Reds Sign Jonathan Broxton- 3 Years, $21m; 4th Year option

[REDREAD]

Originally Posted by WildcatFan

I can get on board with this point.

My gripe with Cordero was the money, not the years. And you're right that he was due for a decline, and I'm reading similar stuff on Broxton, with his dipping velocity and K rates. But if they can keep it under something like 3/22, I'll tip my cap and trust it'll work out.

I agree, Cordero was overpaid. No question about it. At least he did the job though most of the time.

Like Mth said, I'd much rather spend money on Broxton than an injury rehab guy like Madson.. The analogy is kind of like Cordero worked out a lot better than Stanton did. Cordero was a lot more expensive, but at least he produced reasonably well. Stanton had negative value.

[mdccclxix]

I don't like overspending on closers and wish they had a plan to use a Cingrani or Corcino level prospect to step in. I suppose that's something a building team could try as opposed to an already built to win team. I've always liked LeCure for closer, personally. I happened to miss many of Hoover's appearances last year, but never was completely impressed. LeCure has that backdoor fastball that is about all you need.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by mdccclxix

I don't like overspending on closers and wish they had a plan to use a Cingrani or Corcino level prospect to step in. I suppose that's something a building team could try as opposed to an already built to win team. I've always liked LeCure for closer, personally. I happened to miss many of Hoover's appearances last year, but never was completely impressed. LeCure has that backdoor fastball that is about all you need.

I agree with this- especially when they already have Marshall to step in if one of the unproven guys fail.

I'd try:
1. Hoover
2. LeCure
3. Marshall

In that order. I also wouldn't rule out Cingrani, especially if Chapman is ticketed for the rotation. But oh well, seems like Mr. Broxton is coming back to town.

[traderumor]

I was under the impression that Cingrani is pegged as a starter. Plus, I didn't see anything in his arsenal that looked like back of the bullpen material, not sure what I'm missing there.

The young guns names always get thrown around until they are the only answer. Then, when they fall on their face, the cry goes out for "established arms." I know, I know, anyone can get three guys out in the late innings, right? So much silliness, and tunes change as soon as games start and a couple of leads get blown late.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by traderumor

I was under the impression that Cingrani is pegged as a starter. Plus, I didn't see anything in his arsenal that looked like back of the bullpen material, not sure what I'm missing there.

The young guns names always get thrown around until they are the only answer. Then, when they fall on their face, the cry goes out for "established arms." I know, I know, anyone can get three guys out in the late innings, right? So much silliness, and tunes change as soon as games start and a couple of leads get blown late.

Cingrani has a plus fastball but not a ton in the way of secondary pitches. That usually leads most to conclude he could/should wind up at the back of a bullpen.

Yes they are currently using him as a starter, but many scouts have stated his future is in the 'pen. Moving Chapman to the rotation could allow for Cingrani to go back to where he was used in college.

That said, if the Reds plan on bringing in a FA to close, I would keep Cingrani as a starter until he shows he cannot handle it.

[Chip R]

I suppose this is business as usual but I think a 3 year deal is really overkill with Broxton and I like Broxton. He's going to have a very tough act to follow. Whenever someone gets on against him on a bleeder up the middle or an error or a Texas Leaguer, fans are going to complain that he isn't as dominant as Chapman. I suppose if someone like Hoover gets a chance to close and is successful, Broxton could be traded to someone looking for a closer down the stretch.

[Reds/Flyers Fan]

Mariano Rivera is a free agent.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by mdccclxix

I don't like overspending on closers and wish they had a plan to use a Cingrani or Corcino level prospect to step in. I suppose that's something a building team could try as opposed to an already built to win team. I've always liked LeCure for closer, personally. I happened to miss many of Hoover's appearances last year, but never was completely impressed. LeCure has that backdoor fastball that is about all you need.

I don't think Lecure should close. For one thing, he's a pretty fragile pitcher. He misses time almost every year, he did in the minors too. His highest appearance total in MLB is 48 games. Not sure he can handle the rigors of pitching an additional 20 games per season, with all the back-to-backs required of a closer.

Also, Sam's forte is his ability to work multiple innings. He's a former starter. In 2011 he threw 77.2 innings in 43 games. Last year, he threw 57.1 innings in 48 games.

The Reds did use Lecure in the playoffs and I can see him getting more set up work. Just don't see him as a closer.

Hoover looks more like a closer to me. Misses bats, has a background closing in the minors. He does have a history of throwing a lot of fly balls. I'd like to see him get another year of non-closing experience in the big leagues before giving him the ninth inning. He's the in-house candidate IMO.

[marcshoe]

I would think that a three year contract would be offered with the assumption that you won't get value the third year. Sometimes you need to, as Ben Folds might say, do it anyway.

You need multiple back-end arms. I like Hoover, but you honestly don't know yet. Broxton's value isn't just in what he will do, but also in what he will help turn the bullpen into. I want to see a bullpen without a pitcher or two who will make you cringe when they come into a game. Resigning Broxton is a big step in that direction.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by marcshoe

I would think that a three year contract would be offered with the assumption that you won't get value the third year. Sometimes you need to, as Ben Folds might say, do it anyway.

Broxton is 28. When 3 years is up, he'll still be younger than Cordero was when his contract started with us (he was 33). There is no rerason to think Broxton will regress that quickly.

[MikeThierry]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

Broxton is 28. When 3 years is up, he'll still be younger than Cordero was when his contract started with us (he was 33). There is no rerason to think Broxton will regress that quickly.

That's amazing. It seems like Broxton's been in the league for ages. I forgot he was only 28 years old.

[marcshoe]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

Broxton is 28. When 3 years is up, he'll still be younger than Cordero was when his contract started with us (he was 33). There is no rerason to think Broxton will regress that quickly.

I don't so much think he'll regress as possibly wear out. Closing can be hard on guys arms, it seems. Particularly for a big guy.

[Blitz Dorsey]

A lot of people are assuming the Reds are going to grossly overpay for Broxton. I don't think they will. As was previously mentioned, I think we're looking at something like 3-years, $24 million at the very max. That's very affordable. They paid a closer that didn't even pitch $8.5 million last year.

Also, this would allow the Reds to move Chapman to the rotation, which has been the dream of many people on this board. The Reds are not going to move Chapman to the rotation for JJ Hoover (and I love JJ Hoover). The only way they move Chapman is if they think they have a long-term solution at closer. So, if Broxton signs, all the members of the "Chapman Needs To Be Starting" crowd should be elated.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey

A lot of people are assuming the Reds are going to grossly overpay for Broxton. I don't think they will. As was previously mentioned, I think we're looking at something like 3-years, $24 million at the very max. That's very affordable. They paid a closer that didn't even pitch $8.5 million last year.

Also, this would allow the Reds to move Chapman to the rotation, which has been the dream of many people on this board. The Reds are not going to move Chapman to the rotation for JJ Hoover (and I love JJ Hoover). The only way they move Chapman is if they think they have a long-term solution at closer. So, if Broxton signs, all the members of the "Chapman Needs To Be Starting" crowd should be elated.

Don't necessarily disagree, although I'll point out that part of the griping relates to the fact that we're already paying Marshall $5-$6MM/year at the back-end of the pen, so in essence we'll be committing probably $14MM/year for the next three years to the last two bullpen spots, when we have some young guys like Hoover, LeCure, et al who could possibly handle it a lot less expensively.

Personally, I'd rather spend $14MM/year on a cleanup-hitting LF and let the youngsters handle the 'pen, but that's just me. I am happy about seeing Chapman get his chance to start, so I'm not complaining too much.

And I'm also not convinced the Reds won't "find money" elsewhere to pay for one more hitter. I think there is more money to spend than some people think. Of course only time will tell.

[cincrazy]

Originally Posted by Kc61

I differ with this post because I would give Chapman some time to convert to starting. He has such a great arm, I think it's worth a try, it's an experiment with very high upside.

But I am sympathetic to cincrazy's point.

Brox has a history of elbow and shoulder injury, and he's more hittable than Chappy (who isn't?). I don't view him as a sure thing at closer. Hoover looks like a closer, he can be the backup, but I think Brox is something of a gamble at major dollars.

As is well known around here, I worry about bullpens. The Reds pen has good depth, but without Chapman I worry that they lack the lights out guy. Brox doesn't solve that problem for me.

I guess the thing to do is wait for the off-season to end and see what the staff looks like then. Plenty of time to complain. Maybe they will add still another good bullpen arm in their deals.

I'm not saying I wouldn't give Chapman a shot to start. I think he's earned that right. But there's no guarantee it will work out. I'd rather use Marshall at closer, or Hoover, or whomever, until we KNOW for sure whether Chapman can make the conversion to starting. Once we know that, ok, do what you need to do to address the back of the pen. But filling the back of the pen before knowing whether Chapman can make the transition.... I worry about that. He's incredibly valuable out of the pen. Will he be just as valuable out of the rotation? I hope so. Time will well.

His velocity problems concern me. His shoulder concerns me. A lot about this move to the rotation concerns me. He needs to maintain his velocity. He needs to develop another pitch preferably. I don't think it will be a seamless transition, and we'll see if Dusty's patient with him.