PDA

View Full Version : If Walt really wanted to shake up the market



M2
07-29-2008, 10:48 AM
I think we're all aware that that Reds aren't going to be making the playoffs this year. Theoretically that puts them in seller mode.

Yet what do they have to sell? They've got two corner OFs heading into free agency. Are teams going to pay a premium for a rental? Probably not (even if they should in the case of Adam Dunn).

The Reds have some middle relievers, but no one terribly exciting. They've got Josh Fogg for someone who wants a warm body for the rotation.

So what could the Reds dangle to entice a potential buyer?

How about Francisco Cordero?

A lot of teams are looking for relief help (Boston, Texas, Mets, Milwaukee, St. Louis). Notably, those are some systems with prospects the Reds might want to get their hands on.

Yes, Cordero costs money, but he's not a rental. The Reds could eat some salary if a trade partner was willing to pony up the right kids.

It would cost the Reds a bit of a luxury. The nice thing about Cordero is the Reds now have a closer in the coming years should the rest of the team reach the point where a closer can make a major difference. Yet other teams are feeling some win now pressure and Cordero might be the most valuable trading chit the Reds have got.

I think it would be worthwhile for the team to see if a motivated buyer emerges over the next 60 hours.

princeton
07-29-2008, 10:52 AM
seems doubtful. he has that no trade, plus he's not Mr Automatic. there's always been that "big game" question with him.

should clear waivers after Aug 1, though, as may Arroyo. That always makes things interesting. if there's a big injury, Walt may find himself in a nice position post-deadline.

Roy Tucker
07-29-2008, 10:53 AM
I've had that same thought the past couple weeks.

Cordero is all shined up and ready to go. I think the Reds could really get something for him unlike everyone else they've thought about trading.

He's nice to have at the end of games, but the Reds don't need him right now.

flyer85
07-29-2008, 11:03 AM
I believe the contract would scare away potential suitors ... and then there is the issue of what would it take to waive the no-trade.

RichRed
07-29-2008, 11:05 AM
I believe the contract would scare away potential suitors ... and then there is the issue of what would it take to waive the no-trade.

Tell him he's going to a team that will play in October, which means they have lots of leads in the 9th, which means those shiny save numbers might just go through the roof. No-trade, schmo-trade. :D

princeton
07-29-2008, 11:09 AM
Tell him he's going to a team that will play in October, which means they have lots of leads in the 9th, which means those shiny save numbers might just go through the roof. No-trade, schmo-trade. :D


he got his contract already. What does he care about numbers?

an extension, on the other hand, would open his eyes. Mets would probably be the only possibility.

he doesn't strike me as a NY pressure-cooker kind of guy.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-29-2008, 11:18 AM
If the Indians were competing, they could use a guy like Cordero, although I doubt they'd want the contract. They're too smart of an organization to want that contract.

I wonder if Milwaukee would want him back.

flyer85
07-29-2008, 11:22 AM
I wonder if Milwaukee would want him back.just not the contract. When you pay someone at least double what they are worth you have to know you're sticking yourself with a contract that is very hard to move.

REDREAD
07-29-2008, 11:25 AM
Codero isn't tradable probably until 2010. Nice idea, but the problem is that if any club (including NY) thought he was worth that much money and years, they would've simply outbid us last winter.

Cordero has struggled this year. IMO, his percieved value has gone down since the winter, but he's still basically owed all that money and years.. So we are asking a club to assume the same risk with a newly signed FA (3.5 years), a lot of $$, and give us prospects.. IMO, if we have to eat 4 million/year to trade Cordero, it's not worth it.

M2
07-29-2008, 11:31 AM
I wonder if Milwaukee would want him back.

They offered him a similar contract this offseason. Theoretically, they shouldn't have a problem with his current deal. And if the Reds would eat say $3M per season for the next three years (in return for a kid like Alcides Escobar, who's blocked by J.J. Hardy) then I figure it would extremely hard for the Brewers to pass.

Cordero's already been paid most of his money for 2008.

Johnny Footstool
07-29-2008, 11:35 AM
Several contenders have bullpen needs. The Cardinals are having closer issues right now, and the Brewers can't win a pennant with Salomon Torres pitching the ninth.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-29-2008, 11:39 AM
They offered him a similar contract this offseason. Theoretically, they shouldn't have a problem with his current deal. And if the Reds would eat say $3M per season for the next three years (in return for a kid like Alcides Escobar, who's blocked by J.J. Hardy) then I figure it would extremely hard for the Brewers to pass.

Cordero's already been paid most of his money for 2008.

Exactly. And Cordero is one of Krivsky's mistakes. Jocketty and Cast shouldn't think twice about eating some of the contract and ridding the team of the albatross. Just blame it on Krivsky and move forward.

Especially when you consider that there are younger, cheap options (Burton, Roenicke, Stewart, Bailey?) ready to take over the closer and set-up role in the near future.

HotCorner
07-29-2008, 11:44 AM
Wouldn't trading a player you signed in the previous offseason, in which you agreed to a no trade clause, hurt the Reds credibility to future free agents?

PuffyPig
07-29-2008, 11:47 AM
Several contenders have bullpen needs. The Cardinals are having closer issues right now, and the Brewers can't win a pennant with Salomon Torres pitching the ninth.

The Brewers can certainly win with Torres pitching the 9th, but they'll have trouble getting there with there currect set up crew.

Torres is a very underrated pitcher, IMO.

The Brewers need bullpen help, but not necessarily a closer.

Kc61
07-29-2008, 11:54 AM
Exactly. And Cordero is one of Krivsky's mistakes. Jocketty and Cast shouldn't think twice about eating some of the contract and ridding the team of the albatross. Just blame it on Krivsky and move forward.

Especially when you consider that there are younger, cheap options (Burton, Roenicke, Stewart, Bailey?) ready to take over the closer and set-up role in the near future.


A good major league closer isn't easy to find. The assumption that these young relievers are closers is just that, an assumption. If Burton were healthy, you could give him a trial run, but he's not. And if you move Burton to closer, who is your set up man?

The assumption that these minor league prospects -- one of whom is brand new (Stewart) and one (Bailey) who hasn't relieved and isn't missing bats -- can close in the majors is a long-shot. Roenicke is a favorite of mine, but first let him show he can pitch the sixth inning before he becomes a possible closer.

My point is that a closer is a rare bird. Not all relievers can close, even the good ones. And if you move your middle guys to close, then you have no middle guys.

Keep in mind that Weathers and Affeldt will likely be gone. The Reds will need new middle relievers to replace them. That's a potential spot for the younger guys, not closing. At least not in the next year or two.

Cordero has disappointed of late, but the Reds won't be able to trade his contract, nor should they. Instead, they should focus on figuring out how best to use him. When to rest him. How many days can he go. When the Reds are winning he seems to pitch too much, then in bad streaks he sits as closers tend to do.

The Brewers got a great performance from Cordero. So far, the Reds haven't. They should try to maximize the pitcher rather than trading him. There's no need to re-visit the signing of Coco, it's done, and if he pitches like 2007 he'll be worth it.

The other thing the Reds should do is have an alternate closer, someone who can close when Cordero is tired. That's a potential role for Burton, closing once in awhile. If he takes to it well, then maybe there's something to talk about.

Chip R
07-29-2008, 11:55 AM
Wouldn't trading a player you signed in the previous offseason, in which you agreed to a no trade clause, hurt the Reds credibility to future free agents?


I think that's a very fair question.

15fan
07-29-2008, 11:57 AM
Cordero?

That's child's play.

If Walt really wanted to shake things up, he'd let it be known that anyone was available.

Including Edinson Volquez.

I'm not saying give him away. On the contrary, I'd be quite happy keeping him.

But if word got out that you were entertaining offers for EV, you'd probaby get an offer from every one of the other 29 teams.

And as a seller, that's what you want - multiple offers that you can play off of each other.

In fact, you'd likely get someone willing to overpay so that they get him and their division rival doesn't.

Worst case is that you don't get an offer that includes enough of a premium and you hold the guy.

Never hurts to look, tho.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-29-2008, 11:58 AM
The Brewers can certainly win with Torres pitching the 9th, but they'll have trouble getting there with there currect set up crew.

Torres is a very underrated pitcher, IMO.

The Brewers need bullpen help, but not necessarily a closer.

Maybe they need a closer so Torres can move to set up.

Ltlabner
07-29-2008, 11:59 AM
Codero isn't tradable probably until 2010. Nice idea, but the problem is that if any club (including NY) thought he was worth that much money and years, they would've simply outbid us last winter.

Teams have been known to change their minds. What didn't make sense last year makes sense now.

Big Klu
07-29-2008, 12:00 PM
If Walt really wants to shake up the market and entice others to deal, then he will offer Edinson Volquez, Johnny Cueto, and Jay Bruce. Because that is what it will take to get other GMs to "play ball".

But I don't think he wants to shake things up, or trade for the sake of trading (even though a lot of fans want this). He isn't going to give assets away just to show people that "we're dealin'" (to steal a Fred Ricart phrase). He has a plan, and I'm willing to wait and see what it is.

flyer85
07-29-2008, 12:07 PM
it's a buyers market ... if you want value, you have to buy, not sell.

do like the Yanks just did, flip some non-prospects to someone else for real talent.

princeton
07-29-2008, 12:13 PM
Erik Bedard has struck me as a Jocketty kind of pickup.

schroomytunes
07-29-2008, 12:22 PM
I'd be on the phone calling the Pirates to see what it would take for us to land John Grabow(RP) I think he would be a nice middle inning lefty for the pen next year. Also I like the idea of pursuing Laird from Texas as a stopgap until Mesoraco is ready to assume a role for us. I would ask for a package of Gerald Laird and Nelson Cruz, and offer Shaun Cumberland, Matt Maloney, and Sean Watson.

flyer85
07-29-2008, 12:23 PM
Erik Bedard has struck me as a Jocketty kind of pickup.
I know the consensus is to sell, but the cost of buying is cheap at the moment. It won't be in the off-season. Instead of trading major league players for real talent(Dunn, Arroyo, Ross, Weathers), the answer seems to be flip the prospects you don't really like for some real production.

flyer85
07-29-2008, 12:25 PM
I'd be on the phone calling the Pirates to see what it would take for us to land John Grabow(RP) I think he would be a nice middle inning lefty for the pen next year. Also I like the idea of pursuing Laird from Texas as a stopgap until Mesoraco is ready to assume a role for us. I would ask for a package of Gerald Laird and Nelson Cruz, and offer Shaun Cumberland, Matt Maloney, and Sean Watson.find out what prospects it would take to acquire a Willits or Gardner. Deal for Laird. What do the Pirates want for Snell.

Walt needs to think outside the box.

osuceltic
07-29-2008, 12:27 PM
I know the consensus is to sell, but the cost of buying is cheap at the moment. It won't be in the off-season. Instead of trading major league players for real talent(Dunn, Arroyo, Ross, Weathers), the answer seems to be flip the prospects you don't really like for some real production.

Bingo. And much more Jocketty's style.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-29-2008, 12:27 PM
A good major league closer isn't easy to find. The assumption that these young relievers are closers is just that, an assumption. If Burton were healthy, you could give him a trial run, but he's not. And if you move Burton to closer, who is your set up man?

The assumption that these minor league prospects -- one of whom is brand new (Stewart) and one (Bailey) who hasn't relieved and isn't missing bats -- can close in the majors is a long-shot. Roenicke is a favorite of mine, but first let him show he can pitch the sixth inning before he becomes a possible closer.

The way I see it, this team is at least two years from competing. So, when the team is ready to take it to the next level (if none of them can handle it), pick up an average closer for a fraction of the cost you're paying for an average closer now - Cordero.

It is my contention that Jared Burton could do just as well as Cordero closing out games now. I agree that him moving to that role weakens the set-up role and there is a domino effect, but this team isn't competing now anyway. They have two years to put the pieces together in the bullpen to coincide with the team competing and they have a few good ones already in place (Lincoln, Bray, Burton) with a few youngsters that haven't been given much of a chance or could be ready soon (Roenicke, Bailey, Herrera, Pelland, Fisher, Watson, Geronimo, Manuel, Stewart, etc.).


My point is that a closer is a rare bird.

A good one is, but the Reds don't currently have a good one. They have an average one who gets paid like an elite one and will only get worse as he ages. And the save is such a useless stat. Put a good reliever in the role of closer and he will save many games. Put a good reliever in the role of set-up man and he he will hold a bunch of games. Find good relievers that miss bats and don't walk many and biuld your pen that way. Cordero is not part of the future of this team.


Not all relievers can close, even the good ones.

How so? How can a "good" reliever not close? If he's good, he will get outs and get saves. A reliever that misses bats, doesn't walk a lot, and isn't proned to giving up the HR ball will do fine in the back of the bullpen. It's not rocket science.


The Brewers got a great performance from Cordero. So far, the Reds haven't. They should try to maximize the pitcher rather than trading him. There's no need to re-visit the signing of Coco, it's done, and if he pitches like 2007 he'll be worth it.

It is impossible at this point for Cordero to match his 2007. He is 33 and he's declining. He will make Danny Graves look like Trevor Hoffman by the time his contract is up. There is a need to re-visit his signing. We have a new GM and there is no need to bury his head in the sand and ignore the mistake that was made by the old one. Now is the time to be creative and pro-active and find a way out of this mess of a contract.

REDREAD
07-30-2008, 12:46 AM
Wouldn't trading a player you signed in the previous offseason, in which you agreed to a no trade clause, hurt the Reds credibility to future free agents?


Yes, I think it would. Not to mention, what if Cordero says "No"?

On a message board, it's easy to ignore the human side of things.
Milwaukee didn't really budge much in negotiations. If I recall, they gave him a "take it or leave it" offer that the Reds slightly topped. I really don't see Cordero wanting to go back there. I know I wouldn't be in a hurry to rejoin a company that I quitted 8 months prior.

I also imagine Cordero would be pretty annoyed at the Reds for having the gall to ask him to waive his no trade clause this soon. And you are right, it does hurt our credibility in the future..

nate
07-30-2008, 07:27 AM
Yes, I think it would. Not to mention, what if Cordero says "No"?

On a message board, it's easy to ignore the human side of things.
Milwaukee didn't really budge much in negotiations. If I recall, they gave him a "take it or leave it" offer that the Reds slightly topped. I really don't see Cordero wanting to go back there. I know I wouldn't be in a hurry to rejoin a company that I quitted 8 months prior.

I also imagine Cordero would be pretty annoyed at the Reds for having the gall to ask him to waive his no trade clause this soon. And you are right, it does hurt our credibility in the future..

As I recall, the Reds so blew Cordero away with their offer that the Brewers didn't even get a chance to counter. There was talk that the Brewers wanted to come back with a counter-offer but didn't even get the chance.

puca
07-30-2008, 07:39 AM
Deal for Laird.


He of the .697 career major league OPS?
He of the .750 career minor league OPS?

I agree with the premise of buying, I just don't agree with this particular target.

flyer85
07-30-2008, 08:34 AM
He of the .697 career major league OPS?
He of the .750 career minor league OPS?

I agree with the premise of buying, I just don't agree with this particular target.might be cheap, has some upside and catchers tend to develop power late. You want salty, teagarden or Ramirez ... it's going to be costly.

puca
07-30-2008, 08:54 AM
might be cheap, has some upside and catchers tend to develop power late. You want salty, teagarden or Ramirez ... it's going to be costly.

Laird is in the middle of a career year.

He will not be as cheap as he should be - especially considering that prior to this year he has been only a tick better offensively than Paul Bako.

flyer85
07-30-2008, 09:04 AM
Laird is in the middle of a career year.

He will not be as cheap as he should be - especially considering that prior to this year he has been only a tick better offensively than Paul Bako.Would not consider it a career season since he is basically repeating his 2006 season(both were 800 OPS in limited ABs). He is considered a good defensive catcher.