Turn Off Ads?
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 150

Thread: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

  1. #106
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,166

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    Then why have discussions with Cordero? And an offer on the table?

    I think it's safe to assume Cordero is Plan A for the Reds. We all hope he refuses the deal, I know. Then, perhaps, Jocketty will turn to Madson as Plan B. But, IMO, the only logical way you can interpret this news is that Cordero is who the Reds are planning to close games.
    Because that is how his agent, like nearly every other agent works. They negotiate over time, so it's important to constantly trade offers.

    But Boras, on then other hand, is a weird dude, with a very weird way of dealing with his clients. He never contacts a team and makes an offer. Instead, he provides each team with a portfolio of each player he is representing, which explains why a team should sign him. No numbers are given or even suggested, just a hard sell job on how special each player is.

    Then he waits. He does nothing, but waits for teams to contact him and say, okay, we want to sign this player, and here is what we want to offer. If that deal is acceptable to Boras, a contract is drawn up and a a deal is finalized usually that day. if it is not acceptable, he doesn't even bother saying no, he just doesn't respond. He'll never tell the team how far they are off, or what type of deal he is looking for. He just waits until he gets a deal he likes.

    This is why his clients are always the last to sign, especially the big ones. He loves using the clock to his advantage, forcing teams to bid blindly against themselves. Right now, no team has made an official offer on Fielder, or Edwin Jackson. In fact, it was reported the other day that Fielder amd Boras took a tour of Camden Yards, but never actually met with Oriole officials. That is how he works.

    So it's no big deal that the Reds or any other team hasn't put in an offer for Madson. They are just playing the waiting game that Boras always plays.
    "I donít know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody".
    óBill Cosby

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #107
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,560

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    The best way to avoid a melt down like last season is to get a guy who can step into the rotation when Bailey gets hurt or one of the others blow up. A rash of 4 inning starts is the primary culprit IMO. Sign a 6th starter and let Arredondo close. Or sign somebody like Chad Qualls and pick somebody in the spring with Lecure as the 6th starter (though Lecure as a guy going through a line-up multiple times is not an option I'm comfortable with).

    I'd rather have the draft pick than Cordero at almost any price. There are lots of other relievers that could be brought in and IMO the difference would be minimal as long as the starters do their job.

    Of course, this all assumes the Reds are commited to Chapman in the rotation. IMO, he's the best choice to close - Madson included.
    "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

  4. #108
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,560

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Because that is how his agent, like nearly every other agent works. They negotiate over time, so it's important to constantly trade offers.

    But Boras, on then other hand, is a weird dude, with a very weird way of dealing with his clients. He never contacts a team and makes an offer. Instead, he provides each team with a portfolio of each player he is representing, which explains why a team should sign him. No numbers are given or even suggested, just a hard sell job on how special each player is.

    Then he waits. He does nothing, but waits for teams to contact him and say, okay, we want to sign this player, and here is what we want to offer. If that deal is acceptable to Boras, a contract is drawn up and a a deal is finalized usually that day. if it is not acceptable, he doesn't even bother saying no, he just doesn't respond. He'll never tell the team how far they are off, or what type of deal he is looking for. He just waits until he gets a deal he likes.

    This is why his clients are always the last to sign, especially the big ones. He loves using the clock to his advantage, forcing teams to bid blindly against themselves. Right now, no team has made an official offer on Fielder, or Edwin Jackson. In fact, it was reported the other day that Fielder amd Boras took a tour of Camden Yards, but never actually met with Oriole officials. That is how he works.

    So it's no big deal that the Reds or any other team hasn't put in an offer for Madson. They are just playing the waiting game that Boras always plays.
    But if they've made an offer to Cordero, what do they do if he accepts? Sign them both and trade Marshall for a LF?

    I'm sure that sounds as crazy as it did when I was typing it. IMO, they won't even consider Madson unless they know if Cordero will turn them down.
    "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. #109
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,355

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    I would prefer relievers who get the three outs a high percentage of the time. And can regularly do so in the late innings. I am unaware of any major league baseball team that throws any reliever out there in any situation because anyone supposedly can get three outs.

    I would much prefer Madson but if it's Cordero on a one year deal, hopefully he pitches as well or better than in 2011. If Coco wants more than one year my guess is he goes elsewhere. I sense the Reds won't go beyond a year with him.

    Coco isn't my first choice but he really takes a beating on this site. Guy was very good and durable for four seasons with the Reds.

    I would be ok with Marshall closing, but still want an additional good bullpen arm to help avoid last season's bullpen meltdown
    Yea, he had ups and downs, last year some passive/aggressively blame him for the entire season because of that awful weekend in Milwaukee over the AS break. Blown saves are frustrating, most teams' fans' hate their closer. The funny thing is that his worst season was 2010 and the Reds went to the playoffs.

    As for Madson not being in the talks, I imagine the offer was made to Cordero because Madson's number is still too high. If they feel the need for one or the other, it doesn't make any sense for them to be left out in the cold on both while they wait for Boras to respond to emails.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  6. #110
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Bedford, KY
    Posts
    8,992

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by RANDY IN INDY View Post
    With that said, better get a bat for LF that can produce some offense.
    They're going to have to do something to counteract the 80-ish% save rate likely to happen out of Cordero. (Though, to be fair, if he only comes in with a blank slate and isn't asked to go high leverage, he may be better than that and out-perform his periphials.

    They should have somewhere between $5-8 million to play with in finding a full-time LF. Quentin looks okay there (though not great). Lee looks intriguing (though not perfect).

    How about a gamble and a blockbuster?

    Kendrys Morales is questionable as to whether he can come back from a broken leg. The Angels, with huge free agent signings and trades for expensive veterans, have little room for him anyway, especially with the signing of Pujols.

    With that in mind, how about:
    Reds trade Devin Mesoraco, Todd Frazier, and a B+ prospect for Morales and Hank Conger?

    The gamble isn't only health. It's no sure thing that Morales can even play LF. And the Reds give up a lot in this deal. Mesoraco is a monster prospect ready and cheap at a position of need for the Angels. Frazier, too, is cheap and versatile enough to play any of four spots wherein the Angels have shown weakness or age. There's a need for a kid like him. The prospect would be solid (think Yorman Rodriguez) and talented and is ultimately fungible.

    The reason for that is that Morales is a potential difference-maker. He's a switch hitter, and, if healthy, a pre-eminent slugger and the perfect cleanup hitter for the Cincinnati lineup. Conger, while not as celebrated as Mesoraco, looks to be at least decent. Perhaps not a plus, but, when paired with Hanigan in a hitter's park with weaker pitchers to hit against, decent enough to be an option.

    You can then platoon Heisey and Stubbs in CF and spell Morales is he needs a breather. Morales could also DH when needed. The catcher's spot goes to the 8th spot in the lineup, with Cozart likely moved up to second:
    Phillips 2B
    Cozart SS
    Votto 1B
    Morales LF
    Bruce RF
    Stubbs/ Heisey CF
    Rolen/Francisco 3B
    Hanigan/ Conger C

    That's a really nice lineup right there. With the Reds' pitching, I think that's a pennant winner, perhaps more.

    I don't think there's any way anyone less than Mesoraco could net Morales, no matter how much quantity is thrown the Angels' way. They don't really need pitching at all, so the Aroldis Chapman chip wouldn't likely work. Nor would throwing prospects (even good ones), as Los Angeles has prospects but wants to win now. The option is either Mesoraco, really, or Morales. If Morales were entirely healthy, this would be an easy choice. As is, it might be enough to give the Angels pause.
    "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

  7. #111
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,560

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scrap Irony View Post
    They're going to have to do something to counteract the 80-ish% save rate likely to happen out of Cordero. (Though, to be fair, if he only comes in with a blank slate and isn't asked to go high leverage, he may be better than that and out-perform his periphials.

    They should have somewhere between $5-8 million to play with in finding a full-time LF. Quentin looks okay there (though not great). Lee looks intriguing (though not perfect).

    How about a gamble and a blockbuster?

    Kendrys Morales is questionable as to whether he can come back from a broken leg. The Angels, with huge free agent signings and trades for expensive veterans, have little room for him anyway, especially with the signing of Pujols.

    With that in mind, how about:
    Reds trade Devin Mesoraco, Todd Frazier, and a B+ prospect for Morales and Hank Conger?

    The gamble isn't only health. It's no sure thing that Morales can even play LF. And the Reds give up a lot in this deal. Mesoraco is a monster prospect ready and cheap at a position of need for the Angels. Frazier, too, is cheap and versatile enough to play any of four spots wherein the Angels have shown weakness or age. There's a need for a kid like him. The prospect would be solid (think Yorman Rodriguez) and talented and is ultimately fungible.

    The reason for that is that Morales is a potential difference-maker. He's a switch hitter, and, if healthy, a pre-eminent slugger and the perfect cleanup hitter for the Cincinnati lineup. Conger, while not as celebrated as Mesoraco, looks to be at least decent. Perhaps not a plus, but, when paired with Hanigan in a hitter's park with weaker pitchers to hit against, decent enough to be an option.

    You can then platoon Heisey and Stubbs in CF and spell Morales is he needs a breather. Morales could also DH when needed. The catcher's spot goes to the 8th spot in the lineup, with Cozart likely moved up to second:
    Phillips 2B
    Cozart SS
    Votto 1B
    Morales LF
    Bruce RF
    Stubbs/ Heisey CF
    Rolen/Francisco 3B
    Hanigan/ Conger C

    That's a really nice lineup right there. With the Reds' pitching, I think that's a pennant winner, perhaps more.

    I don't think there's any way anyone less than Mesoraco could net Morales, no matter how much quantity is thrown the Angels' way. They don't really need pitching at all, so the Aroldis Chapman chip wouldn't likely work. Nor would throwing prospects (even good ones), as Los Angeles has prospects but wants to win now. The option is either Mesoraco, really, or Morales. If Morales were entirely healthy, this would be an easy choice. As is, it might be enough to give the Angels pause.
    No way I deal Mesoraco for a guy that hasn't played in 2 seasons. An alternative would be to take Bobby Abreu off their hands so that Morales can DH. Frazier and taking the $9 Million off their hands may do it. Of course that would probably mean allowing them to avoid the luxury tax so they could sign Madson. If they are planning on Trumbo at 3B, Frazier may interest them as a back-up who can play there. The Angels have a history of valuing multi-position guys.

    Can Abreu still play the OF?
    "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

  8. #112
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    12,777

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    The best way to avoid a melt down like last season is to get a guy who can step into the rotation when Bailey gets hurt or one of the others blow up. .
    I'm not so sure.

    Relievers sometimes go downhill because of accumulated use over a few seasons.

    I have no reason to believe that the Reds relievers all tanked because of 2011 overwork. Maybe yes, maybe no.

    And even if it was 2011 overwork, who is to say that Masset, Ondrusek, and Bray will all re-emerge in 2012?

    You need starters who go deep into games. You also need bullpen arms that can hold up. Not every good reliever has extended success.

  9. #113
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,560

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    I'm not so sure.

    Relievers sometimes go downhill because of accumulated use over a few seasons.

    I have no reason to believe that the Reds relievers all tanked because of 2011 overwork. Maybe yes, maybe no.

    And even if it was 2011 overwork, who is to say that Masset, Ondrusek, and Bray will all re-emerge in 2012?

    You need starters who go deep into games. You also need bullpen arms that can hold up. Not every good reliever has extended success.
    The Reds may be able to upgrade their relievers, but as you say, extended success is not guaranteed. With that in mind, I just wouldn't give up a long term deal to sign one or pass on upgrading LF to put money into the bullpen. I'd rather have the draft pick than Cordero.

    When it comes to relievers, because there is so much volatility of any individual guy, I think the thing that we can be most certain of is that if the rotation has a repeat of what it did last April and May, the bullpen is going to stink in the dog days no matter who they have out there.

    With that in mind, maybe the best play is to ride the guys they have and if reinforcements are needed, get them at the deadline. That is how both St. Louis and Texas had such successful pens last October.
    "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

  10. #114
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    12,777

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    The Reds may be able to upgrade their relievers, but as you say, extended success is not guaranteed. With that in mind, I just wouldn't give up a long term deal to sign one or pass on upgrading LF to put money into the bullpen. I'd rather have the draft pick than Cordero.

    When it comes to relievers, because there is so much volatility of any individual guy, I think the thing that we can be most certain of is that if the rotation has a repeat of what it did last April and May, the bullpen is going to stink in the dog days no matter who they have out there.

    With that in mind, maybe the best play is to ride the guys they have and if reinforcements are needed, get them at the deadline. That is how both St. Louis and Texas had such successful pens last October.
    All I'm asking for is one more good bullpen arm. Call him a closer or whatever. I'll take my chances with Marshall, Arredondo, one more good arm from outside, and the rest of the crew for awhile.

  11. #115
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,166

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    But if they've made an offer to Cordero, what do they do if he accepts? Sign them both and trade Marshall for a LF?

    I'm sure that sounds as crazy as it did when I was typing it. IMO, they won't even consider Madson unless they know if Cordero will turn them down.
    I think the Reds are confident that Cordero will turn down their current offer. They have had it up for over a month. If it was worth anything, he would have taken it already. it's not like he's being overwhelmed by other offers right now.

    If they really wanted Cordero back, they would have signed him already. He says the Reds are his first choice, so it should be an easy signing. I think they have an extremely low offer out to him just as a backup plan in case they don't get anyone else.
    "I donít know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody".
    óBill Cosby

  12. #116
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,560

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    All I'm asking for is one more good bullpen arm. Call him a closer or whatever. I'll take my chances with Marshall, Arredondo, one more good arm from outside, and the rest of the crew for awhile.
    So if Madson isn't available, who out there is better for a late inning role than Masset or Bray? Not Cordero IMO. Lecure added to the mix later in the game might help. The way to do that would be to get a sixth starter to free Lecure of that role.
    "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. #117
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    12,777

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    So if Madson isn't available, who out there is better for a late inning role than Masset or Bray? Not Cordero IMO. Lecure added to the mix later in the game might help. The way to do that would be to get a sixth starter to free Lecure of that role.
    The fact that you and others are talking Lecure shows the need for another bullpen arm.

    Lecure is a middle inning guy, maybe the seventh once in awhile. Ondrusek and Massett IMO are sixth and seventh inning guiys. I want another late inning arm. Just my view.

  14. #118
    Two-Time Batting Champ Edd Roush's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Loveland, OH
    Posts
    2,919

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    I'd rather have the draft pick than Cordero at almost any price.
    This is an X factor I have not really considered when I have allowed myself to turn my opinion towards wanting to sign Cordero. I agree that comp pick has tremendous value especially considering what we have done to our farm system recently.

    I believe you said your idea to solve the bullpen is simply to allow Chapman to remain in the pen. I agree with you that if we are truly concerned with going all-in in 2012, that makes sense. Chapman will probably provide the 2012 Reds more value in the major league bullpen than in the AAA rotation.

    I think Chapman may be enough to keep the bullpen very good. I still don't know if that is enough. I just posted in the left field thread that Cordero and Quentin would be a good way to round out the off-season. I am not sure if Cordero is going to be worth the money we pay him and the loss of the comp pick.

    Would we also lose a comp pick if we signed Madson? Either way, should these comp picks matter if all we are concerned about is 2012-2013?

  15. #119
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,560

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by Edd Roush View Post
    This is an X factor I have not really considered when I have allowed myself to turn my opinion towards wanting to sign Cordero. I agree that comp pick has tremendous value especially considering what we have done to our farm system recently.

    I believe you said your idea to solve the bullpen is simply to allow Chapman to remain in the pen. I agree with you that if we are truly concerned with going all-in in 2012, that makes sense. Chapman will probably provide the 2012 Reds more value in the major league bullpen than in the AAA rotation.

    I think Chapman may be enough to keep the bullpen very good. I still don't know if that is enough. I just posted in the left field thread that Cordero and Quentin would be a good way to round out the off-season. I am not sure if Cordero is going to be worth the money we pay him and the loss of the comp pick.

    Would we also lose a comp pick if we signed Madson? Either way, should these comp picks matter if all we are concerned about is 2012-2013?
    Chapman would make a bigger impact in the late innings than anyone they can acquire (except possibly Madson). When July rolls around and Chapman has about 100 innings on his arm in AAA, the Reds may want to add him to the pen in the second half. Of course, to do that, they need a 6th starter.
    "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

  16. #120
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,560

    Re: Closer: Down to Cordero or Madson?

    Quote Originally Posted by Edd Roush View Post
    This is an X factor I have not really considered when I have allowed myself to turn my opinion towards wanting to sign Cordero. I agree that comp pick has tremendous value especially considering what we have done to our farm system recently....

    ...Would we also lose a comp pick if we signed Madson? Either way, should these comp picks matter if all we are concerned about is 2012-2013?
    Well, I want to win in 2012 and 2013, but each deal still should be evaluated on its own. There are lots of middling relief arms avaialble. I'd rather sign, say, Chad Qualls and keep the comp pick, than sign Cordero. There just isn't a reason to sign Cordero to give up that pick. He's not better than the rest of the pack.

    I don't know if a pick is involved with Madson. My concern is signing him to a 2 or 3 year deal could mean that Cueto or Bruce would have to go after 2012 to keep the budget in line. I'd be fine with Madson on a one year deal or one year with an option that they can get out of, as long as it doesn't prevent them from getting a LF.
    "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


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