PDA

View Full Version : Jose Contreras Anyone?



Krusty
01-01-2006, 11:43 AM
He was mentioned today in an article in the Cincy Enquirer. He could be available with the White Sox surplus of starters and the contract extension given to Jon Garland. His salary of 8.5 million for next season is what the Reds had in mind when they were negotiating with Matt Morris. Sox could be looking for bullpen help with the departure of Marte to the Pirates. Think they would have interest in Mercker especially with the Reds signing Hammonds? Add a minor league arm like Phil Dumatrait along with Mercker, and do you think the White Sox might be interested?

Contreras would be a free agent after the end of next season so there wouldn't be a longterm commitment of money. He would be an upgrade somewhat over Ramon Oritz.

http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/NASA...yerID=4257 47

Opinions?

VI_RedsFan
01-01-2006, 12:24 PM
I would be interested in Contreras if we weren't giving up too much. I wouldn't trade Kearns or Pena for him, but Mercker and Dumatrait would be fine with me. I would even add in another prospect to sweeten the deal.

I still have interests in Wade Miller and Dewon Brazelton. I would give either one a 2 year 2-3 mill deal. Yes, Dewon has been awful ever since he came to the big leagues, but he's still only 25 with a lot of potential. Before the off-season ends, I would like to see DanO snag one of Contreras/Miller/Brazelton.

BEETTLEBUG
01-01-2006, 12:46 PM
I am for Contreras.

redleg32
01-01-2006, 01:04 PM
No! Adding Contreras does not make a big enough difference to the rotation. The front office has not done anything to really improve the club this offseason, and its to late to get anybody of significance ,unless you make a blockbuster trade. So I'm just hoping that they sign Wade Miller for his potential upside. I would also like to see Julian Tavarez in a Reds uni.

Krusty
01-01-2006, 01:22 PM
No! Adding Contreras does not make a big enough difference to the rotation. The front office has not done anything to really improve the club this offseason, and its to late to get anybody of significance ,unless you make a blockbuster trade. So I'm just hoping that they sign Wade Miller for his potential upside. I would also like to see Julian Tavarez in a Reds uni.

Most likely Miller won't be ready till midseason.

marcshoe
01-01-2006, 10:53 PM
Fine, if he's cheap, but without any illusions that he's the answer. The team needs good young starters who can help anchor the staff for years. Contreras is the kind of pitcher you get to finish filling out a staff on a contender. So, I'd take him if the team didn't have to pay much, but I wouldn't go out of my way to get him quite yet. This team needs to stop playing around with fillers like they already have a decent staff and start doing what they can to build one.

Personally, if I'm talking to the White Sox, I'd talk McCarthy.

I'm getting more and more convinced every day that the Reds need to focus on getting young pitchers.

Krusty
01-02-2006, 12:23 AM
.

And the White Sox treasue their young pitchers too. Contreras buys time till some of the young arms can develop in our system.[/QUOTE]

marcshoe
01-02-2006, 12:28 AM
I don't know if Contrares has that many years left in his arm. There aren't any significant young arms ready to come in in the next year or two.

Young arms can be had. What we need is for the front office to be creative and aggresive. So far, O'Brien hasn't shown either quality.

dougflynn23
01-02-2006, 04:21 PM
:) If we're talking a Kent Mercker for Jose Contreras trade, do it now. If we're talking a Wily Mo or Austin Kearns, I'd lean to saying no. Those who critique the trade do need to realize that Contrares would be the undisputed #1 starter on this team and is coming off a very good season. To say he's too old or on the down side is inaccurate....he's coming off his best MLB season!

Nugget
01-02-2006, 07:03 PM
IMO Mercker is a much better pitcher for the REDS than Contreras. He is only just an upgrade over Ortiz but will cost twice as much. Mercker was one of the best LH relief pitchers last year.

Jr's Boy
01-02-2006, 07:41 PM
I say sign him up,we don't need anymore relief.A one year contract would be an ok gamble.

marcshoe
01-02-2006, 09:10 PM
:) If we're talking a Kent Mercker for Jose Contreras trade, do it now. If we're talking a Wily Mo or Austin Kearns, I'd lean to saying no. Those who critique the trade do need to realize that Contrares would be the undisputed #1 starter on this team and is coming off a very good season. To say he's too old or on the down side is inaccurate....he's coming off his best MLB season!

I agree with you. Contreras would help the staff. My primary worry also is that the Reds would ship Pena or Kearns for him. If you're going to trade youth with a large upside, it should bring youth with a large upside. If you trade one of the outfielders, the return needs to be part of the foundation of the future of this franchise.

And personally, I have trouble believing that the Sox would trade him for Mercker, even if the Reds threw in a so-so prospect.

dougflynn23
01-02-2006, 10:11 PM
IMO Mercker is a much better pitcher for the REDS than Contreras. He is only just an upgrade over Ortiz but will cost twice as much. Mercker was one of the best LH relief pitchers last year. :confused: We must be talking about a different Jose Contreras. He had a fantastic season for Chicago in his first full year out of the Yankee fishbowl. Contreras won 15-16 games, had an ERA well below the league average (around 3.65 if I'm remembering correctly), a great WHIP, and most importantly started 32 games and threw 200+ innings. In the second half of 2005, he was as good a pitcher as there was in the American League. Kent Mercker was good in his role, but Chris Hammond can duplicate or possibly even improve on Mercker's numbers. I'd trade Mercker and a "B" level prospect without thinking twice if Contreras is offered.

Eric_Davis
01-02-2006, 10:18 PM
Contreras?

Give me Jon Garland and that contract.

It's a perfect fit for the REDS.

Krusty
01-04-2006, 12:01 PM
Contreras?

Give me Jon Garland and that contract.

It's a perfect fit for the REDS.

And Garland had one good year and he gets a three-year deal. No thanks. I'll take one year of Contreras without the longterm risks while under the assumption we don't part with any of our key young players.

westofyou
01-04-2006, 12:14 PM
Contreras?

Give me Jon Garland and that contract.

It's a perfect fit for the REDS.
Yep, the Reds would be the type to lock up a low K guy coming off a caeer year from the control side to a fat contract.

Rob Dicken
01-06-2006, 01:59 AM
IMO Mercker is a much better pitcher for the REDS than Contreras. He is only just an upgrade over Ortiz but will cost twice as much. Mercker was one of the best LH relief pitchers last year.

I couldn't agree with you more. There's no sense in trading a pitcher for another pitcher. Getting rid of Mercker would downgrade our bullpen.

What's the point in 'potentially' upgrading our rotation and 'definitely' downgrading our bullpen?

That would be a Lose/Lose situation, honestly.

dougflynn23
01-06-2006, 01:26 PM
I couldn't agree with you more. There's no sense in trading a pitcher for another pitcher. Getting rid of Mercker would downgrade our bullpen.

What's the point in 'potentially' upgrading our rotation and 'definitely' downgrading our bullpen?

That would be a Lose/Lose situation, honestly. :confused: Help me understand how this would be a downgrade.

We added Chris Hammond, who depending on which stats you fing to be most important either matches Mercker's performance or exceeds it.


Hammond 58.2 IP 1.11 WHIP 0.58 K/9IP 3.84 ERA
Mercker 61.2 IP 1.35 WHIP 0.73 K/9IP 3.65 ERA.

Not to mention that Julian Tavarez is still sitting out there who is better than either one of the above.

Contreras simply blows away the alternative, with the combo of paul Wilson and Luke Hudson being the competition he would be replacing.

Contreras 15-7 3.61 ERA 32 Starts 204.2 IP 1.23 WHIP 0.75 K/9IP
Hud-Wil 7-14 6.87 ERA 25 Starts 130 IP 1.68 WHIP 0.64 K/9IP

Looks like a clear cut upgrade to me.

Rob Dicken
01-07-2006, 12:54 PM
:confused: Help me understand how this would be a downgrade.

We added Chris Hammond, who depending on which stats you fing to be most important either matches Mercker's performance or exceeds it.


Hammond 58.2 IP 1.11 WHIP 0.58 K/9IP 3.84 ERA
Mercker 61.2 IP 1.35 WHIP 0.73 K/9IP 3.65 ERA.

Not to mention that Julian Tavarez is still sitting out there who is better than either one of the above.

Contreras simply blows away the alternative, with the combo of paul Wilson and Luke Hudson being the competition he would be replacing.

Contreras 15-7 3.61 ERA 32 Starts 204.2 IP 1.23 WHIP 0.75 K/9IP
Hud-Wil 7-14 6.87 ERA 25 Starts 130 IP 1.68 WHIP 0.64 K/9IP

Looks like a clear cut upgrade to me.


How would it be a downgrade? You've got a guy coming from Chicago, to a homerun hitter's ballpark. Mercker pitched MORE than 'well' in Great American Ballpark, why trade him? Regardless of Chris Hammond's statistics or Jose Contreras', they would be coming into a homerun hitter's ballpark. Stats before entering, wouldn't mean a single thing...

Mercker was one of the BEST left handed relievers in the NL last year, and he did it inside Great American Ballpark.

Take that for what it's worth, but I would rather gain pitcher on a signing or trade a fielding player than trade one pitcher for another.

Krusty
01-08-2006, 11:32 AM
How would it be a downgrade? You've got a guy coming from Chicago, to a homerun hitter's ballpark. Mercker pitched MORE than 'well' in Great American Ballpark, why trade him? Regardless of Chris Hammond's statistics or Jose Contreras', they would be coming into a homerun hitter's ballpark. Stats before entering, wouldn't mean a single thing...

Mercker was one of the BEST left handed relievers in the NL last year, and he did it inside Great American Ballpark.

Take that for what it's worth, but I would rather gain pitcher on a signing or trade a fielding player than trade one pitcher for another.

Lefthanded relievers are a dime for a dozen and the Reds showed that by signing Chris Hammond, which would make Kent Mercker available if the right deal happen.

Contreras won 15 games but more importantly he gave quality starts and pitched over 200 innings. A guy like that would help the Reds rotation by moving everyone down a notch in the rotation. At the same time his ability to go deep into games would provide added rest to the bullpen.

If we're going to use the dimensions of the Great American Ballpark as an excuse for not being able to develop or acquire quality arms, that is pretty lame. Pitchers have to realize that their ERAs will be inflated compared to pitching in pitcher friendly ballparks like in Detroit, Los Angeles Dodgers and Petco Park. But give me a pitcher that gives you two quality starts out of every three and tell me how it wouldn't improve the Reds starting rotation?

Rob Dicken
01-09-2006, 12:42 AM
Team G GS W L SV CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB K ERA WHIP BAA
2004 NYY 18 18 8 5 0 0 0 95.2 93 66 60 22 42 82 5.64 1.41 .250
2004 CWS 13 13 5 4 0 0 0 74.2 73 48 44 9 42 68 5.30 1.54 .256
2005 CWS 32 32 15 7 0 1 0 204.2 177 91 82 23 75 154 3.61 1.23 .232
Career 81 72 35 18 0 1 0 446.0 395 232 212 58 189 376 4.28 1.31 .236

To me, these aren't GREAT numbers to want from a pitcher coming to Great American Ballpark. He's had ONE good season, and that was with a WORLD SERIES team.

I say give the guy a few more years, and if he gives quality seasons in 2-3 more years, then bring him in. Otherwise, ONE good season is not something to run off of, especially coming from a decently pitcher friendly park in Chicago.

A dime a dozen, to me, keeping a great LH reliever is helping our team more than trading him for a starter that has had one good year in Comiskey Park.