Loading ...Okay, time to discuss CoCo. No, not this Koko; this CoCo. How valuable is this guy? And can that value be discussed without looking at the contract he signed last off-season?
I’ll be honest, I’m surprised that Edwin Encarnacion’s “How Valuable” post didn’t top Brandon Phillips’ post for number of comments. Feel free to continue the discussion about those players, but I want to hear what you think about Cordero.
I was not critical of the Cordero signing, and I was pretty pleased with the guy after about half of this season. Now, I’m seriously wavering. If he had pitched like he was being paid, he had some real value to the team. As it turned out, that contract may be an albatross that we will regret for some time.
What do you think?
I think it was a good signing because I would much rather have him closing games than Weathers.
Plus it was probably hard for him with so little save opportunities and I don’t think Baker did a good job at still getting him innings early in the year when they weren’t save situations. So I think he went unutilized a lot more than he should of which is why I think we saw his numbers and quality of innings slide in the second half.
Overall I still like the signing and will wait till I see how he is utilized and how he does next year.
I think responses will increase when we approach the Ryan Freel debate. Which I will start early by saying please trade him he is getting paid way to much for what he is.
I think signing a guy that pitches only one inning in games they’re winning to a $40M contract on a team with a limited budget is crazy.
This team has too many holes to be throwing this much money at a reliever, and people said Dunn was too expensive?
He is crazy overpaid. He may be terrible by the time the contract has expired.
But. . .
The bullpen was great last year, and terrible the year before. A lot (lot!) of that had to do with:
1) Getting rid of Stanton.
2) Having FC be your closer and moving everyone back on your depth chart.
My inclination is to agree with Bill. When you look at the overall salary distribution, and consider the number of innings he pitches, the commitment seems nuts, even though the overall contract number is in line with what established closers seem to be getting.
My thought late last year was that he was a luxury a rebuilding team could not afford, and that given there are only two real closers on the market, we should explore what we could get for him. Problem is, as several people have pointed out, there is no plausible successor on the roster (and PLEASE correct me if I am wrong about that, hope is a good thing). On top of which, being condemned to watch the Indians this season, I believe it mentally and physically wears down a pitching staff to blow lots of leads, particularly early in the season.
This necessarily gets tied up in the larger argument about the overall value of closers, but if a desperate contender wanted to make us an offer (wish the Mets still had some prospects to waste), and we thought we could redeploy the salary effectively somewhere else, I would consider making a move. Since I don’t think those conditions will be satisfied, I will setlle for having some certainty at least at one position.
I am amazed when I read that we should be willing to pay above the market value for a young outfielder who hasn’t spent a full season in the big leagues but when all that was heard in 2007 was improve the bullpen and we need a closer, we then question the move after the fact.
So management got a closer who has an All Star track record and now there is discussion as to whether it was necessity or a luxury.
They paid Cordero what they needed to pay him to get him. The bullpen is better, sometimes good so lets let it play out and be happy we have him. When we win, hopefully before his contract is up, we will need an All Star closer and we have one.
While I agree that Cordoro makes a ton relative to his time on the field, I would say that two facts make me inclined to live with that (at least for the next season):
1. All closers make a lot of money
2. Cordero played well when the Reds were in contention.
My stance on the debate of a closer’s value in based in my belief that some players are consistently better than others in pressure situations. I think Cordero is one of those people.
The bullpen was great last year, and terrible the year before. A lot (lot!) of that had to do with:
great?
I must have watched a different season. The bullpen was mediocre at best. And I remember some low points were the bullpen was awful.
But I decided to take a look instead of rely on my memory.
The bullpen ranked 17th in baseball looking at WXRL.
Another way to put it is no playoff team had a worse bullpen.
Or the only Central team with a worse bullpen was Stl.
the only guys that pitched in the bullpen worth keeping are
Cordero
Burton (!!)
Bray
Affeldt (he’s a free agent right?. Maybe even the best free agent reliever that isn’t from LAA)
and Herrera
the bullpen was not great
I would like to discuss this Coco’s value.
Bill and GRF are right. Too much dough for the value he adds.
Dan, when exactly were the Reds in contention? They were no higher than 4th place after the first week of the season.
I was waiting for the Bird-man reference. A big thank you to Chris for not disappointing…..I like CoCo. Not really overpaid in comparison, but very expensive for this market. I don’t think we can move him, and I like the point above that stated that we have stability at one position. Like Brandon, perhaps not great, but major league-solid. And he does make the rest of the bullpen better. I would like to see a resigning of Affeldt and use him and Burton to set up…..And if we didn’t have CoCo we might still be talking about Coffey and Weathers….
Getting players to wear a Reds jersey is a tough sell, i think thats why the Reds had to pay what they did. My question when they signed him was is he the all-star closer from Milwaukee or the bust from Texas? I’ll wait one more year before i say, but it’s a lot of money to secure a late lead when you have so many holes you never have a late lead. And agree Mike, bullpen was ok in spurts, but not great. Also not crazy about re-signing Weathers.
I was ambivilent about his signing but became less and less of a Coco fan as the year wore on. He was sometimes lights out but too often his one inning was an adventure. How many times did he walk batters, especially the first one he faced. He had a 4.94 ERA after the All-Star break and a 4.17 ERA at home. The MLB site has him with an ERA of 4.42 against right-handers. I want less than a 3.33 ERA for my closer.Pay isn’t a factor; performance is. I’m not that impressed. My question is that the Reds announced at the end of the year that he had been playing hurt all year. I wonder if that is really true; why didn’t it get mentioned until three days before the end of the season. If this is really true, can we expect better performance next year?
One thing I noticed about Cordero in late August was how much better he pitched when the Reds were winning more consistently. When they were close in April and May he seemed to be so much better when he got consistent work and was in the thick of things. Same when the Reds put together a nice run in August.
Then I remembered the same thing happened to him in Texas and Milwaukee. In 2004, he had 49 saves and the Rangers finished only three games out. In ‘06, he lost his closer’s job amid the Rangers finishing 13 games out.
He goes to Milwaukee and saves 60 games in a year and a half as the Brewers are in close contention. So, seeing that pattern, he had spells from late May into July where he’d go three days, four, even five days without an appearance.
Homer Bailey for closer!
Whoa! Someone posting under my name… hmmm…
Anyway, I think Coco is a good but not great closer, definitely improved the bullpen, and I love his good strikeout numbers.
That said, there is no way that a mid-market team can afford to pay a 60-70 inning reliever this kind of money (no matter how good he is – literally!)
Cordero at that price would’ve been a nice signing for a good, high-payroll team that was just a player or two away from being great.
For the Reds to sign Cordero, he probably moved them from being a 72-win team to a 74-win team. That’s why this has not been money well-spent… at least, so far.
Awful signing. Considering he’s making more than he’s worth, he is considerably overvalued.
He’s about a 1.5 WAR player, getting paid like a 3 WAR player. He’s not young, either.
I had no problem with the signing at the time, and his contract is a market deal for a closer (whether the market for closers is rational or not is another story). Problem is that at the time I thought we were much closer to contending than I believe we are now. I would pay that money to get the extra 3-4 wins from high 80s to low 90s. As Dan points out, using it to get from 70 to 73-74 makes less sense.
That having been said, having watched a team with no closer, I think he still has a great deal of value. I really do think there is a ripple effect throughout the pitching staff when you can’t close out games. In terms of value, I would not put him on the untouchable list, but I would only consider monving him if we could both get some serious prospects and use the salary to shore up another position (say if it put us in a position to afford Beltre’s salary and move EE to the outfield). Since I doubt both those happen, I am happy to have him around.
GRF, but I don’t think the rational of the market for closers is “another story”, I think it’s this story. Closers can be found w/o paying $40M…and they’re over-valued..
It filled a big need at the time although for too much money. But he’s not a ‘lights out’ closer.
i have been waiting for someone to explain why the reds played better against better teams. did they play up and down to the other teams levels? was it a lack of concentration against the other teams they thought they should beat?
The most popular measure of a closer is saves. Of the top 4 NL relievers in saves(Woods and Coco are tied at 34 three others ahead of them), only Brad Lidge had a remarkedly better year.
Cordero had 6 blown saves, Valverde had 7, Woods and Wilson 6 and Lidge 0.
ERAs Woods, Valverde and Coco all within .15 of each other, again Lidge on top. Considering the range of the defense behind them only Wilson in SF had it as bad as Coco with the Reds defense.
All the other stats are pretty similar.
I don’t think the Reds had another player stack up at their position as well as they did at closer. It also goes without saying if the team gets better the closer will too.
Call it overvalued but if we had a player in the top four of their position at every position we would still be playing. Give me some more of those kind of overvalued players.
If you have to pay $10 million to get/keep a top four player at every position, could ownership afford it?
I haven’t heard that the Reds have unlimited payroll, either.
Should the Reds be paying 1 reliever the same as they pay Aaron Harang?
Nobody said anything about unlimited payroll. Didn’t even hint. Said simply: they ain’t barking, so why are you? The team agreed to the Cordero contract so they figure it fits into their budget. If budget was a deep concern like the old days, sure. But it’s not. They have a lot of youngsters, they’re going up to around $80 mil, they have cleared off $16-$20 million (after contract escalations and arb cases) and Coco ain’t a concern to them.
Who cares whether Cordero makes more than Harang? It’s simply not germane to anything other than wanton bellyaching.
I have mixed feelings. I wish he wasn’t getting paid so much…to me the fact that one player gets such a high percentage of the payroll at all doesn’t make very much sense. But, what a relief it was to have a good bullpen this year (pun intended). In 2007 it was actually flat out painful, and this year it wasn’t, so although it’s a bummer we’re paying someone that high of a percentage, if we had to do it all over again, I’d sign him, anyway. He’s on the roster for two more years, no reason to complain about having a good closer, I guess.
I think Affeldt could’ve done almost as well, at a much lower cost.
I think Cordero did a good job — pretty much just what was expected — but $11 million/year for a closer is just too much for a team with a, what, $80 million payroll?
Teams at our mid-range payroll level need to try to be a little more creative, IMO.
But really, I shouldn’t be all negative. Castellini opened up the checkbook to address a need, and Cordero pitched well. (I do love his high K rate.)
“I think Affeldt could’ve done almost as well, at a much lower cost.”
Dan, this is exactly what the Reds needed to stop doing at the back of their bullpen: guessing and hoping. Affeldt has never closed, he probably wouldn’t have signed with the Reds if not given a (meager) shot at starting, and he didn’t exactly rove he could pitch every day.
By addressing a serious need, the Reds eliminating the trial-by-error, kerosene-can, fly-by closer rotation that had not worked in any way, shape or form in previous years.
You want that commodity, the cost is what the market dictated. And again: if the Reds aren’t chirping about payroll, why are some of you so hellbent?
His K/BB and WHIP rate him near the bottom of the top ten closers in the league by saves. This is because he walks too many batters. He must cut down his BB to considered among the top closers in the league, which he is being paid to do so.
It isn’t about K/BB and WHIP. It is about saves and blown saves. He is right at the top here. Its about the team winning not fantasy stats.
As far as making as much as Harang it is again what is the market value.
I do wish Coco would have more “clean” innings, however. But in the end, he usually gets the job done.
If resources are not unlimited, then it is germane to compare the cost of individual players relative to their contribution to wins.
I wouldn’t call BB/K & WHIP fantasy stats. They indicate that he allows too many runners on-base which makes him a riskier candidate to continue to earn saves at a high rate. He did great in 2004 and 2007. All those extra base runners came back to haunt him in 2003 and 2006. There’s just a little too much Weathers in his performance for my taste, especially in 1-run save situations.
Only the Yankees have unlimited resources, so your argument is fruitless to the simple point: Cordero is with the Reds, he’s likely to remain with the Reds, he’s asset and not a detriment, his salary is what the market bears, and ownership is perfectly fine with that, so what the fan thinks doesn’t matter one hoot.
Mr. Redlegs it can’t be said better than that.
You’ve won this time, Mr. Redlegs, but we’ll get you someday!!
Chad might as well shut down this blog, then. Only opinions that matter are the Reds and Mr Redlegs.
Cordero has been mostly an asset through one-fourth of his contract. Chad’s question is was it worth it and will it be worth it over the remaining three years. With the number of holes on this team, how can we not discuss whether a different allocation of limited resources would produce a different result? That’s the very question we’re getting at with these blog entries.
Rays, Phillies, Red Sox, and Dodgers.
Who are 4 teams that didn’t have a single reliever making $10 million?
Only the Phillies had a reliever paid more than $5 million.
Thank you Greg…
Coco’s contract is market value, true, but I would argue that the market overvalues “proven closers” in general.
I’m not saying that anyone can do it… but I am saying that you are over-paying when you walk straight into the teeth of the open market and sign a proven closer at market value.
As for payroll, I hear you that Castellini is not squawking about payroll… but the Reds owe him a minimum of $37 million over the next 3 years ($12 million/year plus a $1 million buyout of his 2012 year).
The Reds payroll is not unlimited.
That contract is going to weigh HEAVILY on future player and payroll decisions over the next 3 years. It’s going to tie their hands to some extent, and that’s even if Cordero stays effective.
If he goes down or becomes less effective (we are talking about his age 34, 35, and 36 seasons), that is a LARGE chunk of cash down the drain.
I just don’t think it’s a good idea to commit $12 million a year out of a payroll of $75-80 million to a guy who will pitch 65-70 innings a year maximum.
The market overpays proven closers and we just hopped on and said “OK.” Of course Cordero made our bullpen better… but it just seems to me that clever, smart teams with limited payrolls find a better way.
Maybe Affeldt would’ve been an effective closer and maybe he wouldn’t have… but either way, we wouldn’t owe him $37 million over 3 years. We wouldn’t owe him anything more.
Just another way to look at it…
I say try to get his salary off the books as well. There are plenty of young willing closer-type arms in the farm system that can be placed in his spot.
See: Jared Burton, Josh Roenicke are two.
I tend to think unless the Reds are willing to pay a big chunk of that salary to move him on, Coco is going to be around for a couple of more years. Who would be willing to deal for that contract and needs a closer? I don’t see a team.
It could be worse, it could be like some of the lame deals the Yanks signed like Wright or Pavano where they get paid huge bucks and never play.
I just hope Coco has a good season or at least gets off to a hot start so maybe some club with more cash than brains deals for him.
“Rays, Phillies, Red Sox, and Dodgers. Who are 4 teams that didn’t have a single reliever making $10 million? Only the Phillies had a reliever paid more than $5 million.”
Let’s see, the Dodgers and Red Sox closers are home-grown youngsters who will one day (and not so far off) be commanding the $10 million plateau. So that’s not relevant to the Reds because the Reds had absolutely no one close to being ready to step in and they don’t today.
The Phillies win the World Series because of what Brad Lidge did for the back of their bullpen. The Rays gave a 39-year-old Troy Percival $8 million over two years despite having pitched only a quarter of a season since 2005. It is a ridiculous contract but the Rays don’t make the postseason without Percival’s first half.
How easily you bean counters forget how horrendous the Reds’ bullpen has been for most of this decade and some of the extreme measures–desperate trades, bad signings, reliance on retreads, always hoping and praying for a miracle career year.
Then, they sign a proven closer who saves 34 games, wins 5, has a hand in 54 percent of the team’s meager victories and plays an enormous role with the young Latin players in the clubhouse, and you have balls to say the Reds could find someone cheaper to do the job just as effectively. Really? Who, because they’ve tried the cheap-ass route for years and it has never worked out. Remember 2006? Reds might win the division if they had traded for Coco instead of with Washington.
Now that they have an anchor in the pen who allows them to slot the other roles, you complain about something that’s a.) not an issue and b.) not worth complaining about. Cordero is an asset who’s value is what the market bears. And that market was $12 million a year. If the Reds didn’t pay it, Milwaukee would have, or someone else.
Yes, Coco was good.
Yes, he made the bullpen better.
Yes, the Reds paid market value (and if they hadn’t, someone else would’ve).
We agree on these things.
I’m not even asserting for sure that this is a bad signing. I don’t know.
The only thing I AM sure of is that the $37 million we owe him over the next 3 years WILL keep us doing some other things. I don’t know what, but something.
Will that tradeoff be worth it? I really don’t know. But there IS some trade-off that we will be making, make no mistake about that.
My gut says that $12 million/year is an awful lot to pay for a 65-70 inning guy. Those better be 70 DAMN good innings. I just wonder if that price — admittedly, market value — is worth it for that number of innings.
Dan, why are you and others so damn worried about 2-3 years down the road? Teams really do think of the slotting of salary for future years. That’s why they have assistant Gms who specialize in finance and contracts. And in the future years the payroll will climb–maybe not much, but some. And they will shed some, too.
Look at it this way: They had Cordero this year and the payroll was about $75 mil. They expect payroll to be about $80 mil in 2009. Cordero’s salary essentially replaces Griffey’s.
So the Reds were already spending that money, it was already budgeted, the team isn’t squawking and they’re still going to pursue their needs.
Really, Cordero is not an issue. Yet.
Can we hurry and get to the evaluating of Dick Pole?
Redlegs fact check – the Dodgers closer is a 38 year old Japanese league pitcher. Hardly someone who came up through their organization. Their 24 year old setup man stepped up and closed games after his July elbow injury.
Besides, other teams having minor league bullpen talent only further proves my point that there are much more cost efficient ways to develop a bullpen, which allows your limited resources to go to more cost-competitive positions.
Comparing the bullpens of the Reds, Rays, Red Sox, Dodgers, and Phillies, the Reds have 4 of the highest 10 paid pitchers: Cordero, Stanton, Affeldt, Weathers.
Stanton! That’s depressing…
Did the Dodgers make the postseason due to a late run with that young, homegrown set-up man doing the job? Yes they did, so the point isn’t valid and the fact isn’t wrong.
What minor league talent do the Reds have that could have closed this year? None. No one.
But if you were happy having the same bullpens as in the past three years, you’re just one of those fans who likes to complain about everything.
Look at it this way: They had Cordero this year and the payroll was about $75 mil. They expect payroll to be about $80 mil in 2009. Cordero’s salary essentially replaces Griffey’s.
Egads, now it’s a factless display of bad math. We’ll leave it to the other readers to figure out how many things are wrong with this. Maybe we could do this like a “Where’s Waldo” game for all of Mr. Redleg’s posts.
Egads, now it’s another factless rant of something you know nothing about. We’ll leave it to the other readers to figure out who’s got 32 years’ experience reporting on sports, agents, contracts, labor strikes, history and thematics. Maybe we could do this like a “Where’s Your Experience, Tom?” for all of the counter arguments you constantly make without a grain of foundation or knowledge except for what people like me report to you.
You must have an awesome fact checker to be employed as a reporter for that long, based upon the error ridden posts you make here on this site.
Yeah, the informality of a blog post is the same as a 3,000-word article or 10,000 book proposal. But then, error ridden in your usage is hyphenated because it’s compounded–not that it means a hill of beans in the big picture, right? You understand the big picture of an analyses, don’t ya?
Of course not.