PDA

View Full Version : What the Coco and Harang contracts teach us



The Snow Chief
09-12-2010, 08:01 PM
You see it all the time. Pitchers who dominate for a couple years can't get anyone out 2-3 years later. Pitchers, even established pitchers, are such a crap shoot. Small market teams like the Reds cannot afford to give big, multi-year deals to too many of them because of the real risk of injury or ineffectiveness.

I really hope the Reds learn from these signings. If the Reds are going to give a veteran a long-term deal, I would prefer it to be a position player. The performance of position players is so much more dependable. Of course, they need to be smart about those contracts as well.

I like the position the Reds are in with the good young pitching. The pitchers are under team control and their contracts are set on a year-to-year basis. I hope the Reds continue the emphasis on developing their own pitching from within the system. That way, they can shift their long-term free agent deal focus to position players while still getting quality pitching.

757690
09-12-2010, 08:32 PM
Good post. I hope the Reds have learned their lesson.

DocRed
09-12-2010, 08:39 PM
Unfortunately this is unlikely to change when you have teams like the NYY, RedSox and NYM etc. willing to sign pitchers to large long term contracts it puts other teams at a distinct disadvantage.

foxfire123
09-12-2010, 08:53 PM
Make all contract performance based. You don't perform, you don't get paid. As much at least.

Kingspoint
09-12-2010, 08:58 PM
That when you're really bad for a long time you have to spend a lot of money to get someone to play for you.

webbbj
09-13-2010, 12:34 AM
well i would say dont give huge contracts to relief pitchers. just be very careful w/ who you give money to. it would be foolish for us to give a contract to a pitcher like AJ Burnett like the Yankees did. I would just develop w/in hopefully we have an Ace somewhere in the organization right now. if we dont and when the time is right go out and trade for your postseason Ace.

GIDP
09-13-2010, 12:36 AM
Harangs contract wasnt a bad one, he turned bad recently but he was one of the best pitchers in baseball and there was really no signs of him slowing down when he was signed.

Signing a closer to a huge contract when the difference between a terrible one and a good one is so minimal is just a flawed way to run a ball club.

Girevik
09-13-2010, 09:19 AM
Make all contract performance based. You don't perform, you don't get paid. As much at least.

Why would a player sign an incentive contract here when they could go anywhere else and get guaranteed money? If you take that policy then all you'll get is the leftovers. You can't make that a league wide policy without going through the union and that would NEVER happen.

krm1580
09-13-2010, 09:28 AM
The Harang deal, at the time, I thought was pretty good. He was coming of a couple of really good seasons and had no history of injury issues. Throw in the fact he was only 28 at the time and the deal was locking him up for his prime 28-32 years on a team that did not have much pitching and it seemed like the right move for a small market team to make. To this day I am still not sure exactly what happened to him.

The Cordero deal on the other hand I thought was terrible. Coming off a season full of blown saves the Reds mistakenly thought they were 1 closer away from the playoffs and unfortunatley came into a free agent market where there was heavy demand but short supply. As a result the Reds were forced to overpay in salary and of much more significance, in years. 4 years is what made this deal truly awful.

TheBigLebowski
09-13-2010, 09:39 AM
You see it all the time. Pitchers who dominate for a couple years can't get anyone out 2-3 years later. Pitchers, even established pitchers, are such a crap shoot. Small market teams like the Reds cannot afford to give big, multi-year deals to too many of them because of the real risk of injury or ineffectiveness.

I really hope the Reds learn from these signings. If the Reds are going to give a veteran a long-term deal, I would prefer it to be a position player. The performance of position players is so much more dependable. Of course, they need to be smart about those contracts as well.

I like the position the Reds are in with the good young pitching. The pitchers are under team control and their contracts are set on a year-to-year basis. I hope the Reds continue the emphasis on developing their own pitching from within the system. That way, they can shift their long-term free agent deal focus to position players while still getting quality pitching.

Neither the Harang nor Arroyo contracts were mistakes. At the time they were both signed, we got them at or below market value. Unfortunately, while Bronson has continued to earn his money, Harang has not. Perhaps there is something to be said for making investments in guys who, like Arroyo, have the "rubber arms" rather than guys like Harang, whose body types simply don't project well to long-term sustainability. But that's pure hindsight and second-guessing. If you want to win consistently, you have to have good starting pitching. There's just no two ways about it.

However, the Cordero contract is an albatross and an abysmal failure in judgment. Most teams can get by with a league-average closer and, Cordero who, at the time was an elite closer, is a luxury guys like us cannot afford. I'm not just saying this because he's scuffling right now. Good news is, this is a mistake Jocketty will not make again.

Z-Fly
09-13-2010, 11:52 AM
You see it all the time. Pitchers who dominate for a couple years can't get anyone out 2-3 years later. Pitchers, even established pitchers, are such a crap shoot. Small market teams like the Reds cannot afford to give big, multi-year deals to too many of them because of the real risk of injury or ineffectiveness.

I really hope the Reds learn from these signings. If the Reds are going to give a veteran a long-term deal, I would prefer it to be a position player. The performance of position players is so much more dependable. Of course, they need to be smart about those contracts as well.

I like the position the Reds are in with the good young pitching. The pitchers are under team control and their contracts are set on a year-to-year basis. I hope the Reds continue the emphasis on developing their own pitching from within the system. That way, they can shift their long-term free agent deal focus to position players while still getting quality pitching.

See Ken Griffey Jr.

big boy
09-13-2010, 12:17 PM
See Ken Griffey Jr.

See John Smiley, Danny Graves, and Denny Neagle

SidneySlicker
09-13-2010, 01:10 PM
You see it all the time. Pitchers who dominate for a couple years can't get anyone out 2-3 years later. Pitchers, even established pitchers, are such a crap shoot. Small market teams like the Reds cannot afford to give big, multi-year deals to too many of them because of the real risk of injury or ineffectiveness.

I really hope the Reds learn from these signings. If the Reds are going to give a veteran a long-term deal, I would prefer it to be a position player. The performance of position players is so much more dependable. Of course, they need to be smart about those contracts as well.

I like the position the Reds are in with the good young pitching. The pitchers are under team control and their contracts are set on a year-to-year basis. I hope the Reds continue the emphasis on developing their own pitching from within the system. That way, they can shift their long-term free agent deal focus to position players while still getting quality pitching.

First let me state when I speak of pitching, I'm talking starting pitchers not relief pitchers.

Point 1- Yes predicting a pitcher's success over a career is a crapshoot, but it's much less of a crapshoot than predicting a pitcher who's had minor league success only. So to say they shouldn't give bigger contracts out to their own major league pitchers I think is oversimplifying things. Also it's different to give a guy who's pitched on your team in your stadium a larger contract as it is to give a free agent the same contract. With your own players you know everything about them, from their off the field life to the health of the shoulder/arm on an every day basis. With a free agent you are relying on a one time doctors evaluation which can be flawed.

Point 2- While predicting the value/success of a pitcher vrs a position player, I think is far from a slam dunk. There are alot of people in Cleveland who thought Travis Hafner was the next Jim Thome, but that signing has been an obvious failure. There's always gonna be the can't misses such as the Strasburgs, Priors, Heywards, Arods of the world. It's learning and discerning as an organization who on that next level of player is going to be successful. This is because at that next level of player each one has their flaws, and so its a matter of seeing them at the major league level.

Point 3- I think anyone who's been around baseball for any period of time would realize the importance of having a good farm system. Most people would prefer to produce homegrown tallent as opposed to bringing in free agents. The problem is you have to successfully draft and develop players whether that be pitchers or position players. Until the last 4-5 years the Reds have not. Here's where my main question regaurding your theory. If you have a very good pitcher say top 10-15 pitcher in your league, and he's a free agent, are you going to let him go and hope his replacement out of the farm system is ready or are you gonna pay a guy who's proven in the majors and trust/hope he'll stay healthy and motivated? My contention would be that it is something that needs to be decided on a player by player basis. Obviously any prudent small market team is gonna give out contracts only with great thought and considerating you just have to hope that they use logic and great foresight and not impulse in making these decisions. I think Jockety is prior more so than the latter, so I am confident that they will move forward with a good plan, it's just gonna take time.

lidspinner
09-14-2010, 11:02 AM
all i am going to say is I hope someone in Baseball has the guts to stop having a role of closer.....why in the world do we have that role anyhow? Why do you want your closer comming in the 9th inning to face the 7-8-9 batters when in the 7th and 8th you had bases loaded with the 4 hole hitter up and your closer sat in the bullpen because he is saved for the last inning of the games you are winning? Why?

Girevik
09-14-2010, 11:11 AM
I couldn't agree more. I've always been a proponent of putting your best pitcher in when you need him most. If it's against the heart of the lineup in the 8th, then so be it.

You hear a lot about being able to handle the "pressure" of closing. I'm not sure I buy it, but I'd love to see the experiment done.

gmt
09-14-2010, 01:55 PM
Why would a player sign an incentive contract here when they could go anywhere else and get guaranteed money? If you take that policy then all you'll get is the leftovers. You can't make that a league wide policy without going through the union and that would NEVER happen.

The only way to make a contract "performance based" is to limit everyone's contract to a one year deal. It is against players association union to have stats like wins, home runs, strikeouts, etc. as the basis for compensation. You can have games played or innings pitched or plate appearances. Hardly good reasons to bump up someone's salary unless you presume the player is being played more because he is producing good numbers.

Professional baseball players have it made. They have great salaries and a great pension system. Even a player who is on the roster and doesn't play gets some sort of compensation.

Newman4
09-14-2010, 02:06 PM
Here's another possible discussion - How about Brandon Phillips from here on out? Check out his contract numbers.

gmt
09-14-2010, 02:55 PM
Phillips' contract will be interesting. He is due $11 million, a raise of about $4 million from this season. Then a $12 million team option in 2012 with a $1 million buyout. That's a lot of money for the Reds payroll with Votto, Bruce and Cueto due some hefty increases next year. Even Orlando Cabrera is due a $2 million increase if he is re-upped. Add Cordero, Arroyo and Harang all in that $12 million + category and the Reds meager payroll looks to be quite large by recent standards to continue paying for what they already have in addition to minor increases for the rest of the roster.

Anyone want to estimate the Reds payroll for 2011? Anyone in the league want Harang and/or Cordero for $12 million each?

Newman4
09-14-2010, 03:11 PM
I could see Phillips being shopped this winter. $11 million for a sub-.800 OPS player is a little pricey even with the Gold Glove.

malcontent
09-14-2010, 03:58 PM
4 years is what made this deal truly awful.
(Almost) three down. Just one to go.

:)

malcontent
09-14-2010, 04:00 PM
I could see Phillips being shopped this winter. $11 million for a sub-.800 OPS player is a little pricey even with the Gold Glove.
Yep. And the distractions haven't helped his case.

Plus, I'll always wonder whether we'd still have Hamilton if BP hadn't made a stink about all the attention he got.

I wonder what the Reds FO thinks of Valaika.

gmt
09-14-2010, 04:00 PM
The cardinals need a 2nd baseman with a bit more pop in the bat. Think they are interested :)

Realistically, who wants a 2nd baseman for $11 million? That puts Phillips way out of the price range for almost everyone. The Yankees would pay that much, but I don't see them shopping for any middle infielders at this time.

Newman4
09-14-2010, 04:27 PM
The cardinals need a 2nd baseman with a bit more pop in the bat. Think they are interested :)

Realistically, who wants a 2nd baseman for $11 million? That puts Phillips way out of the price range for almost everyone. The Yankees would pay that much, but I don't see them shopping for any middle infielders at this time.

I'm hoping for LA. Ohio native Chad Billingsley would look pretty nice in our rotation. How about Arroyo/BP for Kemp/Billingsley?

gmt
09-14-2010, 05:22 PM
With the money problems the Dodgers are having now, it's unlikely Phillips/Arroyo will spark any interest in Billingsley/Kemp. Although stats-wise it may be a wash, money wise, the Reds pair is multi-millions of dollars ahead of the Dodgers pair.

NastyBoy
09-15-2010, 12:42 AM
Nevers sign a player based on previous performances. I hope to GOD that they do not sign VOTTO to a long term contract after ONLY one good season. They should milk the arbitration train for all its worth and then let him go to Boston or New York in free agency.