Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Why do we have Miguel Cairo if "utility infielder" is suddenly such a big priority for Walt? Also, Todd Frazier could certainly be a "utility infielder" (and LF'er) as well.
Unless Walt is talking about going after someone who can legitimately challenge Cozart for the starting SS job, then I see nothing wrong with Cairo and Frazier being the UTL guys. Don't get me wrong, if Walt can find a good backup SS on the cheap, I'm all for it, but good luck with all that. I think without question the top-two priorities right now should be LF and closer. However, I also agree that Walt could wait it out in terms of signing a closer because it looks like the Reds will eventually find a bargain.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Blitz Dorsey
Why do we have Miguel Cairo if "utility infielder" is suddenly such a big priority for Walt? Also, Todd Frazier could certainly be a "utility infielder" (and LF'er) as well.
Unless Walt is talking about going after someone who can legitimately challenge Cozart for the starting SS job, then I see nothing wrong with Cairo and Frazier being the UTL guys. Don't get me wrong, if Walt can find a good backup SS on the cheap, I'm all for it, but good luck with all that. I think without question the top-two priorities right now should be LF and closer. However, I also agree that Walt could wait it out in terms of signing a closer because it looks like the Reds will eventually find a bargain.
I don't think the Reds see Frazier as an acceptable backup at SS. We know Cairo isn't. So yeah, he's looking for a guy who can come in and play some SS without being completely useless at the plate. I'm guessing he's targeting Ronny Cedeno.
Unfortunately for Fraizer, his roster spot is either Cairo's or Fransisco's at this point.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedsManRick
It was 1.02. But a lot of that was a .214 BABIP. Give him a .280 BABIP instead (he's at .290 for his career) and it would have been 1.25. That's still not bad, but not nearly as impressive. 1.30 is a reasonable projection for next year, with the BABIP regression and some BB/9 regression as well.
Seemed like he was pitching ahead in the count quite a bit more last year. Again, this may be something that is more severe when you only face a pitcher once per night.
If a starter doesn't have his best stuff, you sometimes get the sense early on when a couple of balls are stung even if they go for outs. So with a starter, even if he's around the plate and getting ahead in the count, eventually an opponent can break through and string a few hits together.
If you get that "feeling" against Cordero, it's too late. And there's as good of a chance as not that the next time he's called upon, he'll have his stuff back.
Of course all these reasons I'm stating why Cordero can continue his success next year could just as easily be applied to whomever is considered the closer next year. Basically you're put in a position where it's difficult for the other team to succeed, so as long as you do the basic things necessary to enhance your success, you'll probably have a great deal of success.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
I flip-flop back and forth.
The Reds' budget has little fat in it and paying Madson big $$$ probably takes away money for LF. And the Reds have a spotty offense. They need more consistency.
But then I remember 1990 when the Reds' played a 6 inning game because if they had a lead after 6, it was pretty well money in the bank. Quality starts and a nails bullpen is a winning strategy. I liked that.
I'd squeeze Madson for a while, but in the end, I'd pay him the bucks. Cordero won't do as a closer. He was too much of a high-wire act last year and I don't want to be around when he falls.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
After reviewing Lidge's statistics over the last 6 years and noticing he has not once had a BB/9 under 4, I am not sure I would want him over Cordero. David Aardsma has the same concerns since he has never in his entire career had a BB/9 under 4.
I am starting to think getting Cordero back is not such a horrible idea. I would obviously prefer Madson on a one-year deal, but if he has offers out there for 3 years at market price, I doubt that he will accept a one year deal. Cordero will definitely be cheaper in 2012 and could sign for just one year.
After seeing the Reds' obligations in 2013, I am not sure there is room for Madson.
Cordero and Luke Scott may be a decent way for Walt to finish with free agency.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Andrew Bailey has been dealt to the Red Sox, eliminating a possible suitor for Madson.
If Walt is smart he might be able to land Madson for a bargain basement price.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Roy Tucker
I flip-flop back and forth.
The Reds' budget has little fat in it and paying Madson big $$$ probably takes away money for LF. And the Reds have a spotty offense. They need more consistency.
But then I remember 1990 when the Reds' played a 6 inning game because if they had a lead after 6, it was pretty well money in the bank. Quality starts and a nails bullpen is a winning strategy. I liked that.
I'd squeeze Madson for a while, but in the end, I'd pay him the bucks. Cordero won't do as a closer. He was too much of a high-wire act last year and I don't want to be around when he falls.
I think you're thinking of 2010. Last year Cordero was pretty much nails all season. He had 26 3 up 3 down innings and 15 more when the runner never got past 1st.
No indication if he'll continue it, but OHNO CO CO was definitely a bigger problem in 2010 than in 2011.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Good front offices and ownerships don't pass up the opportunity to be a serious contender because a lot of salary is scheduled in two years.
If Madson can be had for less than ten million the Reds should sign him for two years, three if necessary. They will have to swell the payroll for a year or two, or find a way to dump a salary, or whatever.
What is the end game here? When will the Reds be better situated to win if not this year?
Now is the time. Otherwise, the Reds are a perpetual outlier, thinking small.
Madson gives them a real good staff. If not, go for offense and get a real cleanup hitter so there is Votto, cleanup man, Bruce and Rolen in the middle with Phillips leading off.
No more half way measures I say. I hope.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Operator
Andrew Bailey has been dealt to the Red Sox, eliminating a possible suitor for Madson.
If Walt is smart he might be able to land Madson for a bargain basement price.
Bailey to the BoSox definitely helps. Now it will be interesting to see what irection the Halos go. They seem to be the last team with a serious closing need other than us.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
corkedbat
Bailey to the BoSox definitely helps. Now it will be interesting to see what irection the Halos go. They seem to be the last team with a serious closing need other than us.
Somebody call the Angels and tell them what a good year Coco had.
Don't mention the Brewer series before the ASB.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
corkedbat
Bailey to the BoSox definitely helps. Now it will be interesting to see what irection the Halos go. They seem to be the last team with a serious closing need other than us.
Halos are pretty content with Walden as closer. They are looking for a setup guy more than a closer. Not sure that's appealing to Madson.
Rangers might be interested, but not sure how much. Reds are really Madson's only clean option to close for a contender.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
757690
Halos are pretty content with Walden as closer. They are looking for a setup guy more than a closer. Not sure that's appealing to Madson.
Rangers might be interested, but not sure how much. Reds are really Madson's only clean option to close for a contender.
That's definitely a nice chip to have, particularly if Walt is trying to go the short contract route.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
I'd love a 1 or 2 year deal for Madsen, so we can figure out our payroll situation in '13 and '14.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
http://www.csnphilly.com/blog/philli...880&feedID=693
Quote:
At this point, it’s almost illogical for the Reds not to sign Madson, who might be available for terms as low as three years, $22-24 million. That seemed unthinkable as the off-season began, but circumstances have changed. Madson was the second-best free agent closer this winter, but an incredibly deep class of closers turned him into the de facto bargain of the off-season.
Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?
Quote:
At this point, it’s almost illogical for the Reds not to sign Madson, who might be available for terms as low as three years, $22-24 million. That seemed unthinkable as the off-season began, but circumstances have changed. Madson was the second-best free agent closer this winter, but an incredibly deep class of closers turned him into the de facto bargain of the off-season.
And if Madson can be had for that price, we need to jump on it. I can live with Heisey and a reclamation project in LF if we are able to land Madson.