Hey--at least the Red Sox have been relevant for the past 2 decades.....

 

Yeah, with 3x the payroll of the Cincy. That's apples and oranges.

Yeah, with 3x the payroll of the Cincy. That's apples and oranges.

 

Start spending then.

Yeah, with 3x the payroll of the Cincy. That's apples and oranges.

 

A poorly run franchise is a poorly run franchise. The Marlins managed to win a World Series with a tiny payroll, the Rays made it to one. Also, no matter what the Red Sox payroll they are in a division with a team that spends almost twice as much as they do every year and they've managed to win 2 World Series in the past 6 years. How about home grown talent, that doesn't have anything to do with payroll, that's about scouting? Compare the Red Sox and the Reds there....or attendance, or any other way you want to compare organizations? The Reds have been one of the 5 worst organizations in the league the last 10 years--and it isn't about money. There are several teams that spend a ton of money--most of them can't compare to the Red Sox track record. On the other side there are several small market clubs that outperform the Reds--its about how they use their resources.

Start spending then.

 

Not that easy.

A poorly run franchise is a poorly run franchise. The Marlins managed to win a World Series with a tiny payroll, the Rays made it to one. Also, no matter what the Red Sox payroll they are in a division with a team that spends almost twice as much as they do every year and they've managed to win 2 World Series in the past 6 years. How about home grown talent, that doesn't have anything to do with payroll, that's about scouting? Compare the Red Sox and the Reds there....or attendance, or any other way you want to compare organizations? The Reds have been one of the 5 worst organizations in the league the last 10 years--and it isn't about money. There are several teams that spend a ton of money--most of them can't compare to the Red Sox track record. On the other side there are several small market clubs that outperform the Reds--its about how they use their resources.

 

They have been poorly ran. One of the biggest problems for years was Marge and Bowdens ignorance. They had a horrible farm system and when they did spend money it was in the wrong places. The one good move seemed to be getting Griff, that even backfired. Their biggest problem has been poor scouting IMO.

 

I disagree, it is about money. The Reds didn't spend enough in a lot of places. Things are changing on some fronts, they now have a very solid farm system and some young home grown talent is starting produce. They still need to add another RH hitting power hitter.

 

You act like the Red Sox have been some juggernaut, let's not forget their streak without a championship. They were good in the 2000's. Sure the Yankees have spent more, but not double. And lets not act like the Red Sox don't spend $, they're in the top three in spending every year. That's fine, with no salary cap they can do that. The Reds can't go buy a Josh Becket, or a Vic Martinez at the trade deadline. They simply don't have the resources to do so. So it is a about money. Only Red Sox and Yankee fans say it isn't.

 

You bring up the Rays, yeah they've been a major factor. They caught lightening in a bottle one year. Aside from that they've been a joke of a franchise.

Start spending then.

 

Can't spend what you don't have.:idunno:

Can't spend what you don't have.:idunno:

 

 

It helps if you don't spend what you do have on Willy Taveras, Alex Gonzalez, Jerry Hairston, Mike Lincoln, Corey Patterson, Paul Bako, Ryan Freel etc.

 

And $10 Million a year on a closer when they aren't in contention.

It helps if you don't spend what you do have on Willy Taveras, Alex Gonzalez, Jerry Hairston, Mike Lincoln, Corey Patterson, Paul Bako, Ryan Freel etc.

 

And $10 Million a year on a closer when they aren't in contention.

 

Could not agree more.

 

I'm just hoping Walt spends money more smartly. I like some of moves he has made so far, and he always did well in STL.

They have been poorly ran. One of the biggest problems for years was Marge and Bowdens ignorance. They had a horrible farm system and when they did spend money it was in the wrong places. The one good move seemed to be getting Griff, that even backfired. Their biggest problem has been poor scouting IMO.

 

I disagree, it is about money. The Reds didn't spend enough in a lot of places. Things are changing on some fronts, they now have a very solid farm system and some young home grown talent is starting produce. They still need to add another RH hitting power hitter.

 

You act like the Red Sox have been some juggernaut, let's not forget their streak without a championship. They were good in the 2000's. Sure the Yankees have spent more, but not double. And lets not act like the Red Sox don't spend $, they're in the top three in spending every year. That's fine, with no salary cap they can do that. The Reds can't go buy a Josh Becket, or a Vic Martinez at the trade deadline. They simply don't have the resources to do so. So it is a about money. Only Red Sox and Yankee fans say it isn't.

 

You bring up the Rays, yeah they've been a major factor. They caught lightening in a bottle one year. Aside from that they've been a joke of a franchise.

 

The Red Sox have been in the playoffs 9 out of the past 15 seasons--while playing in a division with the Yankees. They've won 2 World Series and appeared in 3 American League Championships. Name another team outside of the Yankees that can say that. And they did this while having to compete in the same division as the Yankees every year.

 

In 2008 the Yankees spent $209 Million, the Red Sox $133 Million--not quite double but $76 Million more. The Sox only spent $59 Million more than the Reds.....so by your reasoning if the Reds can't compete with the Red Sox spending when they were outspent by $51 million then the Sox should have been dominated by the Yankees--yet the Sox and Rays made the playoffs that year.

 

In 2009, the Yankees spent $201 Million, the Red Sox $121 Million, an $80 Million difference. The Reds spent $73 Million or $48 Million less than the Sox. Also the Red Sox weren't in the top 3 in spending in either of the last 2 years like you said. They have in fact faced a larger spending deficit than the Reds but have managed to compete with the Yankees in spite of it.

 

Also the Red Sox didn't buy Beckett or Martinez--they traded for both. You can only do that if you have players that the other teams actually want. To do that you have to have prospects--something the Reds haven't had.

 

The Rays also had a very good team last year and stayed right in the wildcard race before fading late. The Marlins seem to always finish at or above .500 while turning their roster over every 3-4 years. The Twins are always in the mix in with a restricted payroll. It isn't a completely level playing field in baseball but there's a reason that the Royals, Pirates, Reds, Nationals and Orioles have been laughingstocks for over a decade--and it isn't about the money. Its about management.

The Red Sox have been in the playoffs 9 out of the past 15 seasons--while playing in a division with the Yankees. They've won 2 World Series and appeared in 3 American League Championships. Name another team outside of the Yankees that can say that. And they did this while having to compete in the same division as the Yankees every year.

 

In 2008 the Yankees spent $209 Million, the Red Sox $133 Million--not quite double but $76 Million more. The Sox only spent $59 Million more than the Reds.....so by your reasoning if the Reds can't compete with the Red Sox spending when they were outspent by $51 million then the Sox should have been dominated by the Yankees--yet the Sox and Rays made the playoffs that year.

 

In 2009, the Yankees spent $201 Million, the Red Sox $121 Million, an $80 Million difference. The Reds spent $73 Million or $48 Million less than the Sox. Also the Red Sox weren't in the top 3 in spending in either of the last 2 years like you said. They have in fact faced a larger spending deficit than the Reds but have managed to compete with the Yankees in spite of it.

 

Also the Red Sox didn't buy Beckett or Martinez--they traded for both. You can only do that if you have players that the other teams actually want. To do that you have to have prospects--something the Reds haven't had.

 

The Rays also had a very good team last year and stayed right in the wildcard race before fading late. The Marlins seem to always finish at or above .500 while turning their roster over every 3-4 years. The Twins are always in the mix in with a restricted payroll. It isn't a completely level playing field in baseball but there's a reason that the Royals, Pirates, Reds, Nationals and Orioles have been laughingstocks for over a decade--and it isn't about the money. Its about management.

 

I agree with your general point that it is about the management & farm system; however, the Reds have done much better in both departments under Jocketty. They're developing a lot of young talent and those players are about to be called upon to perform at the big league level. Whether or not they pan out remains to be seen.

 

A couple of flaws with your argument, though. Yes, the Red Sox traded for Beckett & Martinez. But, the reason they were on the trading block is because the teams with which they came up (Marlins & Indians) knew that they were not going to be able to re-sign them & keep them for the long term. Why? Because they don't have the payroll. So, money is the reason that the Red Sox were able to acquire them.

 

Secondly, I don't think that comparing payroll to payroll is completely accurate. I don't know how to do it, but it's reasonable to assume that the quality of the player increases for each million in salary. When you break down the Yankees' salary, you'll see that their top 5 highest paid players make just about as much as the entire Reds payroll. That's very, very tough to compete against, which is why scouting / player development is crucial. Admittedly, the Reds have been poor in this regard.

 

This is what makes scouting even that much more important for the Reds. They're not in a position to buy free agents or trade for big-time players, because they rely too much on their farm system and young talent. For these same reasons, signing Aroldis Chapman was huge. The Yankees / Red Sox and other big market teams can afford to wait a few years to see if Chapman pans out. In a few years, Chapman will be out of the Reds' league. That's why getting him early is big. Now, we probably won't be able to keep Chapman for very long, but at least we'll be able to use him and potentially trade him down the road.

Go Cubs