PDA

View Full Version : Weathers signs two-year deal to return to Reds



NatiRedGals
12-04-2006, 12:14 PM
By Jerry Crasnick
ESPN.com

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. -- Free agent reliever David Weathers is closing in on a two-year deal with the Cincinnati Reds, two baseball sources at the winter meetings told ESPN.com. The agreement is believed to be worth about $5 million.

Weathers, 37, has a 63-70 record in 16 major-league seasons. The San Francisco Giants were another club that expressed interest in him, and one source said Weathers turned down at least one three-year offer to pitch for Cincinnati.

He saved 12 games for Cincinnati last season and could be a closer option for the Reds, who also signed Mike Stanton to a two-year, $5.5 million deal two weeks ago.

Weathers makes his offseason home in Loretto, Tenn., and sources said Cincinnati appealed to him because he wants to remain close to his family.

Jerry Crasnick covers Major League Baseball for ESPN Insider.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2685719

guttle11
12-04-2006, 12:28 PM
I'm ok with one year at $2.5 Mil, but dude's old, why two years?

Shaknb8k
12-04-2006, 12:30 PM
i will be surprised if its 2 years at a total of 5 million.....im guess more like 6 million but we will see

Joseph
12-04-2006, 12:32 PM
I think Wayne is addicted to multi year deals for old relievers.

corkedbat
12-04-2006, 12:33 PM
I'm ok with one year at $2.5 Mil, but dude's old, why two years?

Makes him easier to deal at the trade deadline?

5DOLLAR-BLEACHERBUM
12-04-2006, 12:40 PM
I'm ok with one year at $2.5 Mil, but dude's old, why two years?
I cant see any reason why Weathers wouldnt have atleast 2 more years left, so why not. The old FO seemed content with rebuilding the bullpen every year, maybe this one wants a little stability so that they can focus on other things next offseason.

mound_patrol
12-04-2006, 12:43 PM
or maybe we give them two years because thats what makes them come here over their other 1 year options

Shaknb8k
12-04-2006, 12:43 PM
Makes him easier to deal at the trade deadline?

I think thats it. A team that really needs a RP to make it to the playoffs that year would trade for a guy with a 2-year deal just so it helps them this year. Plus 2.5-3 million isnt a lot for a team to eat the next year if they dont think he will be good again. 2-year deals dont hurt a team all that much. Its when someone gets signed for a 6-year deal rather than say a 4-year. I have no problem with this signing.

shredda2000
12-04-2006, 12:46 PM
Good signing...and the fact he turned down a possible 3-year deal with another club shows his dedication to Cincinnati.

Handofdeath
12-04-2006, 12:53 PM
The Cincinnati Reds continued to bolster their bullpen Monday, re-signing free-agent right-hander David Weathers.

FOXSports.com has learned that Weathers will receive a two-year deal worth approximately $5 million, pending results of a physical, which Weathers will take today.
The deal will keep Weathers in Cincinnati, where he has played the last two seasons appearing in 140 games. The contract also includes incentives that will increase the value of the deal if Weathers ends up closing games.

Interest in Weathers had been high and the reliever turned down three-year deals from a pair of teams to remain a Red.

Earlier this off-season, the Reds had given a two-year deal to left-hander Mike Stanton, who spent the 2006 season with the Nationals and Cubs.


Looks like the Reds have their closer.

edabbs44
12-04-2006, 01:00 PM
Wayne is going overboard with the bullpen. I think he is shell-shocked from last year.

Johnny Footstool
12-04-2006, 01:04 PM
Wayne is going overboard with the bullpen. I think he is shell-shocked from last year.

I like the idea of loading up the bullpen. However, Wayne is simply doing it the wrong way, IMO. You need fireballers in the bullpen -- guys who miss bats. The Reds currently have ZERO high-K relievers. That spell a lot of blown saves in the 7th, 8th, and 9th innings.

red-in-la
12-04-2006, 01:15 PM
Wayne is going overboard with the bullpen. I think he is shell-shocked from last year.

Yeah.....sure is lucky he has been able to bring back basically the same cast then....:help:

Edd Roush
12-04-2006, 01:46 PM
Wayne is going overboard with the bullpen. I think he is shell-shocked from last year.

Overboard? If Wayne has the ability to have a deep bullpen with adequate fillers in the minors, I'm all for it. Last year, we lost a few games for the bare fact that our bullpen was as thin as Paris Hilton. Weathers will be a welcome addition to the pen. Now, let's find a back of the rotation starter and a plattoon bat for first base.

Edd Roush
12-04-2006, 01:48 PM
I like the idea of loading up the bullpen. However, Wayne is simply doing it the wrong way, IMO. You need fireballers in the bullpen -- guys who miss bats. The Reds currently have ZERO high-K relievers. That spell a lot of blown saves in the 7th, 8th, and 9th innings.

Fireballers are usually overpaid in free agency. Who in the current free agent market would you have prefered the Reds to go after? I'm just curious.

redsupport
12-04-2006, 01:49 PM
Weathers is proof that if you leave a guy around long enough, hopeless fans remember that he is mediocre instead of just putrescent

lollipopcurve
12-04-2006, 01:52 PM
The Reds currently have ZERO high-K relievers.

Would you deal Freel for Derek Turnbow?

Johnny Footstool
12-04-2006, 02:06 PM
Fireballers are usually overpaid in free agency. Who in the current free agent market would you have prefered the Reds to go after? I'm just curious.

Non necessarily fireballers, but guys who strike out more than 7 batters per 9 IP.

Justin Speier, for one. Scott Williamson (in an incentive-laden deal).

I'd still like the Reds to take a chance on Octavio Dotel.

Falls City Beer
12-04-2006, 02:07 PM
Would you deal Freel for Derek Turnbow?

God no.

Johnny Footstool
12-04-2006, 02:08 PM
Would you deal Freel for Derek Turnbow?

Since Freel is a Free Agent after 2007, I'd seriously consider that deal.

Handofdeath
12-04-2006, 02:12 PM
I like the idea of loading up the bullpen. However, Wayne is simply doing it the wrong way, IMO. You need fireballers in the bullpen -- guys who miss bats. The Reds currently have ZERO high-K relievers. That spell a lot of blown saves in the 7th, 8th, and 9th innings.

The Reds need a good group of relievers who can go out in the 6-8th innings and just simply hold a lead. They were last in the NL in holds this past season and that, more than anything, cost them the divison title. You don't need to be a high K pitcher to be an effective reliever. Who is the best reliever of the past 10 years? Mariano Rivera. Over his career he's averaging 7.99 K's/per 9IP. I'll do you one better than that. This past season, Rivera had 34 saves with a 1.80 ERA and averaged 6.60 K's/per 9IP. Bill Bray and Todd Coffey had 7.02 and 6.92 respectively. Stanton was 6.35 and Weathers 6.08. You don't need fireballers so much as you need effective relievers.

fearofpopvol1
12-04-2006, 02:20 PM
Very glad to see it. This is a pretty inexpensive signing for a guy who has been reliable for us. Not to mention, the veteran leadership he provides to the younger guys.

I'm really glad this deal was done.

VR
12-04-2006, 02:22 PM
I like the idea of loading up the bullpen. However, Wayne is simply doing it the wrong way, IMO. You need fireballers in the bullpen -- guys who miss bats. The Reds currently have ZERO high-K relievers. That spell a lot of blown saves in the 7th, 8th, and 9th innings.

Why are strikeouts important for Reds relievers, but not for the Reds hitters?

(not trying to be sarcastic)

edabbs44
12-04-2006, 02:24 PM
Overboard? If Wayne has the ability to have a deep bullpen with adequate fillers in the minors, I'm all for it. Last year, we lost a few games for the bare fact that our bullpen was as thin as Paris Hilton. Weathers will be a welcome addition to the pen. Now, let's find a back of the rotation starter and a plattoon bat for first base.

Now our lineup is playing the role of Paris Hilton and our rotation is Lindsay Lohan. Thank God the bullpen is Rosie O'Donnell.

corkedbat
12-04-2006, 02:32 PM
No problem. He can always see how the bullpen shakes out in Spring Training and then deal the surplus (if there is one) for something of value. Maybe to the Nationals for Kearns and Lopez. :evil:

We could always throw in Castro and we always have a young pitcher or two coming off arm surgery to add.

IrishDavidKY
12-04-2006, 02:39 PM
It's a good deal. Now I hope WK finds a OF, starting pitcher or two. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few days.

11BarryLarkin11
12-04-2006, 02:57 PM
It looks like Krivsky may have promised some time in the closer role for Stormy:

"David Weathers, who will be back with Cincinnati on a two-year, $5 million contract, said he took less from the Reds because he wanted a chance to close.
"The last two years of my career I want to be someplace with a chance to (be a closer)," he said. "That the convenience of being close to home outweighed the money. I left some money on the table." There are some incentives in the contract based on games finished. Unless the Reds keep adding to the their pen, Weathers will enter spring training as the favorite for saves. Mike Stanton will also likely get some opportunities."
Source: Cincinnati Enquirer

WMR
12-04-2006, 02:58 PM
At least Weathers appears to have the testicular fortitude to close games, even if he's not the prototypical closer in terms of 'stuff.'

IslandRed
12-04-2006, 03:30 PM
I'm not a big fan of Weathers. But...

One of the nitpicks I have about modern bullpen usage is that teams that don't have a Mariano Rivera act like they have Mariano Rivera, by picking one guy out of the herd and anointing him The Closer and leaving him there no matter what. In the absence of a Rivera -- and I'm not saying Krivsky shouldn't be trying to find one in someone else's farm system -- I'm encouraged that the Reds haven't promised the closer role to anyone and seem to be headed toward a hot-hand approach, with Weathers and Stanton or even Bray or Coffey getting chances. It seems more sensible than pretending you have the automatic guy when you don't.

TeamSelig
12-04-2006, 04:10 PM
I saw a stat of the end of season for Weathers. Can't remember exactly, but I'm pretty sure he didn't give up hardly any runs at all during the season, except for a horrendous month where he lost his closer role.

savafan
12-04-2006, 04:14 PM
Why not have Bailey close a la Jonathan Papelbon?

Falls City Beer
12-04-2006, 04:20 PM
Why not have Bailey close a la Jonathan Papelbon?

I'm for that idea.

TeamSelig
12-04-2006, 04:36 PM
Not a bad idea, but then you have to stretch his arm back out. He's currently at 130... so he could get up to 160 this season. Next season 190. Seems like a good track to be a solid 200 inning starting pitcher.

BuckeyeRedleg
12-04-2006, 04:36 PM
Why are strikeouts important for Reds relievers, but not for the Reds hitters?

(not trying to be sarcastic)

Posted by RedsManRick a while ago....

Originally Posted by RedsManRick
The difference in the way strikeouts are treated when looking at pitchers and hitters has a lot to do with what the ability to strikeout a guy (or not strikeout) says about the rest of the player's skill, particularly when looking at the predictive context.

History has shown that K/9 rates are more highly correlated with future ERA than is present ERA. Thus we can pretty generally say that a high K/9 is a good indicator of future success (and visa versa). Surely there are a lot of other variables involved, but the positive correlation is strong. This is largely because there is little downside to a high strikeout rate for a pitcher. There is no other skill set which is strongly correlated with the ability to strikeout guys that would balance it out (e.g. high K rate pitchers give up lots of homers).

However, with hitters, while most other types of outs are indeed BETTER than strikeouts, that relationship is dwarfed by the fact that there is a pretty strong correlation between high strikeout rates and power. Furthermore, the benefit of power grossly outweights a high strikeout tendency. Because of the nature of the strikeout, a player who strikes out a lot and doesn't hit for power, isn't likely to stay in the majors (presumably because he doesn't hit for average either). Therefore, the only real correlation between strikeouts and batting production is that the more strikeouts, the more production. Now of course we know this isn't a causal relationship. Sure, if Dunn could hit 45 homers and never strikeout, he'd be better. But that's not what we're looking at. We're trying to say, "what's the predictive value of strikeouts for hitters", and given the way it shakes out, the answer is not much. Because of selection bias based on skill set correlation, we cannot look at a hitters strikeout rate and make a general statement about his future productivity.

I guess in my head I see it this way. On the X axis graph strikeout rate of MLB pitchers (or hitters) and on the Y axis, productivity (measured in some general fashion like VORP):

Hitters: As you move left to right along the strikeout axis, productivity is all over the map, but generally increases. This would be shown as a moderate, positive R value (help me out here with a real number Steel). However, common sense tells us that strikeouts themselves are not a cause of greater production. So instead, we simply say that there is some other variable (the outcome of non-strikeout events) affecting both production and K rate which causes the observed correlation.

Pitchers: As you move from left to right on the K/9 axis, productive consistently and strongly increases. This shows up as a strong positive correlation (R-value... again, the real number Steel?). However, this relationship also passes the common sense test.

Part of the reason for this is that the strikeouts are distributed across the opposing hitters of varying skill sets. That is, assuming all pitchers face the same types of hitters, more strikeouts = less balls in play = less runs. There is no significant & consistent correlation between strikeout rates and the types of balls hit against said pitcher. With hitters, this relationship does exist and counfounds the relationship.

Will M
12-04-2006, 04:49 PM
I am OK with this.

Since we don't have a true ace closer and none seem to be on the market then we have to go with the next best thing - depth.
Stanton replaces Guadaro ( sp ) and we basically have the same bullpen we had late last year. Weathers, Stanton, Bray, Coffey, Majik & Cormier aren't sexy but each has the potential for a sub 4.00 ERA in GABP. Someone recently posted that a bullpen will pitch ~400 innings. Look at what the Reds will spend on the above six relievers compared to what Lilly, Eaton,etc will get this winter.

Also - they ALL will be better with the improved defense.

edabbs44
12-04-2006, 04:57 PM
I am OK with this.

Since we don't have a true ace closer and none seem to be on the market then we have to go with the next best thing - depth.
Stanton replaces Guadaro ( sp ) and we basically have the same bullpen we had late last year. Weathers, Stanton, Bray, Coffey, Majik & Cormier aren't sexy but each has the potential for a sub 4.00 ERA in GABP. Someone recently posted that a bullpen will pitch ~400 innings. Look at what the Reds will spend on the above six relievers compared to what Lilly, Eaton,etc will get this winter.

Also - they ALL will be better with the improved defense.

Agreed, but the only problem is that the BP might be trying to stop the opposition from stretching their lead rather than protecting a Cincy lead. For a team w/o an expensive pitcher in the bullpen, they now have a lot of money tied up there. A bit too much, if you ask me.

My guess is that WK is thinking about pulling a bullpen squeeze and trading a lot of these guys come July. Maybe just as a contingency plan if the season doesn't turn out.

How many BP arms has this guy gotten since opening day '06?

James B.
12-04-2006, 05:09 PM
I think this was a good sign. The reds are quietly putting together a good pen. I still think they need a dominate closer, but most teams are looking for a dominate closer.

schroomytunes
12-04-2006, 05:32 PM
IMHO this is an above average bullpen, and the money allocated to it is basically peanuts compared to the rest of the league. Look at what we have:

Weathers-@2.5
Stanton-@2.5
Bray-.350k
Majewski-350k
Cormier-@2.5
Coffey-300k
Belisle-350k

if I'm adding that up, our pen is under 9 million per season. Think about that, that is not bad at all, and it has the ability to be very effective, and I see all of them being able to be under a 4.2ERA. I like the pen, I think it will surprise us this year, and it allows us to maybe move one of them at the deadline for prospects, cause we still have Lizard, Claussen and Lohse in the mix.

Redsland
12-04-2006, 05:38 PM
You have four guys making less than the major league minimum of $380,000.

Word to the wise: If you do that for too long then the next thing you know they'll be throwing the World Series.

;)

RedsManRick
12-04-2006, 05:52 PM
High strikeout pitchers are great -- especially relievers since they don't have to worry about pitch counts so much. But I'll take half the strikeouts and a 4.00 ERA over 10 K/9 and a 5.00 ERA. At the end of the day, strikeouts are just another way of getting guys out. If you give up lots of homers or walk too many guys, well, the strikeouts are sort of pointless.

My biggest complaint about the lack of a high K guy isn't for the closer role. The job of pitching the last inning of a game, protecting a lead, isn't really that hard. You can put Joe Average reliever out there at the beginning of the 9th and he'll "save" the game 70% of the time. What is hard is putting out fires. That's where the leverage really exists in terms of "saving" wins. When the game is tied in the 8th and there's a guy on 3rd with no outs, that's when you can really use that power arm.

osuceltic
12-04-2006, 05:55 PM
IMHO this is an above average bullpen, and the money allocated to it is basically peanuts compared to the rest of the league. Look at what we have:

Weathers-@2.5
Stanton-@2.5
Bray-.350k
Majewski-350k
Cormier-@2.5
Coffey-300k
Belisle-350k

if I'm adding that up, our pen is under 9 million per season. Think about that, that is not bad at all, and it has the ability to be very effective, and I see all of them being able to be under a 4.2ERA. I like the pen, I think it will surprise us this year, and it allows us to maybe move one of them at the deadline for prospects, cause we still have Lizard, Claussen and Lohse in the mix.

I would agree if they had that hammer at the back end. Unfortunately, those guys are hard to come by. Anyway, it really is a solid group -- but they all need to shift down one spot in their roles.

Falls City Beer
12-04-2006, 06:15 PM
IMHO this is an above average bullpen, and the money allocated to it is basically peanuts compared to the rest of the league. Look at what we have:

Weathers-@2.5
Stanton-@2.5
Bray-.350k
Majewski-350k
Cormier-@2.5
Coffey-300k
Belisle-350k

if I'm adding that up, our pen is under 9 million per season. Think about that, that is not bad at all, and it has the ability to be very effective, and I see all of them being able to be under a 4.2ERA. I like the pen, I think it will surprise us this year, and it allows us to maybe move one of them at the deadline for prospects, cause we still have Lizard, Claussen and Lohse in the mix.


That is not an above average pen. Not at all.

Doc. Scott
12-04-2006, 07:00 PM
That is not an above average pen. Not at all.

I'd say it's deeper than most bullpens, but doesn't look as impressive without a "proven closer" (not that I care about baseball's least-valuable stat, but others do). On the whole I'd call it average at minimum, perhaps a tick above. The problem is that a bullpen like this can be very problematic for your typical Inside-the-Box manager to use wisely. Which I don't have much faith in, given current personnel in place.

Chip R
12-04-2006, 07:11 PM
Why not have Bailey close a la Jonathan Papelbon?


It's not a bad idea and I halfheartedly suggested it last year. But if he's successful, what I see happening is that the Reds keep him in that closer's spot - since the good ones don't come cheap. We need starting ptching more than we need a closer. But I would like to see him used out of the bullpen when he first comes up. But that won't happen.

Degenerate39
12-04-2006, 07:16 PM
Glad to see him back.

Willy
12-04-2006, 07:31 PM
I'm for that idea.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51946

Most didn't think it was a good idea

Falls City Beer
12-04-2006, 07:50 PM
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51946

Most didn't think it was a good idea

I realize it's not popular.

Falls City Beer
12-04-2006, 07:52 PM
I'd say it's deeper than most bullpens, but doesn't look as impressive without a "proven closer" (not that I care about baseball's least-valuable stat, but others do). On the whole I'd call it average at minimum, perhaps a tick above. The problem is that a bullpen like this can be very problematic for your typical Inside-the-Box manager to use wisely. Which I don't have much faith in, given current personnel in place.

The only two pitchers who performed at or above average last season were Weathers and Coffey. And I don't think Weathers will walk down that road again.

LINEDRIVER
12-04-2006, 08:55 PM
Thought I was coming down with the flu this afternoon but I soon realized I was only hearing the news of a 2-yr deal with Weathers.

I find this to be disappointing news. Isnt it time to move on? Why the same ole crap? Is signing Weathers just laziness in coming up with other ideas and persuing those options and avenues?? How much 'veteran presence' do the the Reds have to have down in the pen to keep Coffey, Bray, Belisle, Majewski in line? Can't Hume, Cormier, and Stanton handle that?

mth123
12-04-2006, 09:56 PM
IMHO this is an above average bullpen, and the money allocated to it is basically peanuts compared to the rest of the league. Look at what we have:

Weathers-@2.5
Stanton-@2.5
Bray-.350k
Majewski-350k
Cormier-@2.5
Coffey-300k
Belisle-350k

if I'm adding that up, our pen is under 9 million per season. Think about that, that is not bad at all, and it has the ability to be very effective, and I see all of them being able to be under a 4.2ERA. I like the pen, I think it will surprise us this year, and it allows us to maybe move one of them at the deadline for prospects, cause we still have Lizard, Claussen and Lohse in the mix.

I think the pen has a whole bunch of guys who are all about the same. Cormier, Stanton and Weathers could all contribute to a team as a 4th or 5th option. To pay almost $8 Million for those guys when there is little difference between them and the others already there is not the best use of $. As it stands now there is no role for Belisle or Claussen. Shack, Coutlangus and Salmon won't make the team, there won't be room for the promising guys who tore up AA last year, and the pen still is lacking in legit late inning relievers. There were lots of internal candidates to pitch the 6th and 7th. Why spend $8 Million on 3 more? Get a decent one that can pitch the 8th or 9th.

BTW Weathers in 2006 walked 4.15 per 9 innings, gave up 1.47 HR per nine innings and basically looked good because he managed an unrepeatable .236 BABIP. This is a waste of money.

Hopefully, the relief market will be nutty again in 2007 and Weathers, Cormier and Stanton can be dumped for something useful. But Krivsky gave a lot for young relievers, no one was giving much for older guys who pitch the 7th so I doubt it.

The worst part of this is that they are perceived as needed at all. Didn't this team trade its heart and soul already to fix up the pen? Why do the Reds need these guys too?

I hope this isn't the end and some of this mess will be packaged for some quality.

edabbs44
12-04-2006, 11:26 PM
IMHO this is an above average bullpen, and the money allocated to it is basically peanuts compared to the rest of the league. Look at what we have:

Weathers-@2.5
Stanton-@2.5
Bray-.350k
Majewski-350k
Cormier-@2.5
Coffey-300k
Belisle-350k

if I'm adding that up, our pen is under 9 million per season. Think about that, that is not bad at all, and it has the ability to be very effective, and I see all of them being able to be under a 4.2ERA. I like the pen, I think it will surprise us this year, and it allows us to maybe move one of them at the deadline for prospects, cause we still have Lizard, Claussen and Lohse in the mix.

See, I'm looking at it this way...we have $7.5 million tied up with, shall we say, the elder statesman of the bullpen? Over 10% of the suggested payroll in those 3 guys. Lots of money. And this is what kills me. W/o other pieces of the puzzle, that's wasted money. Btw those 3 and Gonzalez, we're talking, what, $11 million? For what? To be middle of the pack? No thanks...spend the money elsewhere. When this team is 75-87, we can all be happy that we at least have Weathers and Stanton for another year. :thumbup:

edabbs44
12-04-2006, 11:28 PM
Hopefully, the relief market will be nutty again in 2007 and Weathers, Cormier and Stanton can be dumped for something useful. But Krivsky gave a lot for young relievers, no one was giving much for older guys who pitch the 7th so I doubt it.

I agree with your whole post, but this part cracked me up. The only reason the relief mkt was "nutty" last year is b/c of WK. No one else did anything resembling what WK did, and it was only damage control when he was telling us all how crazy the mkt was.

The only way the Reds get anyone of any real value for these three are if WK is the GM of another team in July.

Patpacillosjock
12-05-2006, 12:22 AM
am i the only one who is unimpressed with this signing? We keep signing the same player over and over again.

outside of Gonzalez, we have signed or traded for nothing but middle relievers the past 8 months.

thats ridiculous. and im pissed.

Johnny Footstool
12-05-2006, 12:32 AM
High strikeout pitchers are great -- especially relievers since they don't have to worry about pitch counts so much. But I'll take half the strikeouts and a 4.00 ERA over 10 K/9 and a 5.00 ERA. At the end of the day, strikeouts are just another way of getting guys out. If you give up lots of homers or walk too many guys, well, the strikeouts are sort of pointless.

If you have a guy striking out more than a batter per inning with an ERA over 5.00, you have an effective reliever having a bad season. Guys who strike out that many batters tend to be effective. As Brad Lidge showed, they can have terrible seasons, but the high K rate shows that their stuff is still excellent, which makes them good bets to rebound.

redsupport
12-05-2006, 01:14 AM
I agree the signing is a joke but if you say that the rosie eyed fans feel as if their bullpen heroics have been torn asunder