Skip to content

Report: Reds are “getting close” on a nine-figure extension with Homer Bailey

Feb 16, 2014, 8:05 PM EDT

Paul Hoynes of the Cleveland Plain Dealer with the report:

Previous reports had indicated that there was an “enormous gap” in negotiations between the Reds and Bailey. If a deal can’t be hammered out soon, Bailey is on track to go to an arbitration hearing. In his third and final year, Bailey filed for an $11.6 million salary for 2014 while the Reds filed for $8.7 million, putting the midpoint at $10.15 million.

Obviously, a six-year deal in the $100 million range puts the average annual value just under $17 million per year, a significant upgrade over what Bailey is projected to earn on a one-year deal to avoid arbitration, or what he would be awarded by an arbitrator.

  1. djsammmyskillz - Feb 16, 2014 at 8:24 PM

    Deserved. Reds will not regret when the 2014 pennant is hung next to the 1990 pennant.

    • Kevin S. - Feb 16, 2014 at 10:34 PM

      The Reds were the last NL team into the playoffs, lost 200 league-average innings in the rotation, lost the second-best OBP man in MLB, and replaced them with nothing. Why should we expect them to even hold off a now-healthy Washington club, much less do anything if they actually make the playoffs?

      • savvybynature - Feb 17, 2014 at 1:49 AM

        Because baseball.

      • jonrox - Feb 17, 2014 at 9:27 AM

        Err, they’re losing 200 innings of Bronson Arroyo and replacing it with a lot more innings of Tony Cingrani and Johnny Cueto. That’s a nice upgrade.

        As for Choo, losing him will hurt but focusing only on OBP is missing the point. Hamilton obviously can’t compete against Choo at the plate, but will be a defensive and baserunning upgrade, negating some of the loss.

        Meanwhile, if you’re going to give the Nationals’ disaster of a season a free pass due to injury, you should acknowledge that the Reds had major ones as well. They lost their starting LF on opening day (Ludwick was coming off a 2-3 WAR year), Sean Marshall basically missed the year, Jonathan Broxton missed half, Johnny Cueto missed 2/3, Cingrani missed 1/3, and Brandon Phillips lost 200 OPS after being hit in the forearm on June 2. Plus, Joey Votto’s knee wasn’t 100% going into the season and so wasn’t the same.

        This year, all of those guys should be back at 100%. The team is almost entirely built on guys who are in prime years, so there’s no reason not to assume improvement on last years’ numbers for the entire team. Sure they didn’t make a big signing to replace Choo, and that’s bad, but that doesn’t mean the team will be a disaster.

    • wpjohnson - Feb 17, 2014 at 11:33 AM

      It might be helpful if he produced more wins than losses.

      • jm91rs - Feb 17, 2014 at 11:37 AM

        Yeah, pitcher wins are so important.

      • wpjohnson - Feb 17, 2014 at 3:57 PM

        I said “produce wins” not get the win himself. You sure don’t win too many pennants without wins. All the BS pseudo statistics can’t change that fact now can it, jm91rs?

      • jm91rs - Feb 17, 2014 at 4:55 PM

        He can only try to keep the other guys off the board. Measuring that in wins and losses isn’t taking into account blown saves, low scoring output from his own team, etc. I have many knocks on Homer, but his win loss record isn’t one of them.

      • wpjohnson - Feb 17, 2014 at 6:18 PM

        Well, if Bailey gets near $100 million for six years, it will sure make the Braves look good for signing Teheran for six years for $34.4 million. Teheran is much younger and, in reality, has a bigger upside. He may well be a bargain.

  2. merchie89 - Feb 16, 2014 at 8:27 PM

    I do not like this. thats like 1/12 of payroll, for a guy who has been pretty good the past two years but was below average before that.

    With Stephenson and Cigniari(not sure how to spell) in the pipes, they are running out of space

    • paperlions - Feb 16, 2014 at 8:32 PM

      1/12 of the payroll? Assuming $17M AAV, you think the Reds annual payroll is $204M?

  3. braddavery - Feb 16, 2014 at 8:28 PM

    $100+ million for Homer Bailey? lol This is getting out of hand. But hey, the money’s gotta go somewhere.

  4. jpalughi823 - Feb 16, 2014 at 9:18 PM

    really?? i mean i think he’s a decent pitcher & all, but are you kidding me? this is why the market is out of control

  5. ltzep75 - Feb 16, 2014 at 9:21 PM

    Brandon Phillips is not amused.

  6. detectivejimmymcnulty - Feb 16, 2014 at 10:38 PM

    I really want to see how much money these owners are making. About time for professional teams to finance their own stadiums I’d say.

    • mc1439 - Feb 16, 2014 at 11:30 PM

      But ith a public fathality!!!!!

      • lonnie49 - Feb 17, 2014 at 4:53 AM

        nice spelling there.

    • savvybynature - Feb 17, 2014 at 1:53 AM

      That’s exactly what needs to happen, but it has to be all owners lest a handful get a competitive edge.
      It’s social game theory but right now the owners work together to make decisions by consensus while the cities act as disparate entities even though their interests are tied together when it comes to stadium financing.

  7. savvybynature - Feb 17, 2014 at 1:59 AM

    Not a bad deal. It’s a crazy number, sure, but that’s what the market is.
    Wonder if this means they try to move Phillips. I like BP but a starter is definitely more valuable than a second baseman, and they need some talent in the farm system.
    Very solid rotation, good defense and a couple good hitters (Votto and Bruce ain’t bad). This team just need a right-handed bat to compete imo.

  8. Carl Hancock - Feb 17, 2014 at 2:34 AM

    As a Cards fan I’d love to see the Reds blow over $100 million on Homer Bailey.

    • jmcneely1982 - Feb 17, 2014 at 3:14 AM

      I wouldn’t call it “blowing $ 100 million dollars”. But it’s an overpay for sure. Homer’s turned into a very good if not at times great pitcher. Two no hitters in less than a full calender year. I think it’ll more likely be 5-6 years and about 75 or 80 million. But just think, what’s it going to cost STL to lock up their pitchers long term in a few years? I mean come on, Arroyo just got 23 million and he’s not even a average starting pitcher anymore.

  9. tuberippin - Feb 17, 2014 at 3:29 AM

    Foolish overpay. Two no-hitters is great, but he’s not been consistently good to the point that they should invest $100,000,000 in the guy, particularly with prospects in the pipeline (Robert Stephenson and Tony Cingrani, amongst others) and Cueto ready to become a FA in 2015 or 2016 as well.

    Latos-Cueto-Cingrani-Stephenson-Leake could plausibly be as productive as Latos-Cueto-Bailey-Cingrani-Leake without the same financial investment.

    • ptfu - Feb 17, 2014 at 8:02 AM

      TINSTAAPP

      • tuberippin - Feb 17, 2014 at 9:08 AM

        Considering Cincy bet their core’s future on pitching prospects for the past three or four years, I think TINSTAAPP has no place in this discussion.

      • paperlions - Feb 17, 2014 at 9:10 AM

        Except for the fact that there is, that acronym is exactly right. The mindless propagation of that bit of jest is unfortunate. All it meant was that pitchers break a lot, often before reaching the majors.

      • ptfu - Feb 17, 2014 at 10:04 PM

        Fine, I’ll spell it out. Paper’s right: TINSTAAPP means that pitching prospects frequently break and/or don’t reach their potential. I’m saying that Tube can’t just pencil in Stephenson, Cingrani, or whoever into Bailey and Cueto’s rotation spots. Can’t assume the kids can get it done until they actually do. Excess pitching depth is a great problem to have, if it actually happens.

  10. onbucky96 - Feb 17, 2014 at 5:20 AM

    6yrs $100 million? What the ****, are the Reds nuts? He ain’t that good. Way to waste cash, I’m sure they won’t regret this next year.

  11. bengalsucker - Feb 17, 2014 at 8:28 AM

    Yeah I’m not a Homer fan at all. He’s always had this “doucheness” to him. I dunno. I’ve heard he isn’t a very pleasant guy. But I sure as heck don’t think he’s a 100mil pitcher. Yeah 2 no hitters but at times he just looks awful. Not enough consistancy for me to throw that kind of money at him. Does this also mean Latos walks when he’s up for free agency then bc he should then be a 100mil pitcher if he stays healthy.

  12. 4d3fect - Feb 17, 2014 at 9:07 AM

    Good commentating here. Just one question; shouldn’t a pitcher be named “heater” or something along those lines? Not Homer? I mean you go with the hand you’re dealt, but still..

  13. metalhead65 - Feb 17, 2014 at 9:15 AM

    it is the going rate for young starting pitchers right now why should he settle for less? if the Reds don’t give it to him somebody else will and since they can’t afford to lose him they better do it. it is about time they stop whining about being a small market team and signing everybody else’s rejects and step up and sign their own good players. lock him up him then Latos and then along with Cingrani and stephenson coming up from the minors they will have a solid young staff for years to come. but that won’t help them contend as long as walt keeps signing ex-cardinals to over paid contracts at the end of their careers to be useless role players or starters in left field.

  14. jm91rs - Feb 17, 2014 at 11:36 AM

    As a Reds fan I would prefer that they keep him this year and then let him walk. Or if they’re out of it around the deadline, deal him then and get something for him. He’s a good pitcher, a solid #3, but we’ve already heard several times this year from management that they can’t do much in free agency because of payroll. Now when Cueto and Latos are free agents they likely won’t be able to keep them. I’d much rather see that money banked until Latos is eligible.

  15. neverbinbetter - Feb 17, 2014 at 12:38 PM

    Homer’s numbers do not look to good from the 5th inning and on.

  16. buckemtp - Feb 17, 2014 at 12:51 PM

    Please please please do this.

    -cardinals fans

  17. stex52 - Feb 17, 2014 at 12:55 PM

    If you go by 2013 stats, he looks solid for maybe a #2 pitcher. The question is whether you think 2013 was the start of a good run for him (he is only 27) or an unusual uptick. If you got five years of that kind of WHIP, ERA and strikeouts he might well be worth the money.

    • jm91rs - Feb 17, 2014 at 5:00 PM

      Just from what I’ve seen out of Homer and heard in the media in the past few years, I think he’s finally pitching versus throwing. He came out of the minors as a hot shot without much tolerance for accepting coaching. I think now he’s learning that the pure talent isn’t enough. It really feels like it took him longer than it should have to reach his potential, although now that he’s getting there I’d hope he can keep it at that level for a few years.

  18. thirdandthird - Feb 17, 2014 at 5:39 PM

    Bailey has averaged just below 3 win shares per year for the past two years. Given that the value of a win share in 2014 should be around $6-7 million, and $100 million over 6 years works out to just less than $17 million/year, it won’t be an overpay as long as his current level of production stays the same.

  19. markofapro - Feb 17, 2014 at 6:59 PM

    Oh, crud. Shoulda held out for more. – Phil Hughes

Leave Comment

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

Featured video

Patience finally paying off for Royals fans
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. R. Castillo (3388)
  2. G. Stanton (2627)
  3. A. Rizzo (2383)
  4. H. Ryu (2302)
  5. J. Hamilton (2186)
  1. M. Trout (2134)
  2. N. Arenado (2116)
  3. E. Gattis (1980)
  4. D. Ortiz (1900)
  5. A. Pujols (1860)