The Reds are getting rid of everything and starting over. Houston and Kansas City went through a similar process.

 

1. How is this different than what the Marlins have done for the past 15 years?

 

2. Will the Reds need to blow it all up again in 4-5 years? Why not?

 

3. How many seasons of last place losing will you accept to win a pennant? To win a World Series?

 

4. Isn't there a better way to rebuild? What are your ideas?

The Cardinals model is better.

I have never understood this model. Seems like it's the "thing to do" in baseball, but you never see football or basketball teams do it, that's to say completely "blow it up" and essentially get rid of everybody.

I have never understood this model. Seems like it's the "thing to do" in baseball, but you never see football or basketball teams do it, that's to say completely "blow it up" and essentially get rid of everybody.

 

Salary cap in those sports is the main reason.

Salary cap in those sports is the main reason.

 

Yeah, I guess you really can't compare the sports because of that aspect, and others probably as well. Still I have never understood of getting rid of all your good players and "hope" to rebuild from scratch, but baseball sure seems to believe in it.

That's because football and basketball have salary caps. Big market teams can't try to buy a championship.

If a baseball team wants to use the new model they have to start with rebuilding their farm system. When a player gets to where they can't afford him they have to be willing to let him go via trade or free agency. I don't think anyone can figure out the Marlins ownership but I like what KC and Houston are doing I just wouldn't want it to take so long to be competitive.

I have never understood this model. Seems like it's the "thing to do" in baseball, but you never see football or basketball teams do it, that's to say completely "blow it up" and essentially get rid of everybody.

 

Happens in the NBA all the time. 76ers claim they are doing this. Every year you have a "battle to the bottom" to lose as many games as possible to get more ping pong balls for the lottery.

If you make decisions you can't support (Votto, Bailey, Phillips, Bruce, etc.), you are forced into a tear down and rebuild scenario. (NOTE: I am not arguing Phillips & Bruce were / are bad deals. You can even argue the Bailey deal is still an open question. HOWEVER, if you're going to claim to be a mid-market team based on TV, attendance and other local revenues, you can't sign Red Sox, Yankees, Angels, Dodgers long term contracts.)

 

After you tear it down and rebuild, you have to target a 2-3 yr. window when your talent is good enough to win but not too experienced (years of service) to price itself out of staying together. Add a couple of solid players on 1 or 2 yr. deals that are playing for free agency (elsewhere) and make a run at it. Deal those talented players (before arbitration eligible $ or FA $ outprice them from you) for new talent if the plan doesn't come together and keep the cycle in place. This keeps you from having to tear down to 0. You can stay between 25% and 75% and hope you can catch lightning in a bottle. If you try to go to 100% (Votto, Bailey, etc.), you will eventually be forced to go back to 0% (now) to build it back up.

 

I'd say they're targeting 2018 if they are very lucky, but more realistically 2019. If that is the case, they likely have to deal some of the current young talent before that to get players controllable in 2019. If they could get Toronto or someone else to take Votto at the trade deadline, they'd have a better chance of 2018 being a reality.

By the time the Reds guys are ready the central division will have a lot of turnover which is good. They'll be on the upswing when others are coming down.

Hard to believe that there isn't a better way.

By the time the Reds guys are ready the central division will have a lot of turnover which is good. They'll be on the upswing when others are coming down.

 

I doubt it. St. Louis is too well run. We are trying to restart a game from the ground level. Like JPA said, the Reds made mistakes w/ contracts that the Cardinals just don't. They let Pujols go, they led Edmonds go, the let Rolen go. There was no long term handcuffing. They are like the Steelers, who may be the best at the NFL at knowing the perfect time to let someone go and have a set replacement ready.

 

The Reds signed contracts that I don't get.

The Reds are getting rid of everything and starting over. Houston and Kansas City went through a similar process.

 

1. How is this different than what the Marlins have done for the past 15 years?

 

2. Will the Reds need to blow it all up again in 4-5 years? Why not?

 

3. How many seasons of last place losing will you accept to win a pennant? To win a World Series?

 

4. Isn't there a better way to rebuild? What are your ideas?

 

Here is my thing and why I am not as excited about this as others. I mean I definitely get why they are doing if, however I have seen many people say and act like its a for sure thing that this will lead to them being good again in a few years. I think what the Astros, royals and cubs have done recently has made many people think that this is a for sure thing. When in reality I think more teams have failed than succeeded doing this. When you are dealing with prospects, it is no for sure thing they will turn into good major leaguers. Which then if they don't, then you basically are another 3 to 5 years of waiting for the next group and hoping they develop.

 

So I am really torn on this, I get why they are doing it but at the same time I hate it. I really wish baseball would have a salary cap. I honestly think with a salary cap it would make baseball even more interesting and in the long run would start to get baseball to gain ground on the NFL in popularity.

I think it is common sense, but it helps me makes amends with following a team destined for last place in the division before the year starts if I type it out. Generally each player gets better with more experience, but there is a point for everybody where each year they are getting slightly worse as they age.

 

Of course I don't know anything about the Reds' prospects outside of hearing some names more than others, if they couldn't get close with a lot of these likable players, does it really hurt to go in a different direction? They're going to miss on some of these young guys and hopefully hit on more than they miss, but with the road they're taking now, at least they are freeing up some cash for when they think they are close and they got to pick out guys to give a chance rather than just working with whatever they had in the minors.

 

It's a shame that the home-run derby was one of the coolest events to ever happen at GABP, but it may have come at the expense of what the Reds could have received if they would have traded some of their better players earlier.