OnlyBucs

Wow, I didn't realize Votto was inked at $20M+ through age 40. There's little chance he'll earn that pay for more that a max of two more seasons.

I'm 100% sure the reds could trade Votto easily.  Very few trying to win now care about 25 mil per year, 3 years from now, let alone 5.   Especially for a HOF 1st baseman pumping out 5-6 WAR per year and a class act.  Also, especially with revenues continuing to explode.



Id love to see him stay in Cincy until he retires.  The rare player who puts together a HOF career with the same club, front to back.   

4B4E494F474D544940535558210 wrote: Wow, I didn't realize Votto was inked at $20M+ through age 40.  There's little chance he'll earn that pay for more that a max of two more seasons.
At age 40, there's a 7 million buyout. But he's guaranteed 25 million a year now thru age 39.

767F776668120 wrote: I'm 100% sure the reds could trade Votto easily.  Very few trying to win now care about 25 mil per year, 3 years from now, let alone 5.   Especially for a HOF 1st baseman pumping out 5-6 WAR per year and a class act.  Also, especially with revenues continuing to explode.



Id love to see him stay in Cincy until he retires.  The rare player who puts together a HOF career with the same club, front to back.   


They can't trade him. They've tried to.  They do care about 25 mm whether they should or not. They keep him because of a no trade clause, not because of some great philosophy they have that the pirates don't.  Still, I'm glad he's there apparently for the long haul.

05373B3B2F1D3E373A3F3037560 wrote: I'm 100% sure the reds could trade Votto easily.  Very few trying to win now care about 25 mil per year, 3 years from now, let alone 5.   Especially for a HOF 1st baseman pumping out 5-6 WAR per year and a class act.  Also, especially with revenues continuing to explode.



Id love to see him stay in Cincy until he retires.  The rare player who puts together a HOF career with the same club, front to back.   


They can't trade him. They've tried to.  They do care about 25 mm whether they should or not.  They keep him because of a no trade clause, not because of some great philosophy they have that the pirates don't.  Still, I'm glad he's there apparently for the long haul.


When this contract was signed it looked insane. It's still unlikely Votto is going to preform for the length of the contract. Despite all of this: the Reds are going to survive and in the end, in baseball terms, this may have a great value to the reds. How did it go from insane to manageable and maybe even a good K for Cinci? The exploding revenues. Pirate payroll has not really increased since the 2015 season but I'd love to know how much revenue has increased.



All The fear mongering appears to be just that. The reality appears to be carefully selected contracts do not have to cripple the team for the future and can be a valuable clubhouse addition if you're actually trying to compete.

Yeah, pirate payroll hasn't even increased compared to "real life" inflation let alone in MLB terms.



Still, the reds haven't traded votto but have moved almost everything else not tied down (as they should have, but you don't know how much of that was due directly to the votto contract).

424740464E445D40495A5C51280 wrote: Wow, I didn't realize Votto was inked at $20M+ through age 40.  There's little chance he'll earn that pay for more that a max of two more seasons.
Disagree entirely with this. I think Votto (barring an injury) will age better than a guy with a similar hit tool in George Brett. I think that mostly because Votto has a much higher walk rate, hits for a bit more power and generally speaking has been healthier over the course of his career.



Brett averaged 2.1 fWAR over the 7 year period between age 34 and 40 (Votto turned 34 at the end of the 2017 season). The last three years Brett was mediocre, posting just 0.4 fWAR total between 1991 and 1993.



Let's assume Votto only matches Brett with ~2.0 fWAR. (Important to note that Brett moved to 1B in his age 34 season when Kevin Seitzer emerged as the Royals 3B - so Brett does not have a positional difference benefit over Votto moving forward and Brett was a DH in those three mediocre final three years.) The current Fangraphs $/WAR estimate for 2017 is $10.5 million and they estimate that to go up to $13.9 million by Votto's age 38 season (https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-rec ... t-pricing/). If he can maintain the same pace that Brett did, Votto's contract will be fair value. If he ages better than Brett, like I think he will, the Reds will overall get a nice value from his contract.

0C3E32322614373E3336393E5F0 wrote: Yeah, pirate payroll hasn't even increased compared to "real life" inflation let alone in MLB terms.



Still, the reds haven't traded votto but have moved almost everything else not tied down (as they should have, but you don't know how much of that was due directly to the votto contract).


Vottos full no-trade makes it impossible to know for sure.   We're going to have to agree to disagree on this.   To me, it wouldn't be hard for the reds to trade Votto right now if he would approve it. 



He's peaking.  He plays a position that's one of the least physically demanding.   Most importantly, he's not the kind of hitter that will stop hitting.   He hits to all field, walks as much as his K's, can take you deep or slap a single the other way and he'll intentionally foul off 10 pitches just to earn that walk. 

There's no comparing his hit tool to a guy like, say McCutchen, who has always had some warts even when peaking (too many K's, tries to pull too often, etc..)



I don't know if there's anyone in the game like him right now from a hitting perspective.  Perhaps Trout.  There are heavier hitters, but pure hitters, I'm not sure.   



Votto's game isn't going anywhere, I don't think.  He's one of those guys who will be hitting well until the end.

464F475658220 wrote: Yeah, pirate payroll hasn't even increased compared to "real life" inflation let alone in MLB terms.



Still, the reds haven't traded votto but have moved almost everything else not tied down (as they should have, but you don't know how much of that was due directly to the votto contract).


Vottos full no-trade makes it impossible to know for sure.   We're going to have to agree to disagree on this.   To me, it wouldn't be hard for the reds to trade Votto right now if he would approve it. 



He's peaking.  He plays a position that's one of the least physically demanding.   Most importantly, he's not the kind of hitter that will stop hitting.   He hits to all field, walks as much as his K's, can take you deep or slap a single the other way and he'll intentionally foul off 10 pitches just to earn that walk. 

There's no comparing his hit tool to a guy like, say McCutchen, who has always had some warts even when peaking (too many K's, tries to pull too often, etc..)



I don't know if there's anyone in the game like him right now from a hitting perspective.  Perhaps Trout.  There are heavier hitters, but pure hitters, I'm not sure.   



Votto's game isn't going anywhere, I don't think.  He's one of those guys who will be hitting well until the end.


Fully agree with Dmetz' assessment of Votto. Votto has gone on record numerous times saying he doesn't want to be traded, making any trade talks regarding him nothing more than just that - talk. If he were on the block, I think there would be a robust market for him. As I noted earlier, like Dmetz, I think Votto's hit tool will age well.

Votto turned 34 in September. His contract guarantees him 157 million from now thru age 40. That's got to limit the trade possibilities. I can easily see him having another 2 great years. Maybe 3. But players in their later 30s tend to have more injury issues or just decline due to age, bat speed, etc. The Reds are obligated by the contract and if they're lucky, they will get solid production from him thru most of the remaining years of the contract. But it's doubtful other teams would gamble 157 million on a 34 year old, even when he is currently very productive.