The Washington Nationals offered All-Star closer Chad Cordero for Luke Scott and Chad Qualls. I would of took it. Chad is a stud closer. Quall is nothing more than 7th-8th inning guy. As a closer, Qualls is 6-for-12 in save oppurtunities. Cordero has a lifetime 2.79 ERA with 128 saves. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7526956
Yuck. Thank goodness they turned that down. Qualls is a much better pitcher than cordero and is significantly cheaper (cordero made over 5 million last year). That's not even getting into scott. Qualls' save stats don't mean what you think they do. As a set-up man he is often exposed to no-win save situations. For example, if he comes up in the 8th inning with a one run lead and does his job for one inning he isn't credited with save. Yet if you gives up a run in that situation he receives a "blown save". Thus, as with most set-up men, he has a low save percentage. However, that's is much more indicative of the quirkiness (worthlessness) of the stat rather than his actual performance.
Yea he is and i don't even think it can be reasonably debated. cordero in an extreme pitchers' park had a 3.36 ERA (125 era+) in 75 innings Qualls in a slight hitters' park had a 3.05 ERA (144 era+) in 82.7 innings Even more importantly, Qualls also has much better peripheral statistics. Last year in a significantly worse pitching environment Qualls had a 8.1 k/9 and a 2.2 bb/9 w/ a 1 hr/9 vs. Cordero' 6.8 k/9, 3.1 bb/9 and 1 hr/9. All together Qualls had a 3.04 defensive independent era of 3.04 vs. Cordero's 3.94 It's not even close. Even ignoring the salary comparison, I can't think of a single legitimate argument that cordero is a better pitcher. Do you have one?
Dude, Qualls is not better than Cordero. Yeah, you can spin it if you compare Cordero's worst season to Qualls' best. But if you look at the full body of work, it's not even close. I'm not saying Cordero is so significantly better that he's worth Qualls AND Scott, but he is better than Qualls.
You're a funny guy. I already admitted it. You don't have to rub it in. Let's just ignore all the stats: Cordero (2005-07): .225 Avg Against, 192 K's, 113-for-133 in Save Oppurtunites (85%), 2.79 ERA and gave up 189 Hits in 222.2 Innings Pitched. Cordero had a 2.72 Road ERA in that span. Qualls (2005-07): .254 Avg Against, 194 K's, 5-for-16 in Save Oppurtunites (31%), 3.37 ERA and gave up 233 hits in 251 Innings Pitched. Qualls had a 3.07 Road ERA in that span.
I don't really care who is marginally better at this point. I don't want to see this team giving up any player resources to get a closer. To me, that is way down on the priority list, and we need to worry about our starting pitching before we think about trading for a closer.
Qualls doesnt compare to cordero...period. Cordero is a bonafide closer on a TERRIBLE team. If this deal was really out there, im surprised we didnt do it.
Herein lies the point. There is nothing to close if your "starting pitching" has already given up eight runs. This team needs at least one more starting pitcher. The Astros don't have enough tradeable assets to be sending one for an upgrade of their closer.
Agree totally. My one qualm with Wade's offseason thus far is that we may be in a position to need to use resources that need to go to starting pitching on a closer. But you got to give up something (Lidge) to get something (Bourn), I guess. I just hope we focus our assets on starting pitching and not the bullpen at this point. I'm pretty comfortable going with Qualls at closer to start the season and addressing the closer situation at the trading deadline if Qualls stumbles.
Last year, this team had something like 35 save opportunities - and lost the game in something around 10 of them I think - despite having little to no starting pitching. Had they only lost 2 or 3, they would have been in the division race in September.
But save opportunities are not limited to the closer! I would hazard a guess that *every* team has more "BS's" than its closer alone collects. For example, every time Borkowski or Rick White gave up four runs in the 7th with a 3 run lead there was a BS.
Closer is the most overrated position in baseball. The A's figured this out that you can just plug someone in there who can get three outs and they will rack up the saves. Someone will then overpay you for it. We have plenty of closer candidates, we dont need to waste our only trade assets to get one. Starting pitching is what we need bad. Im confident that one of Qualls/Paulino/Sarfate/Nieve can get the job done.
Good point - for some reason, I thought Yahoo's stats only listed the 9th inning BS's, but apparently not. It looks like we only lost 5-6 games this season that we had 9th inning save opportunities.
And if you look at Cordero's body of work you'll see severe negative downward trends. His K's/IP has dropped significantly since his first full season as his ERA and DERA have risen. Part of it is masked by pitching at one of the best pitcher's parks in the baseball. Qualls was much better last year, is much cheaper, and judging by peripheral stats will be better in the near future as well.
lol, maybe cordero has more saves because he's actually a closer. as far as save percentage i addressed that in my first post. Qualls has better K/ip, K/BB, Hr/IP, GB/FB stats than cordero
For his career, he is. For right now, it's debatable. If you look at the full body of work, Brad Lidge is one of the best closers in the game. But there are trends to consider, and just because someone was great in 2005 doesn't mean they're the same now. Given Cordero's declining numbers (and peripherals) in a pitcher's park, it's a legitimate question as to whether he's better than Qualls right now. He might be, but not for sure.
