Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Who closes for this team?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
185 replies to this topic

#51 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 10,559 posts

Posted 15 November 2011 - 05:06 PM



The Red Sox, Reds, Blue Jays, Marlins, Dodgers, Angels, and Mets are among the teams that have expressed interest in free-agent closer Francisco Cordero, major-league sources say.

Cordero, 36, is one of the top closers available, now that Jonathan Papelbon is off the board. Cordero averaged nearly 40 saves per season over the past five years, with a 2.97 ERA. Hes coming off a season in which he posted his best WHIP (1.019) since 2002.

http://mlbbuzz.yardb...cordero/8115385

#52 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11,944 posts

Posted 15 November 2011 - 05:54 PM

http://mlbbuzz.yardb...cordero/8115385


Please. God. No.

#53 maufman


  • SoSH Member


  • 13,186 posts

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:03 PM

A few years ago, I would have shared Savin Hillbilly's reaction, on the assumption that someone would overpay Cordero, but teams are smarter now than they used to be.

Cordero has reinvented himself as a guy who pitches to contact and gets groundballs. If he's paid based on the pitcher he is now, he could be useful as a middle reliever. If he's paid in part based on his pedigree and the absurd .214 BABIP he posted last season, then obviously I hope the Sox stay away.

#54 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11,944 posts

Posted 15 November 2011 - 08:39 PM

A few years ago, I would have shared Savin Hillbilly's reaction, on the assumption that someone would overpay Cordero, but teams are smarter now than they used to be.

Cordero has reinvented himself as a guy who pitches to contact and gets groundballs. If he's paid based on the pitcher he is now, he could be useful as a middle reliever. If he's paid in part based on his pedigree and the absurd .214 BABIP he posted last season, then obviously I hope the Sox stay away.

The thing is, how do you assess a guy who reinvents himself as a groundball pitcher....and then posts a .214 BABIP?

I think the answer is, you congratulate him on his crazy good luck and let somebody else swallow the bait.




#55 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 10,559 posts

Posted 15 November 2011 - 10:49 PM



The Padres appear to be falling behind other teams in their efforts to keep free agent closer Heath Bell. Bell on Tuesday afternoon said he hopes to know something about his future before leaving Thursday on a planned trip to Fiji.

My agents have told me numerous other teams are interested with most of those on the East Coast, said Bell.




The Levinsons have a reputation for moving quickly to finalize deals for their free agent clients. Ive heard Boston might have interest in me, said Bell. I could go play with Adrian (Gonzalez) again. I could do that.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/nov/15/numerous-teams-interested-padres-bell/







#56 Hee-Seop's Fable

  • 1,264 posts

Posted 15 November 2011 - 11:09 PM

That same link claims the offer the Padres have made to Bell is in the order of $16-17M for two years, and that he's looking for three years. If he commands in the order of $25/3 years I have a hard time seeing the Sox offering that. They may have to offer 3 years to one of the higher end guys to keep the door open for both Bard and Aceves to both move into the rotation (for at least a ways into Spring Training, when they have more information on the plausibility of each experiment), but not for more than $20M would be my guess.

#57 Zona90

  • 165 posts

Posted 15 November 2011 - 11:57 PM

Bell would not be bad if signed for two years.

Edited by Zona90, 15 November 2011 - 11:59 PM.


#58 Eric Van


  • Kid-tested, mother-approved


  • 10,990 posts

Posted 17 November 2011 - 03:07 PM

Here are some numbers for all the quality FA relievers (including Papelbon), and all the incumbent Sox.

Everything is the average of the last three seasons, weighted 3-2-1 (and by BFP in season, of course). I don't know where Tango gets 5-4-3 for Marcel; I ran a regression on the last three years of FIP- as a predictor of ERA-, and the weights were 3.1, 1.9, 1.0.

EIP is Effective IP and tells you the sample size, not how much they can be expected to work. (Hence it's low for Nathan who missed 2010).

E-F(-) is ERA- minus FIP-. Hence negative is good. It's probably 80% noise, but it's there for your perusal nonetheless.

BJ is Bill James' 2012 prediction, park adjusted to a neutral park and adjusted for league (x 1.06 moving from NL to AL).

I grabbed inLI, average leverage at the start of innings, as the best measure of how a pitcher has been used.

WPA has been normalized to a standard BFP per year.

Clu is my measure of how Clutch their WPA has been. I did a regression to predict WPA based on FIP- and E-F(-), and this is the difference between actual and expected. For instance, Scott Atchison should have been +0.10 normalized; since he's actually -0.13, he's -0.23 Clutch. You can figure that 90% of this is noise, but you might want to stay away from the likes of Kerry Wood anyway.

Vs34 is derived from their career splits by batting order position. It's 7 times their OPS allowed vs. 3 and 4 hitters, minus 1 times OPS vs 1 and 2, 2 times OPS vs. 5 and 6, and 4 times OPS vs. 7 through 9. The bigger the number, the more the guy is susceptible to being hit by elite hitters and the more value he'd lose facing a lineup like the Yankees, or pitching in the AL East in general. (You'll note that Takashi Saito has the worst split in this table.) The MLB average last year was 75.

Relievers
Name FA EIP FIP- E-F(-) SIERA BJ inLI WPA Clu Vs34
Jonathan Papelbon X 62.7 57 14 2.39 2.34 1.76 2.29 0.63 34
Ryan Madson A 57.6 64 2 2.57 3.50 1.44 1.42 0.06 117
Darren Oliver A 55.0 66 -9 2.95 2.75 1.21 0.62 -0.65 94
Daniel Bard 64.3 73 -7 2.89 2.22 1.58 1.60 0.27 150
Heath Bell A 62.5 74 -10 3.07 2.92 1.80 1.98 0.44 177
Francisco Rodriguez A 65.1 75 -5 2.93 2.81 1.54 1.12 -0.02 63
Takashi Saito A 38.8 78 -17 3.04 2.80 0.99 0.69 -0.12 216
Bobby Jenks 35.9 79 30 3.16 --- 1.43 -0.33 -0.42 -30
LaTroy Hawkins 39.3 82 1 3.19 3.57 1.07 0.53 0.05 126
Jonathan Broxton 39.7 82 19 2.99 3.51 1.59 -0.40 -0.67 82
Scott Atchison 33.6 89 3 3.83 2.96 0.64 -0.13 -0.23 27
Mike Gonzalez 47.0 89 2 3.26 2.96 1.10 0.30 0.06 16
Octavio Dotel A 57.1 91 0 3.09 3.70 1.14 0.48 0.24 183
Kerry Wood 50.7 94 -10 3.43 3.97 1.28 -0.63 -1.01 143
Alfredo Aceves 72.0 94 -30 4.07 3.30 0.94 1.09 0.54 9
Joe Nathan 32.6 94 3 2.94 2.40 1.34 1.34 1.22 128
Todd Coffey 63.5 94 4 3.55 4.33 0.96 0.06 0.02 50
Matt Albers 70.8 95 17 3.83 4.39 0.87 0.04 0.20 11
Francisco Cordero A 66.7 95 -23 3.99 3.17 1.64 0.89 0.09 61
Shawn Camp 69.6 96 -8 3.88 4.13 1.05 0.51 0.32 98
Dan Wheeler 46.8 97 -5 3.35 2.69 0.83 -0.13 -0.21 144
George Sherrill 42.0 97 3 3.77 --- 1.10 0.03 0.03 64
Brad Lidge 35.8 99 -6 3.60 4.07 1.46 0.01 -0.15 125
Jon Rauch 56.5 101 -4 3.89 3.41 1.29 0.14 0.13 29
Arthur Rhodes 41.0 103 -25 3.75 3.36 1.29 0.54 0.19 13
Matt Capps A 64.9 105 -10 3.72 3.94 1.49 -0.51 -0.53 69
Franklin Morales 40.0 109 -6 4.18 4.24 0.99 -0.22 0.00 139


Some comments:

-- Given the volatility of relievers, does it make any sense to give up your first round pick when you could keep it and sign a guy who might well be as good? Joe Nathan's FIP- is blown up by his awful first few months coming back from surgery, but he was his old self after coming off the DL (the Bill James projection seems to include this). He struggles against elite hitters (memories of him failing in the post-season vs. the Yankees, eh?) but has been insanely clutch.

-- If you exclude guys who cost a pick, and exclude Bard (because he's starting), Bobby Jenks has the best FIP-, and the third best SIERA (after Nathan and Broxton), and he has the best Vs34 split of anyone. To say he has not been getting the expected results is an understatement: he has the highest ERA- - FIP- of anyone, and even factoring that in, the 3rd worst clutch. Given his health as well, is he a massive gamble to pencil in as Bard's replacement as relief ace? Of course. Given the possible upside, would you be stupid not to give him every chance at it? Just as much of course.

-- If you're looking to sign a second guy (rather than trade for someone), Mike Gonzalez looks like the most attractive option.

-- It's interesting to see how well most of the incumbents have done at the Vs34 split. And anyone thinking Scott Atchison, given his quality, his cheapness, and his ability to work multiple innings, should not be penciled in as the mop-up guy, needs to give reality a phone call.

-- Morales, remember, was dramatically better after coming here, which means his ranking here is less than wholly meaningful. So this breakdown excludes the whole realm of acquiring someone mediocre and turning him into someone good. They did that last year with Albers, too, and will certainly be looking to do it again, but you're not going to find that guy with 3-year weighted averages.

#59 OCD SS


  • SoSH Member


  • 6,902 posts

Posted 19 November 2011 - 06:02 PM

Saw this from Rosenthal on Twitter (Sorry, I'm not sure how to link the tweet from Tweetdeck...):

Source: All remaining Type A relievers - Madson, K-Rod, Bell - will NOT be subject to draft-pick compensation this off-season.


Sounds like the Phillies jumping right in may have cost them a pick, and if Madson is not subject to the Sox losing a pick, he would become an even more appealing option. (For the Record, I'd like to see the Sox sign someone to pitch the 9th and keep Bard as a Jamesian relief ace. With the Sox IF defense I also really like Madson's GB tendencies.)

Edit: here's the story. So far the paragraph where he states that Madson would "benefit from an enchanced market" (i.e. will not cost the signing team a pick) is directly contradicted by the last paragraph, where he says the Phillis could get a pick for him.

Edited by OCD SS, 19 November 2011 - 08:53 PM.


#60 Eric Van


  • Kid-tested, mother-approved


  • 10,990 posts

Posted 19 November 2011 - 10:57 PM

Edit: here's the story. So far the paragraph where he states that Madson would "benefit from an enchanced market" (i.e. will not cost the signing team a pick) is directly contradicted by the last paragraph, where he says the Phillis could get a pick for him.

I don't think there's a contradiction. The lesser type A's (including all the relievers currently unsigned) will yield at least one sandwich pick for the losing team, maybe two, but will not cost the signing team a pick.

#61 OCD SS


  • SoSH Member


  • 6,902 posts

Posted 19 November 2011 - 11:06 PM

I don't think there's a contradiction. The lesser type A's (including all the relievers currently unsigned) will yield at least one sandwich pick for the losing team, maybe two, but will not cost the signing team a pick.


Thanks, I was reading the article a bit to quickly, but I still think that Rosenthal should have been a bit more specific about the difference between a draft pick forfeited to another team as compensation, and a pick gained in the supplemental round. I also should've been reading the CBA thread I started in the MLB forum...

If Madson doesn't cost a pick, I like him more for the reasons I stated above; it's just a matter of whether or not his salary or market price him out of the range the Sox would spend on relievers.

#62 Eric Van


  • Kid-tested, mother-approved


  • 10,990 posts

Posted 20 November 2011 - 05:33 PM

Thanks, I was reading the article a bit to quickly, but I still think that Rosenthal should have been a bit more specific about the difference between a draft pick forfeited to another team as compensation, and a pick gained in the supplemental round. I also should've been reading the CBA thread I started in the MLB forum...

If Madson doesn't cost a pick, I like him more for the reasons I stated above; it's just a matter of whether or not his salary or market price him out of the range the Sox would spend on relievers.

Yeah, before this news, I was for signing Joe Nathan, period. Now you want to see if you can get comparable bang for buck for Madson, and keep an eye on K-Rod in case he turns out to be a big bargain.

#63 JakeRae


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,326 posts

Posted 20 November 2011 - 05:43 PM

It's a little too early to assume that the lack of draft pick cost will decrease the net cost of signing these players. It is very likely that teams were already largely accounting for this as an acquisition cost. The elimination of draft pick loss should, if the market is reasonably efficient, result in an increase in contract value rather than a savings for the signing team. This change should significantly benefit the players and marginally benefit teams that are above average drafters who are signing these players.

#64 Doctor G

  • 1,967 posts

Posted 20 November 2011 - 06:28 PM

Based on his performance down the stretch in Sept. when he was the only pitcher who didn't turn to dust, I would like to see Aceves given a chance to compete for the closers job with Jenks. i would rather spend the money it will take to get Madson Bell or KRod on a SP or two. I just don't see the value of committing 8+ mill in addition to the 6 mil going to Jenks.
If Aceves is ineffective as a closer, you can always use Bard.

Aceves could accomplish his financial goals as a closer just as well as he could as a starter.

Edited by Doctor G, 20 November 2011 - 06:29 PM.


#65 bosockboy


  • SoSH Member


  • 7,050 posts

Posted 21 November 2011 - 08:19 PM

Nathan off the board:

http://trsullivan.ml...ign-joe-nathan/

#66 scotian1


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,355 posts

Posted 21 November 2011 - 08:37 PM

If Nathan got a two year deal and a buy out option for a third year what will Bell and Madson be asking for?

#67 ThatsMyPeskyPole

  • 455 posts

Posted 21 November 2011 - 08:55 PM

If Nathan got a two year deal and a buy out option for a third year what will Bell and Madson be asking for?

Pap's contract not looking too bad. May have to pay more per year to avoid 4yr deals.

#68 Hee-Seop's Fable

  • 1,264 posts

Posted 21 November 2011 - 09:39 PM

For dramatically less than $20M total for Nathan, it's disappointing he's off the board. I figured he'd pull a Radke and end up staying in MN.

At that deal, there would have been money to gamble on a second reliever at less money, try to find 2012's Aceves as a third guy, and still convert both Bard and Aceves to the rotation with one of them returning to the bullpen late in the season as they start to pile up innings to plug whatever holes appear there late in the season. Bell and Madson are much younger and almost certainly more durable at this point, but I'd pin them at 3/$26 and 4/$38, respectively, and I have a hard time imagining the Sox laying out that kind of money for either one, much less Cordero who's nearly as old as Nathan with a much higher walk rate.

#69 Rough Carrigan


  • reasons within Reason


  • 16,955 posts

Posted 21 November 2011 - 10:13 PM

For dramatically less than $20M total for Nathan, it's disappointing he's off the board. I figured he'd pull a Radke and end up staying in MN.

At that deal, there would have been money to gamble on a second reliever at less money, try to find 2012's Aceves as a third guy, and still convert both Bard and Aceves to the rotation with one of them returning to the bullpen late in the season as they start to pile up innings to plug whatever holes appear there late in the season. Bell and Madson are much younger and almost certainly more durable at this point, but I'd pin them at 3/$26 and 4/$38, respectively, and I have a hard time imagining the Sox laying out that kind of money for either one, much less Cordero who's nearly as old as Nathan with a much higher walk rate.

Nathan's 37. Bell's age at mid season next year will be 34. A fat 34.

#70 Corsi


  • isn't shy about blowing his wad early


  • 10,559 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 04:05 PM

Among teams interested in huston street are bluejays, o's, marlins, redsox, reds and mets (tho geren feud is deterrent)

https://twitter.com/#!/SI_JonHeyman/status/139084434224857089
link to tweet

#71 Comeback Kid

  • 781 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 04:07 PM

Heyman tweets that the Red Sox are among the teams interested in Huston Street.

Could be a nice fit. He's owed $7.5MM for next year.


Edit: Ack, Corsi beat me to it.

Edited by Comeback Kid, 22 November 2011 - 04:07 PM.


#72 Rough Carrigan


  • reasons within Reason


  • 16,955 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 08:51 PM

Ehh.
Street throws mostly 2 seam fastballs and yet gave up 10 homers in 58 innings. (6 of those in other parks in case you were wondering if it was just a Coors Field thing). He strikes me as the sort of guy whose arm clearly gets progressively worse over the course of his career. His homers allowed in the seasons he's pitched have been 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 5(Woohoo, decline!) and last year's 10. He hasn't had an ERA under 3 since 2010. I know ERA's not a great predictive measure but, especially for a closer where no one's cleaning up or not cleaning up your mess, it's not terrible for assessing that season and better still for looking at 4 seasons work. I'd be okay with Street being part of a Sox bullpen but not the closer.

#73 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30,164 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 09:15 PM

I think Street is pretty damn good. He had an uptick in HR/FB this season, but he doesn't walk anyone, relatively speaking, and his SwStr% is rock steady 13%+. His GB% is similar to Papelbon's.

$7.5M + a $9M player option.

@TroyRenck Troy Renck, Rockies
I believe Huston Street will do well next season but makes sense for #Rockies to try to move him for starter like Guthrie, Pavano etc

https://twitter.com/#!/TroyRenck/status/139017547596038145
link to tweet

That's crazy to me, I have to think we could/would offer something better than that.

#74 bd11

  • 570 posts

Posted 22 November 2011 - 09:18 PM

There were times when Francisco looked excellent against the Sox last season. Toronto thought enough of him to deal Napoli for him. Might he be a solid buy low option and give the Sox a little time to groom Bard?

#75 Flynn4ever

  • 524 posts

Posted 23 November 2011 - 01:05 AM

There were times when Francisco looked excellent against the Sox last season. Toronto thought enough of him to deal Napoli for him. Might he be a solid buy low option and give the Sox a little time to groom Bard?

If you were looking at Bard as the closer, and I kinda wanta, but have't gone through the "I don't want Bard to close for this team" thread, which I will do now... he would be the closer this year, they would not give him time to groom, the past two years have been that time.

#76 Rasputin


  • Will outlive SeanBerry


  • 26,412 posts

Posted 24 November 2011 - 12:49 AM

There were times when Francisco looked excellent against the Sox last season. Toronto thought enough of him to deal Napoli for him. Might he be a solid buy low option and give the Sox a little time to groom Bard?

Why on earth do you think Bard needs grooming?

#77 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30,164 posts

Posted 02 December 2011 - 03:52 PM

JimBowdenESPNxm: Red Sox continue dialogue with Scott Boras regarding closer Ryan Madson


Where Bowden comments, there is fire, nowadays.

Of course Cherington said like five times over the last two days he doesn't need a closer in place next week or this month.

#78 bosockboy


  • SoSH Member


  • 7,050 posts

Posted 02 December 2011 - 04:39 PM

Where Bowden comments, there is fire, nowadays.

Of course Cherington said like five times over the last two days he doesn't need a closer in place next week or this month.


I'm sure Boras is aggressively pursuing the Sox....when Philly signed Pap it ruined his market on Madson. I'd offer 3/30 and hold the line....I can't see anyone else paying more.

#79 Rough Carrigan


  • reasons within Reason


  • 16,955 posts

Posted 02 December 2011 - 11:08 PM

Where Bowden comments, there is fire, nowadays.

Of course Cherington said like five times over the last two days he doesn't need a closer in place next week or this month.

I hope Bowden's right. Madson's the best option available. I'd be comfortable with Madson replacing Papelbon. I like that he's got that classic fastball-changeup jujitsu going. He throws a decent curve sometimes, too. He walked 8 guys unintentionally last year and has been excellent in the postseason the last 2 years. He wipes out lefties even better than he stifles righties.

The Sox are probably sending signals like what you recount Cherington saying in order to not bid against themselves. It's still a market fairly flush with closing candidates and a couple of the buyers with money have left the market (Texas and Miami). 3 years and 30 million? Then get another reliever to be an 8th inning option and move Bard to the rotation.

#80 dynomite

  • 4,862 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 01:10 PM

Couple days old, but apparently the Red Sox -- who "expressed interest as soon as he became a free agent" -- are among the teams who will watch Joel Zumaya throw a mound session in 2 weeks in Houston:

The next step comes in two weeks. Zumaya is scheduled to throw a mound session for interested teams in mid-December in Houston, where his agents, Randy and Alan Hendricks, are based.


Link

For the right price I would love to see this signing.

#81 EP Sox Fan

  • 1,278 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 01:24 PM

Couple days old, but apparently the Red Sox -- who "expressed interest as soon as he became a free agent" -- are among the teams who will watch Joel Zumaya throw a mound session in 2 weeks in Houston:



Link

For the right price I would love to see this signing.


Zumaya immediately had surgery to repair it, and ended up with a screw in his elbow to help hold it together. The screw, and the surgery to insert it, created enough new problems that he had another surgery, this time from Dr. James Andrews, and a different screw.


Yikes. My recollection is that when he was injured, there was a real concern that he would every be able to pitch again. Are there any other pitchers who have recovered from a similar injury? The quote from the article does not sound reassuring.

#82 dynomite

  • 4,862 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 03:42 PM

Yikes. My recollection is that when he was injured, there was a real concern that he would every be able to pitch again. Are there any other pitchers who have recovered from a similar injury? The quote from the article does not sound reassuring.


Not sure. In another quote it sounds fairly promising, though:

I was cleared to throw by Dr. James Andrews. I went straight to Lakeland, started lifting those weights again. The ball is coming out easier than Ive ever thrown. Im throwing with less effort than I used to.


Link

Obviously that's the kind of boilerplate we're used to with free agents, but if he's lifting and throwing and, indeed, throwing for MLB teams in two weeks, I'm betting he's got something left. Given that he'll only cost something like 1 year/700K (with performance incentives), is only 27, and had one of the best fastballs in the league as recently as 2010, I'm absolutely interested.

#83 Snodgrass'Muff


  • smarter as Lucen


  • 21,355 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 04:02 PM

Link

Obviously that's the kind of boilerplate we're used to with free agents, but if he's lifting and throwing and, indeed, throwing for MLB teams in two weeks, I'm betting he's got something left. Given that he'll only cost something like 1 year/700K (with performance incentives), is only 27, and had one of the best fastballs in the league as recently as 2010, I'm absolutely interested.


As a reliever, absolutely. As a closer or even a set up man, absolutely not. Bringing him in with the promise that he'll get some innings to show what he's got and that he'll be moved up the depth chart as his performance warrants would be a good idea. Not much risk, plenty of potential reward. But if he doesn't have two or three guys in front of him (preferably 3) at the end of a game, I'm not going to be happy.

#84 dynomite

  • 4,862 posts

Posted 03 December 2011 - 04:42 PM

As a reliever, absolutely. As a closer or even a set up man, absolutely not. Bringing him in with the promise that he'll get some innings to show what he's got and that he'll be moved up the depth chart as his performance warrants would be a good idea. Not much risk, plenty of potential reward. But if he doesn't have two or three guys in front of him (preferably 3) at the end of a game, I'm not going to be happy.


No question -- it's a "make good" contract and he'll have to make good.

But for a guy who used to throw in the 100s for short money and short years, I'm definitely interested.

#85 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,687 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 12:32 PM

Who will close?

The closer market shrunk further yesterday when Matt Capps signed a one-year contract to stay with the Minnesota Twins. A few hours earlier, Heath Bell was introduced as the new Marlins closer, and although the Red Sox made Bell an offer, it didnt measure up to the three-year, $27 million contract he ultimately signed with Miami.

Ryan Madson and Francisco Rodriguez, the top remaining free agent closers, likely will command as much in salary as Bell, perhaps leaving the Red Sox to fish in a pool that includes Francisco Cordero, Frank Francisco and Brad Lidge. The Sox also could swing a trade, and the Colorado Rockies are dangling Huston Street.



#86 bosockboy


  • SoSH Member


  • 7,050 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 01:07 PM

I think the Bailey trade is where this lands....just a hunch. And we sign Lidge on a short deal as an 8th inning guy if Bard or Aceves is moved to the rotation, which seems likely.

#87 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30,164 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 07:55 PM

McAdam on the CSNNE baseball show just said the Sox already had meetings with the A's today, suggesting Reddick, Lowrie and a lesser prospect for Bailey.

#88 Jed Zeppelin


  • SoSH Member


  • 16,001 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 08:00 PM

McAdam on the CSNNE baseball show just said the Sox already had meetings with the A's today, suggesting Reddick, Lowrie and a lesser prospect for Bailey.


I'd be all over that, although I wish I felt better about Kalish's injury history.

#89 knucklecup


  • hi, I'm a cuckold


  • PipPip
  • 4,251 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 08:08 PM

I'd prefer Brandon League to Andrew Bailey and could probably be had for a similar/lesser package.

He was fantastic last year. Obviously assisted by spacious Safeco, he really pitched well.

I like the upside.

#90 Laser Show

  • 3,525 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 10:10 PM

Francisco to the Mets:

@Jon_Heyman Frank francisco gets 2 year deal w/ mets, as @KenDavidoff reported



And another arm off the table...

Edited by Laser Show, 06 December 2011 - 10:10 PM.


#91 SoxScout


  • Maalox Territory


  • 30,164 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 10:20 PM

Francisco to the Mets:



And another arm off the table...


Better way to look at it is another arm that was never coming to Boston is eating up another closer job. We should offer Madson the Bell contract.

#92 Rough Carrigan


  • reasons within Reason


  • 16,955 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 10:22 PM

I'd be all over that, although I wish I felt better about Kalish's injury history.

How do you feel about Andrew Bailey's injury history?

He was out until June last year with forearm soreness.
Oh, and he had surgery in September 2010 to remove "loose bodies" from his elbow.

These were his second and third years in MLB. He pitched 40-something innings each year.

I think I'd rather give up a 2nd round draft pick for Ryan Madson and use the trade chips for something else.

Of course, Bailey is cheaper for the next couple years because he's only played three years.

Edited by Rough Carrigan, 06 December 2011 - 10:26 PM.


#93 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,687 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 10:27 PM

It doesn't seem likely that the Sox can afford Madson, though, esp. with Ortiz coming back. I'm sure a major reason they want Bailey is that he's a first year arb guy who is going to make a few million at most next season.

In addition to Madson, you've still got Cordero, Lidge, Farnsworth, and K-Rod available as FA; and the flexibility to give the job to Bard. It's going to be frustrating as hell to watch guys get signed, but I think the Sox will continue to wait and see if someone falls to them.

What other teams definitely need closers?

#94 Kid T

  • 501 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 10:36 PM

I think I'd rather give up a 2nd round draft pick for Ryan Madson and use the trade chips for something else.


I thought there was no draft pick loss for signing Madson (though Phillies would get an additional pick in the supplemental round)?

#95 bd11

  • 570 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 11:05 PM

Francisco to the Mets:



And another arm off the table...


I'm disappointed as I like FF. However he was not a bargain at $12m for 2.

#96 Rough Carrigan


  • reasons within Reason


  • 16,955 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 11:08 PM

You're right, KidT. And that just moves the calculus a smidge more toward Madson. I agree with Soxscout. Offer Madson the Heath Bell deal. Andrew Bailey's inability to pitch more than 40 something innings in both his 2nd and 3rd years in the majors is scary. I don't picture the Red Sox going for the K-Rod act. What other closer is still out there? Cordero?! Please, no. Part of my thinking on this is that I think the Sox should move Bard to the rotation. I'd also go talk to the White Sox and see if they'd trade Matt Thornton for use here as a setup guy. He fell out of favor with the Guillen regime after a bad April but was good the rest of the year. Maybe they're still overly down on him.

Edited by Rough Carrigan, 06 December 2011 - 11:10 PM.


#97 knucklecup


  • hi, I'm a cuckold


  • PipPip
  • 4,251 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 11:37 PM

They are overly down on Thornton, mainly because of his contract. He's certainly available because of it.

Not that the Red Sox have been linked to Brandon League but other teams have. Is he not a viable option?

#98 Hee-Seop's Fable

  • 1,264 posts

Posted 06 December 2011 - 11:43 PM

You're right, KidT. And that just moves the calculus a smidge more toward Madson. I agree with Soxscout. Offer Madson the Heath Bell deal. Andrew Bailey's inability to pitch more than 40 something innings in both his 2nd and 3rd years in the majors is scary. I don't picture the Red Sox going for the K-Rod act. What other closer is still out there? Cordero?! Please, no. Part of my thinking on this is that I think the Sox should move Bard to the rotation. I'd also go talk to the White Sox and see if they'd trade Matt Thornton for use here as a setup guy. He fell out of favor with the Guillen regime after a bad April but was good the rest of the year. Maybe they're still overly down on him.

I'm with you on all of your reasoning, but my guess is Madson goes for something between what Philly was reputed to be offering and what Bell got - 3/$30-$32M, 4/$38-$40M, something like that. And I don't see the Sox going that far given the financial corner Theo worked them into.

Here's hoping Cheringtons's scouting pedigree bears fruit. Extrapolating from EV's points about the 40 man situation, it looks like they are looking to swing a trade for a pitcher Ben values, and sign one of the leftovers of the closer market. I'll be shocked, but elated, if Madson ends up here. Too much dice rolling from the way it's looking right now, but again, money's tight.

#99 Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat


  • has big, douchey shoulders


  • 13,218 posts

Posted 07 December 2011 - 12:00 AM

I'm with you on all of your reasoning, but my guess is Madson goes for something between what Philly was reputed to be offering and what Bell got - 3/$30-$32M, 4/$38-$40M, something like that. And I don't see the Sox going that far given the financial corner Theo worked them into.

Here's hoping Cheringtons's scouting pedigree bears fruit. Extrapolating from EV's points about the 40 man situation, it looks like they are looking to swing a trade for a pitcher Ben values, and sign one of the leftovers of the closer market. I'll be shocked, but elated, if Madson ends up here. Too much dice rolling from the way it's looking right now, but again, money's tight.

While that seems reasonable in theory, who are the teams that are likely to pay him that? Cubs? Angels? Orioles? Certainly anything is possible--someone could do a Soriano with him, I suppose--but the list doesn't appear long or obvious to me.

#100 Rough Carrigan


  • reasons within Reason


  • 16,955 posts

Posted 07 December 2011 - 12:12 AM

I fear that you might be right about Madson, HSF, getting more than the Bell contract, but from whom?

yankees - job already filled
Red Sox - Job open and some money available
Tampa Bay - Job might be open but no money
Toronto - Job just got filled with trade with ChiSox
Baltimore - Job is open some money to spend but should they buy candles before they even have a cake?

Detroit - Job is filled.
Cleveland - Job is filled and no money.
Kansas City - Job is filled and no money.
Minnesota - Job is sort of filled and they don't really have the money.
Chicago - Kenny Williams says they're rebuilding. They just traded their closer to Toronto.

Texas - Job is filled.
Anaheim - Job is filled.
Seattle - Job is filled and they've got a whole lot more suck to fix first.
Oakland - Job is filled at the moment and no money.

Phillies - Job is filled.
Atlanta - Job is filled.
New York Mets - Job is sort of filled and they sort of have no money.
Marlins - Job was just filled.
Nationals - Job is filled.

Brewers - Job is filled.
Cardinals - Job is filled.
Pirates - Job is filled and no money.
Cubs - Job is filled.
Reds - Job is open but doubtful that they'd pay that much.
Astros - No way the sketchy new owner will pay that much.

Diamondbacks - job is filled and they won't spend that much
Giants - Job is filled.
Rockies - Job is sort of filled (Street) and they won't pay that much.
Dodgers - Job is kind of open but their finances are questionable and there's a lot of suck to fix first
Padres - They'll never pay the money.

So, when you look at all 30 situations, absent the Orioles, Reds, White Sox or Dodgers doing something pretty obviously ill advised given where they are in the success cycle, it's hard to see against whom the Red Sox would be bidding.

Edited by Rough Carrigan, 07 December 2011 - 12:17 AM.