Home
    Articles
    Raisel Iglesias
    Raisel Iglesias

    Reds sign Raisel Iglesias to new 3-year deal

    Doug Gray 20

    The Cincinnati Reds have signed reliever Raisel Iglesias to a new three year contract. This is not an extension, as he was under team control for those years already. What it does, though, is avoid the issues of going to arbitration for the next three seasons.

    When Raisel Iglesias signed his initial 7-year deal with the Cincinnati Reds, there were options in the contract that allowed him to opt for arbitration every year following the 2016 season. Given how he has performed that certainly would be what he and his agents would do as it would result in more money for him.

    This deal locks up those years at a set number. Mark Feinsand of MLB.com had the salary first. While he doesn’t have the breakdown by year at this point, he does have the total salary of those three seasons.

    That’s essentially $8M per year, if it is broken down evenly. We don’t know that it is or not, though. If we assume that it is, that’s a potential big raise for 2019. For 2020 I would think it’s about on par with what he would be expected to get – maybe slightly less. It’s that 2021 year, if it’s at $8M, that would be an absolute bargain year by comparison to what he would have gotten in arbitration.

    Update at 5:15pm

    The Cincinnati Reds during a conference call with the media were not willing to comment  on whether or not the contract has a no-trade clause, citing that the team doesn’t comment on that publicly.

    Doug Gray
    Doug Gray is the owner and operator of this website and has been running it since 2006 in one variation or another.

    Related Posts

    20 Responses

    2. I can’t decide if this makes him an asset we plan to hold on to or an even more attractive trade option.

      1. He gets certainty. If he gets injured in any significant way, he won’t be able to expect as big an arb raise. And pitchers get injured pretty frequently. And he has some shoulder issues in his past.

      2. Baseball contracts are guaranteed. He has been healthy but does have something in his shoulder that made the Red’s not keep him a starter. So by signing it he knows he will make 24 mil even if he gets injured.

        If healthy I think he could get like 26-31 mil (2 arbitration years and first year as a few agent) over that time without signing a deal now. It is probably worth knowing you are getting 24 then you may or may not get 2-7 mil extra if you don’t. If he is healthy (and productive) though all 3 years he will get a big contract after the current one is over.

      3. 8 million a year. You don’t think he gets to live like a king? Give me a break. He should never have to work again if that is his choice.

    4. I thought when I heard Williams say they want to add a relief arm that Iglesias was probably going to stay because if he were traded they would not be adding but instead replacing.

    5. Great deal for Iggy. Arbitration is expected to pay 40%/60%/80% of market value in your three years of arbitration. I was thinking he was taking his $5 guarantee this year because it was as good as he could get in arbitration. My thought was is he stays healthy he would get 5/7.5/10 the next 3 years if he stays healthy. If not less than that. Seems there is no upside for the Reds in this deal if he remains closer. The contract they gave him was the most they could have even if he plays well.

      1. Market value for a top closer is close to 16 mil (Rockies signing of Davis).
        So, I think his numbers would have been higher.
        24 Mil guaranteed is a chunk more money. Nice for both.

        1. Chapman received $24 million his last 3 years.
          Jensen received $22 million. They both went year to year which based upon their performance should have maximized their income. Signing 3 years guaranteed means the player comes at a discount. He is getting more than Chapman. He is getting more than Jensen and he is not as good as either. They didn’t get a discount with Iglesias. Maybe you can argue it is near market value for what they would have paid him had he been healthy in 2019 and 2020.

          The only way I see this deal making sense is if they have plans to move him into the rotation.

      2. That statement isnt totally accurate. I do not believe it is known if he opted into arbitration this year. Which brings back diacussion i saw elsewhere about a similar case- Jose Abreu.

        No one knows because a player like Iggy or Abreu ever actually reached the arb pricess. You say its 40-60-80 but its also about a percentage pay raise from the prior year. So a good argument for Iggy would have been percentage X raise over 2018 salary, which i think was $5m as well, landing at prob $7.2ish this year thus increasing 2020 amd 2021 arb years

        1. Andrew if it were a % of his salary then all players would get the same salary in year 4 because they all make 500K in year 3 (except Rasiel). It is true that a pay cut is difficult. But he is not getting 7.2 million this year because he got 5 million last year.

        3. The CBA determines the guidelines for the arb process and as i stated there are no clear guidlines around Iggy and Abreus cases. I think it is interesting teams havent tested it either and the player and team agree outside of arbitration

        4. Good article Andrew. For the record Abreu opted out of his contract and resigned each year for slightly more. All the collective bargaining agreement does is limit Arbitration cuts to 20%. This is stated in the article you posted. There is no guaranteed raise. Many times players do not get raises. Abreu is proof of that. He had a great year in 2016 and his salary increased from 10 million to 10.8 million. I have never heard you are guaranteed a % raise increase. I do agree that pay cuts are rare even if a player spends the year on the DL.

        5. I never stated guaranted raise. If you read my post it says *its also about.

          If you think about thats why being a super 2 is so important becauses it bumps you starting salary up in year one. I have NEVER seen a pay cut througj arb in fact i beleive the CBA doesnt allow it.

          During arbitration arguments from what i have heard, pkayer reps argue the following SOMETIMES

          Player X made $1 and in year 2 of arb made $1.25, a 25% hike. Rep for player Z argues pkayer z who made $2 deserves AT LEAST the same 25% hike as player X to $2.50.

          This is obviously simplified but hoepfully you understand my point. Jeremy Regal is a good friend of mine that worked as a paralegal for one of the arbitrators essentially and he always said in no way is it as simple as 40-60-80, especially in scenarios like iggys where there are prorated bonuses attached and unclear language in the CBA.

          And yes, i made the bery point you did about Abreu not going through the arb process hence my point these contracts paid to foreign players with thtle rigjt to opt into arb has never really beem teated so neither you now me can say confidently what the process would look like.

          Happy thankagiving!

    6. Dick Williams said: “I think the bottom line is we think this is a great deal for us to lock it in because it gives him a fixed salary, we don’t go through the next few years worrying about arbitration and his value is assessed,” Williams said. “Some of the counting stats that arbitration uses, we don’t want those to become a factor. We wanted Raisel and our coaching staff to be aligned in the goal of just winning games.”

      It sounds like he may be taking on more innings, I’m not sure how, but with the changes in the way bullpen pitchers and starters are being used, who knows. Maybe the goal will be to make him a starter again or at least clearly they intend to push his inning totals up toward 100+ hopefully.

      More from Williams: “David and Derek will spend time with Raisel over the winter,” Williams said. “This is a guy who loves to pitch. He loves to appear frequently. He loves to appear in multiple innings if possible. He enjoys the back of the game. But he enjoyed starting. I’m looking forward to seeing what they come up with. The more we see an elite arm like this, the better off we are as a team.”

    7. This makes zero sense to me.
      As someone already mentioned, if he performs like an Ace the next 3yrs then this is right around what he would have made anyways.
      If he doesn’t perform as a Top 5-8 Closer then we’re way overpaying the kid.
      So, basically the best the Reds can do is break even on this one…….

    8. Thanks to Scottya for posting DW’s statements. The answer to the contract are right there. For relievers, they make the most money in arbitration by getting saves. However, analytics have really questioned the importance of the save. Is it more valuable to shutdown the top of an order in the seventh inning up by one run, or the bottom of the order in the ninth when up by three runs?

      It would appear that the Reds want to maximize Iggy’s effectiveness, in a way they seem important. If that way costs Iggy saved, then it costs him money, and you get an unhappy player.

      So the Reds show their support for Iggy by paying him what he would likely make in arbitration. They make a commitment to winning by showing good faith to their player. Sounds like a win-win to me. I acknowledge that there are those people who feel like the workforce serves at the pleasure of ownership. I don’t share that opinion and I will leave it there.

    Comments are closed.