Turn Off Ads?
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 43 of 43

Thread: Cordero for Lidge?

  1. #31
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,658

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    A little better?

    Massest throws gas and strikes out many.

    Franklin pitches to contact and relies upon luck. There's a reason his xFIP is always in the 4's.
    xFIP for relievers is troublesome because often relievers have HR/FB% lower than 10%. Franklin has a HR/FB% that is dramatically different from his career (so perhaps he might need to be adjusted as you suggest). However, he has also dramatically changed his repertoire this season which might explain some of it.

    Also, Masset is having a career year in almost every category and he's likely to regress next season (though he's also dramatically changed his repertoire too... so maybe not). In '09 Massett has been basically Franklin (similar repertoire) with better velocity (so as you suggest '09 Masset smokes '09 Franklin).

    All of that said, regardless of how much better Massett is than Franklin, the bigger question is still valid-he's better and the Reds picked him up as a castaway.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #32
    SSG, Red Army Choir Guacarock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Santa Fe, New Mexico
    Posts
    1,141

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    Cordero for Lidge doesn't make much sense. We get little in the way of salary relief, and we get back a closer who looks battered and frazzled.

    A better deal: Cordero and a top prospect to the Angels for Fuentes and Izturis. Fuentes also is having a rough year, with more blown saves than usual, some injury problems early on, and notable signs of fatigue lately. But he still has collected 44 saves and his $9 million salary gives us more relief than picking up Lidge, who carries an $11 million pricetag. Also, being a southpaw, Fuentes would be the ideal complement to emerging ace set-up man Masset.

    If the Angels add the switch-hitting Izturis to the mix, we get our desired upgrade at SS, plus Izturis is just perfect to hit No. 2, where the Duster seems to want his shortstops slotted. We would probably have to pay Izturis $2-$3 million next year, but the differential between Cordero and Fuentes' salaries would cover that.

    This deal makes sense for both teams. The Angels are always contenders, and have to be a little frustated with Fuentes' inconsistencies this season. Cordero looks to be the more airtight closer.

    As for us, I'll take Fuentes' ups-and-downs if we solve our SS problem. The Angels can afford to shed Izturis because they are well covered in the infield with Kendrick at 2B, Aybar at ss, Figgins at 3B, and Wood emerging and vying for a position. Izturis could be the one squeezed out, so why not see if we can grab him -- although the Angels are admittedly difficult trading partners. Maybe if Fuentes blows 2-3 key playoff games, they might be more receptive to a hot stove deal.

  4. #33
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,730

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guacarock View Post
    Cordero for Lidge doesn't make much sense. We get little in the way of salary relief, and we get back a closer who looks battered and frazzled.

    A better deal: Cordero and a top prospect to the Angels for Fuentes and Izturis. Fuentes also is having a rough year, with more blown saves than usual, some injury problems early on, and notable signs of fatigue lately. But he still has collected 44 saves and his $9 million salary gives us more relief than picking up Lidge, who carries an $11 million pricetag. Also, being a southpaw, Fuentes would be the ideal complement to emerging ace set-up man Masset.

    If the Angels add the switch-hitting Izturis to the mix, we get our desired upgrade at SS, plus Izturis is just perfect to hit No. 2, where the Duster seems to want his shortstops slotted. We would probably have to pay Izturis $2-$3 million next year, but the differential between Cordero and Fuentes' salaries would cover that.

    This deal makes sense for both teams. The Angels are always contenders, and have to be a little frustated with Fuentes' inconsistencies this season. Cordero looks to be the more airtight closer.

    As for us, I'll take Fuentes' ups-and-downs if we solve our SS problem. The Angels can afford to shed Izturis because they are well covered in the infield with Kendrick at 2B, Aybar at ss, Figgins at 3B, and Wood emerging and vying for a position. Izturis could be the one squeezed out, so why not see if we can grab him -- although the Angels are admittedly difficult trading partners. Maybe if Fuentes blows 2-3 key playoff games, they might be more receptive to a hot stove deal.
    Makes tons of sense. Sign me up.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

    Having better players makes "the right time" or "the big hit" happen a lot more often. PLUS PLUS

  5. #34
    Socratic Gadfly TheNext44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,228

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guacarock View Post
    Cordero for Lidge doesn't make much sense. We get little in the way of salary relief, and we get back a closer who looks battered and frazzled.

    A better deal: Cordero and a top prospect to the Angels for Fuentes and Izturis. Fuentes also is having a rough year, with more blown saves than usual, some injury problems early on, and notable signs of fatigue lately. But he still has collected 44 saves and his $9 million salary gives us more relief than picking up Lidge, who carries an $11 million pricetag. Also, being a southpaw, Fuentes would be the ideal complement to emerging ace set-up man Masset.

    If the Angels add the switch-hitting Izturis to the mix, we get our desired upgrade at SS, plus Izturis is just perfect to hit No. 2, where the Duster seems to want his shortstops slotted. We would probably have to pay Izturis $2-$3 million next year, but the differential between Cordero and Fuentes' salaries would cover that.

    This deal makes sense for both teams. The Angels are always contenders, and have to be a little frustated with Fuentes' inconsistencies this season. Cordero looks to be the more airtight closer.

    As for us, I'll take Fuentes' ups-and-downs if we solve our SS problem. The Angels can afford to shed Izturis because they are well covered in the infield with Kendrick at 2B, Aybar at ss, Figgins at 3B, and Wood emerging and vying for a position. Izturis could be the one squeezed out, so why not see if we can grab him -- although the Angels are admittedly difficult trading partners. Maybe if Fuentes blows 2-3 key playoff games, they might be more receptive to a hot stove deal.
    A much better idea. I hope the Angels think so too.
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein

  6. #35
    SSG, Red Army Choir Guacarock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Santa Fe, New Mexico
    Posts
    1,141

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guacarock View Post
    Cordero for Lidge doesn't make much sense. We get little in the way of salary relief, and we get back a closer who looks battered and frazzled.

    A better deal: Cordero and a top prospect to the Angels for Fuentes and Izturis. Fuentes also is having a rough year, with more blown saves than usual, some injury problems early on, and notable signs of fatigue lately. But he still has collected 44 saves and his $9 million salary gives us more relief than picking up Lidge, who carries an $11 million pricetag. Also, being a southpaw, Fuentes would be the ideal complement to emerging ace set-up man Masset.

    If the Angels add the switch-hitting Izturis to the mix, we get our desired upgrade at SS, plus Izturis is just perfect to hit No. 2, where the Duster seems to want his shortstops slotted. We would probably have to pay Izturis $2-$3 million next year, but the differential between Cordero and Fuentes' salaries would cover that.

    This deal makes sense for both teams. The Angels are always contenders, and have to be a little frustated with Fuentes' inconsistencies this season. Cordero looks to be the more airtight closer.

    As for us, I'll take Fuentes' ups-and-downs if we solve our SS problem. The Angels can afford to shed Izturis because they are well covered in the infield with Kendrick at 2B, Aybar at ss, Figgins at 3B, and Wood emerging and vying for a position. Izturis could be the one squeezed out, so why not see if we can grab him -- although the Angels are admittedly difficult trading partners. Maybe if Fuentes blows 2-3 key playoff games, they might be more receptive to a hot stove deal.
    Press reports are beginning to surface indicating that the Angels are targeting an upgrade from Fuentes as one of their off-season priorities. Time to strike while the iron is hot. We should offer Cordero for Fuentes and Izturis, adding a decent prospect or two to even out the deal and entice the Angels. We're somewhat bereft in the middle infield (unless they want Frazier, Janish or Valaika), but we do seem to have a glut of good, up-and-coming outfielders and relievers.

    Looking over this year's thin crop of free-agent shortstops and the few available shortstop trade candidates (like Hardy or Drew), Izturis stands out as the best possible fit for the Reds. He's got glove, speed and OBP, sufficient OBP, in fact, to lead off and allow us to bat Stubbs second where his power might come more into play, along with his speed.

    Izturis is eligible for an arbitration-set raise, and will no doubt command north of $2 million in 2010, but Hardy and Drew are already paid far more, along with the top free-agents like Scutaro, Cabrera or Tejada. We should be able to budget for him, using our savings from shedding Cordero (due $12 million in 2010) for Fuentes (due $9 million).

    Am I worried that we're weakening our bullpen? Yes and no. In an ideal world, I would take Cordero as my closer over Fuentes most days, but we don't live in an ideal world. We are a small-market team that needs to upgrade at SS, and it's quite possible we don't have the resources to do so unless we trim a big contract.

    I'd rather trim Cordero's contract than Harang's or Arroyo at this juncture. We lack a welter of starting pitchers to replace Harang and Arroyo, but we do have a handful of potential closer candidates (Masset, Burton, Bray) already on the roster and a few others (Ondrusek, Del Rosario) knocking on the doors. We also have Rhodes under contract, and while he can't pitch everyday, he's good as gold when he does.

    The only big knock I can see on Izturis? He can declare for free-agency in 2011. So we might enjoy one year of his wizardry, and then have to either really pay for it or else downsize our expectations and start grooming his replacement. We're already grooming his replacement - Todd Cozart -- and he's looking good in the Arizona Fall League. At the same time, Todd won't be ready for 2010, but maybe 2011. Bingo!

  7. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Bedford, KY
    Posts
    8,992

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    Wood/ Izturis and Fuentes for Cordero and Francisco?

    While a lot to pay, I'd do it.

    I don't think the Angels would do anything less than that.
    "You can learn little from victory. You can learn everything from defeat."
    -- Christy Matthewson
    "Show me a good loser and I'll show you an idiot."
    -- Leo Durocher

  8. #37
    SSG, Red Army Choir Guacarock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Santa Fe, New Mexico
    Posts
    1,141

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    Wood/ Izturis and Fuentes for Cordero and Francisco?

    While a lot to pay, I'd do it.

    I don't think the Angels would do anything less than that.
    Too much to surrender for Wood. After three years of partial service in the majors, his batting average is still hovering below the Mendoza Line. Ouch!

    But for Izturis, I'd probably reluctantly part with Francisco, although I'd drag out the discussions and see if we could entice the Halos through some combination of lesser prospects. No doubt about it, Izturis would be a major upgrade for us at SS. But if he's going to declare for free agency in 2011, we have to be careful not to overpay for a one-year rental.

  9. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Williamsport, PA
    Posts
    12,362

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    After the season Cordero had, I can't imagine trading him for Lidge. Are you guys that serious?
    If you think small, you'll go nowhere in life.

  10. #39
    Brett William Moore Will M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Crescent Springs KY
    Posts
    3,595

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    I argued a few months ago that Cordero was a good acquisition for the Angels. I do believe that he still would be. Cordero for Itzuris & Fuentes seems a fair trade for both teams.
    .

  11. #40
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,132

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    I just don't see the Angles trading for, or signing a high dollar reliever.

    It sure would be a serious mea culpa after they let one of the best in the game, K Rod, walk over the last off season.

    I also think their main priority over the off season is to sign John Lackey. Lackey is in line to get paid this off season and I don't see the Halos letting him walk.

  12. #41
    SSG, Red Army Choir Guacarock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Santa Fe, New Mexico
    Posts
    1,141

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    Quote Originally Posted by bucksfan2 View Post
    I just don't see the Angles trading for, or signing a high dollar reliever.

    It sure would be a serious mea culpa after they let one of the best in the game, K Rod, walk over the last off season.

    I also think their main priority over the off season is to sign John Lackey. Lackey is in line to get paid this off season and I don't see the Halos letting him walk.
    Not according to the Boston Globe's Nick Cafardo. He reported the opposite this weekend, as summarized below by MLBTraderumors.com:

    John Lackey is in line for a big contract this winter, but it doesn't appear that he'll get it from the Angels. The Angels could instead use that money on an upgrade over Brian Fuentes. Cafardo says to look for the Rangers and Mets to show interest.

  13. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,562

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    Quote Originally Posted by bucksfan2 View Post
    I just don't see the Angles trading for, or signing a high dollar reliever.
    If they, at the same time, traded another high cost reliever, it's neutral from that point of view.

  14. #43
    BobC, get a legit F.O.! Mario-Rijo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Ohio
    Posts
    9,052

    Re: Cordero for Lidge?

    Quote Originally Posted by Guacarock View Post
    Too much to surrender for Wood. After three years of partial service in the majors, his batting average is still hovering below the Mendoza Line. Ouch!

    But for Izturis, I'd probably reluctantly part with Francisco, although I'd drag out the discussions and see if we could entice the Halos through some combination of lesser prospects. No doubt about it, Izturis would be a major upgrade for us at SS. But if he's going to declare for free agency in 2011, we have to be careful not to overpay for a one-year rental.
    I'd be inclined to toss in Francisco (and even another B or C prospect say Valaika) if we can also do a Taveras for Willits swap.
    "You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

    --Woody Hayes


Turn Off Ads?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25