Reds nearing extension with Votto

[Clem Fandango]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/04/reds-to-extend-joey-votto.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook

 

Prince Fielder and Albert Pujols won't be the only first basemen to cash in with historic contracts this offseason. Joey Votto and the Reds are nearing an extension that will keep the first baseman in Cincinnati for a long time, MLBTR's Tim Dierkes and Ben Nicholson-Smith have learned. Dan Lozano of Icon Sports Group represents Votto.

 

Terms of the deal are not known, but the total contract value could surpass $200MM. Votto will earn a total of $27MM through 2013 on the extension he signed last winter.

[El Duderino]

thought he was going to end up a dodger.

[Cubswin11]

Man, Lozano had a big offseason with this contract and the Pujols one. Couldn't have happened to a classier guy........

[mookie]

Good thing we have Rizzo. Makes the Dodgers big players for pitching though. I would imagine they will go after a lower priced first baseman. They also need a third baseman and other things though, so who knows.

[fromthestretch]

Man, Lozano had a big offseason with this contract and the Pujols one. Couldn't have happened to a classier guy........

 

Guy has to pay for those high-priced hookers somehow.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

Man, Lozano had a big offseason with this contract and the Pujols one. Couldn't have happened to a classier guy........

 

Guy has to pay for those high-priced hookers somehow.

 

Isn't that what we're all working for?

[El Duderino]

10/225

[Clem Fandango]

Wow. Can't say he hasn't earned it, but that's a huge contract for the Reds to dish out.

 

Somewhere else mentioned that Brandon Phillips will likely be released into free agency instead of extended because of it. Not interested in the Cubs pursuing him, but thought it was a mildly intriguing MLB storyline

[J.R.]

10/225

And no-trade throughout.

 

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/dailypitch/post/2012/04/joey-votto-reds-contract-extension/1#.T3ovq6tSQ_h

[TruffleShuffle]

i'd definitely rather have votto at 10/225 than fielder at 9/214. this seems like a pretty reasonable deal to me.

[XZero771679666304]

i'd definitely rather have votto at 10/225 than fielder at 9/214. this seems like a pretty reasonable deal to me.

 

I don't think I'd characterize any 10 year, 200MM+ deal with a full NTC as being reasonable, especially for a mid-market team.

[mookie]

Yeah, this is a big big big contract. Go Reds, I guess.

[dew1679666265]

i'd definitely rather have votto at 10/225 than fielder at 9/214. this seems like a pretty reasonable deal to me.

 

I don't think I'd characterize any 10 year, 200MM+ deal with a full NTC as being reasonable, especially for a mid-market team.

 

He'll turn 29 in September and has been worth 7.3 and 6.9 WAR the past two years. Relatively speaking, paying $22 million AAV for that production is reasonable.

[TruffleShuffle]

i'd definitely rather have votto at 10/225 than fielder at 9/214. this seems like a pretty reasonable deal to me.

 

I don't think I'd characterize any 10 year, 200MM+ deal with a full NTC as being reasonable, especially for a mid-market team.

 

i suppose it's reasonable in terms of market value. let's face it, they either give him a deal like this or he stops playing on their baseball team after 2013.

[mookie]

But they are going to have him till he is 40, right? That's a very long time. Any contract structuring released yet?

[XZero771679666304]

i'd definitely rather have votto at 10/225 than fielder at 9/214. this seems like a pretty reasonable deal to me.

 

I don't think I'd characterize any 10 year, 200MM+ deal with a full NTC as being reasonable, especially for a mid-market team.

 

He'll turn 29 in September and has been worth 7.3 and 6.9 WAR the past two years. Relatively speaking, paying $22 million AAV for that production is reasonable.

 

It's not the AAV I find offensive, it's the years (his mid-late 30's, to be precise). For a big market club, that's not a huge risk. For Cincy, it is (IMO).

 

In general, I think going beyond 5-7 years for 99% of players isn't a reasonable thing to do.

[dew1679666265]

But they are going to have him till he is 40, right? That's a very long time. Any contract structuring released yet?

 

Depends on when the contract kicks in. If it's an extension added on to the end of the current deal, then it would take him through his age 40 season. If it begins in 2012, then it carries through his age 38 season (he'd turn 39 in September of the final contract year).

 

If you want elite players, you have to make these kinds of deals. It's an incredible rarity that you see a 24 or 25 year old signing a 10 year deal (mainly because you don't have enough history to ensure that it's a smart signing). It's reasonable in that if they had gone out onto the FA market to sign Votto, he'd have easily gotten close to $30 million AAV.

[El Duderino]

it doesn't begin until 2014.

[TruffleShuffle]

But they are going to have him till he is 40, right?

 

yes, but he's a good athlete and plays the least defensively challenging position on the diamond. obviously there's some risk, but take a look around mlb. elite position players generally aren't getting 5 to 7 year deals when they hit free agency in their late 20s. obviously you're giving that contract with the assumption that he'll be worth more than $22m/year in the first few years, and not worth that money by the time the contract is about up.

 

the alternative that would still have gotten a deal done is probably something like 6/170m. hoping that he would do 5-7 years at an AAV of $22.5m is an unrealistic pipe dream.

[XZero771679666304]

it doesn't begin until 2014.

 

Then it's a bad deal outright, imo. That's 10 years at 20MM+ tacked on to the tail end of his prime. Votto's great, but not that great.

[dew1679666265]

It's not the AAV I find offensive, it's the years (his mid-late 30's, to be precise). For a big market club, that's not a huge risk. For Cincy, it is (IMO).

 

I'm not arguing it's not a risk, it's a big risk for a team with the payroll of Cincy. It's still reasonable considering he'd have gotten far more in AAV and the same amount of years on the open market.

 

In general, I think going beyond 5-7 years for 99% of players isn't a reasonable thing to do.

 

It'd be a very easy argument that Votto isn't in the 99% of players. If the past two seasons are indicative of things to come, he's one of the best players in the game. This is something you have to do to keep a player like Votto (and, thus, compete at a high level consistently) and to keep the dollars as relatively low as they are is fairly reasonable.

 

Like I said earlier, I have little doubt Votto could have hit FA and commanded a deal much closer to 10/300 than this was. Reasonable is relative to market value and that's what makes this reasonable, I think.

[XZero771679666304]

But they are going to have him till he is 40, right?

 

yes, but he's a good athlete and plays the least defensively challenging position on the diamond. obviously there's some risk, but take a look around mlb. elite position players generally aren't getting 5 to 7 year deals when they hit free agency in their late 20s. obviously you're giving that contract with the assumption that he'll be worth more than $22m/year in the first few years, and not worth that money by the time the contract is about up.

 

the alternative that would still have gotten a deal done is probably something like 6/170m. hoping that he would do 5-7 years at an AAV of $22.5m is an unrealistic pipe dream.

 

Then you let him go, especially if you're a mid-market club.

 

And really when did it become SOP to hand out decade long deals to players, regardless of whether or not they are elite? How many have we seen?

[dew1679666265]

it doesn't begin until 2014.

 

That makes it less desirable, but still a pretty reasonable deal relatively speaking. Assuming it's a backloaded deal, it has the potential to really hurt Cincy down the line, but even the mid-markets at some point have to lock in their elite talent or they remain stuck in the mire of mediocrity.

[XZero771679666304]

 

Like I said earlier, I have little doubt Votto could have hit FA and commanded a deal much closer to 10/300 than this was. Reasonable is relative to market value and that's what makes this reasonable, I think.

 

Votto will be in his 30/31 season when this kicks in, and he's no Albert Pujols, in terms of performance or stature. I don't think he'd get anywhere near 10/300 on the open market.

[dew1679666265]

it doesn't begin until 2014.

 

Then it's a bad deal outright, imo. That's 10 years at 20MM+ tacked on to the tail end of his prime. Votto's great, but not that great.

 

Over the past two seasons, Votto has averaged a 7.1 fWAR. Pujols was right around an 8 WAR player. If Votto continues what he's done the past couple years, then he's one of the top 2-3 players in the game today and up there with some of the greatest players ever. If Votto and Pujols aren't worth this type of contract, then I really have no idea who is. And if nobody is ever worth this type of contract, then you're simply not going to have elite players.