View Full Version : Erardi-Trade Chapman

10-01-2011, 12:14 AM

In a new article, John Erardi says that the Reds should not extend Phillips nor Cordero, and trade Chapman.

Good arguments can be made on both sides for extending Phillips or Cordero. However, his argument for trading Chapman is just plain wrong.

And while we’re on the subject of Chapman, what are the chances the Reds are going to get their $30 million worth out of him over the next three years? Not likely.

Really? The Reds are not likely to get $30M of value out of Chapman?

First, they really only signed him to a $25.5M deal, with a $5M player option in 2015. And this assumes that they received no value from him up to this point.

Even if that is true, I think it is easy to imagine Chapman earning $25.5 over the next 3 seasons. That basically would mean that he would be an average starting pitcher over the next three seasons, since it would take around $8M a year to get a league average starting pitcher.

Or from a pure WAR point of view, he needs to average 1.85 WAR over three seasons to earn the whole contract. He actually has earned 1.2 WAR so far according to Fangraphs, so he really only needs to average 1.5 WAR, which is what Homer Bailey did this year.

Why is that not likely? I think it is highly likely, and probable that Chapman will put up numbers similar to what Bailey put up this season, over the next three years. It possible that he doesn't, but the odds are that he will, meaning it's silly to trade him.

Blitz Dorsey
10-01-2011, 12:17 AM
Is there a way to get Erardi as our GM? No? Alright, then I guess I'll hope Walt actually does something this offseason (and by "doing something" I mean improving the club, not vacationing/playing golf).

10-01-2011, 03:51 AM
I agree with Erardi on Cordero, although I wouldn't even sign him at a discount.

I disagree a bit on Phillips. BP has been pretty productive the last few years and I agree he will probably be so for a couple of more years. Again, I wouldn't sign him to another contract, but I would pick up his optionofr two main reasons - they don't have an heir-apparent and he will be playing in 2012 for a contract. If the Reds are truly in contention at the deadline, hold onto him and part ways at the end of the season. If not trade him for a helpful piece.

As for Aroldis? I believe they can get their money's worth and I would definitely try him as a starter, but I'm not sold on him in that role. His strength may turnout to be as a closer.

I toitally agree with trying Homer or EV as a closer (if they aren't in the rotation or dealt).

10-01-2011, 10:14 AM
Letting go of your better players only works if you have the ability and willingness to find, acquire, develop, and effectively use very good replacements from within and outside of your organization. It requires pro-active and smart management with a first rate eye for baseball talent.

It is easy to say that a team shouldn't spend to keep this player or that. But you need a system for replacing those players effectively.

Some teams do that well, like the Rays. Other teams move slowly, generally just drafting players and hoping they all eventually fall into place, such that there is hardly a time when all the good elements come together. Such a team may get worse by letting good players go.

10-01-2011, 10:21 AM
I too have doubts about Chapman. I don't think the notion of trading him for an impact talent is ridiculous. I'd be looking at the Marlins for players like Morrison (plus) or Ramirez. Chapman has a super high ceiling and box office appeal, but his best role is still unestablished.

10-01-2011, 11:23 AM
I don't agree with his reasoning but I agree with the idea of trading Chapman. We have blown apart the Chapman experiment this season by not attempting to stretch him out into a starter. Now we are going to have to go through next season with him possibly switching back to starting, probably on a limited inning count. His value in the trade market may be increased from his true value due to the novelty of his 100 mph fastball fanfare.

If we could get another good young core player that is a pretty great talent like Aroldis, then we should definitely do it.

I agree with not extending Phillips as much as I like the guy.

Roy Tucker
10-01-2011, 12:15 PM
It's an intriguing thought. The shine is slightly off that thunderbolt left arm and I could see a deal on the Volquez for Hamilton level.

Buuuuut I just hate to get rid of an arm like that. Between Cueto, Volquez, Bailey, and Chapman, its the best crop of arms I've ever seen on a Reds staff. Their results on the field have been mixed, but having lived through turd arms like Eric Milton and Joey Hamilton, I'd rather take my chances on the talent we have and do the Chapman-as-a-starter thing next year and see where the chips fall.

10-01-2011, 07:19 PM
Channeling Krusty for a moment, would you do Chapman-Votto for Romero-Batista?

10-01-2011, 07:57 PM
Channeling Krusty for a moment, would you do Chapman-Votto for Romero-Batista?


10-01-2011, 09:11 PM
The part I don't see working is targeting "cheaper and 85% of the production." Why 85%? How do you target that? Does that include offense and defense? For a pitcher, do you measure that by ERA, W/L, saves, holds, K/BB ratio? I just really don't understand the concept and how that is going to translate to success. You have a team with a losing record, and you want 85% of BP cheap? How is that going to increase wins? 85% of Cordero, whatever that means, assumes that less of Cordero cheaper will lead to more wins?

Just a puzzling theory.

10-01-2011, 09:15 PM
I think he makes some good points in the article. Tampa is a good example of making tough choices at the right times when you don't have the cash to compete with the larger markets on a financial level.

Not saying who we should trade or re-sign or whatever. Just saying the Reds can't afford to leave any stone unturned.