PDA

View Full Version : Official 'What to do with Cordero' Thread



Pages : 1 [2]

_Sir_Charles_
09-13-2010, 05:23 PM
So you're advocating sticking with Cordero, but putting him on a shorter leash? I don't see how that solves the problem. Why not just put Masset/Ondrusek/Chapman out there to begin with?

Yes, that's what I'm advocating. And it's for a few very simple reasons.

1. Cordero's been there and done that. We know what he's capable of. When he's on, he's nearly unhittable. You want and need that experience in that slot for the playoffs (if we get there...not going to assume ANYTHING).

2. When a team is playing above expectations and is playing in virtually uncharted territories, the last thing I want to do is to mess with the team chemistry and team makeup right at the end of the season. Cordero has played a huge role in this teams rise to the top of the division. This late in the game, ride the horses that brought ya.

If we want to make a change at the closer role...let's do that at the beginning of next season. The last thing I want to do is throw a rookie into the fire of a pennant race. That could do more harm than good over the long haul.

RedsManRick
09-13-2010, 05:59 PM
Perhaps it hurts to throw the slider, and thus reliance on a straight FB more than usual

Maybe. And if it's an elbow thing, that would have impact on his control too.

dsmith421
09-13-2010, 06:00 PM
1. Cordero's been there and done that. We know what he's capable of. When he's on, he's nearly unhittable.

Has Cordero ever pitched in the playoffs? If he has, it was minimal work. When's the last time Cordero looked unhittable to you? Even when he was effective during the WC trip he wasn't missing bats. He just showed better control and managed contact.

Also, you're right. I do know what Francisco Cordero in 2010 is capable of, and I want that nowhere near a playoff series.


2. When a team is playing above expectations and is playing in virtually uncharted territories, the last thing I want to do is to mess with the team chemistry and team makeup right at the end of the season. Cordero has played a huge role in this teams rise to the top of the division. This late in the game, ride the horses that brought ya.

But in this case, it's not like we rode Cordero all year. He's been sketchy at best since day one. His ERA is over four as a closer. He's blown eight saves and been bailed out of perhaps a half dozen other games. He's been a hindrance as much as a help. I bet constantly fighting for narrow leads only to watch a 300-lb. blimp blow them probably doesn't help chemistry much.

RedsManRick
09-13-2010, 06:03 PM
If you believe in clubhouse chemistry at all, removing your proven, veteran, clubhouse leader from the closer role is a great way to ruin it. I've heard many relievers talk about how knowing their role allows them to prepare better mentally. Dusty clearly considers this when making decisions and, short of Chapman, it's not like we have anybody who represents a clear upgrade.

westofyou
09-13-2010, 06:09 PM
If you believe in clubhouse chemistry at all, removing your proven, veteran, clubhouse leader from the closer role is a great way to ruin it. I've heard many relievers talk about how knowing their role allows them to prepare better mentally. Dusty clearly considers this when making decisions and, short of Chapman, it's not like we have anybody who represents a clear upgrade.

Yep, I suggest a look at the Bronx Zoo for some great looks at the mind of a closer and his workload/role and how they feel it should be defined.

dsmith421
09-13-2010, 06:09 PM
If you believe in clubhouse chemistry at all, removing your proven, veteran, clubhouse leader from the closer role is a great way to ruin it. I've heard many relievers talk about how knowing their role allows them to prepare better mentally. Dusty clearly considers this when making decisions and, short of Chapman, it's not like we have anybody who represents a clear upgrade.

I do believe in clubhouse chemistry. I strongly doubt that demoting Cordero would "destroy" clubhouse chemistry when he clearly cannot do the job at the level required. This problem didn't start Friday, or yesterday afternoon. He's been hacking up leads all season.

WMR
09-13-2010, 06:19 PM
I do believe in clubhouse chemistry. I strongly doubt that demoting Cordero would "destroy" clubhouse chemistry when he clearly cannot do the job at the level required. This problem didn't start Friday, or yesterday afternoon. He's been hacking up leads all season.

I would further postulate that taking wins--and money--out of your starting pitcher's pockets isn't the greatest way to keep the clubhouse chemistry mojo workin'.

lollipopcurve
09-13-2010, 06:26 PM
WHIP for NL closers

Wagner 0.87
Street 0.99
Franklin 1.05
Meek 1.06
KRod 1.15
Bell 1.15
Axford 1.19
Lidge 1.21
Wilson 1.22
Marmol 1.26
Broxton 1.31 (lost his job to Kuo while they were still in the race)
Nunez 1.34
Cordero 1.50

We admire Baker's loyalty to his players. Still, it's clear that Cordero is not a good closer at this point, and the team is barreling toward the postseason. I'd much prefer to see Baker shake it up here in the last 3 weeks, because for all we know it may have a positive effect on Coco. I know for sure that I don't want to see the team go to the playoffs with a closer who's pitching poorly and who has lost his confidence. The longer that goes on, and the louder the boobirds get, the bigger the drag it can become on the whole club.

Shake it up for awhile. You can always go back to formula you started with.

Cedric
09-13-2010, 06:28 PM
Wainright/Price is a great example of why talent overrides experience. Let Chapman and Masset pitch the high leverage innings from here on out.
Forgot K-Rod also. Probably the best example yet.

RedsManRick
09-13-2010, 06:41 PM
I do believe in clubhouse chemistry. I strongly doubt that demoting Cordero would "destroy" clubhouse chemistry when he clearly cannot do the job at the level required. This problem didn't start Friday, or yesterday afternoon. He's been hacking up leads all season.

I think we sometimes forget that players think different than fans. As fans, it's easy for us to see the big picture. Players empathize with a guy who is struggling; nobody wants all of their good times to be discredited by a slump and they all live in constant fear of just that circumstance. I'd bet that, to a man, if you asked Reds players who should be their closer, you hear Cordero unanimously.

If you ask me, I'd say it would make a lot of people unhappy but it would have little to no impact on their performance. But Dusty doesn't think that way. I wouldn't be shocked to see Chapman given an opportunity or two if the save would require facing some tough lefties or if Cordero was unavailable. But there's no way I see Masset getting the save with Cordero available in the pen (or having been used in middle relief). Dusty would not want to rock the boat that way.

OldXOhio
09-13-2010, 06:48 PM
I'd bet that, to a man, if you asked Reds players who should be their closer, you hear Cordero unanimously.



Conversely, I'd bet that to a man if you asked Reds players what their only goal is at this point, you'd hear win the Central unanimously.

I'd think all bets are off at this point from the player's view regarding who should get to do what.

_Sir_Charles_
09-13-2010, 07:02 PM
Has Cordero ever pitched in the playoffs? If he has, it was minimal work. When's the last time Cordero looked unhittable to you? Even when he was effective during the WC trip he wasn't missing bats. He just showed better control and managed contact.

I wasn't trying to say he's got playoff experience. To be honest, I don't know that he even does. I meant that he's got plenty of MLB experience and he's not going to get rattled easily. Sorry if I worded that poorly.

As for when he's looked unhittable...I can recall lots of times here in the second half and many in the first half as well. Not to mention TONS in the previous 2 seasons. It's easier to remember the bad outings than it is the good ones. Cordero can go 1-2-3 and make it look easy and the response from Reds fans is usually something along the lines of "wow, has he ever gone 1-2-3 this season?". And for me "unhittable" doesn't mean strictly strikeouts. It means not getting hits. The batter might put the bat on the ball, but it's not good contact and they're outs.



But in this case, it's not like we rode Cordero all year. He's been sketchy at best since day one. His ERA is over four as a closer. He's blown eight saves and been bailed out of perhaps a half dozen other games. He's been a hindrance as much as a help. I bet constantly fighting for narrow leads only to watch a 300-lb. blimp blow them probably doesn't help chemistry much.

Again, it's easier to remember the bad outings than it is the good ones. He's got 30+ saves...he's had SOME good outings. They might not have been pretty, but they were effective.

WMR
09-13-2010, 07:04 PM
I wasn't trying to say he's got playoff experience. To be honest, I don't know that he even does. I meant that he's got plenty of MLB experience and he's not going to get rattled easily. Sorry if I worded that poorly.

As for when he's looked unhittable...I can recall lots of times here in the second half and many in the first half as well. Not to mention TONS in the previous 2 seasons. It's easier to remember the bad outings than it is the good ones. Cordero can go 1-2-3 and make it look easy and the response from Reds fans is usually something along the lines of "wow, has he ever gone 1-2-3 this season?". And for me "unhittable" doesn't mean strictly strikeouts. It means not getting hits. The batter might put the bat on the ball, but it's not good contact and they're outs.




Again, it's easier to remember the bad outings than it is the good ones. He's got 30+ saves...he's had SOME good outings. They might not have been pretty, but they were effective.


WHIP for NL closers

Wagner 0.87
Street 0.99
Franklin 1.05
Meek 1.06
KRod 1.15
Bell 1.15
Axford 1.19
Lidge 1.21
Wilson 1.22
Marmol 1.26
Broxton 1.31 (lost his job to Kuo while they were still in the race)
Nunez 1.34
Cordero 1.50

cincrazy
09-13-2010, 07:08 PM
I wasn't trying to say he's got playoff experience. To be honest, I don't know that he even does. I meant that he's got plenty of MLB experience and he's not going to get rattled easily. Sorry if I worded that poorly.

As for when he's looked unhittable...I can recall lots of times here in the second half and many in the first half as well. Not to mention TONS in the previous 2 seasons. It's easier to remember the bad outings than it is the good ones. Cordero can go 1-2-3 and make it look easy and the response from Reds fans is usually something along the lines of "wow, has he ever gone 1-2-3 this season?". And for me "unhittable" doesn't mean strictly strikeouts. It means not getting hits. The batter might put the bat on the ball, but it's not good contact and they're outs.


Most of Cordero's "good" outings can be mostly attributed to luck. He's blown eight saves, and came within a whisker of blowing who knows how many more. Do we really want to run him out there against Infante, Heyward, and Prado? Or Utley, Howard, Rollins, etc.? Or ANY postseason team for that matter? It would be the equivalent of throwing a hail mary pass at the end of the game and praying it works.

Give me Chapman. If Chapman blows it, it's because the other team earned it. If CoCo blows it, the other team just as likely had it given to them.

Again, it's easier to remember the bad outings than it is the good ones. He's got 30+ saves...he's had SOME good outings. They might not have been pretty, but they were effective.

_Sir_Charles_
09-13-2010, 07:16 PM
@ WMR

Yeah, I've seen that list. I'm not trying to say Cordero's been good this season. Not at all. It's been his worst season as a Red by far. But that being said, that list is a list of relievers. And closers at that. Which means VERY limited innings. You could have one horrible outing and vastly distort nearly any stat. But yes, overall, he's been pretty bad. But however bad he's been...at the end of the day, he's still managed to get the job done. This season from Francisco reminds me a LOT of the last 2 or 3 years from David Weathers. Weathers, at the end of the day got the job done, but it was brutal to watch. I called him "ole smoke and mirrors" and in many respects, that's what Coco's been like this season. He gets himself into trouble...but most nights, he escapes it. When he doesn't...let's say it's memorable.

Redhook
09-13-2010, 09:46 PM
WHIP for NL closers

Wagner 0.87
Street 0.99
Franklin 1.05
Meek 1.06
KRod 1.15
Bell 1.15
Axford 1.19
Lidge 1.21
Wilson 1.22
Marmol 1.26
Broxton 1.31 (lost his job to Kuo while they were still in the race)
Nunez 1.34
Cordero 1.50


This data tells me the Reds have been extremely fortunate with him this year. It could be way, way, way worse. With a few more timely hits and bad luck this could equal so many more blown saves and losses. Thank god luck is on the Reds side this year.

The Operator
09-14-2010, 02:52 AM
I doubt any Red player would ever throw CoCo under the bus publicly, so of course they'd all still give Cordero their vote of confidence if asked right now. But I'm sure they all get a bit nervous when he's in and starts to put runners on, though. There are lots of books written by former players where we find out just how players really feel about things that go on during the season and their teammates.

The players want to win. I'm sure they realize amongst themselves that Cordero isn't getting the job done.

cincrazy
09-14-2010, 10:32 AM
WOW did I screw this post up. My response is hidden inside of the piece I was trying to quote.... shouldn't try and play on Redszone while distracted with other work :).

durl
09-14-2010, 04:43 PM
Again, it's easier to remember the bad outings than it is the good ones. He's got 30+ saves...he's had SOME good outings. They might not have been pretty, but they were effective.

He definitely has had some good outings. It's just hard to ignore the bad ones that are accumulating. Having 30+ saves sounds good, but we have to keep that number in context.

Looking at the Saves count for 2010, Cordero is firmly within the top 20, but there are only 2 other closers in the top 20 with a worse save percentage. Among the top 20, Cordero has the 2nd most games played at 67 (Marmol has 68). That makes it a lot easier to accumulate the saves. There are 6 closers with more saves than Cordero, the average games played by those 6: 59.6...almost 8 fewer games.

His save count is good. But it's bolstered by having more opportunities. As far as his reliability to record a save, it's far from impressive. Especially when you consider his high salary. He's got the 7th most saves in baseball, but he's 7th from the bottom in save percentage.

_Sir_Charles_
09-14-2010, 04:48 PM
WOW did I screw this post up. My response is hidden inside of the piece I was trying to quote.... shouldn't try and play on Redszone while distracted with other work :).

No worries. I saw it. :O)

Chip R
09-14-2010, 05:51 PM
Conversely, I'd bet that to a man if you asked Reds players what their only goal is at this point, you'd hear win the Central unanimously.

I'd think all bets are off at this point from the player's view regarding who should get to do what.


I know this would never happen but if Dusty were to make a change, I think the players would be behind him. They may feel bad for Cordero but they realize they are trying to win a championship and if someone isn't doing the job, a change needs to be made.

dsmith421
09-14-2010, 06:04 PM
He definitely has had some good outings. It's just hard to ignore the bad ones that are accumulating. Having 30+ saves sounds good, but we have to keep that number in context.

And furthermore, the save is one of the dumbest, most pointless statistics in sports. Like pancakes in football, it's an arbitrary and largely meaningless measure designed to quantify the contributions of players whose contributions are difficult to quantify.

Unlike the pancake, the arbitrary conditions for the save statistic have inexorably altered bullpen usage patterns in the major leagues.

Cedric
09-14-2010, 06:11 PM
And furthermore, the save is one of the dumbest, most pointless statistics in sports. Like pancakes in football, it's an arbitrary and largely meaningless measure designed to quantify the contributions of players whose contributions are difficult to quantify.

Unlike the pancake, the arbitrary conditions for the save statistic have inexorably altered bullpen usage patterns in the major leagues.

Couldn't agree more. Agents love it as a stat though.

Ron Madden
09-15-2010, 05:34 AM
Marty Brennamen has often said the Home Run is the most over rated stat in Baseball. Chris Welsh has often called Home runs rally killers.

Both Marty and Chris place more value in Saves.

I just happen to disagree with them on over rated stats. ;)

GAC
09-15-2010, 06:42 AM
Free to correct me on this, but there are many on here who say DL him. If there is nothing physically wrong with him then I'm pretty sure the organization can't. Especially if the player objects or refuses. And then the Player's Union is going to step in too.

REDREAD
09-15-2010, 10:39 AM
Cordero now has the distinction of blowing the most saves of any closer in all of MLB this season.

As I said yesterday, Walt needs to get rid of him during the off season, even if the Reds pay half or 2/3 of his salary next year.

Additionally, Dusty would be wise to move forward with a closer by committee.

I would love to see Cordero traded, but if the Reds have to pay 2/3 of his salary, that means we only get about 4 million of salary relief. Of course, every little bit helps, but for only 4 million more incremental cost, we might as well keep him and hope he rebounds next year.. As we've seen in the past 5 years, it's pretty difficult to put a bullpen together.

I understand the frustration this year. He has not been getting the job done, but unfortunately, that's the nature of baseball.. every team has a few guys that they regret signing. In fact, the day Cordero was signed, the consensus was that he was probably going to slip in his performance towards the end of his contract.. It's bad timing that he started to slip right when the Reds are good again..

Just one more year of him :)

sonny
09-15-2010, 12:29 PM
Marty Brennamen has often said the Home Run is the most over rated stat in Baseball. Chris Welsh has often called Home runs rally killers.

Both Marty and Chris place more value in Saves.

I just happen to disagree with them on over rated stats. ;)

Evey stat has some sort of value. I happen to believe that homeruns are a pretty nice stat, since they guarantee runs. As does BA with runners in scoring position, in most cases. I like saves too because they guarantee victory.

However I do think they should tweak the save stat a little bit. I do not like the "soft saves". I think a save should be credited when a team is up by only two or less with one inning to go or if the tying runs are on base when a player comes into relief when there are 6 out or less to go.

Johnny Footstool
09-15-2010, 12:43 PM
Free to correct me on this, but there are many on here who say DL him. If there is nothing physically wrong with him then I'm pretty sure the organization can't. Especially if the player objects or refuses. And then the Player's Union is going to step in too.

That's why you tell him he's been tipping his pitches. Then you give him a few days off to work on his mechanics. It lets you work with him without bruising his ego.

durl
09-15-2010, 12:59 PM
That's why you tell him he's been tipping his pitches. Then you give him a few days off to work on his mechanics. It lets you work with him without bruising his ego.

From Andrew McCutchen this past weekend when the Pirates came from behind to win in the 9th:


"When I got down 0-2, I was thinking that I'd do anything I can to get on base," McCutchen said. "I knew what he threw. I've faced him a few times. All the pitches were sliders. After you've seen it a few times, you recognize it out of his hand. He left it up and I got the good part of the bat on it. - http://www.wcpo.com/dpp/sports/baseball/reds/reds-drop-series-finale-3-1on-blown-save

Hopefully someone with the pitching staff will have read that interview and help Cordero get that straightened out.

bucksfan2
09-15-2010, 01:13 PM
Evey stat has some sort of value. I happen to believe that homeruns are a pretty nice stat, since they guarantee runs. As does BA with runners in scoring position, in most cases. I like saves too because they guarantee victory.

However I do think they should tweak the save stat a little bit. I do not like the "soft saves". I think a save should be credited when a team is up by only two or less with one inning to go or if the tying runs are on base when a player comes into relief when there are 6 out or less to go.

Your description of "soft save" would have applied to last night. In reality had Upton not made a pretty good play the Reds would have won that game. But in the end it would have gone down as a soft save because the Arizona closer came on with a 3 run lead and eventually won 3-1.

IMO saves may not be the best stat but they aren't void of value. I am a believer in that the pressure and psychological aspect of the save situation is much more important than many give it credit for. To many's chagrin saves aren't going away and in all likelihood closers aren't going to way of the dinosaur. Now if you want to talk about paying top dollar to a closer that is another story all together.

Cedric
09-15-2010, 01:16 PM
Your description of "soft save" would have applied to last night. In reality had Upton not made a pretty good play the Reds would have won that game. But in the end it would have gone down as a soft save because the Arizona closer came on with a 3 run lead and eventually won 3-1.

IMO saves may not be the best stat but they aren't void of value. I am a believer in that the pressure and psychological aspect of the save situation is much more important than many give it credit for. To many's chagrin saves aren't going away and in all likelihood closers aren't going to way of the dinosaur. Now if you want to talk about paying top dollar to a closer that is another story all together.

That's the only story I care about though. I couldn't care less if everyone else in the world loves the save stat, as long as my favorite team realized to not overpay because of it.

bucksfan2
09-15-2010, 01:28 PM
That's the only story I care about though. I couldn't care less if everyone else in the world loves the save stat, as long as my favorite team realized to not overpay because of it.

I guess my real issue is, is it smart to give top dollar to anyone who isn't amongst the best at their respective position? Don't get me wrong the CoCo contract was foolish, but I would have given that to Rivera in a heartbeat. I would have paid top dollar to the PED'd Gagne in his heyday or Trevor Hoffman over the course of a decade was a good investment.

Griffey012
09-15-2010, 02:16 PM
And furthermore, the save is one of the dumbest, most pointless statistics in sports. Like pancakes in football, it's an arbitrary and largely meaningless measure designed to quantify the contributions of players whose contributions are difficult to quantify.

Unlike the pancake, the arbitrary conditions for the save statistic have inexorably altered bullpen usage patterns in the major leagues.

Saves are just like most every other stat in baseball. They are not a tell all or a means to an end. They simply have to be looked at in conjunction with a collection of other stats. If a save is one of the dumbest, most pointless statistics in sports, than so are basically all non sabermetric baseball status such as home runs, doubles, triples, walks, etc.

Now I do completely agree that saves are looked upon in the entirely wrong fashion amongst most in baseball. Saves should be looked at along with saves opps and whip. Then you can get a much better feel on the quality of a closer.

fearofpopvol1
09-15-2010, 02:45 PM
I would love to see Cordero traded, but if the Reds have to pay 2/3 of his salary, that means we only get about 4 million of salary relief. Of course, every little bit helps, but for only 4 million more incremental cost, we might as well keep him and hope he rebounds next year.. As we've seen in the past 5 years, it's pretty difficult to put a bullpen together.

I understand the frustration this year. He has not been getting the job done, but unfortunately, that's the nature of baseball.. every team has a few guys that they regret signing. In fact, the day Cordero was signed, the consensus was that he was probably going to slip in his performance towards the end of his contract.. It's bad timing that he started to slip right when the Reds are good again..

Just one more year of him :)

4+ million to put toward a free agent could help a lot in the current economy. And I think there are teams out there that might pay that much for Cordero next year on a 1 year deal. Cordero this year is providing 0.5 WAR...nearly any guy the Reds currently have can top that...even Maloney. I don't see good reason to believe Cordero will rebound next year either. His numbers have gotten progressively worse each year.

dsmith421
09-15-2010, 03:06 PM
If a save is one of the dumbest, most pointless statistics in sports, than so are basically all non sabermetric baseball status such as home runs, doubles, triples, walks, etc.

I wholly disagree with that assertion. A home run means that the team has scored one or more runs. A triple means a player advances to third base. A walk is a quantifiable commodity that affects a team's expected runs scored. A pitcher's strikeout affects the opponents' ability to score. All these things can be measured.

A save? What does it really tell you about how a pitcher performed?

Pitcher A could come into a 3-0 game with two outs in the ninth inning, walk five straight guys and then coax a screaming line drive directly at someone and receive a save. Pitcher B, meanwhile, comes into a 1-1 game with the bases loaded and no one out in the ninth, strike out two and then the second baseman kicks a routine ground ball. Blown save.

It's the same problem with wins.

At the end of the day, I think teams would do well to ignore saves and wins in day-to-day management, but given the ubiquity of those stats and their importance in contract negotiations, that's a complete pipe dream.

mbgrayson
09-15-2010, 03:27 PM
4+ million to put toward a free agent could help a lot in the current economy. And I think there are teams out there that might pay that much for Cordero next year on a 1 year deal. Cordero this year is providing 0.5 WAR...nearly any guy the Reds currently have can top that...even Maloney. I don't see good reason to believe Cordero will rebound next year either. His numbers have gotten progressively worse each year.


Who would pay even $4 million for Cordero next year? NOBODY. As this thread has already amply shown, he has the most blown saves and highest WHIP of any NL reliever. You point out that his WAR is down to replacement level (or worse). Exactly who is dumb enough to pay even $4 or $5 million for that?

If Cordero was released, I am sure teams would pay maybe $1 million on the chance that he rebounds. But that is about it. The Reds will be stuck paying his huge salary next year, no doubt.

Far East
09-15-2010, 03:53 PM
[QUOTE=durl;2258024]From Andrew McCutchen this past weekend when the Pirates came from behind to win in the 9th:
Quote:
"When I got down 0-2, I was thinking that I'd do anything I can to get on base," McCutchen said. "I knew what he threw. I've faced him a few times. All the pitches were sliders. After you've seen it a few times, you recognize it out of his hand. He left it up and I got the good part of the bat on it."
QUOTE]

I have not read the whole thread, so someone else might have mentioned it. It's probably time for Coco to use a third pitch and a third speed -- perhaps a changeup ala Billy Wagner and other closers as they aged.

fearofpopvol1
09-15-2010, 03:58 PM
Who would pay even $4 million for Cordero next year? NOBODY. As this thread has already amply shown, he has the most blown saves and highest WHIP of any NL reliever. You point out that his WAR is down to replacement level (or worse). Exactly who is dumb enough to pay even $4 or $5 million for that?

If Cordero was released, I am sure teams would pay maybe $1 million on the chance that he rebounds. But that is about it. The Reds will be stuck paying his huge salary next year, no doubt.

I think a team would happily pay $4M of the salary if the Reds throw in a prospect or two. And that might just make it worth it.

westofyou
09-15-2010, 04:19 PM
. If a save is one of the dumbest, most pointless statistics in sports, than so are basically all non sabermetric baseball status such as home runs, doubles, triples, walks, etc.


Hardly

Saves are a creation of a sportswriter (Jerome Holtzman) who devised a way to assign value to the performance of a reliever.

Home runs, doubles, triples and walks are not stats they are events that occur due to the essence of the game (pitcher delivers ball, hitter attempts to strike the ball and traverse 4 bases to score a run) Take away home runs, doubles, triples and walks and you change the fabric of the game.

Take away a save and nothing happens to the way a game is scored, nothing changes in the game except removing a bargaining chip for non starters at contract time.

It's superfluous to the fabric of the game.

It's noise.

Griffey012
09-15-2010, 04:49 PM
I wholly disagree with that assertion. A home run means that the team has scored one or more runs. A triple means a player advances to third base. A walk is a quantifiable commodity that affects a team's expected runs scored. A pitcher's strikeout affects the opponents' ability to score. All these things can be measured.

A save? What does it really tell you about how a pitcher performed?

Pitcher A could come into a 3-0 game with two outs in the ninth inning, walk five straight guys and then coax a screaming line drive directly at someone and receive a save. Pitcher B, meanwhile, comes into a 1-1 game with the bases loaded and no one out in the ninth, strike out two and then the second baseman kicks a routine ground ball. Blown save.

It's the same problem with wins.

At the end of the day, I think teams would do well to ignore saves and wins in day-to-day management, but given the ubiquity of those stats and their importance in contract negotiations, that's a complete pipe dream.

If a guy comes into a 1-1 game it's not a save situation ;)

Maybe I wasn't clear enough in my post about my main point. What I was trying to get at in comparing Saves vs. the traditional stats like HRs, Doubles, Triples, etc....is that the stats themselves only tell a little part of the story. A player may have 40 home runs, but could hit .175, have a lousy OBP, and play horrible defense, but if you just look at home runs, 40 is a good number.
Just like a pitcher (Cordero) may save 40 games and have a 1.5 whip, and blow 10 saves while he is at it. If you use saves too see that the guy pitches at the end of a game, then explore other relevant stats, you can tell more of the picture. But the saves category itself only tell you the guy pitches at the end of games.

A guy can walk the bases loaded, give up 2 runs and still get a save, or have a guy drop a fly ball and the runner score on a ground out and get a blown save. Just like a guy can hit pop fly that's lost in the sun lands behind the guy and goes for a triple, just like he can hit a scorching liner into the gap that is robbed by a great defensive play.

The way I see it is that pretty much any singular baseball stat the simply counts the number of times something occurs is pretty worthless unless it is used in the correct context.

traderumor
09-15-2010, 05:01 PM
The Reds never paid for saves. They started at the back end of the bullpen after the 2007 season and worked their way forward--Massett, Rhodes both came from outside the organization. They had to pay for that back-end because of a lack of in-house options. I think the bullpen, as a whole, has come together pretty well and has been above average for three years running. And that is with Dusty not knowing what he is doing (sarcasm alert).

The last year of a LT contract usually turns out just like Cordero's and Harang's--everyone whining about how much money the guy makes and the wisdom of the contract in the first place if he is in any form of decline.

Griffey012
09-15-2010, 06:40 PM
The Reds never paid for saves. They started at the back end of the bullpen after the 2007 season and worked their way forward--Massett, Rhodes both came from outside the organization. They had to pay for that back-end because of a lack of in-house options. I think the bullpen, as a whole, has come together pretty well and has been above average for three years running. And that is with Dusty not knowing what he is doing (sarcasm alert).

The last year of a LT contract usually turns out just like Cordero's and Harang's--everyone whining about how much money the guy makes and the wisdom of the contract in the first place if he is in any form of decline.

Using this notion, maybe we can find a team who was in a similar situation we are in 2007. Someone like the D-Backs potentially who has an awful bullpen this year. Shoring up their back end and pushing a guy like Heilman to a set up role could have a similar effect of their overall bullpen, in the same way Cordero did when we are able to push Weathers into the set up role.

RedsManRick
09-15-2010, 07:16 PM
Evey stat has some sort of value. I happen to believe that homeruns are a pretty nice stat, since they guarantee runs. As does BA with runners in scoring position, in most cases. I like saves too because they guarantee victory.

However I do think they should tweak the save stat a little bit. I do not like the "soft saves". I think a save should be credited when a team is up by only two or less with one inning to go or if the tying runs are on base when a player comes into relief when there are 6 out or less to go.

It depends on how you use the stat. If all you're looking for is a history of what happened in the past, those things are fine. But if you're expecting them to tell you how talented a guy is or how well he's likely to do in the future in that area, they're not so hot.

oregonred
09-15-2010, 11:15 PM
Unbelieveable. Just need Reds OF's to rob game tying home runs and CoCo is fine... What a grease fire he is with two strikes. Time to change my Depends.

KYRedsFan
09-15-2010, 11:17 PM
Really, not to just continue piling on, but get someone else at the ends of the games. one guy cannot be allowed to destroy this team

fearofpopvol1
09-15-2010, 11:17 PM
Not to pile on the dude, but again, looked horrendous out there. Gave up hits and a run and nearly blew another save if it wasn't for the remarkable defense of Bruce. We easily could be going to extras right now.

sivman17
09-15-2010, 11:18 PM
There is ZERO reason for Cordero to ever be put in a save situation again. Dusty Baker is a terrible manager for allowing him to continue "saving" games. Terrible.

MWM
09-15-2010, 11:24 PM
Hey, he got the save.... must mean he did his job, right!

paulrichjr
09-15-2010, 11:25 PM
I almost (almost) wish that ball had gone out. It would have surely made Dusty realize what the rest of us know. CoCo is done.

Griffey012
09-15-2010, 11:31 PM
Has CoCo ever heard of throwing a high heater with 2 strikes or an inside fastball? It is sickening watching him get to 2 strikes and the catchers (who may be partially to blame) just continue to call pitches on the outside part of the plate, whether its a fastball or either of his meatball off-speed pitches.

cincrazy
09-15-2010, 11:36 PM
I almost (almost) wish that ball had gone out. It would have surely made Dusty realize what the rest of us know. CoCo is done.

I was rooting for him to blow it, and for us to win it in the 9th. No lie.

OnBaseMachine
09-15-2010, 11:48 PM
From here on out, any game that Cordero blows is on Dusty Baker. He should have been pulled from the closer role weeks ago.

dsmith421
09-16-2010, 12:12 AM
Really, not to just continue piling on, but get someone else at the ends of the games. one guy cannot be allowed to destroy this team

I'm struggling to come up with an example of a team whose worst reliever is their closer. The only one I can think of is Bob Wickman the year Dunn dealt him the coup de grace on that famous walkoff grand slam.

Cordero came into the ninth with a clean slate and a three-run lead against a last-place team and very nearly blew a third consecutive save. (The other two, of course, being to another last-place team that's on its way to 110 losses).

Dusty's excuses about experience just simply don't wash. Chapman came in tonight in a high-leverage situation and was untouchable. Masset pitched well. Maloney made one mistake but was generally good, Bray looked fine. Ondrusek, Smith, and Rhodes have been largely solid. It's time to pull the trigger because, to paraphrase Billy Beane, this [garbage] will not work in the playoffs.

oregonred
09-16-2010, 12:13 AM
Simple. Kidnap Carlos Marmol and slap a Cordero jersey on him.

westofyou
09-16-2010, 12:13 AM
From here on out, any game that Cordero blows is on Dusty Baker. He should have been pulled from the closer role weeks ago.

A pox on his kin!!

traderumor
09-16-2010, 12:18 AM
Has CoCo ever heard of throwing a high heater with 2 strikes or an inside fastball? It is sickening watching him get to 2 strikes and the catchers (who may be partially to blame) just continue to call pitches on the outside part of the plate, whether its a fastball or either of his meatball off-speed pitches.Yea, I do think a lot of this is predictability. Nibble on the edge out and down with fastballs, the slider is barely a show me pitch anymore, and then crowd the plate with two strikes knowing he is going away. When he started getting his act together after the Wrigley meltdown, he started coming inside again. And guess what happened? His stuff was good enough to pitch in there. But, at this stage, he is what he is, which is obviously easy to get on base against.

traderumor
09-16-2010, 12:20 AM
Simple. Kidnap Carlos Marmol and slap a Cordero jersey on him.

Marmol would drive you more nuts than Cordero. He is all over the place and is often found trying to get out of the jams he creates.

oregonred
09-16-2010, 12:23 AM
Marmol would drive you more nuts than Cordero. He is all over the place and is often found trying to get out of the jams he creates.

16 K/9IP and a 1.2 WHIP. Yeah, I'll stick with our man CoCo instead...

Brutus
09-16-2010, 12:24 AM
16 K/9IP and a 1.2 WHIP. Yeah, I'll stick with our man CoCo instead...

1 homer allowed in 70 innings too

Tommyjohn25
09-16-2010, 12:27 AM
I don't remember the last guy he struck out. He throws the same pitch to the same spot because, well, that's all he can do anymore.

traderumor
09-16-2010, 12:31 AM
16 K/9IP and a 1.2 WHIP. Yeah, I'll stick with our man CoCo instead...Did I say that? You forgot to mention that within that WHIP of 1.23 going into tonight is a walk rate of 6 per 9 IP.

All I was saying is that Marmol is not your lock down closer because of his wildness tendencies. I didn't say he was not a better choice than Cordero. I have been around here long enough to know that he would drive folks crazy as well.

SirFelixCat
09-16-2010, 12:32 AM
I'm all for loyalty, but at some point, you have to face facts, Dusty. You can't continue to hope and pray CoCo walks the tight-rope. There must be a change.

1.51 WHIP. UNCLE!

And the month is half over and CoCo has ZERO K's. 0. Zilch. Nada.

oregonred
09-16-2010, 12:34 AM
Did I say that? You forgot to mention that within that WHIP of 1.23 going into tonight is a walk rate of 6 per 9 IP.

All I was saying is that Marmol is not your lock down closer because of his wildness tendencies. I didn't say he was not a better choice than Cordero. I have been around here long enough to know that he would drive folks crazy as well.

No closer is a 1-2-3 machine. But an obscene K/IP ratio means you can get yourself out of any jam. Imagine Marmol and Chapman in the same pen. Good night.

Co-Co has no out pitch and little command. He is hitting 95/96 so velocity isn't the issue. It's movement, command and predictability.

CTA513
09-16-2010, 12:34 AM
Simple. Kidnap Carlos Marmol and slap a Cordero jersey on him.

Marmol would need some kind of fat suit or it wouldn't be believable.

fearofpopvol1
09-16-2010, 12:40 AM
CoCo is a real catch-22. You don't want to see the Reds lose or CoCo to fail...we all WANT him to do well.

But my real fear is that Cordero does just enough to prove he is barely stable for the rest of the regular season and then completely blows in in the postseason, when he is mostly likely going to be up against much better hitters. If he can't retire Pirates and DBacks hitters, how will he handle Braves or Phillies or Yankees or Rays hitters?

corkedbat
09-16-2010, 12:42 AM
Cordero has to be the biggest issue going into next season. He doesn't miss bats unless the batter swings at pitches out of the zone (and they're not doing that anymore) and anything in the zone is very hittable. I really don't believe this is a case of him going through a bad streak either - I think he's just lost it. He probably dooms us in any close postseason games.

He as untradeable as anyone in the majors and there's no way the Reds eat the final year of that contract. That means he returns next year and if he returns with that contract he closes due to the money due him. The best possible hope is that the offseason rejuvenates him somewhat and he starts off hot and the Reds can deal him to someone needing a closer while eating only part of the final year of his contract.

OnBaseMachine
09-16-2010, 12:57 AM
Quote from Dusty after the game:


Cordero, despite getting his 36th saves, has to be a concern.

“Maybe this will change his fortune,” Baker said. “That’s how we got to look at it.”


http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2010/09/15/save-goes-to-bruce/

Good grief.

corkedbat
09-16-2010, 01:02 AM
Quote from Dusty after the game:



http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2010/09/15/save-goes-to-bruce/

Good grief.

I don't care about his fortune, will it put some movement in his pitches?

CTA513
09-16-2010, 01:16 AM
Sign him to a contract extension while his value is low?


;)

WVRedsFan
09-16-2010, 02:09 AM
Quote from Dusty after the game:



http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2010/09/15/save-goes-to-bruce/

Good grief.And with that, It's no wonder why I worry about the future of Chapman with the organization. Dusty is so tied to his closer that if Chapman ever becomes the closer, that's where he will stay. Of course, with Codero around, that's not going to happen.

TheNext44
09-16-2010, 04:01 AM
Quote from Dusty after the game:



http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2010/09/15/save-goes-to-bruce/

Good grief.

To be honest, I read this as Baker moving one step closer to removing Cordero as the closer.

He really, really, really doesn't want to do it for chemistry sake, but he is running out of excuses for keeping in the role. Baker admitted in that quote for the first time that Cordero is not doing the job, and that all he can hope for is luck. I read this as Baker saying, reluctantly, that he has lost faith in Cordero, but has to keep in the role for whatever reasons he has.

GAC
09-16-2010, 07:30 AM
That's why you tell him he's been tipping his pitches. Then you give him a few days off to work on his mechanics. It lets you work with him without bruising his ego.

I agree with that Johnny. But that's not the same as DL'ing him.

Roy Tucker
09-16-2010, 08:50 AM
I honestly think the number of times Dusty runs Cordero out there in a save situation is rapidly dwindling if he keeps pitching as he is.

Baker has two eyes, he knows what's happening, and I'm sure there is a lot of internal behind-closed-door "what are we going to do" talks going on.

The only thing that disturbs me is that Dusty says this is fortune or luck? Nah, I don't buy that. Luck is Leake or Wood having ground balls hit either at a fielder or between them. Cordero ain't giving up grounders, he's giving up rockets, harkening back to Tommy "Boom Boom" Hume giving up wall-rattling hits. With Cordero its mechanics or lost confidence or health or lost ability.

Always Red
09-16-2010, 09:27 AM
I honestly think the number of times Dusty runs Cordero out there in a save situation is rapidly dwindling if he keeps pitching as he is.

Baker has two eyes, he knows what's happening, and I'm sure there is a lot of internal behind-closed-door "what are we going to do" talks going on.


One of the things that I really have come to admire about Dusty Baker is how he never throws his guys under a bus. Unlike another manager in the NL Central, who dresses in red every night.

He'll make the change if this continues, I have no doubt. There is actually some time for Cordero to work things out, if that's possible (I have seen the trending stats- not good).

Brad Lidge's epic playoff meltdowns come to mind. :scared:

lollipopcurve
09-16-2010, 09:34 AM
At the back of the bullpen you've got a couple guys who are regularly overmatching hitters and one guy who is regularly putting guys on base and giving up runs. At some point, Baker needs to shift this team into postseason mode -- where the team stands to make some serious money. I'd be surprised if he lets Cordero own the 9th inning at that point -- as Roy Tucker says, he's got two eyes. And a wallet.

Marc D
09-16-2010, 09:35 AM
I read that quote as Dusty saying "I am stuck with this guy as my closer for now so I am going to try and salvage whatever shred of confidence and dignity I can for him by saying this has all been a run of bad luck." Given that he is indeed stuck with Cordero for the foreseeable future it is better than saying "I don't think Cordero could close a screen door on a submarine."

I'm with 44 in that the progression of the comments about Cordero seem to be moving toward being able to remove him from the closers role while still abiding by the rules of how to treat a player that Dusty lives by.

Griffey012
09-16-2010, 09:47 AM
One of the things that I really have come to admire about Dusty Baker is how he never throws his guys under a bus. Unlike another manager in the NL Central, who dresses in red every night.

He'll make the change if this continues, I have no doubt. There is actually some time for Cordero to work things out, if that's possible (I have seen the trending stats- not good).

Brad Lidge's epic playoff meltdowns come to mind. :scared:

And to build off your statement, which I agree with, is that so far most everytime this season RZ has been clamoring for Dusty to make some sort of move in the lineup, rotation ,etc he has eventually made the move...he has just took a bit longer to do it than some would have liked.

I think the extended patience is that if CoCo can regain form and be Coco of 07 and 08 we are much much better than with Masset or Chapman as closer and CoCo doing zilch. Simply because this allows us to have a dominant 7th and 8th inning guy and still have Rhodes to do what is needed of him.

durl
09-16-2010, 09:52 AM
What goes down as yet another save on Cordero's stat sheet could have easily had been his 3rd blown save in less than a week.

Is it possible to award Jay Bruce the Save? He's the one who really saved the game.

I know Chapman's young and not that experienced, but I would still like to see him in the 9th a few times before the playoffs in order to see if he can handle that situation. Maybe he's hungry enough to pull it off. I expect Chapman to get people out. I don't expect that of Cordero...at all.

HokieRed
09-16-2010, 09:54 AM
At the risk of attributing too much conscious intention to Dusty's comments, I think he has said, "we'll now see if this turns it around," and if it doesn't, then there's going to have to be a change.

mbgrayson
09-16-2010, 10:15 AM
Cordero, despite getting his 36th saves, has to be a concern.

“Maybe this will change his fortune,” Baker said. “That’s how we got to look at it.”

Actually, Cordero has not been particurally 'unlucky' this season overall. His BABIP is currently .305, which is lower than his career rate of .314. And if you think about it, that is REALLY scary....what will Cordero's other stats look like when his BABIP regresses to his career average? He has actually been lucky to have a strong defense behind him. Last night, in the 9th, Janish was at third, Bruce in right, and Heisey was in left.

Looking over Cordero's advanced stats at the Fangraphs Web Site (http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1243&position=P), I can't help note the steady decline in his K/BB rate. That stat is an indicator of two things that are not dependant on luck or defensive skill: walks and strikeouts. The higher the ratio, generally the better the pitcher.

Cordero's K/BB ratio has reached a nine year low.

2002: 3.15
2003: 2.37
2004: 2.47
2005: 2.63
2006: 2.63
2007: 4.78
2008: 2.05
2009: 1.93
2010: 1.47

Simply put, Cordero's control and dominance has dropped off sharply. His line drive rate is actually down a bit this year, and his ground ball rate is slightly higher, which should both be good things. He has given up 5 HRs this year, which is an increase from last year's 2.

It is clearly his current inability to get strikeouts that is causing the recent drop in effectiveness.

In six appearances this month (September), Cordero has zero strikeouts. Zero.

dunner13
09-16-2010, 10:27 AM
Coco does have a pretty solid track record of being an above average closer. Hes never been a great closer but hes been good for a number of years. So either A. Hes just done, hes gotten old and lost his control and stuff or B. Hes injured I have to think hes injured and a week or two off could really help. Massett can fill in for a couple of weeks while you rest Coco then hopefully he will be 100% for the playoffs. If we keep running him out there everyday hes only going to get worse then were going to be in trouble come playoff time.

reds1869
09-16-2010, 10:36 AM
I would love to see Chapman take a crack at Cordero's role until the end of the season. If he doesn't pan out there nothing has been lost. But if he does, my goodness.

Sea Ray
09-16-2010, 10:39 AM
I think the Reds have been very fortunate that they haven't lost more of Cordero's blown saves. The one he blew this week to the Pirates was only the 4th blown save of his that we've lost this year. The save Mariano Rivera blew for the Yankees this week was the 2nd they've lost; not a big difference over 5.5 months...but that doesn't make me feel any better. I think it's pure luck and guile on the part of his teammates that we haven't lost more because of him.

I think we can all vividly remember the 4 games he blew. The first was in the Pirates sweep of us in April. The second was the Atlanta debacle. The third was in the Philly four game sweep at the All Star break and the last one this weekend vs the Pirates

reds1869
09-16-2010, 10:44 AM
I think the Reds have been very fortunate that they haven't lost more of Cordero's blown saves.

Most definitely. Lady Luck has smiled on the Reds this year. Hopefully the closer problem is resolved by the playoffs. If not the Reds could have quite a short run.

Sea Ray
09-16-2010, 10:49 AM
Cordero does get into grooves. He was in one a week ago for about ten games. We need to hope he finds one more groove for the post season because I see Dusty sinking or swimming with him. I don't think he'll replace him while the roof's leaking. He'll wait for it to cave in

RedEye
09-16-2010, 12:32 PM
Cordero does get into grooves. He was in one a week ago for about ten games. We need to hope he finds one more groove for the post season because I see Dusty sinking or swimming with him. I don't think he'll replace him while the roof's leaking. He'll wait for it to cave in

That's the problem. Should we then root for the roof to cave in over the next two weeks? Maybe then Dusty will be forced to repair it before the playoffs?

Homer Bailey
09-16-2010, 12:49 PM
A question about the possibility of Aroldris Chapman moving into the closer role for Francisco Cordero set Dusty Baker off a bit this morning. Baker dismissed the idea, but left the possibility of it open down the road. More on that later heres the most vociferous of what he said:

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/

Baker goin OFF.

Chip R
09-16-2010, 12:54 PM
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/ (http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/)

Baker goin OFF.

On a side note, I enjoyed Fay's headline for this entry,


"Rolen has stiff in back, neck"

:lol:

WVRedsFan
09-16-2010, 12:59 PM
That's the problem. Should we then root for the roof to cave in over the next two weeks? Maybe then Dusty will be forced to repair it before the playoffs?No. Let's win regardless of who is the closer.

RedEye
09-16-2010, 01:03 PM
No. Let's win regardless of who is the closer.

Obviously, that's the ideal. But if a few more cataclysmic losses in the 9th are the only way to get a closer change for the games that really count... ?

Maybe we should just root for more games like last night; Cordero comes in with a two or three run lead and gets an unconvincing save. Reds win, but Dusty gets more (bad tasting) food for thought.

edabbs44
09-16-2010, 01:07 PM
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/

Baker goin OFF.

I love his response.

WVRedsFan
09-16-2010, 01:07 PM
Obviously, that's the ideal. But if a few more cataclysmic losses in the 9th are the only way to get a closer change for the games that really count... ?

Maybe we should just root for more games like last night; Cordero comes in with a two or three run lead and gets an unconvincing save. Reds win, but Dusty gets more (bad tasting) food for thought.Don't get me wrong. I'm with you, but Dusty's a stubborn man and will stick with Codero regardless. But right now, I'm just concerned with winning games and though Codero is an obstacle, we have to hope the offense does its job and gets enough runs to avoid the dreaded "save" situation. I firmly believe that a change is needed, but as long as Dusty is in charge, he's going to use Codero in those situations, sad as it is.

mbgrayson
09-16-2010, 01:11 PM
Actually, we are lucky to be in a situation with an eight game lead. Dusty has the luxury of first trying to 'fix' Cordero, and failing that, allowing Chapman or Masset to get a couple chances in.

With about 16 games left, there may be about 5 to 7 more save chances. With the division almost locked up, those save opportunities need to be seen as a chance to get our relief pitching house in order for the playoffs.

MikeS21
09-16-2010, 01:12 PM
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/

Baker goin OFF.
I love this. Baker is right about one thing. The peanut gallery is very fickle.

Baker mentions Dickerson, Nix, Masset, Bruce, Stubbs as players who have been ragged on.

There are others. Folks screamed for Heisey to get PT. Funny, I'm not hearing it so much now. Even the calls for Paul Janish seem to have cooled somewhat.

RedEye
09-16-2010, 01:17 PM
There are others. Folks screamed for Heisey to get PT. Funny, I'm not hearing it so much now. Even the calls for Paul Janish seem to have cooled somewhat.

Not fickle--just tired. I'd still be screaming for both of these guys to get more opportunities, but after awhile one realizes the sounds are falling on deaf ears.

edabbs44
09-16-2010, 01:24 PM
Not fickle--just tired. I'd still be screaming for both of these guys to get more opportunities, but after awhile one realizes the sounds are falling on deaf ears.

I'm not sure that anyone could have a legit case for criticising the work of anyone in management at this point.

Cedric
09-16-2010, 01:35 PM
I'm not sure that anyone could have a legit case for criticising the work of anyone in management at this point.

You can criticize a singular FO move and still love the overall body of work they have done. I think you lose sight of this when you label everyone as a hater because they respectfully disagree with a single move.

sivman17
09-16-2010, 01:37 PM
I agree with Dusty somewhat, but he is being a hypocrite a little bit if you ask me. He took Harang out the rotation. He sent Volquez down. He has switched up the number 1 and 2 spots in the order throughout this year. If he "can't go with who's hot," then how come he hasn't used the exact same lineup and the same pitchers the entire year?

You have to go with who is hot. If your starting pitchers aren't getting it done, then you make a change, which he has done. When the relievers aren't doing well they get sent down. Just because a guy is your designated closer and makes 12 mil doesn't mean he should do it even if he continues to perform below expectations.

I loved in the article when Baker said Cordero doesn't even lead the league in blown saves, and Fay put in parentheses that he is second in BS. That's hysterical to me that Baker tried using that as a reason for why Cordero isn't terrible.

thatcoolguy_22
09-16-2010, 01:43 PM
All I got out of Baker's rant, was that he reads Redszone :D

hebroncougar
09-16-2010, 01:46 PM
Statheads aren't always right. "Baseball" guys aren't always right. What is pretty blatant is that Cordero is not getting people out at the same right he has in the past. The baserunner's he is allowing are extremely troubling. If he's not at least grooming somone to take the spot, he's asking for trouble. Especially in the postseason, when we are more likely to play closer games.

BRM
09-16-2010, 01:50 PM
Baker's rant was entertaining if nothing else.

HokieRed
09-16-2010, 01:50 PM
Actually I find it pretty interesting that Dusty knew CoCo wasn't the worst in blown saves. It means he's checked.

jojo
09-16-2010, 02:06 PM
Wait, there were people calling for Laynce Nix to play? :p:

Roy Tucker
09-16-2010, 02:11 PM
A very open and candid rant by Baker. I like it. A lot. Go Dusty.

All things about baseball fans that have been in effect since time immemorial.

edabbs44
09-16-2010, 02:13 PM
You can criticize a singular FO move and still love the overall body of work they have done. I think you lose sight of this when you label everyone as a hater because they respectfully disagree with a single move.

But it's also like criticising your kid for getting a 95% on a test instead of 100%. Or asking Votto why he only went 2-4 instead of 4-4.

Managing a team isn't a series of independent moves. Dusty's style is applied in all situations. He isn't going to treat each situation differently every time. The organization has shown great patience with other players who have struggled, and many have worked out well. Hopefully they play this situation correctly as well.

If you are happy with the way the team has been managed to this point, then trust these guys to do the right thing here as well. If Cordero is brutal over the next 2 weeks, I seriously doubt that you'll see him pitching much in important situations in the postseason.

Redsfan320
09-16-2010, 02:14 PM
OF COURSE YOU GO WITH WHO'S HOT, DUSTY! No let's go with who's cold. Fry me if you will, but I'm livid right now. LIVID. Without the fans, there IS no team, and DUSTY's out of a job. :angry:

Call my coment sundeckly if you will, lol.

320

RedFanAlways1966
09-16-2010, 02:58 PM
If you are happy with the way the team has been managed to this point, then trust these guys to do the right thing here as well. If Cordero is brutal over the next 2 weeks, I seriously doubt that you'll see him pitching much in important situations in the postseason.

Nicely said. I agree 100%. Nice to have a cushion to "trial run it" in regard to the closer's spot. I (and most here) have been guilty of calling for some of the things Dusty pointed out during the season. Things have worked out despite "them" not listening to me or any of you. I trust "they" will play it the right way from here on out.

Johnny Footstool
09-16-2010, 03:23 PM
I agree with that Johnny. But that's not the same as DL'ing him.

Exactly. You don't run into any issues with putting a healthy player on the DL, plus you get Cordero out of games for a while without hurting his ego.

fearofpopvol1
09-16-2010, 03:56 PM
If Cordero was in St. Louis or NYM or NYY or Philly, he would've been yanked already from his spot until he proved he could handle it again. I just don't understand why Dusty won't do the same. Is he afraid of hurting CoCo's feelings? Is he afraid no one else can do the job? Is he that naive? What is it?

westofyou
09-16-2010, 04:14 PM
A very open and candid rant by Baker. I like it. A lot. Go Dusty.

All things about baseball fans that have been in effect since time immemorial.

Look Ma, no unbridled anger.

Brutus
09-16-2010, 04:20 PM
All I got out of Baker's rant, was that he reads Redszone :D

Ha! Yeah it sure seemed like he does.

I think he makes some really good points. I want him to bench Cordero, but his explanation is a good one as to why he doesn't. He's got a good point about throwing strikes... his issue was the control earlier and that does seem to be a little better now. I'd still like to see a change as pretty much everyone would, but I get the reasons he hasn't done it yet.

sivman17
09-16-2010, 04:46 PM
I want him to bench Cordero, but his explanation is a good one as to why he doesn't. He's got a good point about throwing strikes... his issue was the control earlier and that does seem to be a little better now.

I'm not sure which is better. Before he wasn't necessarily getting hit, he was just walking too many guys. Now he can throw strikes but those strikes are getting knocked.

If he doesn't throw strikes he gives up walks and runs. If he throws strikes he gives up hits and runs. I'm no expert, but it seems to me like we have a very big problem here with Cordero.

paulrichjr
09-16-2010, 05:15 PM
All I got out of Baker's rant, was that he reads Redszone :D

Yeah and now we have to figure out who he goes by. Does anyone use "Baseclogger", or "Sabremania"?

Brutus
09-16-2010, 05:17 PM
Yeah and now we have to figure out who he goes by. Does anyone use "Baseclogger", or "Sabremania"?

Heh. I believe *Baseclogger* was banned recently.

Boss-Hog
09-16-2010, 05:19 PM
Heh. I believe *Baseclogger* was banned recently.
That's not true.

Brutus
09-16-2010, 05:20 PM
That's not true.

My bad. I may have misunderstood the issues going on there. Sorry, Boss.

RedsManRick
09-16-2010, 06:23 PM
I understand the psychological and political reasons for leaving Cordero as closer, but Dusty's defense of the way he's been pitching was really weak. By any measure other than saves, which are largely a function of opportunity (e.g. Dusty's doing, not CoCo's), he has not pitched well. Period.

I understand that he has to make decisions based on considerations beyond who played well yesterday, but what's frustrating from a fan's perspective is the apparent inconsistency in his decision making process. I know Dusty will always protect his players in the press and commend him for doing so. But there seems to be a level of secrecy in how and why certain decisions are made, particularly regarding playing time, that only feeds the fans complains. Yes, his job is to win ballgames, not react to every fan criticism. But he could do a lot more to diffuse that criticism if it really gets him worked up the way it seems to have.

In my experience, in industries where your performance is open to public scrutiny, education goes a long way in appeasing critics. His explanation of the thought process with Cordero, particularly about working through the walks and not the meat pitches, was interesting. We know (even if we sometimes say otherwise) that Dusty is a smart guy who knows a ton about baseball. But a major part of being a baseball fan is in understanding managerial decisions. If he wants fans to accept his decisions, the onus is on him to help us understand them.

jojo
09-16-2010, 06:56 PM
I understand the psychological and political reasons for leaving Cordero as closer, but Dusty's defense of the way he's been pitching was really weak. By any measure other than saves, which are largely a function of opportunity (e.g. Dusty's doing, not CoCo's), he has not pitched well. Period.

I understand that he has to make decisions based on considerations beyond who played well yesterday, but what's frustrating from a fan's perspective is the apparent inconsistency in his decision making process. I know Dusty will always protect his players in the press and commend him for doing so. But there seems to be a level of secrecy in how and why certain decisions are made, particularly regarding playing time, that only feeds the fans complains. Yes, his job is to win ballgames, not react to every fan criticism. But he could do a lot more to diffuse that criticism if it really gets him worked up the way it seems to have.

In my experience, in industries where your performance is open to public scrutiny, education goes a long way in appeasing critics. His explanation of the thought process with Cordero, particularly about working through the walks and not the meat pitches, was interesting. We know (even if we sometimes say otherwise) that Dusty is a smart guy who knows a ton about baseball. But a major part of being a baseball fan is in understanding managerial decisions. If he wants fans to accept his decisions, the onus is on him to help us understand them.

Dusty used to tweak the heck out of me with some comments he'd make. But I believe he basically says a lot of the things he says in defense of a player and he may or may not actually believe what he's saying. I really don't think it's productive to treat a lot of what he says as dialog meant to be engaged.

Brutus
09-16-2010, 06:56 PM
I understand the psychological and political reasons for leaving Cordero as closer, but Dusty's defense of the way he's been pitching was really weak. By any measure other than saves, which are largely a function of opportunity (e.g. Dusty's doing, not CoCo's), he has not pitched well. Period.

I understand that he has to make decisions based on considerations beyond who played well yesterday, but what's frustrating from a fan's perspective is the apparent inconsistency in his decision making process. I know Dusty will always protect his players in the press and commend him for doing so. But there seems to be a level of secrecy in how and why certain decisions are made, particularly regarding playing time, that only feeds the fans complains. Yes, his job is to win ballgames, not react to every fan criticism. But he could do a lot more to diffuse that criticism if it really gets him worked up the way it seems to have.

In my experience, in industries where your performance is open to public scrutiny, education goes a long way in appeasing critics. His explanation of the thought process with Cordero, particularly about working through the walks and not the meat pitches, was interesting. We know (even if we sometimes say otherwise) that Dusty is a smart guy who knows a ton about baseball. But a major part of being a baseball fan is in understanding managerial decisions. If he wants fans to accept his decisions, the onus is on him to help us understand them.

I got the impression he doesn't necessarily care that fans accept them, just pointing out that fans are also inconsistent in how they treat these situations too. When fans are given what they ask for, then they boo and complain when the situations don't work out. I think his point is that he doesn't owe anyone an explanation, though he gave a pretty straight-forward answer with this one: namely, each person is different and he doesn't have to be consistent in how he treats their position on the club.

For the people that value the psychological aspect of sports, I suppose this answer will suffice. For those that don't, it won't make much sense. I guess it's all on the weight one applies to the intangibles of a club makeup.

Far East
09-16-2010, 07:07 PM
I think that Codero still has just enough stuff and just enough command to save games. He just needs to be less predictable.

Wednesday night, in the ninth, La Roach (even with two strikes) was sitting on a middle/in fastball -- even a back-door slider would have been better.

Look at how Volquez (different stuff from Cordero, I realize) handled LaRoach with high heat and then outside corner changeups today.

traderumor
09-16-2010, 07:13 PM
I'm with Dusty on the booing. I'm not sure how the booers think they are helping their squad by publicly denegrating their abilities. Booing from the hometown fans has ruined some guys.

Will M
09-16-2010, 07:22 PM
lets assume that Dusty moves Cordero out of the closers role (which i would like). then who closes? asking Chapman to close after 16 days in the show is pretty gutsy. Rhodes has had issues in the closer role in the past (with the Ms i believe). Despite this i would use Rhodes & Masset as co-closers depending on the matchups. Let Ondrusek & Chapman pitch in the 7th & 8th. Cordero joins Smith & Bray in middle relief.

IslandRed
09-16-2010, 07:40 PM
Dusty used to tweak the heck out of me with some comments he'd make. But I believe he basically says a lot of the things he says in defense of a player and he may or may not actually believe what he's saying. I really don't think it's productive to treat a lot of what he says as dialog meant to be engaged.

I fully agree. Dusty protects his players. That means, often, not saying what he really thinks or disclosing all the factors that went into the decisions he's made. And when discussing potential moves, sometimes not tipping the future requires fibbing about the present.


I'm with Dusty on the booing. I'm not sure how the booers think they are helping their squad by publicly denegrating their abilities. Booing from the hometown fans has ruined some guys.

Yep. I understand that buying the ticket gives someone a right to boo, but I've always thought it was kind of dumb.

cincrazy
09-16-2010, 09:37 PM
Don't get me wrong. I'm with you, but Dusty's a stubborn man and will stick with Codero regardless. But right now, I'm just concerned with winning games and though Codero is an obstacle, we have to hope the offense does its job and gets enough runs to avoid the dreaded "save" situation. I firmly believe that a change is needed, but as long as Dusty is in charge, he's going to use Codero in those situations, sad as it is.

Dusty is a stubborn man, and he's loyal, but he's not stupid. If inserting Chapman into the closer's role is what it takes to win a title, you bet your butt Baker will do just that.

thatcoolguy_22
09-16-2010, 10:38 PM
Dusty is a stubborn man, and he's loyal, but he's not stupid. If inserting Chapman into the closer's role is what it takes to win a title, you bet your butt Baker will do just that.

what happens if i lose said bet?

the closer situation will be worked out. if baker thinks coco will come back from being putrid then he will stay. otherwise it will be masset. i doubt they let chapman close.

sivman17
09-16-2010, 11:29 PM
Just because we are hometown fans doesn't mean we aren't allowed to boo players when we are disgusted with them. Fans were influential in getting Danny Graves booted from Cincy and I think we were all happy to see that.

There's nothing wrong with voicing displeasure. What do you expect fans to do when Cordero comes in and basically blows 3 out of his last 4 games (against last place teams), just sit there and clap for him?

Griffey012
09-17-2010, 12:51 AM
Just because we are hometown fans doesn't mean we aren't allowed to boo players when we are disgusted with them. Fans were influential in getting Danny Graves booted from Cincy and I think we were all happy to see that.

There's nothing wrong with voicing displeasure. What do you expect fans to do when Cordero comes in and basically blows 3 out of his last 4 games (against last place teams), just sit there and clap for him?

That is all true, BUT Cordero is going nowhere at the moment, it is past pretty much all trading deadlines and they are not eating all of his remaining salary. With the team being this close to the playoffs, Baker & Jocketty are going to make decisions solely off what they feel put us in the best position to win, they could care less about appeasing to fans right now, because they have done so in putting a great team on the field.

So what does booing Cordero do? Possibly drops his confidence even lower, and may cause him to perform even worse. And at the point in time in last night's game we had already used Masset and Chapman (the 2 most likely to close over Cordero). So it's not quite like we were watching Cordero unravel with those to twittling their thumbs in the bullpen.

And if someone uses the argument of I would rather have seen Bruce not catch the ball and Cordero blow it so we can get him out of there. That is ludicrous because we have not won ANYTHING yet.

mth123
09-17-2010, 07:23 AM
I'm not a booer myself, but fans pay good money for the right to watch these guys play. If they stink up the joint, they have the right to boo. Taking the heat is part of the reason these guys make big, big, bucks (even the guys making the minimum). Its a fact of life in the major leagues. Can't take it, then go bag groceries IMO.

edabbs44
09-17-2010, 09:01 AM
And if someone uses the argument of I would rather have seen Bruce not catch the ball and Cordero blow it so we can get him out of there. That is ludicrous because we have not won ANYTHING yet.

I love this point for another reason. Sometimes we act as if Baker wakes up in the morning, looks at the box score and says "Nice, Cordero saved the game last night. He's back, baby."

These guys are watching the same games we are. The fact that Bruce robbed that HR did nothing for Cordero except add to his save total.

edabbs44
09-17-2010, 09:02 AM
Just because we are hometown fans doesn't mean we aren't allowed to boo players when we are disgusted with them. Fans were influential in getting Danny Graves booted from Cincy and I think we were all happy to see that.

There's nothing wrong with voicing displeasure. What do you expect fans to do when Cordero comes in and basically blows 3 out of his last 4 games (against last place teams), just sit there and clap for him?

It is tough to boo when the team is in first place.

Redhook
09-17-2010, 09:28 AM
Just because we are hometown fans doesn't mean we aren't allowed to boo players when we are disgusted with them. Fans were influential in getting Danny Graves booted from Cincy and I think we were all happy to see that.

There's nothing wrong with voicing displeasure. What do you expect fans to do when Cordero comes in and basically blows 3 out of his last 4 games (against last place teams), just sit there and clap for him?

Yep. Hometown fars are allowed to boo. I, personally, have never booed a Red at a game and don't know if I ever will. However, I don't fault people for booing. Cordero is paid to be an elite closer and he isn't performing like one. Most fans are making way less than 1% of his annual salary and aren't happy that they're working harder than him, they're doing a better job than him at their job and making a lot less money doing it. I'm sure a little bit of jealousy factors into the booing.

BRM
09-17-2010, 10:17 AM
It is tough to boo when the team is in first place.

Apparently not.

traderumor
09-17-2010, 10:23 AM
Just because we are hometown fans doesn't mean we aren't allowed to boo players when we are disgusted with them. Fans were influential in getting Danny Graves booted from Cincy and I think we were all happy to see that.

There's nothing wrong with voicing displeasure. What do you expect fans to do when Cordero comes in and basically blows 3 out of his last 4 games (against last place teams), just sit there and clap for him?I'm pretty sure Graves pitched his way out of a job. But while you are on that motif, we've also had fans convince ownership with standing ovations to overpay an aging, fading shortstop and hamstring payroll for a few years, so there's two sides to fans influencing decisions. Fortunately, we now have a management team who does not seem to be influenced by the potpourri of voices.

traderumor
09-17-2010, 10:29 AM
Yep. Hometown fars are allowed to boo. I, personally, have never booed a Red at a game and don't know if I ever will. However, I don't fault people for booing. Cordero is paid to be an elite closer and he isn't performing like one. Most fans are making way less than 1% of his annual salary and aren't happy that they're working harder than him, they're doing a better job than him at their job and making a lot less money doing it. I'm sure a little bit of jealousy factors into the booing.How do you how hard he works? I don't think this is a work ethic issue. This isn't a construction crew, where if you show up on time, work hard and do what you're told you will be considered a successful worker.

I submit people booing shows a lack of appreciation for the difficulty of the job that someone is failing to perform to their wax nose standards of performance.

westofyou
09-17-2010, 10:31 AM
Here's Cordero's numbers by results

Group G IP W L Pct H R SO BB ERA
Wins 6 7 6 0 1 6 5 8 5 6.43
Losses 5 4 0 5 0 8 9 2 6 20.25
Saves 36 35.2 0 0 ---- 29 5 25 16 1.26
Blown Saves 8 5.2 2 3 0.4 16 16 4 11 25.41
Holds 1 0.1 0 0 ---- 0 2 1 3 54.00
No Decisions 17 16.2 0 0 ---- 13 4 17 4 2.16

PuffyPig
09-17-2010, 10:32 AM
There's nothing wrong with voicing displeasure. What do you expect fans to do when Cordero comes in and basically blows 3 out of his last 4 games (against last place teams), just sit there and clap for him?


He's blown 2 out his last 3, with the Reds losing just one of those games.

He's come into the game in a save situation 45 times this year, and the Reds have lost 4 of those games.

I'm not saying he's great but when he's enters the game in a save situation, we've gone on to win 91% of the time.

westofyou
09-17-2010, 10:36 AM
Francisco Cordero
2010
Innings Pitched 65.2
Runs Allowed 30
Innings Started 66
Runs in Those Innings 26
Shutout Innings 49
One-Run Innings 9
Two-Run Innings 7
Three-Run Innings 1
Got First Man Out 49
Runs Scored in Those Innings 8
Runs/9 Innings 1.47
First Man Reached 17
Runs Scored in Those Innings 18
Runs/9 Innings 9.53
1-2-3 Innings 22
10-pitch Innings (or less) 12
Long Innings (20 +pitches) 23
Failed to Finish Inning 5

dsmith421
09-17-2010, 10:39 AM
I'm not saying he's great but when he's enters the game in a save situation, we've gone on to win 91% of the time.

What's the major league average? Because that number in a vaccuum means nothing. Teams should win almost all the time when they enter the ninth inning in a save situation.

westofyou
09-17-2010, 10:40 AM
I'm pretty sure Graves pitched his way out of a job.

2005 Graves



Group G IP W L Pct H R SO BB ERA
Wins 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Losses 1 0.1 0 1 0 4 3 0 0 27
Saves 10 9.2 0 0 ---- 13 5 6 9 3.72
Blown Saves 2 1.1 0 1 0 5 3 0 1 6.75
Holds 1 1 0 0 ---- 0 0 0 0 0
No Decisions 26 25.2 0 0 ---- 41 27 14 10 8.06

PuffyPig
09-17-2010, 11:37 AM
What's the major league average? Because that number in a vaccuum means nothing. Teams should win almost all the time when they enter the ninth inning in a save situation.

Whatever the average, the fact that we've lost 4 times when he's been presented with a save opportunity in the 9th shows that even if the number should be 95% instead of 90% it's still just two games.

How many times have the Reds won when they entered a game on the other side of a save chance? It cuts both ways. We beat the Pirates this weekend when we were down entering the 9th.

sivman17
09-17-2010, 11:43 AM
I'm pretty sure Graves pitched his way out of a job.

That, and he flipped off a fan.

Far East
09-17-2010, 12:18 PM
That, and he flipped off a fan.
Come to think of it, if I verbally insult Graves or Cordero with booing, gestures, or words that mean "You are a bad pitcher," then I guess that the player has a right (constitutionally speaking, at least) to communicate back to me (words or gestures) about how bad I might be as a fan.

Or, if the player saw my yard, car, or house, he might boo (or gesture) me for not keeping my car as clean, my yard as dandelion-free, or my house as well maintained as the player would expect of me.

The difference is that the player cannot see my car, yard, or house, but I can see his blown saves.

sivman17
09-17-2010, 12:42 PM
Got this from Sundeck..

http://espn.go.com/mlb/features/cyyoung

Apparently Cordero is 10th in the Cy Young predictor. Perhaps he is really really good and we just haven't noticed? :eek:

durl
09-17-2010, 12:43 PM
He's blown 2 out his last 3, with the Reds losing just one of those games.

He's come into the game in a save situation 45 times this year, and the Reds have lost 4 of those games.

I'm not saying he's great but when he's enters the game in a save situation, we've gone on to win 91% of the time.

He blows roughly 2 out of every 10 save opportunities. He's allowed 63 hits in 65 innings along with 30 earned runs. A 4.11 ERA. The opponent will score at least one run every other appearance. His ERA for September is 10.13.

Granted, he had a good August, not blowing a single save and managing a 2.19 ERA. But his July ERA was 3.27, June was 5.25, and May was 4.63. Hardly inspiring.

Looking at Save leaders ahead of Cordero, none of them have an ERA above 2.00. They're more reliable and make a LOT less money:

Wilson (SF): 43 Saves, 91% Save Percentage for $6.5 million.
Soriano (TB): 43 Saves, 93%, $7.25 million.
Bell (SD): 42 Saves, 93%, $4 million.
Soria (KC): 38 Saves, 95%, $3 million.
Cordero: 36 Saves, 82%, $12.1 million. (Almost double the Saves Leader.)

Bigger salaries should go to better players. And it's the cost that makes me believe that he isn't the best option for the Reds. (I realize we're primarily talking about who deserves the closer role for the rest of the season, so this will mean more in 2011...bear with me :)) Looking at salaries and saves:

Wilson (SF): $151K/Save or $138K/Save Opportunity.
Soriano (TB): $168K/Sv or $157K/SvO
Bell (SD): $95K/Save or $89K/SvO
Soria (KC): $79K/Save or $75K/SvO
Cordero: $337K/Save or $275K/SvO

So if you look at Save Percentage and it's relation to Salary, that Save Percentage becomes a reflection of how much the pitcher is paid for total blown saves.

Wilson (SF): $553K or 9% of 2010 salary (inverse of 91% Save%)
Soriano (TB): $472K or 7%
Bell (SD): $266K or 7%
Soria (KC): $150K or 5%
Cordero: $2.2 million or 18%.

If Cordero simply had a 90% save percentage (still below those ahead of him in actual Saves), he'd be paid $1.1 million for blown saves this year, yet well ahead of better-performing closers.

Anyway, thanks for bearing with my number-crunching. I just don't have a lot of confidence in Cordero. That 81% save rate, that ERA of 4.11, that WHIP of 1.51...that's hard to ignore.

nate
09-17-2010, 12:48 PM
Are saves the sole responsibility of the closer?

There are a number of ways to measure Cordero's effectiveness as a pitcher.

A "save" isn't one of them.

Griffey012
09-17-2010, 01:53 PM
He blows roughly 2 out of every 10 save opportunities. He's allowed 63 hits in 65 innings along with 30 earned runs. A 4.11 ERA. The opponent will score at least one run every other appearance. His ERA for September is 10.13.

Granted, he had a good August, not blowing a single save and managing a 2.19 ERA. But his July ERA was 3.27, June was 5.25, and May was 4.63. Hardly inspiring.

Looking at Save leaders ahead of Cordero, none of them have an ERA above 2.00. They're more reliable and make a LOT less money:

Wilson (SF): 43 Saves, 91% Save Percentage for $6.5 million.
Soriano (TB): 43 Saves, 93%, $7.25 million.
Bell (SD): 42 Saves, 93%, $4 million.
Soria (KC): 38 Saves, 95%, $3 million.
Cordero: 36 Saves, 82%, $12.1 million. (Almost double the Saves Leader.)

Bigger salaries should go to better players. And it's the cost that makes me believe that he isn't the best option for the Reds. (I realize we're primarily talking about who deserves the closer role for the rest of the season, so this will mean more in 2011...bear with me :)) Looking at salaries and saves:

Wilson (SF): $151K/Save or $138K/Save Opportunity.
Soriano (TB): $168K/Sv or $157K/SvO
Bell (SD): $95K/Save or $89K/SvO
Soria (KC): $79K/Save or $75K/SvO
Cordero: $337K/Save or $275K/SvO

So if you look at Save Percentage and it's relation to Salary, that Save Percentage becomes a reflection of how much the pitcher is paid for total blown saves.

Wilson (SF): $553K or 9% of 2010 salary (inverse of 91% Save%)
Soriano (TB): $472K or 7%
Bell (SD): $266K or 7%
Soria (KC): $150K or 5%
Cordero: $2.2 million or 18%.

If Cordero simply had a 90% save percentage (still below those ahead of him in actual Saves), he'd be paid $1.1 million for blown saves this year, yet well ahead of better-performing closers.

Anyway, thanks for bearing with my number-crunching. I just don't have a lot of confidence in Cordero. That 81% save rate, that ERA of 4.11, that WHIP of 1.51...that's hard to ignore.

That's an interesting analysis, but we are not paying Cordero's 12.1 million dollar salary. And he is not going anywhere before the end of the season. That is a good point to bring up in the off-season of what to do with Cordero, but for the short term, how much money he makes is irrelevant.

sivman17
09-17-2010, 02:12 PM
Are saves the sole responsibility of the closer?

There are a number of ways to measure Cordero's effectiveness as a pitcher.

A "save" isn't one of them.

What? :confused:

nate
09-17-2010, 02:51 PM
What? :confused:

Saves are a measure of opportunity, not pitching ability.

Strikeout, walk and home run rates are measures of pitching ability as are hit types to a degree.

RedsManRick
09-17-2010, 03:06 PM
Saves are a measure of opportunity, not pitching ability.

Strikeout, walk and home run rates are measures of pitching ability as are hit types to a degree.

To be fair, Saves are an indicator of ability -- in that good pitchers will convert more save opportunities in to saves than bad ones. But to your point, you can save 40 games and a replacement level pitcher.

Often people cite save percentage as an indicator of good performance, but fail to provide the baseline. It's not that Cordero is a horrible pitcher. It's the job of simply converting saves most of the time isn't all that hard. What's hard is doing it nearly every single time. He's getting paid do the latter and isn't getting it done.

bucksfan2
09-17-2010, 03:17 PM
To be fair, Saves are an indicator of ability -- in that good pitchers will convert more save opportunities in to saves than bad ones. But to your point, you can save 40 games and a replacement level pitcher.

Often people cite save percentage as an indicator of good performance, but fail to provide the baseline. It's not that Cordero is a horrible pitcher. It's the job of simply converting saves most of the time isn't all that hard. What's hard is doing it nearly every single time. He's getting paid do the latter and isn't getting it done.

Has there ever been a replacement level pitcher with 40 saves?

westofyou
09-17-2010, 03:24 PM
Has there ever been a replacement level pitcher with 40 saves?

Joe Borowski 2007 era+ = 89

nate
09-17-2010, 03:40 PM
Although he doesn't have 40 saves, I would say Chad Qualls has a very "replacement level" scent about him this season.

A good portion of that season spent on my fantasy team :(

traderumor
09-17-2010, 03:51 PM
The biggest lesson to me about Cordero is that managers who have mind sets like Dusty's "the 9th inning is a whole different animal" are simply self-fulfilling their own prophecy. I disagree that defining a reliever's role should be based on what inning the game is in. The pecking order should be based on #1 reliever through #6-8 reliever, with whomever is the best available reliever showing up as needed. Remove the mystique and a lot less of these "he's my closer" or "he's my setup guy" garbage would dictate who is out there at any point in the game. The funny thing is, Dusty operates this way in most part with his bullpen.....except "Cordero is my closer."

RedsManRick
09-17-2010, 04:03 PM
Has there ever been a replacement level pitcher with 40 saves?

Yep. Our own Danny Graves saved 41 games with a WAR of -0.1. 1 other guy has done it with exactly 0.0 (Borowski 2007) and 9 others have done it while producing less than 1 WAR. 40 saves has only happened 123 times. So 1 of every 12 guys did it while adding very little value above replacement. Coco will be joining that club his year as he's at 0.3.

In fact, this is fascinating. 40 save seasons, by WAR:


WAR Saves
5+ 1 (Dan Quisenberry, 1983)
4-5 13
3-4 29
2-3 41
1-2 29
0-1 9
<0 1 (Danny Graves, 2004)
You have what is, more or less, a normal distribution. But what's fascinating is the range. Everybody from run of the mill guys

The issue is not one of save conversion rate. Graves saved 41 of 50 that year -- 82% (Imagine that). It's that bad closers usually don't get that many opportunities to close. If a pitcher has any business being in the big leagues, he can save 35+ games easy if you give him a full season of opportunities. Baseball Reference doesn't have the data, but I'd love to know the save totals of every pitcher who was given at least 54 save chances. (75% conversion = 40 saves)

It's true across MLB, the amount of opportunities a guy is given is a decent proxy for how good of a player he is. However, accruing a lot of opportunities does not in any way guarantee the guy is a good player. And with counting stats based on conversions of opportunities (like saves and RBI), we have to realize that replacement level performances can still generate impressive counting stats.

bucksfan2
09-17-2010, 04:43 PM
Yep. Danny Graves saved 41 games with a WAR of -0.1. 2 other guys have done it with exactly 0.0 (Borowski 2007, Brian Wilson 2008) and 8 others have done it while producing less than 1 WAR. 40 saves has only happened 123 times. So 1 of every 12 guys did it while adding very little value above replacement. Coco will be joining that club his year as he's at 0.3.

So basically it has happened less than 10% of the time. And when you look at it the you have to wonder if the pitchers just had a bad year? or they truly were replacement level pitchers. I don't think I would call Brian Wilson a replacement level pitcher but that is just me.

To suggest that a replacement level pitcher can be successful in the most pressure packed situation is beyond me. We have seen it time and time again where a pitcher with good stuff has failed in that capacity. Its easy to say "well Jordan Smith can close games" but the reality is its an entire different animal doing that.

Do any of you get nervous when Cordero takes the mound to close a game? You start to pace around, you change the channel, you sit up in you seat? If you have nervous tendencies, why do you think players don't as well?

PuffyPig
09-17-2010, 05:18 PM
And with counting stats based on conversions of opportunities (like saves and RBI), we have to realize that replacement level performances can still generate impressive counting stats.


Gomes is a pretty good example of that I would guess, though his RBI's are also the result of better hitting with RISP, which is likely unsustainable.

jojo
09-17-2010, 05:54 PM
We have seen it time and time again where a pitcher with good stuff has failed in that capacity. Its easy to say "well Jordan Smith can close games" but the reality is its an entire different animal doing that.

We've also seen time and again where pitchers who don't miss bats have success in the role using "saves" as a metric.

*BaseClogger*
09-19-2010, 06:23 AM
That's not true.

Hi!

LvJ
09-22-2010, 12:00 AM
He's so friggin' horrible.

sivman17
09-22-2010, 12:02 AM
He's so friggin' horrible.

That about sums it up.

HokieRed
09-22-2010, 12:03 AM
That about sums it up.

No, there's more to be said. He's also so overpaid.

LvJ
09-22-2010, 12:08 AM
No, there's more to be said. He's also so overpaid. Forgot that part.

dsmith421
09-22-2010, 09:25 AM
I'm starting to believe he's the worst pitcher on the entire staff.

Also, his "effort" backing up Bruce's errant throw would have been embarrassing for a high school kid, let alone a guy paid eight figures. I guess it becomes tough to bend down when you're carrying about 60 extra pounds.

edabbs44
09-22-2010, 09:46 AM
If things don't turn around lightning fast, my guess is that he is removed from the role soon.

bucksfan2
09-22-2010, 09:51 AM
Lets be honest here. What in the world was Jay Bruce thinking last night? The Rickie Weeks run meant nothing. He should have been more concerned about Braun going to 3b and keeping the batter to first. If Bruce makes the correct play then the tying run is on first instead of 3rd.

CoCo tends to get all the blame here on RZ. Lets not forget that Bruce's boneheaded play lead to a more exciting 9th inning than it should have been.

jojo
09-22-2010, 09:57 AM
Dude still got the save. He's better than Mariano Rivera (who blew one on the 19th)!

dsmith421
09-22-2010, 09:58 AM
CoCo tends to get all the blame here on RZ. Lets not forget that Bruce's boneheaded play lead to a more exciting 9th inning than it should have been.

Bruce doesn't make a bonehead play if Cordero hasn't already given up his second hit (in addition to an HBP) of the inning. That's the biggest problem. Bruce made a bad play (which was exacerbated by Cordero's laziness), but even if he had fielded that ball cleanly, the tying run is on first IN A THREE RUN SAVE.

It's inexcusable. He "tends to get all the blame" because he deserves it.

edabbs44
09-22-2010, 10:01 AM
Lets be honest here. What in the world was Jay Bruce thinking last night? The Rickie Weeks run meant nothing. He should have been more concerned about Braun going to 3b and keeping the batter to first. If Bruce makes the correct play then the tying run is on first instead of 3rd.

CoCo tends to get all the blame here on RZ. Lets not forget that Bruce's boneheaded play lead to a more exciting 9th inning than it should have been.

Bruce gets leeway for two reasons: because he is typically a very good fielder and because he's Jay Bruce.

But either way, that was an awful play that made Cordero's job a bit harder. He also didn't help himself by failing to pick up the errant throw.

On a related note, how did Bruce only get one error on that play?

Griffey012
09-22-2010, 10:03 AM
I find it baffling that once he gives up a couple hits, and Bruce does his best impression of a little leaguer and Cordero follows up by also acting like a little leaguer and lets the tying run reach 3rd. Cordero mows down the next two hitters with strikeouts. Especially when he has 1 k so far this month.

Maybe Dusty should tell him "2nd baserunner to reach your out of the game" to light a little fire under him.

bucksfan2
09-22-2010, 10:06 AM
Bruce doesn't make a bonehead play if Cordero hasn't already given up his second hit (in addition to an HBP) of the inning. That's the biggest problem. Bruce made a bad play (which was exacerbated by Cordero's laziness), but even if he had fielded that ball cleanly, the tying run is on first IN A THREE RUN SAVE.

It's inexcusable. He "tends to get all the blame" because he deserves it.

Bruce made an awful play, it wasn't a bad play.

I am not excusing CoCo for what he does. He has been downright poor this season. But we all know if Gomes had botched that play RZ would be up in arms about it. But since Bruce makes that play everyone piles on the blame on Cordero. Pitches give up hits, its the nature of the game. Cordero gives up more hits than he should, but its what it is. But when the ball is put in play you have to rely on your fielders. Runners on first and second, which should have been, is a completely different ball game than the tying run on 3rd because of a comedy or errors committed but the Reds d. They looked like the Pirates in the ninth, not a team with a magic number of 5 (at the time).

traderumor
09-22-2010, 10:09 AM
5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines.I think this thread has reached that level. Just one man's opinion.

dsmith421
09-22-2010, 11:27 AM
I am not excusing CoCo for what he does. He has been downright poor this season.

Then we're agreed.

Bruce botched the play and is partially responsible for the near collapse. Cordero's consistent incompetence is also partially responsible for the near collapse.

I'll cut Bruce some slack given that a scant week ago he jumped over the wall to save ... wait for it ... yet another oil can performance from our "closer." He's also been generally immaculate in the field. He does his job well 99% of the time.

OldXOhio
09-22-2010, 11:36 AM
If things don't turn around lightning fast, my guess is that he is removed from the role soon.

I have little confidence in that happening.

edabbs44
09-22-2010, 11:42 AM
I have little confidence in that happening.

Oh I think it is pretty apparent.

Sea Ray
09-22-2010, 11:45 AM
No one's saying Bruce shouldn't have been given error(s) on the play. But is it too much to ask a player to bend down and pickup a slowly rolling ball?

dsmith421
09-22-2010, 11:49 AM
Oh I think it is pretty apparent.

You think Dusty is going to make a change in the closer role a week before the end of the season? I strongly doubt it.

bucksfan2
09-22-2010, 11:53 AM
Then we're agreed.

Bruce botched the play and is partially responsible for the near collapse. Cordero's consistent incompetence is also partially responsible for the near collapse.

I'll cut Bruce some slack given that a scant week ago he jumped over the wall to save ... wait for it ... yet another oil can performance from our "closer." He's also been generally immaculate in the field. He does his job well 99% of the time.

Using that logic I can cut Cordero some slack because he went 1-2-3 the previous day in a save situation.

Bruce made a bad play that led to the further exacerbation of the inning. Cordero is getting all the blame for last nights near miss, but IMO because Bruce has done "his job well 99% of the time" it is getting eased over. In the grand scheme of things last night's 9th inning really didn't matter. Hopefully Bruce learned from that bone headed play.

Cedric
09-22-2010, 11:57 AM
Using that logic I can cut Cordero some slack because he went 1-2-3 the previous day in a save situation.

Bruce made a bad play that led to the further exacerbation of the inning. Cordero is getting all the blame for last nights near miss, but IMO because Bruce has done "his job well 99% of the time" it is getting eased over. In the grand scheme of things last night's 9th inning really didn't matter. Hopefully Bruce learned from that bone headed play.

His play only mattered in allowing the runner to advance into scoring position. Is that really anywhere near screwing up as bad as Cordero did that inning?

I don't see it as being close.

mbgrayson
09-22-2010, 12:04 PM
I find it baffling that once he gives up a couple hits, and Bruce does his best impression of a little leaguer and Cordero follows up by also acting like a little leaguer and lets the tying run reach 3rd. Cordero mows down the next two hitters with strikeouts. Especially when he has 1 k so far this month.

There were two outs when the little league play happened: he struck out Fielder BEFORE that play. Then McGhee hit the single to right that Bruce bobbled, then Cordero struck out Gomez.

The last two games in Milwaukee may actually represent a sort of good turn around for Cordero. Monday he struck out one batter, and last night two batters. These are his first strike outs all month. It is also noteworthy that he has had only one walk this month.

Cordero's BABIP is insanely high lately, and the only way he has a chance is if he can regain some of his ability to strike batters out. That may be starting to happen. Small sample size though....

I have not been a supporter of Cordero's at all, but I am resigned to the fact that Dusty is probably doing the right thing: keep using Cordero, and let Bryan Price work with him to try to work out the problems.

I don't think there is enough time left in the regular season to really change to anyone else to close. Given that fact, we need to try to get Cordero a couple of good appearances under his belt to restore his confidence for the playoffs.

Don't get me wrong: I get just as stressed out at the frequent rides on the Codero-Coaster as the next guy. I don't think a 1.50 plus WHIP is workable for a closer. But we need to try to get this guy right for the playoffs, because there isn't time to safely get anyone else enough experience closing games in time for the playoffs.

Roy Tucker
09-22-2010, 12:10 PM
Yeah, the Reds will live or die with Cordero in the playoffs. I just don't see Dusty changing at this late date.

It will be an interesting time, that's for sure. Buckle up.

lollipopcurve
09-22-2010, 12:12 PM
there isn't time to safely get anyone else enough experience closing games in time for the playoffs.

I don't really get this argument. Chapman was closing in Louisville. Masset has been apprenticing in the 8th for a long time. At some point, you have to take the training wheels off. Yes, the playoffs are even more pressure-packed and it could lead to these guys folding under the pressure -- but what is there to lose when your current closer is struggling mightily?

I think that Cordero opens the playoffs as the closer, and that's OK. But if he scuffles right out of the chute, you have to consider alternatives. There's too much money to be made in the postseason for the Reds to hitch their wagon to a broken down horse without a fresh one in reserve.

edabbs44
09-22-2010, 12:57 PM
His play only mattered in allowing the runner to advance into scoring position. Is that really anywhere near screwing up as bad as Cordero did that inning?

I don't see it as being close.

If Bruce fields it cleanly and makes the proper throw the likely result is runners on 1st and 2nd with one out. Cordero definitely added to the mess by looking 127 years old while bending down to pick up the ball.

The end result on Jay was actually moving both runners into scoring position. Cordero allowed them to move up another base each after Jay's poor throw, but make the right throw and Cordero doesn't even enter the equation.

edabbs44
09-22-2010, 12:59 PM
You think Dusty is going to make a change in the closer role a week before the end of the season? I strongly doubt it.

If Cordero continues down this path in the next 2 weeks, I think the Reds will make the change. Whether Dusty is involved or not, I can't see everyone sitting around doing nothing. If they have reason to believe that his stuff is ok, then maybe they keep him there. That's what scouts are for. But if he continues to be a mess and looks horrendous next week, there is no way he continues to close in the playoffs.

Griffey012
09-22-2010, 01:10 PM
There were two outs when the little league play happened: he struck out Fielder BEFORE that play. Then McGhee hit the single to right that Bruce bobbled, then Cordero struck out Gomez.

My mistake, thanks for pointing that out.

Big Klu
09-22-2010, 01:11 PM
Bruce gets leeway for two reasons: because he is typically a very good fielder and because he's Jay Bruce.

But either way, that was an awful play that made Cordero's job a bit harder. He also didn't help himself by failing to pick up the errant throw.

On a related note, how did Bruce only get one error on that play?

If I were the official scorer, I would have charged three errors on that play--two to Bruce and one to Cordero. Bruce gets an error on the boot that allows a run to score, then another on the errant throw that allows the batter to take second base. Cordero then gets an error for letting the ball roll through his legs, allowing the batter to take third.

Griffey012
09-22-2010, 01:12 PM
No one's saying Bruce shouldn't have been given error(s) on the play. But is it too much to ask a player to bend down and pickup a slowly rolling ball?

Could you clarify which player you are talking about picking up the slow rolling ball? :jump:

Cedric
09-22-2010, 01:19 PM
If Bruce fields it cleanly and makes the proper throw the likely result is runners on 1st and 2nd with one out. Cordero definitely added to the mess by looking 127 years old while bending down to pick up the ball.

The end result on Jay was actually moving both runners into scoring position. Cordero allowed them to move up another base each after Jay's poor throw, but make the right throw and Cordero doesn't even enter the equation.

Not true. There were 2 outs. The only thing that mattered was Bruce allowed the tying run into scoring position. Going from 2nd to 3rd didn't matter with 2 outs.

bucksfan2
09-22-2010, 01:21 PM
Not true. There were 2 outs. The only thing that mattered was Bruce allowed the tying run into scoring position. Going from 2nd to 3rd didn't matter with 2 outs.

It absolutely did matter that the runner advanced from 2nd to 3rd. Its much easier to score from 3rd than 2nd.

Cedric
09-22-2010, 01:23 PM
It absolutely did matter that the runner advanced from 2nd to 3rd. Its much easier to score from 3rd than 2nd.

Ah.. You are one of those fans that claps when a guy gets someone to 3rd as they are making the 2nd out :)

bucksfan2
09-22-2010, 01:29 PM
Ah.. You are one of those fans that claps when a guy gets someone to 3rd as they are making the 2nd out :)

No im not one of those fans. But to say standing on 2nd is equivalent to standing on 3rd is wrong. A wild pitch, passed ball, error, infield hit, sharp single right at a player all will score a runner from 3rd with two outs but not a runner from second. So year that extra base makes a difference, even more so because the Reds were throwing the ball around the infield like a tee ball team. You never want to give up extra bases.

edabbs44
09-22-2010, 01:41 PM
Not true. There were 2 outs. The only thing that mattered was Bruce allowed the tying run into scoring position. Going from 2nd to 3rd didn't matter with 2 outs.

It's one event...the runner went from 2nd to 3rd, which allowed the runner on first to go to 2nd.

If the guy didn't go from 2nd to 3rd, the runner on first then could not make it into scoring position.

Cedric
09-22-2010, 01:43 PM
It's one event...the runner went from 2nd to 3rd, which allowed the runner on first to go to 2nd.

If the guy didn't go from 2nd to 3rd, the runner on first then could not make it into scoring position.

Obviously. But you said there was one out. It's much more important to keep the runner from 3rd with one out. Sorry for the confusion.

edabbs44
09-22-2010, 01:53 PM
Obviously. But you said there was one out. It's much more important to keep the runner from 3rd with one out. Sorry for the confusion.

Ah, understood. That's my fault, there were obviously 2 outs but it wasn't really part of my point anyway. But I agree with your point.

Carry on.

RedsManRick
09-22-2010, 02:36 PM
So basically it has happened less than 10% of the time. And when you look at it the you have to wonder if the pitchers just had a bad year? or they truly were replacement level pitchers. I don't think I would call Brian Wilson a replacement level pitcher but that is just me.

This completely misses the point. Yes, they had a bad year -- and still saved 40 games. It doesn't take a good year to accrue a bunch of saves. That's entirely the point. And a bad year from a good pitcher (a guy likely to pitch better in the future) is not any more effective than that same year from a bad pitcher. You could keep running out that 5.00 ERA guy and if he gets 55-60 save chances, he'll save you 40 games.

It's not about the guy's underlying ability. It's the fact that you can save 40 games while pitching poorly. You don't have to pitch well, at all, to accrue a lot of saves. No need to over-complicate this.



To suggest that a replacement level pitcher can be successful in the most pressure packed situation is beyond me. We have seen it time and time again where a pitcher with good stuff has failed in that capacity. Its easy to say "well Jordan Smith can close games" but the reality is its an entire different animal doing that.

Except for the fact that is has happened many times. Pitchers have saved a lot of games while not doing a good job of pitching. If all you care about is a guy who can protect a lead 70% of the time or more, put any major league pitcher in the closer role, give him enough save opportunities to let random variation work itself out (no 3 of 5s) and look at his save rate.

Care to point out a good pitcher (not just one with good stuff, but one who belongs in the majors) who has failed in the closer role when given a decent opportunity to save games? A high profile blow-up or two happens to everybody, even the very best closers. But there's a survivor bias in play here. Guys who have that blow-up or two occur early often aren't given the chance to save more games. Show me a pitcher who saved less than 70% of his chances in 20+ chances and I'll show you a guy who probably doesn't deserve to pitch in the majors in any capacity.



Do any of you get nervous when Cordero takes the mound to close a game? You start to pace around, you change the channel, you sit up in you seat? If you have nervous tendencies, why do you think players don't as well?

Yes, I get nervous when Cordero takes the mound. But it has nothing to do with his ability to "close" games. It's because his control sucks and he puts an average of 1.5 guys on base per inning. Do you think middle relievers don't get nervous? I know I get nervous when Jordan Smith comes in in the 7th inning with a man on second in a tie game.

I won't disagree that pitching in the 9th inning caries a little bit more stress. But as much as we can play amateur sports psychologist, the data simply don't bear this out. Two basic realities:

Relief pitchers pitch essentially the same in the 9th inning as they do in other innings (assuming they've pitched enough innings for the samples to be relevant)
You don't have to pitch well to save games -- you just have to allow fewer runs than your team is ahead by -- often 2 or 3 runs. Do you really think it's particularly tough to not allow 2 or 3 runs in an inning just because it's the last one?


The Reds had a Jordan Smith as a closer for a few years recently. His name was David Weathers. He was a mediocre relief pitcher without impressive stuff and next to no experience as a closer before he took the role in Cincinnati. From a save conversion perspective, he was just fine.

Did Danny Graves go from a guy who had special mental toughness in 2004 (41 saves) to one who just didn't have what it takes in 2005? Oh wait, he still saved 10/12 in 2005 despite his 7.36 ERA and 2.29 WHIP. He stunk so much as a pitcher that we gave him away in the same season he converted 83% of his save chances.

In terms of what it takes performance wise, saving games isn't hard. You can suck as a pitcher and still save a lot of games. The tough part is inspiring enough confidence in your manager such that you are given a lot of save chances in the first place.

Far East
09-22-2010, 02:57 PM
It absolutely did matter that the runner advanced from 2nd to 3rd...

Didn't the announcers say and the replay show that nobody was covering third base anyway and that it mattered little or not at all whether Cordero picked up Bruce's rolling errant throw?

edabbs44
09-22-2010, 03:03 PM
Care to point out a good pitcher (not just one with good stuff, but one who belongs in the majors) who has failed in the closer role when given a decent opportunity to save games?

I guess it would depend on the definition of fail.

Arthur Rhodes blew 5 saves in 14 opportunities in Oakland in 2004, then was removed for Dotel. Small sample size, but definitely not a good run as closer. I don't think you'll ever get a large sample size of a failing closer, since they'd be removed from the role before the sample size got large enough.

edabbs44
09-22-2010, 03:04 PM
Didn't the announcers say and the replay show that nobody was covering third base anyway and that it mattered little or not at all whether Cordero picked up Bruce's rolling errant throw?

The run doesn't score if he picks it up and it remains 2nd and 3rd in a 4-2 game.

RedsManRick
09-22-2010, 04:02 PM
I guess it would depend on the definition of fail.

Arthur Rhodes blew 5 saves in 14 opportunities in Oakland in 2004, then was removed for Dotel. Small sample size, but definitely not a good run as closer. I don't think you'll ever get a large sample size of a failing closer, since they'd be removed from the role before the sample size got large enough.

He had a 5.12 ERA and 1.733 ERA that year. He clearly didn't pitch well. But this is pretty much my point. Even in a small sample where a guy was sub-replacement performance wise, he still converted 64% of his save opportunities.

But the initial post in this vein was more about how counting stats can be very misleading. Even at that horrible 64% conversion rate, a full-time closer would save 30+ games. Like RBI, the conversion rates between great players and replacement level ones are such that opportunity plays a larger role in your raw total than does actual performance.

That's really my point -- when discussing how good a guy is, counting stats aren't terribly informative of performance quality. We intuitively compare counting stats to the count to 0 and not to the count that would have been accrued by a lesser player given the same chances. And even when we try to account for opportunity & context, we often do so poorly. (e.g. comparing guys' PA totals when examining RBI, instead of base-runners)

IslandRed
09-22-2010, 04:26 PM
He had a 5.12 ERA and 1.733 ERA that year. He clearly didn't pitch well. But this is pretty much my point. Even in a small sample where a guy was sub-replacement performance wise, he still converted 64% of his save opportunities.

From my experience, the save percentage threshold is somewhere around 80%. Above that line, teams can talk themselves into saying "well, he usually gets the job done" even if the guy isn't pitching worth much of anything. Below that line, it doesn't really matter how a guy's peripherals indicate he's pitched, the accumulated failures speak louder.

To add useless information to the discussion: At the time Rhodes was demoted from closer, his numbers weren't that bad. His peripherals in those 14 save situations were actually decent (13.2 IP, 17 K, 4 BB, 2 HR, a FIP ERA of 3.49 if my calculations are right). And he was playing on the team that invented the notion of, it doesn't matter who the closer is as long as he's a decent pitcher. Yet he got bumped anyway.

bucksfan2
09-22-2010, 04:29 PM
He had a 5.12 ERA and 1.733 ERA that year. He clearly didn't pitch well. But this is pretty much my point. Even in a small sample where a guy was sub-replacement performance wise, he still converted 64% of his save opportunities.

But the initial post in this vein was more about how counting stats can be very misleading. Even at that horrible 64% conversion rate, a full-time closer would save 30+ games. Like RBI, the conversion rates between great players and replacement level ones are such that opportunity plays a larger role in your raw total than does actual performance.

That's really my point -- when discussing how good a guy is, counting stats aren't terribly informative of performance quality. We intuitively compare counting stats to the count to 0 and not to the count that would have been accrued by a lesser player given the same chances. And even when we try to account for opportunity & context, we often do so poorly. (e.g. comparing guys' PA totals when examining RBI, instead of base-runners)

64% is a lot different from the 80% that was mentioned earlier in this thread. I also think it speaks to the fact that a pitcher can fail in a closers role but be very successful at another role.

Sea Ray
09-22-2010, 04:37 PM
Yeah, the Reds will live or die with Cordero in the playoffs. I just don't see Dusty changing at this late date.

It will be an interesting time, that's for sure. Buckle up.

I agree with you which begs the question:

If Cordero blows a game in the playoffs, does the blame rest on Dusty since he's had all season to address it and he refuses to?

I say yes. Dusty has made no attempt to use others in the closer's role even though he should know that Cordero is not getting the job done.

edabbs44
09-22-2010, 04:37 PM
CJ Wilson is another guy who wasn't a great closer but pitched better in other situations.

Will M
09-22-2010, 06:59 PM
I agree with you which begs the question:

If Cordero blows a game in the playoffs, does the blame rest on Dusty since he's had all season to address it and he refuses to?

I say yes. Dusty has made no attempt to use others in the closer's role even though he should know that Cordero is not getting the job done.

my fear is we get outdueled in game #1. then in game #2 Coco blows it.

I think that if Cordero blows up in the postseason that the fault is not just on Dusty but on Bob, Walt & Dusty. Bob/Walt wouldn't add another arm or didn't see the glaring need to. Yet many many people argued at the deadline that another 8th/9th inning arm was needed. Cordero's problems have been a season long issue. If Bob/Walt wouldn't add another arm Dusty should have tried Rhodes and/or Maset in the 9th.