radio silence:

How many wins would Cordero have directly contributed to this year?

It's fine to criticize Melvin for not signing Cordero, but that criticism doesn't correlate to Cordero's success; in fact, there's no one here that knows that Cordero would not have reverted to his low-to-mid 70% SVO% days had the Brewers signed that. It's simply poor argumentation to assume that becaue Cordero is successful in Cincinnati right now that he would be in Milwaukee, too -- Gagne's workload has been different from Cordero's to start with, and there's no telling how Cordero would have responded to the stretches of close games that Gagne faced.

We could very well be in the same situation with Cordero, and that's a fact based on his past track record.

Ummm...I think we can see from Eric Gagne that past record isn't always the best possible indicator for future success.

robertj44:

If Melvin was unaware of Gagne's drug (HGH) problem before aquiring him then I don't blame him. It seems to me like he was outed after the deal was done, correct me if I am wrong.

As for Suppan and Kendall, I like them both. Excellent start by Soup today, looked like the 06' version. Kendall has been rock steady as has been Kapler for that matter.

 

Everyone in baseball knew about Gagne's steroid use before the Mitchell Report. If you don't believe me, stop by Section 221, Row 9 on Tuesday or Wednesday and I'll introduce you to some people who can verify I've been mentioning him as a prominent user for 5 years. According to reports, Boston investigated Gagne's use while they were deciding to sign him in December '06. According to Melvin, the Brewers were blindsided by the report in December '07.

Excellent start by Suppan today? OK, Ned. It was a decent start, but when you walk 5 and load the bases a couple times, it's not "excellent".

brewguru:

Gabe Gross, a backup outfielder (despite Einstein's insistence that he was almost as good as Mickey Mantle)

I spend the weekend away, and I come back and you're still completely distorting what I said about something.

I said he was a good 4th or 5th outfielder. I wasn't even excited in the offseason at the prospect of platooning him with someone. I just objected when people went nuts about him being on the team and getting at bats.

I would say I'm surprised, but sadly this isn't a surprise.

Care to apologize?

 

brewhawk:

Ummm...I think we can see from Eric Gagne that past record isn't always the best possible indicator for future success.

Well, other than going out and doing an updated scouting report on someone (which is something most of us fans can't really afford to do, because seeing stuff on TV is only so useful) pretty much all you can do is look at past performance and view it through factors like age and trends.

Other than that, I think you're stuck looking at phases of the moon and animal migration patterns to figure out stuff. 

For what?

You've wasted more keystrokes defending Gabe Gross than what would be considered normal.

 

 

 

 

brewguru:

For what?

You've wasted more keystrokes defending Gabe Gross than what would be considered normal.
 

For lying about what I said.

Don't worry, I didn't actually expect you to be a man and own up to it.
 

Einsteinhood:

brewhawk:

Ummm...I think we can see from Eric Gagne that past record isn't always the best possible indicator for future success.

Well, other than going out and doing an updated scouting report on someone (which is something most of us fans can't really afford to do, because seeing stuff on TV is only so useful) pretty much all you can do is look at past performance and view it through factors like age and trends.

Other than that, I think you're stuck looking at phases of the moon and animal migration patterns to figure out stuff. 

Very funny.  But this does bring up a legitimate point to consider.  While Gagne's career numbers were good, his most recent numbers in Boston are a disaster.  So, which ones are the better predictor of future success?

I would argue the most recent season is the better indicator, in general, than career numbers.  There are obvious caveats to this, such as sample size, injuries, etc.  But I feel that way because it more likely takes into account trends in production, that may result from age, coaching, experience, etc.

I would also be curious what it was about the "detailed scouting reports" that you mentioned that favored a $10M guaranteed contract for this guy.  All you had to do was watch him with Boston to see he didn't have it anymore.

OK, I apologize to all the posters that think you are some kind of baseball expert. You have an infinite amount of love and respect for mediocre players. Dave Bush, Brady Clark, Gabe Gross.

 

I'm sorry. I'm really sorry for you.

shipitdear:

radio silence:

How many wins would Cordero have directly contributed to this year?

It's fine to criticize Melvin for not signing Cordero, but that criticism doesn't correlate to Cordero's success; in fact, there's no one here that knows that Cordero would not have reverted to his low-to-mid 70% SVO% days had the Brewers signed that. It's simply poor argumentation to assume that becaue Cordero is successful in Cincinnati right now that he would be in Milwaukee, too -- Gagne's workload has been different from Cordero's to start with, and there's no telling how Cordero would have responded to the stretches of close games that Gagne faced.

We could very well be in the same situation with Cordero, and that's a fact based on his past track record.

Radio - you're reaching so far w/ this that it actually made me laugh.  Look at his numbers so far w/ the Reds this year - granted, in limited duty.  You are one of those guys that is NEVER going to admit you're wrong on this one.  It's fine, we can discuss other stuff, I'm not going to bother trying to convince you.  Cordero could set the save record this year and have a 1.3 ERA and you wouldn't change your mind.  It's cool.

But you are ignoring an important part. The Reds are on the hook for Cordero for 4 YEARS. What if he collapses this year? The Reds are still on the hook for 3 more years. The Brewers, on the other hand, will part with Gagne at the end of the year. You can't judge letting Cordero go only 1 month into his 4 YEAR deal. It is stupid to already get on Melvin for Cordero when Cordero has 3 1/2 years to go on his deal.

Also, I seem to remember many at the JSO board who are now here who said at the time Cordero wasn't worth the money the Reds gave him. Kind of funny how people all of a sudden change their mind.

brewhawk:

Einsteinhood:

brewhawk:

Ummm...I think we can see from Eric Gagne that past record isn't always the best possible indicator for future success.

Well, other than going out and doing an updated scouting report on someone (which is something most of us fans can't really afford to do, because seeing stuff on TV is only so useful) pretty much all you can do is look at past performance and view it through factors like age and trends.

Other than that, I think you're stuck looking at phases of the moon and animal migration patterns to figure out stuff. 

Very funny.  But this does bring up a legitimate point to consider.  While Gagne's career numbers were good, his most recent numbers in Boston are a disaster.  So, which ones are the better predictor of future success?

I would argue the most recent season is the better indicator, in general, than career numbers.  There are obvious caveats to this, such as sample size, injuries, etc.  But I feel that way because it more likely takes into account trends in production, that may result from age, coaching, experience, etc.

Yes, obviously the numbers is Boston were bad. Though his really bad streak lasted about two weeks last year, his overall numbers in Boston and Texas did point to a decline from his days in LA. But simply looking at the Boston numbers is putting a lot of faith in that small sample (which is what most of the criticisms of the Brewers signing Gagne did) isn't a good idea.

I think the trend pointed to Gagne being better than he has been, though no where near as good as the LA days. So far, that's not the case. We'll see how things shake out, because I still think he is likely to start putting up zeros much more often than he has been.

brewhawk:

I would also be curious what it was about the "detailed scouting reports" that you mentioned that favored a $10M guaranteed contract for this guy.  All you had to do was watch him with Boston to see he didn't have it anymore.

posted: Sunday, December 9, 2007  |  Feedback  |  Print Entry

This exchange couldn't have worked out much better for the Brewers. They let Francisco Cordero walk, receiving two draft picks as compensation after he rejected their long-term contract offers, and now their divisional rivals are saddled with his four-year, $46 million deal. They now replace Cordero with Eric Gagne on a one-year, $10 million deal that is low-risk (because of its length) and has high-upside. It certainly beats taking Washington's offer of Chad Cordero for future superstar Rickie Weeks. There are two significant risks with Gagne: health and performance. Gagne missed most of the 2005 and 2006 seasons with elbow and back (herniated disc) injuries, then missed time in early 2007 with a hip injury but was healthy for the remainder of the season. (I don't buy the alleged shoulder injury from September 2007, which sounded more like a case of a guy going on the shelf due to ineffectiveness.) The performance risk wasn't a concern when Boston acquired him at the nonwaiver trade deadline, because he pitched very well for Texas in 33 innings prior to the deal. After the trade, his results were terrible, driven mostly by the 18 hits he allowed in just 10 innings in August. There wasn't anything wrong with his stuff: his four-seamer was mostly 92-94 mph and his "Vulcan" changeup was still an outpitch, 82-85 mph, with tumble and fade. The problem was pitch selection: He barely used the change, throwing mostly fastballs, even in obvious changeup counts (e.g., 1-2 to a left-handed hitter). Because his fastball is straight, hitters can time it if they know it's coming. The responsibility for pitch selection can fall on the pitcher or the catcher, depending on the team. But at some point, Red Sox catcher Jason Varitek or pitching coach John Farrell should have altered the pitching plan, or Gagne himself should have started shaking Varitek off when Varitek leaned too heavily on the fastball. None of this happened, and the results were predictably bad. Gagne now moves to a new team with a new catcher and switches to the easier league, going to the NL Central, baseball's weakest division. If he stays healthy for most of the year, he's a good bet to pick up 30-odd saves, earning himself a bigger contract next winter and earning the Brewers another two draft picks. Milwaukee, meanwhile, gets to push Derrick Turnbow out of any kind of leveraged role, using David Riske in the seventh or eighth innings and Gagne in the ninth inning. Brian Shouse is available as a situational lefty. The signing of Gagne fills the Brewers' biggest offseason need, and if they can find a third baseman to let them move Ryan Braun to the outfield, they'll be as solid as any other club in their division.

brewguru:

OK, I apologize to all the posters that think you are some kind of baseball expert. You have an infinite amount of love and respect for mediocre players. Dave Bush, Brady Clark, Gabe Gross.

I'm sorry. I'm really sorry for you.

Like I said, I expect nothing from you but this sort of thing.

cpk1994:

Also, I seem to remember many at the JSO board who are now here who said at the time Cordero wasn't worth the money the Reds gave him. Kind of funny how people all of a sudden change their mind.

I'm still right where I was.

Given the choice of the two with the contracts being equal, I take Cordero. But given the contracts and the Brewers payroll situation, I think Gagne was the better signing.

ike1024:

Plus, I still think Cameron will be fine - can we at least give a solid, proven player a few weeks before we call him a failure?

ok, but i'd still like to blame him for everything else...Except Braun and Fielder....

Einsteinhood:

Good fit for Gagne, Brewers

posted: Sunday, December 9, 2007  |  Feedback  |  Print Entry

This exchange couldn't have worked out much better for the Brewers. They let Francisco Cordero walk, receiving two draft picks as compensation after he rejected their long-term contract offers, and now their divisional rivals are saddled with his four-year, $46 million deal. They now replace Cordero with Eric Gagne on a one-year, $10 million deal that is low-risk (because of its length) and has high-upside. It certainly beats taking Washington's offer of Chad Cordero for future superstar Rickie Weeks. There are two significant risks with Gagne: health and performance. Gagne missed most of the 2005 and 2006 seasons with elbow and back (herniated disc) injuries, then missed time in early 2007 with a hip injury but was healthy for the remainder of the season. (I don't buy the alleged shoulder injury from September 2007, which sounded more like a case of a guy going on the shelf due to ineffectiveness.) The performance risk wasn't a concern when Boston acquired him at the nonwaiver trade deadline, because he pitched very well for Texas in 33 innings prior to the deal. After the trade, his results were terrible, driven mostly by the 18 hits he allowed in just 10 innings in August. There wasn't anything wrong with his stuff: his four-seamer was mostly 92-94 mph and his "Vulcan" changeup was still an outpitch, 82-85 mph, with tumble and fade. The problem was pitch selection: He barely used the change, throwing mostly fastballs, even in obvious changeup counts (e.g., 1-2 to a left-handed hitter). Because his fastball is straight, hitters can time it if they know it's coming. The responsibility for pitch selection can fall on the pitcher or the catcher, depending on the team. But at some point, Red Sox catcher Jason Varitek or pitching coach John Farrell should have altered the pitching plan, or Gagne himself should have started shaking Varitek off when Varitek leaned too heavily on the fastball. None of this happened, and the results were predictably bad. Gagne now moves to a new team with a new catcher and switches to the easier league, going to the NL Central, baseball's weakest division. If he stays healthy for most of the year, he's a good bet to pick up 30-odd saves, earning himself a bigger contract next winter and earning the Brewers another two draft picks. Milwaukee, meanwhile, gets to push Derrick Turnbow out of any kind of leveraged role, using David Riske in the seventh or eighth innings and Gagne in the ninth inning. Brian Shouse is available as a situational lefty. The signing of Gagne fills the Brewers' biggest offseason need, and if they can find a third baseman to let them move Ryan Braun to the outfield, they'll be as solid as any other club in their division.

 

Where is this article from?

btw, by the time the draft picks get here, our window will be closed.

brewguru:

Einsteinhood:

Good fit for Gagne, Brewers

posted: Sunday, December 9, 2007  |  Feedback  |  Print Entry

This exchange couldn't have worked out much better for the Brewers. They let Francisco Cordero walk, receiving two draft picks as compensation after he rejected their long-term contract offers, and now their divisional rivals are saddled with his four-year, $46 million deal. They now replace Cordero with Eric Gagne on a one-year, $10 million deal that is low-risk (because of its length) and has high-upside. It certainly beats taking Washington's offer of Chad Cordero for future superstar Rickie Weeks. There are two significant risks with Gagne: health and performance. Gagne missed most of the 2005 and 2006 seasons with elbow and back (herniated disc) injuries, then missed time in early 2007 with a hip injury but was healthy for the remainder of the season. (I don't buy the alleged shoulder injury from September 2007, which sounded more like a case of a guy going on the shelf due to ineffectiveness.) The performance risk wasn't a concern when Boston acquired him at the nonwaiver trade deadline, because he pitched very well for Texas in 33 innings prior to the deal. After the trade, his results were terrible, driven mostly by the 18 hits he allowed in just 10 innings in August. There wasn't anything wrong with his stuff: his four-seamer was mostly 92-94 mph and his "Vulcan" changeup was still an outpitch, 82-85 mph, with tumble and fade. The problem was pitch selection: He barely used the change, throwing mostly fastballs, even in obvious changeup counts (e.g., 1-2 to a left-handed hitter). Because his fastball is straight, hitters can time it if they know it's coming. The responsibility for pitch selection can fall on the pitcher or the catcher, depending on the team. But at some point, Red Sox catcher Jason Varitek or pitching coach John Farrell should have altered the pitching plan, or Gagne himself should have started shaking Varitek off when Varitek leaned too heavily on the fastball. None of this happened, and the results were predictably bad. Gagne now moves to a new team with a new catcher and switches to the easier league, going to the NL Central, baseball's weakest division. If he stays healthy for most of the year, he's a good bet to pick up 30-odd saves, earning himself a bigger contract next winter and earning the Brewers another two draft picks. Milwaukee, meanwhile, gets to push Derrick Turnbow out of any kind of leveraged role, using David Riske in the seventh or eighth innings and Gagne in the ninth inning. Brian Shouse is available as a situational lefty. The signing of Gagne fills the Brewers' biggest offseason need, and if they can find a third baseman to let them move Ryan Braun to the outfield, they'll be as solid as any other club in their division.

 

Where is this article from?

btw, by the time the draft picks get here, our window will be closed.

Sorry, I thought the name was at the top.

It's from Scouts inc (a division of ESPN.com) and Keith Law. It's the only "scouting report" that I saw of all the talk about Gagne's contract this offseason. Most writers chose to make jokes and focus on a few months last year. If there are others, I didn't see them.

As for the window being closed, I totally disagree. First of all, I think if things are managed well, the window can stay open for 5 to 6 years before a small rebuild to reopen another window. Second, guys can make it to the majors fairly quickly. LaPorta will probably be up a year and a half after being drafted, and some guys (like college closers (I'm crossing my fingers for Josh Fields, I think)) are up even sooner. I plan on being a fan for the rest of my life, so I'll take talent where I can get it.