Joey Votto Signs 3-Year Deal With The Reds

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Pro Sports ▸ Joey Votto Signs 3-Year Deal With The Reds
L

Lersavich Mowbranowski

Junior Member

9 posts
Jan 16, 2011 2:14 PM
I don't know if anyone saw this a couple weeks ago... but he was also named Canada's top athlete in 2010.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ys-loumarsh121410
Jan 16, 2011 2:14pm
jordo212000's avatar

jordo212000

Senior Member

10,664 posts
Jan 16, 2011 2:23 PM
Great! Now start working on another contract that will lock him up much longer than that!
Jan 16, 2011 2:23pm
R

rugbywrestler

Senior Member

462 posts
Jan 16, 2011 2:26 PM
jordo212000;640313 wrote:Great! Now start working on another contract that will lock him up much longer than that!

+ 38million
Jan 16, 2011 2:26pm
Tiger2003's avatar

Tiger2003

Kill or be Killed

15,421 posts
Jan 16, 2011 2:32 PM
Not a Reds fan but what is Cincy thinking only signing him for 3 years 38 million....why not lock him up longer and pay him more I really think he is worth it.
Jan 16, 2011 2:32pm
justincredible's avatar

justincredible

Nick Mangold

32,056 posts
Jan 16, 2011 2:38 PM
Tiger2003;640324 wrote:Not a Reds fan but what is Cincy thinking only signing him for 3 years 38 million....why not lock him up longer and pay him more I really think he is worth it.

This gets them through arbitration. He probably wasn't willing to sign for longer just yet.
Jan 16, 2011 2:38pm
Azubuike24's avatar

Azubuike24

Senior Member

15,933 posts
Jan 16, 2011 3:27 PM
This was the first deal that buys out his remaining arbitration years.
Jan 16, 2011 3:27pm
M

mhs95_06

Senior Member

8,167 posts
Jan 16, 2011 3:56 PM
I think the Reds did just the right thing. I don't think Votto is going to take below market value to play in Cincy. And I don't think the Reds are a team that can count on winning with established players with very high dollar contracts. Their best chance is to do it with players under their control before free agency, and then after that only reasonably priced free agents. They have to keep uppermost in their minds that a player that "flames out", such as Eric Milton, has way more dire consequences to their chances for success than a team that can afford a very high budget.
Jan 16, 2011 3:56pm
CinciX12's avatar

CinciX12

Senior Member

2,874 posts
Jan 16, 2011 3:59 PM
He wasn't willing to sign anything longer and is even on the record saying he can't picture himself in Cincinnati in 10 years. This deal proves to me that he won't be around past this contract unless we have a WS appearance.
Jan 16, 2011 3:59pm
M

mhs95_06

Senior Member

8,167 posts
Jan 16, 2011 4:03 PM
CinciX12;640392 wrote:He wasn't willing to sign anything longer and is even on the record saying he can't picture himself in Cincinnati in 10 years. This deal proves to me that he won't be around past this contract unless we have a WS appearance.

What difference would a World Series appearance make?
Jan 16, 2011 4:03pm
L

Lersavich Mowbranowski

Junior Member

9 posts
Jan 16, 2011 5:15 PM
because he would have the chance to re-sign for one of the best teams in the league? stupid question...
Jan 16, 2011 5:15pm
sherm03's avatar

sherm03

I go balls deep.

7,349 posts
Jan 16, 2011 5:42 PM
The clock has started.

The Reds have 3 years to win the WS before Votto is gone.
Jan 16, 2011 5:42pm
C

cat_lover

Senior Member

2,388 posts
Jan 16, 2011 10:13 PM
Three years is better than nothing.
Jan 16, 2011 10:13pm
Ironman92's avatar

Ironman92

Administrator

49,363 posts
Jan 16, 2011 10:18 PM
Great signing.....hope he is completely over his issues.

$525,000 for an MVP season is funny......at least after 1986
Jan 16, 2011 10:18pm
M

mhs95_06

Senior Member

8,167 posts
Jan 16, 2011 10:24 PM
Lersavich Mowbranowski;640508 wrote:because he would have the chance to re-sign for one of the best teams in the league? stupid question...

Yes, but for less money than others of the best teams could offer. I think winning a WS may lessen his chance to sign with the Reds for less than others offer. That is because he would have accomplished a major goal in Cincy, and is smart enough to know that with the budget the Reds can afford being so much less than a lot of others, the Reds will never be a juggernaut, and it's time to move on. Of course I disagree that it was a stupid question! He may also be more prone to want to avoid some LeBron James type back-lash if the Reds seem to be contenders, but have not yet won the WS, thus increasing his chance of re-signing with the Reds.
Jan 16, 2011 10:24pm
M

mhs95_06

Senior Member

8,167 posts
Jan 16, 2011 10:28 PM
cat_lover;640905 wrote:Three years is better than nothing.

Yes, it could have been nothing. Imagine if Joey's arbitration figure was $23 million for 2011, and he won. Then the Reds may have to trade him early in the first year to avoid breaking their budget!
Jan 16, 2011 10:28pm
se-alum's avatar

se-alum

The Biggest Boss

13,948 posts
Jan 17, 2011 2:41 PM
I'm just glad they locked him up for 3 more years. Unfortunately, this is how small market teams have to do it.
Jan 17, 2011 2:41pm
Mooney44Cards's avatar

Mooney44Cards

Senior Member

2,754 posts
Jan 18, 2011 9:45 AM
mhs95_06;640934 wrote:Yes, it could have been nothing. Imagine if Joey's arbitration figure was $23 million for 2011, and he won. Then the Reds may have to trade him early in the first year to avoid breaking their budget!

This makes no sense unless Votto batted like .400 every year. The money the Reds are paying him with this new contract....to get that same amount in arbitration he would have to have better years than he had in 2010 in the following three seasons....oh AND he can't get hurt or that would hurt his arbitration number.

In short, he's getting paid way more with this deal than he ever would have gotten paid in arbitration barring him turning into Ted Williams all of a sudden.

This deal was about respect. The Reds showed Votto respect by giving him more than he is worth (right now) in hopes that he will be more likely to sign an extension in 2-3 years.
Jan 18, 2011 9:45am
T

thavoice

Senior Member

14,376 posts
Jan 18, 2011 10:04 AM
THis is how i see it......the deal is long enough that it gives him, and the reds and the fans, some stability knowing he is under contract. It also is short enough that he cannot just become a fat cat and get lazy wtih a long term deal. Long termers seem cool at the time....but many times it does not work out as the player gets lazy, or hurt and the deal is a waste for all that time. Also, if he keeps playing well then the player gets mad his deal is not for enough because of he escalation of contracts........
Jan 18, 2011 10:04am
jordo212000's avatar

jordo212000

Senior Member

10,664 posts
Jan 18, 2011 12:16 PM
Mooney44Cards;642449 wrote:This makes no sense unless Votto batted like .400 every year. The money the Reds are paying him with this new contract....to get that same amount in arbitration he would have to have better years than he had in 2010 in the following three seasons....oh AND he can't get hurt or that would hurt his arbitration number.

In short, he's getting paid way more with this deal than he ever would have gotten paid in arbitration barring him turning into Ted Williams all of a sudden.

This deal was about respect. The Reds showed Votto respect by giving him more than he is worth (right now) in hopes that he will be more likely to sign an extension in 2-3 years.

The main thing that this contract avoids is arbitration. The arbitration situation can get pretty sticky and it can leave both sides sour. Nice to see that the Reds avoided arbitration with Votto. However with that being said, if I am Jocketty, I am currently game planning a way to try and lock up Votto for the long term.
Jan 18, 2011 12:16pm
N

Nate

Formerly Known As Keebler

3,949 posts
Jan 18, 2011 1:02 PM
Unfortunately, Votto will be a Yankee in 2 1/2 years probably. I love Votto and wish he'd stay forever but realistically, it's not going to happen. The Reds HAVE to put the pieces together this year and next or their chances lessen.
Jan 18, 2011 1:02pm
wildcats20's avatar

wildcats20

In ROY I Trust!!

27,794 posts
Jan 18, 2011 6:46 PM
johnfayman:
#Reds offered Cueto $3 million, he countered at $3.9 million. They offered Volquez $1.3 million, he countered at $1.3 million.
Not sure what he means with the Volquez money.
Jan 18, 2011 6:46pm
HitsRus's avatar

HitsRus

Senior Member

9,206 posts
Jan 18, 2011 7:00 PM
The main thing that this contract avoids is arbitration. The arbitration situation can get pretty sticky and it can leave both sides sour. Nice to see that the Reds avoided arbitration with Votto. However with that being said, if I am Jocketty, I am currently game planning a way to try and lock up Votto for the long term.
well, yes and no. It avoids arbitration for three years which is very good, but the time to leverage out another year or two would have been now. The Indians were able to add a year or two when they did this with Sabathia, which actually gave them some leverage when his arbitration years were over...but alas...the Tribe frittered away the chance to lock up C.C.. They were "determining market value" ....hahaha, they found out!
Jan 18, 2011 7:00pm
jordo212000's avatar

jordo212000

Senior Member

10,664 posts
Jan 18, 2011 8:23 PM
HitsRus;643089 wrote:well, yes and no. It avoids arbitration for three years which is very good, but the time to leverage out another year or two would have been now.

Votto wasn't willing to do that yet
Jan 18, 2011 8:23pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Jan 18, 2011 9:20 PM
wildcats20;643077 wrote:Not sure what he means with the Volquez money.

The second 1.3 is supposed to read 2.
Jan 18, 2011 9:20pm