike being opposed to free agency, Mike's numerous comments throughout the years i.e. "Making the playoffs would cost me money"...

-No investment in Hall of Fame, fan events, or on-par alumni returns/reunions.

-Still holding Hamilton County to 75% of stadium upgrades while the Reds were gracious enough to forgive over 80%.

-Holding city, then county hostage for parking lot deal needed for music venue.

-Outdated approach to roster construction...Lack of free agent spending, refuse to cut under-performing players and eat dead-money, refusing to restructure deals, to better spend dollars season to season.

The list goes on and on. And as far as cap spending, there's a floor now in place. Every team falls within 10% of eachother. In fact, the last numbers I saw the last place team in cap spending over the 4 year window sat at like 92% while the first place team sat at 98.xxx. A difference of like 6%.

If you take into account total spending, players, staff, operating, and money spent on facilities and ammentities there is no doubt we are at the very bottom. If not dead last, then 2nd or 3rd least in total investment.

This franchise is cheap. Cheap and stubborn. Period.

[Shake n Blake]

(01-28-2020, 03:42 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: Yes, I understand how that version of rebuilding works. My point is, the other way is the way the big market teams like the Yankees do it. Trade those prospects for vets and sign a couple of big free agents. Not saying the Reds could do that every year, but if they wanted to open a window like they are doing now, they could have done it quicker at a higher cost. Instead they took the cheaper, saving money for a decade approach, like the Bengals.

Although I hate when people bring up "small market" in football (which has a salary cap and revenue sharing), market size does matter in baseball. Yet Castellini is able to spend big every now and then, which is more than what Mike does with the benefits the NFL offers.

Say what you will about Castellini or his approach, Mike has never had a free agency this active in his entire stint as owner/GM.

[bengals67]

Mike Brown is almost certainly a nice and good man but he is an awful owner/GM

How many games in a row have we lost to Steelers ???

How many playoff wins compared to every other team following the death of Paul Brown?

is there an  NFL owner of 20 years or more with a worse career winning percentage? Maybe there is and Fred will know

The metrics showing the long term ineptness of this organization are off the charts.

They have a once in 20 year chance to jump start by drafting Burrow and signing at least two to three top tier or good free agents.

With revenue sharing and TV money it would be far easier for the Bengals to sign three quality free agents in positions of need than what the Reds have done this year.

Yes, the Reds owner would be way better than Mike Brown because he would sign the free agents to build around Burrow, just like almost everyone who posts on this board if they owned the team.