Chad Cordero

[homer]

Now that CoCo has gone bye bye, I think the Brewers should deal for ChadCo. What would it take to get him? Has this been dealt with in another thread? I seem to recall that we talked about it but I didn't see anything.

[strawbossisevil]

He's gonna be very expensive. Why not grab free agents which won't cost us any prospects/depth? Or trade someone who is a bit more available (Fuentes).

 

Examples of guys who won't cost us our prospects:

 

Herges

Riske

Hawkins

 

I think we should be focusing less on the closer spot, and more on having a solid pen from top to bottom. Signing two of those three and adding Fuentes in a deal for Capuano would do just that. We might not have that lock down closer, but we would be much better at protecting leads/staying in games in middle innings.

[dadofandrew]

They asked the sky for Chad Cordero last year at the deadline. Don't see it happening. I'd even say Nathan would be more likely.

[jackalope02ca]

If I'm the Nationals I'm asking for Parra and Bill Hall. That's why this will never happen.

[DHonks]

I'd love to add Fuentes or Hawkins. Hawkins has been dominant for so long, yet people only remember his failed stints as closer

[MNBrew]

Having seen as much of Hawkins' career up-close as I have, I'm really not sure he's a guy we want.

 

He was productive but not always as great as his numbers seemed in the later stages of his Twins career, and he became very arrogant about his performance with the media. His attitude about got him run out of town with the Cubs. He was absolutely nothing special with the Giants and Orioles. He finally had a productive year combined with a quiet attitude last year in Denver.

 

The Brewers could certainly do worse. But there's also much more negativity in this guy's history than there was with Tomo Ohka when we first picked him up.

[RobertR]

I bet there's a GM out there that's in love with "good bloodlines, prototypical leadoff hitter Tony Gwynn Jr." and will give up a decent reliever for him.

 

To me Cordero is the most attractive trade option out there because he's a couple year solution. It's probably more efficient to trade for Chad Cordero than to trade for a different closer in 2007, who will likely demand a couple of prospects, and then be in the same position in 2008, which will likely cost another set of prospects to fill that hole.

 

And, who knows, maybe Bowden overrates our prospects. It's happened before. Or, perhaps, there's just a good fit.

 

Robert

[fondybrewfan]

Any way we can pry a your Red Sox reliever not name Papelbon away from the Red Sox? Craig Hansen or Manny DelCarmen would do nicely for me, if not a closer a vital 7th or 8th inning guy

[RobertR]

I don't see a real match between the Red Sox and Brewers. Maybe they'd be interested in Escobar, but the Boston system is swimming in prospects, and their lineup is set. Ben Sheets is about the only player they'd be interested in that the Brewers might be willing to part with. In that case, sure Delcarmen and Hansen are on the table, although I suspect they'd make a run at Santana first.

 

Robert

[And That]

If I'm going for Cordero, I'm also going for Kearns. I'd like to see a huge deal for those two guys, but sadly we'll only get one or the other.

[colbyjack]

If not Cordero, I would definitely pursue Jon Rauch, or even Luis Ayala, who has been a very underrated part of the Nats bullpen. Neither Rauch or Ayala is without some medical history concerns, but both have put up very impressive numbers.

 

I do really like the idea of pursuing Cordero, I just think the asking price could be in the Crawford-esque range (speaking of which, Crawford for Cordero might be a trade match made in heaven).

[ReverendBrewmeister]

Listening to WGN Radio this evening (around 7:30pm), on Dave Kaplan's show, the possibility of Chad Cordero and Ryan Church to the Cubs was being discussed. The reporter (whose name I forget) and Kaplan both indicated that the asking price from Washington was Felix Pie and Rich Hill. The Chicagoans thought that was too high, but it does give some indication of what an offer from our end might have to include.

 

In other words, what is our equivalent to Felix Pie and Rich Hill that the Nationals would want from us?

[DHonks]

I like the Jon Rauch idea colbyjack. One question..when he dominated in the Olympics, he was throwing around 98. Has his velocity returned?

[yoshii8]

I don't know if the Nats are a good match, especially if there turning down Hill and Pie for Cordero and Church. I'm not sure that our guys in Capuano, Gwynn etc... would be a good enough offer.

[Oldcity]

In other words, what is our equivalent to Felix Pie and Rich Hill that the Nationals would want from us?

Tony Gwynn and Chris Capuano?

 

[Postseason2006]

The said part about all of this is, Melvin has no idea about valuing players. He gave up the #1 prospect at the time along with another higher prospect plus a LH reliever for a fading setup man.

[hauser42]

The said part about all of this is, Melvin has no idea about valuing players. He gave up the #1 prospect at the time along with another higher prospect plus a LH reliever for a fading setup man.

No Melvin doesn't because he finds guys like Davis, T-Bow and other players from the scrap heap.

Inman was a #4 starter at the major league level, and LH relievers are usually not any good till they reach 30.

What did you want Melvin to sit on his hands and watch the team crumble (sure you would have complained about that) or would you like him to make a move to improve the team?

[paul253]

What did you want Melvin to sit on his hands and watch the team crumble (sure you would have complained about that) or would you like him to make a move to improve the team?

 

I don't think he wanted Melvin to sit around and do nothing, but to trade away 3 pitching prospects for an average Major League reliever wasn't what he had in mind. Maybe Inman makes it, maybe he doesn't, but I think his value was higher than what we got for him. Despite the bullpen struggling so much, Thatcher never got a shot in Milwaukee, and look what he did in San Diego. Everyone says, well now we got 2 picks for Linebrink that are higher than the pick we took Inman with....thats great....but what are the odds the people we draft will have more success or a higher ceiling than Inman had when he got traded?

[MadtownTim]

What did you want Melvin to sit on his hands and watch the team crumble (sure you would have complained about that) or would you like him to make a move to improve the team?

 

I don't think he wanted Melvin to sit around and do nothing, but to trade away 3 pitching prospects for an average Major League reliever wasn't what he had in mind.

Ummmm, you mean the best setup guy in the Major Leagues? The guy who when the deal was signed the entire Padres pitching staff just about staged a revolt? That guy?

 

I've read this board enough to have agrred with the opinion that minor league prospects are just that, prospects. You can't predict what they're going to do any better than the local weather guy can tell you what the weather is going to be 5 minutes from now. When we picked up Linebrink, the Brewers were still in a fight for the Central and we needed another strong arm in the BP. The addition of Linebrink was a good one, IMHO.

[Fatter than Joey]

The guy who when the deal was signed the entire Padres pitching staff just about staged a revolt? That guy?

 

Yeah that guy -- he has been trending downward -- He was replaced much more effectively by Heath Bell and

Joe Thatcher.

[billyhallfan]

You can't predict what they're going to do any better than the local weather guy can tell you what the weather is going to be 5 minutes from now.

 

That is not true at all, i hate it when comments like this are made, sure, some prospects will turn out to be nothing, but a lot of prospects turn out to be something. To say you can't predict?

 

you can't tell me that Andrew McCutcheon isn't going to have a better chance of making it than James Boone...

 

you can predict prospects, and we traded 3 of our top 30 for a guy that severely underperformed for milwaukee. And one of the guys we traded, FTJ already mentioned was one of the Padres' most solid relievers.

[MoneyballMan]

The said part about all of this is, Melvin has no idea about valuing players. He gave up the #1 prospect at the time along with another higher prospect plus a LH reliever for a fading setup man.

This statement is just wrong. Melvin has done more good deal than bad ones, including doing what was necessary to grab bullpen help for a possible playoff run. Granted we haven't won anything yet, but we're getting a little spoiled (in my opinion). This franchise was dead in the water three or four years ago. There have been contributions from many, but DM has been the guy in charge of turning this entire franchise around.

[hauser42]

What did you want Melvin to sit on his hands and watch the team crumble (sure you would have complained about that) or would you like him to make a move to improve the team?

 

I don't think he wanted Melvin to sit around and do nothing, but to trade away 3 pitching prospects for an average Major League reliever wasn't what he had in mind. Maybe Inman makes it, maybe he doesn't, but I think his value was higher than what we got for him. Despite the bullpen struggling so much, Thatcher never got a shot in Milwaukee, and look what he did in San Diego. Everyone says, well now we got 2 picks for Linebrink that are higher than the pick we took Inman with....thats great....but what are the odds the people we draft will have more success or a higher ceiling than Inman had when he got traded?

 

Hitter were starting to catch up to Inman this year, so it looks like his potential could already be peaking at the minor league levels. Sorry he reminds me a lot of Zack Jackson that looks good in the low minors but just doesn't have enough stuff to get it done at the bigs.

 

Thatcher did a great job for the Padres but the Brewers wanted a vet that had been through the wars of the playoffs so they had to pay with some talent to get that guy.

 

Certain prospects do have better tools than others and should be better to predict if they will make it. But a lot can happen on the way to the majors. Injuries, log jams of talent on the major league talents, or something out of the ordinary. Look Josh Hamilton should have been a lock for a long major league career, but he got sidetracked and mostly likely never meet the expectations that came with his tools and pick. This is a extreme example, but look at some past Brewer prospects that have just not made it.

[Fatter than Joey]

Thatcher did a great job for the Padres but the Brewers wanted a vet that had been through the wars of the playoffs so they had to pay with some talent to get that guy.

 

Linebrink has less than 3IP in the playoffs.

[Postseason2006]

What is funny that when we had Inman before the trade, people thought he was awesome. Some of you are the same posters that are now undervaluing his value and saying, he's going to be a bust. Take of the blue and yellow glasses.

 

And the same posters are trying to argue that Federlinebrink was worth it? Comparing Thatcher's stats to his are a wash at best, so it's not even a close argument at this point. And as far as I am concerned, how was he better than McClung? Melvin overpaid period.

 

And this Doug Melvin has done so much? The core of this team is from Dean Taylor but yet people are so blind to Melvin? What does he have to show for players from the Sexson deal? Not much at this point. What does he now have to show for in the Carlos Lee trade? Not much either. He was so hell bent to get Nix thrown in too and he's done what? Why does he continually go for the blue light specials and overpay in beyond me. Instead, we get underachievers for our players and when he's forced to make a deal, we get disappointing BP help.

 

Why can't Melvin pick up players that are not struggling with their teams before a trade? At the time of the Lee trade, baeball analysts were critical of the move in terms of value. Now, we have picks when we heard last year about trying to win now.