Reds Spend About Half Payroll on 2 Players.

[kevin]

(08-24-2018, 03:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If teams could win with nothing but $5 million players than no teams would be paying guys $20 million plus.

Plus you can't get rid of those contracts by cutting a player.  So what team is going to take Homers contract off our hands?

Well, here is where you say to deep pocket Yankees or Red Sox type teams, If you want Votto, you have to take Bailey.  A team like deep pocket New York, Boston, LA just might go for it to get Votto because they can afford it. You free up half the payroll and you can't finish any worse than last place where Reds have been stuck in last few years.  The Reds are not a big market team. They are a small market team. They really have to avoid the 20 mil contracts as a small market team. Cincy is not New York City.  Still, other small market teams have played good ball without huge contracts. Reds were playing good ball a few years there without huge contracts. Jack McKeon for example didn't want the huge contracts. Cincinnati can never spend like New York, Boston, LA. Those days are long gone since 1994 strike. This does not mean Reds can't be a good team.  As long as 2 players eat half their payroll, Reds will remain in last place. 

Now football is different. NFL has it set up to where Cincinnati gets TV revenue sharing. NFL is set up for Cincinnati to compete. Baseball isn't. Reds do have to do more with less. Here is where small markets win with pitching and defense, good bullpen, clutch hitting. Good solid fundamentals. Good players coming up in minors to Bigs at starting pay. Picking up good players like Scooter when you can on the cheap compared to big money guys. You can win a lot of games with pitching and defense and clutch hitting. As it is, the last few years the Reds are as bad as it gets stuck in last place. If Reds go into 2019 with Votto and Bailey eating half the payroll, Reds will clinch last place in April again.