Turn Off Ads?
Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 150

Thread: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

  1. #61
    Brett William Moore Will M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Crescent Springs KY
    Posts
    3,595

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    at that price the Reds could get Madson and still have some cash for LF. I think they still have ~$10M in the budget.
    .

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #62
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,132

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Why not go out and sign two of Lidge, Madson, or Cordero?

    I realize that there are some holes to fill in the roster, but building a lock down pen would be a nice asset to have. You have good starting staff and a great pen it makes the LF hole a little easier to swallow.

  4. #63
    Member Sabo Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    845

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD View Post
    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.
    Agreed, though I think 3 and $24 might be a little too much of a discount right now. Start with that, but I'd be willing to go 3/$27 million if necessary. Front load that deal so you're not in a pinch in years 2 and 3 payroll-wise. Madson and Marshall would be quite the tandem at the end of games. Toss in Bray and hopefully a bounce-back year from Masset and that's quite the bullpen.
    "It's still a long way to the top if we want to rock'n'roll, but at least they dumped the tuba player."
    --M2

  5. #64
    High five! nate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    6,976

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by bucksfan2 View Post
    Why not go out and sign two of Lidge, Madson, or Cordero?
    Madson, absolutely.

    Lidge, maybe.

    Cordero, no.
    "Bring on Rod Stupid!"

  6. #65
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,932

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by nate View Post
    Madson, absolutely.

    Lidge, maybe.

    Cordero, no.
    I am not going to complain if Lidge is brought in here.. (unless the salary is crazy).. However, I think we need to pay the premium for certainty here.
    That's what made Marshall such a great trade.

    We need someone that will most likely be better than Masset/Arrondo/Logan O.

    Of those three, I really only think Madson fits the bill. Of course, it's no sure thing.. the trio of current Reds above might all implode next year.

    Honestly, if Madson is brought in, I don't know if it would be wise to bring in Lidge or Cordero.. that would probably bump someone that can't be sent to the minors and I'm not sure it would be an upgrade.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  7. #66
    Two-Time Batting Champ Edd Roush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Loveland, OH
    Posts
    3,038

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Wow, if I could get Madson on a 3 year- $22-24 million dollar deal, I would be pumped!

    Madson is much better than Lidge or Cordero. Seeing Lidge's BB numbers, I am not sure I would want him as a consolation prize. I would only want Cordero if we can't get Madson.

    I believe we had about $15 million before the Marshall trade and his $3M dollar salary brings us down to $12. If we could get Madson for $8M and Scott for $4M or less, I think we would generally be set.

    I know Walt said that he wants a utility infielder, but I don't see Cedeno/Theriot's value over a Janish. I know I wouldn't pay the difference. I would get Scott and Madson today at those prices and then start scourging for re-clamation projects on minor league invites. I do want an Aaron Cook type to sign a minor league contract for depth when one of our starters gets hurt.

  8. #67
    Start the Reactor! *BaseClogger*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Midland, MI
    Posts
    6,414

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by Edd Roush View Post
    Wow, if I could get Madson on a 3 year- $22-24 million dollar deal, I would be pumped!

    Madson is much better than Lidge or Cordero. Seeing Lidge's BB numbers, I am not sure I would want him as a consolation prize. I would only want Cordero if we can't get Madson.

    I believe we had about $15 million before the Marshall trade and his $3M dollar salary brings us down to $12. If we could get Madson for $8M and Scott for $4M or less, I think we would generally be set.

    I know Walt said that he wants a utility infielder, but I don't see Cedeno/Theriot's value over a Janish. I know I wouldn't pay the difference. I would get Scott and Madson today at those prices and then start scourging for re-clamation projects on minor league invites. I do want an Aaron Cook type to sign a minor league contract for depth when one of our starters gets hurt.
    I'm with you--throw $10M at Madson.

    I would be surprised if Luke Scott gets $4M. I think $2M should do it.

    I agree that we're set with the infielders. Janish/Cairo/Frazier are capable utility infielders...
    "On-base percentage is great if you can score runs and do something with that on-base percentage," Baker said. "Clogging up the bases isn't that great to me."

  9. #68
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    10,049

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Good article explaining the situation by Eric Seldman at Fangraphs

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index...the-offseason/

    At this point, it would be prudent for he and Boras to regroup and potentially accept a lucrative one-year deal, instead of settling for three years and $21 million if they both think a 4/$40 could be signed next season
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  10. #69
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    10,049

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/mlb/s...land-cj-wilson

    Pujols agreed to a backloaded deal -- taking significantly less money in the first two years -- to aid the Angels in their pursuit of free agent pitcher C.J. Wilson, baseball sources told ESPN.com. Pujols will make a base salary of $12 million in 2012 and $16 million in 2013, said a source. His salary will gradually increase until it surpasses $30 million annually near the end of the deal. By agreeing to take less money up front, Pujols helped the Angels sign Wilson, who reached agreement on a five-year, $77.5 million deal three weeks ago.
    If this is true, I would have to imagine that the Angels do not have as much payflex to sign Madson as thought.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  11. #70
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Lexington
    Posts
    5,755

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Good article explaining the situation by Eric Seldman at Fangraphs

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index...the-offseason/
    I might give Madson 3/$30M if its a little backloaded and there is no no trade clause (or only a limited one). Maybe $8M the first year, $10M the second & $12M the third with the ability to trade his third year if advantageous to the Reds. Could end up being 2 yrs @ $9M per and a prospect or two at the end.
    Last edited by corkedbat; 12-30-2011 at 03:48 AM.

  12. #71
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,730

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    I year at $8 Million with a mutual option for a second year at $8 Million or a $2 Million buy-out if the Reds decline. The Reds can afford Madson at $8 Million this year and could probably deal off Masset to make enough $ room for a LF.

    The option favors both sides. If Madson is great, he can opt out and go back on the market after the year and the Reds get a one year bargain for $8 Million. If Madson goes south and the Reds opt out, Madson is still effectively getting $10 Million for 1 year and the Reds aren't on the hook in 2013. Probably the least likely thing that would happen would be Madson actually pitching for the Reds in 2013, but the Reds would have a leg up on him if they want to keep him.

    Relievers are unreliable. I don't want the Reds to be on the hook into the future for more than $4 or $5 Million per year to any reliever. Adding one like Madson on a one year deal when the budget permits is ok, but locking in isn't a good idea IMO.
    "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

  13. #72
    Two-Time Batting Champ Edd Roush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Loveland, OH
    Posts
    3,038

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/mlb/s...land-cj-wilson



    If this is true, I would have to imagine that the Angels do not have as much payflex to sign Madson as thought.
    Great catch, 757690. I really hope we land Madson. I really think he helps the Reds win a couple more games in 2012. Madson and Marshall take this from an average pen to a pretty good bullpen. If we are all about this window, I would still want to leave Chapman in the bullpen so the Reds have three high leverage arms to use. Rotational depth could be acquired through Aaron Cook and maybe even a Paul Maholm/Joe Saunders type, if they were to agree to start in AAA for a chance to be on a playoff club.

  14. #73
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    13,299

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    I year at $8 Million with a mutual option for a second year at $8 Million or a $2 Million buy-out if the Reds decline. The Reds can afford Madson at $8 Million this year and could probably deal off Masset to make enough $ room for a LF.

    The option favors both sides. If Madson is great, he can opt out and go back on the market after the year and the Reds get a one year bargain for $8 Million. If Madson goes south and the Reds opt out, Madson is still effectively getting $10 Million for 1 year and the Reds aren't on the hook in 2013. Probably the least likely thing that would happen would be Madson actually pitching for the Reds in 2013, but the Reds would have a leg up on him if they want to keep him.

    Relievers are unreliable. I don't want the Reds to be on the hook into the future for more than $4 or $5 Million per year to any reliever. Adding one like Madson on a one year deal when the budget permits is ok, but locking in isn't a good idea IMO.
    I would want a two year deal with Madson. I would readily agree to three, if pushed.

    A two year window gives the Reds more opportunity to win. 2012 could turn out to be injury plagued. Or some other Central team could get hot. I prefer to have Madson for more than one cycle.

    Marshall is signed for one year. Don't want to have to re-make the bullpen every single season.

    Madson is good. I want him in the bullpen for longer than one season.
    Last edited by Kc61; 12-30-2011 at 09:54 AM.

  15. #74
    Viva la Rolen kaldaniels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,895

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    I'm wondering if the Phillies could be lurking around in the Madson hunt (1 yr deal).

  16. #75
    Two-Time Batting Champ Edd Roush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Loveland, OH
    Posts
    3,038

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by kaldaniels View Post
    I'm wondering if the Phillies could be lurking around in the Madson hunt (1 yr deal).
    They could still want him, and he could want to play for a team who is a near-lock for the playoffs next year, but if he really wants to close, he should see Papelbon and his money and realize that he has a low probability of racking up saves.

    After seeing that the Halos may finally be tight on money and the fact that the Rangers have already signed Joe Nathan, I really like the Reds' chances to land Madson. However, this all comes down to Walt's willingness to spend the majority of the rest of his unspent budget on a closer. I think Madson does the most to improve this team seeing what the holes are on this roster and what is available in free agency, but he has the World Series ring, and I assuredly, do not have one.


Turn Off Ads?

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