Chad Cordero available for A level prospects?

[witesoxfan]

I actually beat all 3 of them in a decathalon, and I had the flu that day.

[Rowand44]

Our schools already fought about it and I came out on top. Nuff' said.

Ok, that was a low blow.

[103 mph screwball]

Wouldn't hurt to explore another quality bullpen arm. Maybe that could free up Sisco and or Massett to convert back to a starter ahead of schedule and perhaps be more valuable. All depends on if KW can swing a deal that can make the club better now and 3 years from now. That would depend on the asking price for Cordero. Anderson and Broadway were mentioned for Soriano. That is not necessarily what it would take to acquire Cordero.

[redandwhite]

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Jan 2, 2007 -> 12:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I actually beat all 3 of them in a decathalon, and I had the flu that day.

Okay, Rosie Ruiz.

 

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jan 2, 2007 -> 12:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok, that was a low blow.

You beat us, on the road, in football. Come on.

[CWSGuy406]

Still, if the White Sox have what it takes ala Broadway and Anderson, they should without hesitiation go after him.

 

Anderson and Broadway? Ick.

 

The way Masset has been talked up, I think they feel that HE will be the guy who can step up if/when MacDougal gets hurt. The Sox bullpen might not be experienced, but it's quite deep. The top three are amongst the best backends you'll find in the game, Aardsma should be (at worst) a good backend guy, probably like Riske last year. And there's a lot of depth for those last two spots. It looks like Sisco and Masset have the last two spots on lockdown, but there's also Haeger/Floyd (loser of the fifth starter battle), Phillips, Logan, and Perez who have little to prove down at AAA.

 

Quite honestly, the starting pitching and the offense concern me much more than the bullpend does.

[Heads22]

So, if we trade Anderson, who plays CF? Tererro? Sweeney? Owens? Pods? Mack?

 

That gives me the heebie jeebies.

[DBAHO]

So, if we trade Anderson, who plays CF? Tererro? Sweeney? Owens? Pods? Mack?

 

That gives me the heebie jeebies.

It'd be Sweeney.

 

He'd hit for a higher average than BA did in 06, but for less power.

 

And I rate BA highly of course.

 

My point is, BA and Broadway for Cordero is probably fair value. The problem is, we're not in stocking up for 2007 mode are we, and that's why this deal probably doesn't make a lot of sense.

[Balta1701]

My point is, BA and Broadway for Cordero is probably fair value. The problem is, we're not in stocking up for 2007 mode are we, and that's why this deal probably doesn't make a lot of sense.

It may be fair value on paper, but it's not a deal I'd ever want to do. Maybe I'm just being conservative, but I look at the innings. A good setup man/potential closer gives you 60-70 innings. A good starting pitcher gives you 200.

 

I can understand maybe dealing a starter who's still hanging around the low levels, or making a move in-season for relief pitching if a hole actually appears. But right now, I see 6, maybe more people who can compete for slots in the 2007 White Sox bullpen, and potentially do a damn good job. 3 or 4 of them could close on most teams in the big leagues, they're all young, they're all cheap, and they're all under our control for several years.

 

I see even dealing Broadway for him straight up as sacrificing some of our starting pitching depth to fix a problem that may not even be a problem mid-season.

 

If we're desperate for a righty reliever at the deadline, I can't imagine the price would possibly be higher, and it might even be lower for someone else other than Cordero.

[CWSGuy406]

I see even dealing Broadway for him straight up as sacrificing some of our starting pitching depth to fix a problem that may not even be a problem mid-season.

 

You're dead on.

 

We'd be giving up six years of Broadway and five years of Anderson for three years of Cordero. And if you think Cordero is going to be good, then you're looking at just three years of Cordero, because he'd get paid BIG TIME, and you don't want to dole out big cash to a reliever.

 

I guess you could make some sense of that if you don't believe in improvement from young players, or if you believe that Broadway is never going to make it, but I would see a trade like that as being quite stupid.

[DBAHO]

It may be fair value on paper, but it's not a deal I'd ever want to do. Maybe I'm just being conservative, but I look at the innings. A good setup man/potential closer gives you 60-70 innings. A good starting pitcher gives you 200.

 

I can understand maybe dealing a starter who's still hanging around the low levels, or making a move in-season for relief pitching if a hole actually appears. But right now, I see 6, maybe more people who can compete for slots in the 2007 White Sox bullpen, and potentially do a damn good job. 3 or 4 of them could close on most teams in the big leagues, they're all young, they're all cheap, and they're all under our control for several years.

 

I see even dealing Broadway for him straight up as sacrificing some of our starting pitching depth to fix a problem that may not even be a problem mid-season.

 

If we're desperate for a righty reliever at the deadline, I can't imagine the price would possibly be higher, and it might even be lower for someone else other than Cordero.

That's the opposite sort of thinking to the MacDougall trade though. Let's say right now we had Lumsden still, and MacDougall was a Royal, would you still make that trade?

 

Personally I don't think you're really trading for Cordero to "fix a problem". You're trading for him to make something that is already pretty good, and turning it elite.

 

And if you look at the SP's that we've acquired, Broadway would be in the lower tier compared to those guys in terms of upside, which in my mind, in the right deal (would have to be a good one) certainly makes him expendable.

[beck72]

Bucholz, Bowden, and Bard are "A level prospects" but you make it sound like they are horrible prospects. They all could be top 30 prospects in Baseball America in the next year.

 

Still, if the White Sox have what it takes ala Broadway and Anderson, they should without hesitiation go after him.

 

I was showing that a trade for Cordero wouldn't necessarily take guys who would play for the sox in 2007. Most teams want players who can help this yr at some point. The Nats are in a different situation

[beck72]

Trying to get back on topic, I have no problem getting rid of a quality pitching prospect for one of the better, more constant bullpen arms in the game. Jenks and Mac don't exactly have clean bills of health, and like it was mentioned earlier in the thread, Cordero might be a better closer than Jenks is now. I just have a problem with giving up Anderson. Then what, Sweeney in CF? I like Sweeney, but I would expect him to be almost as bad as Anderson was last year. He just isn't ready, and there isn't anything wrong with that, he just needs more time.

If you could get Cordero for a Broadway or Gio, I say you do it.To have a shut down bullpen like that would be outstanding to have.

 

IMO, Anderson wouldn't be part of a trade with the Nats. They have a logjam of OF's now and it looks like they'll be going with Escobar in CF. And it was pointed out that the writer suggested BA and Lance for Soriano, that it wouldn't take as much for Cordero.

 

Yet a trade for a proven bullpen arm wouldn't mean the sox are keeping BA in CF. Actually, it may make a trade even easier for a CFer/ LFer, as the sox could use a guy like Aardsma or MacDougal as bait. Somehow, the sox will upgrade the OF via trade. If they can do it w/o trading away guys who can help the sox big club in 2007 great. But it's not likely.

[southsider2k5]

For as much as Brian did wrong last year, it seems like a lot of teams would still like to get their hands on him.

 

It's almost like they think he won't continue to suck.....

 

Great post. Too bad it hasn't been quoted more often in this thread.