Skip to content

Reds sign Brandon Phillips to a six-year $72.5 million extension

Apr 10, 2012, 2:00 PM EDT

Cincinnati Reds Photo Day Getty Images

Jim Bowden reported earlier this afternoon that the Reds and Brandon Phillips had a six-year, $72.5 million contract extension in place.  Now it appears to be done, says Ken Rosenthal.

That’s just shy of Ian Kinsler money, so it’s probably about right for the market, even if it seems kind of nuts to go that long with a second baseman. They don’t age all that well. Carlos Baerga and Chase Utley told me so.

But what a world we live in: the Cincinnati Reds, inhabitants of one of baseball’s smallest television markets, have now committed over $300 million to two players in the past couple of weeks.

  1. southpaw2k - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:05 PM

    So then in about five years they’ll be about where the Phillies are now.

    • paperlions - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:29 PM

      Yeah….except they still won’t be able to spend $175M/year on payroll….or have 3 pitchers of that quality….or have such a crappy minor league system. Otherwise, yep, exactly where the Phillies are.

  2. cincyorangenblack - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:05 PM

    yes,yes,yes!

    Walt Jocketty, please stay in Cincy as long as you can!
    I thought after the Votto deal, extending Phillips would be very very hard…but apparently the Reds have been squirreling away money for quite some time OR their is about to be a very lucrative TV deal in the near future

    • fearlessleader - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:57 PM

      The Reds drew 16,000 people to yesterday’s game—on a beautiful spring night, in the second series of the year, against their most hated rival in a division they’ve been picked by many to win.

      I’m equally baffled by the questions of HOW they’re going to pay for these contracts…..and WHY.

      • WhenMattStairsIsKing - Apr 10, 2012 at 4:49 PM

        Well, I believe they receive $25M annually from revenue sharing. Plus, by the time Votto becomes exponentially expensive, they’ll be able to negotiate TV rights, correct?

        Plus, they’ve been skimming enough…if you keep putting pennies in that rainy day jar, one day it’s going to overflow, yes?

    • roadwearyaaron - Apr 10, 2012 at 5:14 PM

      I’m more interested in praising Bob Castellini. While I appreciate Walt’s work in extending the big guns, Bob is the man that’s giving him the cash to get things done. Thanks Bob!

  3. johnnyb1976 - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:12 PM

    I like the commitment to winning not only this season but for years to come. Put the captains C on his shoulder already BP is a red for life.

  4. cup0pizza - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:14 PM

    Well, there goes yet another guy the Dodgers seriously coveted. Votto, Matt Cain & Phillips all gone within a week. Ugh.

  5. redguy12588 - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:16 PM

    So how exactly are they going to sign Latos to a long term deal now?

    • paperlions - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:28 PM

      Latos hasn’t even hit arbitration yet….they may have time to figure that out…signing pitchers to long-term deals is far more risky than signing position players to such deals (unless you are signing the guy for 5+ years and past his age 35 season…you just don’t have any info yet on how he’ll age…if the decline will be slow or fast).

      The problem for Cinci will always be developing their own talent….no team in a market that size can afford to keep signing veterans (even those they develop), they’ll have to supplement a few high priced guys with a decent amount of cheap talent.

    • johnnyb1976 - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:28 PM

      They have control of Latos for 4 seasons until 2015 i think

  6. Ben - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:43 PM

    This baseball bubble is going to vicious when it bursts. The current Reds’ owners bought their controlling share for less than what the Reds just committed to Votto and Phillips. That’s crazy.

    • paperlions - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:56 PM

      That will be the interesting thing…..the Reds TV contract still has 4 years on it (I’ve seen it referred to as going through 2015 in some places and through 2016 in others, but it seems like it expired after 2015 with the next one starting in 2016)….with the speed of technological advancement…will TV contracts still be that big of a deal at that time? If so, will the economy be in such a state that stations are willing to bid against each other to commit so much money to such a long term deal in smaller (and probably dwindling) markets like Cinci?

      • Ben - Apr 10, 2012 at 3:00 PM

        No, they won’t be as big a deal. Teams are constructing their futures around contracts that need the absolute best conditions to come to fruition, and that’s scary. Millions of Americans have cancelled their cable, and the rate is accelerating; what does that shrinking market mean for an already tiny market? Nothing good.
        My media consumption is done almost exclusively through my laptop or iPad–this holds true for a huge part of the under-30 cohort, and as that shift in media consumption becomes more permanent, teams could potentially be crippled in the near future by these contracts, which are essentially mortgage-backed securities. Bad bad bad for baseball.

      • paperlions - Apr 10, 2012 at 3:08 PM

        I suppose as long as networks are willing to dive in (and they must have done some intensive work on future projections of such deals with respect to technology and such), teams will be fine….the problem here is committing to the money so long before you even know what your TV deal will be.

        I also watch most of my sports online, but that has more to do with being a displaced StL fan than anything else.

  7. brucewaynewins - Apr 10, 2012 at 2:57 PM

    I may regret seeing this deal in 5 years but for now I’ll live in the moment and enjoy it! If metalhead is going to be the Reds fan with cup half empty I’ll be the one with the full cup. Now hopefully we can sign Cueto! A few years ago I thought it was impossible we’d sign both Phillips and Votto.

    So glad to be so wrong.

    • bunglesindajungle - Apr 10, 2012 at 7:11 PM

      They extended Cueto around the same time as the Bruce extension.

      • brucewaynewins - Apr 11, 2012 at 8:12 AM

        I’m pretty sure Cueto was just a contract covering his arbitration years. I’m talking about locking him up after that.

  8. metalhead65 - Apr 10, 2012 at 3:35 PM

    this is not about what kind of player he will be in 6 years but about one of the best second baseman in the game now. that is the price they had to pay or gamble on somebody not as good or a prospect not ready. more importantly it saves the reds and their fans from walt going to the cardnial reject pile to replace him.

    • roadwearyaaron - Apr 10, 2012 at 5:18 PM

      I almost thought it was going to be an entirely positive post but you got your jab in at the end. Thank you for not disappointing me.

      • metalhead65 - Apr 10, 2012 at 9:20 PM

        what is more positive than saying reds fans do not want anymore overpriced cardinal rejects?

  9. 4letterman - Apr 10, 2012 at 3:52 PM

    So this officially takes the Reds out of the “small market team” conversation. Nice signing though.

    • paperlions - Apr 10, 2012 at 5:06 PM

      No. It doesn’t. The contracts are back loaded in hopes of a new TV deal and they will replace the money going to the rather bad contracts of Rolen and Arroyo.

  10. dodger88 - Apr 10, 2012 at 4:18 PM

    So my Dodgers will finally have money to spend and no premium free agents left at this rate. If all that will be left are retreads then they might as well keep Coletti as they are his specialty.

  11. okwhitefalcon - Apr 10, 2012 at 4:48 PM

    Nice sign, BP’s a helluva player – good for him and the Reds.

    Time for their fans to start showing up and quit whining about the the level of commitment on the franchises part.

    Feel free to bitch about Dusty though – he’s just goofy.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Managers get easier path to Cooperstown
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. H. Street (3460)
  2. T. Tulowitzki (3086)
  3. C. Headley (2791)
  4. H. Ramirez (2672)
  5. Y. Puig (2669)
  1. R. Howard (2504)
  2. C. Lee (2466)
  3. B. Belt (2459)
  4. M. Trout (2196)
  5. A. Rios (2147)