Rockies Draw Line At Three Years For De La Rosa

The Rockies have drawn the line at a three-year deal for free agent lefty Jorge de la Rosa, reports Troy E. Renck of the Denver Post.  Competition for De La Rosa appears heavy; Renck adds the Orioles to a list of suitors that already included the Pirates, Nationals, Rangers, Yankees, and Brewers.  Since three of those clubs are eyeing higher profile lefty Cliff Lee, Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports feels that De La Rosa may wait until he signs, though Renck does not agree.

With Jake Westbrook and Hiroki Kuroda off the board, Renck believes that Carl Pavano is now a stronger possibility for Colorado.  Renck also names Javier Vazquez, and I imagine they might take a look at Jon Garland.

Renck also notes that Melvin Mora is looking to sign a contract soon.  The Rockies aren't ready to commit, so he may sign elsewhere.


Leave a Reply

15 Comments on "Rockies Draw Line At Three Years For De La Rosa"


bbxxj
4 years 9 months ago

I might go three years with a team option on a fourth and a reasonable buyout but thats it. Kudos to the Rockies for making sure they don’t overpay for a guy with control issues in a weak FA market. I’d rather trade for a starter or use a youngster than overpay in years for JdlR.

4 years 9 months ago

I just don’t see any way that Carl Pavano isn’t the right option for the Twinkies.
-wtk

mikefromNY
4 years 9 months ago

Imagine Javy playing in Coors Field – now that would be a treat for all the fans in the OF bleachers.

myname_989
4 years 9 months ago

I just have this sinking feeling that De La Rossa’s best mediocre years are behind him. Reminds me of the Randy Wolf signing from last year. Any team that signs him to a three year deal will come to regret it, because he’s going to be paid like a top of the rotation pitcher in this weak market, where in all reality, he’s really a bottom of the rotation type of arm. Even with John Buck’s deal getting a lot of attention, I think De La Rossa has the potential to be the worst deal of the 2011 offseason.

bleedrockiepurple
4 years 9 months ago

I’m not disagreeing with you on the fact that a team that gives the guy 3 years may regret it and also it could turn into a Randy Wolf situation but what i will disagree with you on the fact that he isn’t a “top of the rotation pitcher in this weak market, where in all reality, he’s really a bottom of the rotation type of arm.” The guy has a 96-98 mph fastball, with a good slider/curve and a very deceiving changeup and in the 3 seasons with Colorado has posted a 8.9 K/9 ratio. If that is at the end of my rotation I’m feeling very good about where my rotation is at.

I understand that most people don’t see him pitch and only sees the stats on walks and IP etc. which definitely aren’t where they should be and by no means am i condoning the thought that he deserves anymore than 3 years 33+ mil but the guy is definitely more than an end of the rotation guy. At the same time is he a #1, go-to guy? He is not that either.

BobbyJohn
4 years 9 months ago

If they’re going to pay him $10 million per year for three years shouldn’t there be some sort of reasonable expectation that he’s going to toss something around 200 quality innings? He’s never done that one time in his career.

I’ve watched him pitch a lot the last three seasons and I wouldn’t give him that kind of money. That’s #1 starter money (for the Rockies, anyway) and only once in the last three seasons has Jorge been their 2nd-best starter.

He is a middle-of-the-rotation guy (#3) who happens to be part of a very, very weak free agent class. Why should the Rockies overpay because of that?

bleedrockiepurple
4 years 9 months ago

In this FA market your going to have to overspend. There is no way around that.

I do believe that giving him 3 yrs, 33+ mil is over paying a player, who in my opinion and I’m sure you would agree, has not proven himself to earn that sort of money. But it continues to come back to the FA market and how thin it is, especially for LH starters.

You’ll probably disagree with this statement but he needs to be at least our #3 starter this year. The Rox have no chance at winning the NL West without him(and still there is work to be done even if he does come back), but who do you slide in that #3 spot if JDLR leaves?? Westbrook and Kuroda have signed, Vazquez has clearly said he refuses to pitch anywhere west of the Mississippi, that leaves who on the Rox radar? Jon Garland and Carl Pavano….By no means are they upgrades and not to mention if either of these guys signed with Col, that leaves you with a rotation of 5 RHPs. So do you look internally at the farm system…there is plenty of talent down there but not a single one who is major league ready. Maybe Esmil Rogers but he needs to make huge leaps forward this winter if hes going to be penciled in as a starter for 2011.

BobbyJohn
4 years 9 months ago

The Rockies do not HAVE to have DLR. If he comes back at THEIR number, then that’s great and I’d be happy to have him. But overpaying simply because that’s what the FA market dictates is a bad business philosophy, in my opinion.

I think Pavano is probably going to get similar money to DLR, to be honest. Not sure that he’s the guy. Garland might be, and he would be cheaper than either of those two. Then there’s Francis, who just might come back on a reasonable deal with some incentives. That wouldn’t bother me too much if they just HAVE to have a lefty.

And there’s always the trade market, though I don’t know who is available or the potential prices associated with them.

For me, having a rotation full of RHPs is not a big deal. I just want to see five guys who can produce solid ERAs and combine for 900+ innings, much like the 2009 rotation did.

bleedrockiepurple
4 years 9 months ago

So your telling me that every club’s front office that is interested in DLR and gives him a contract offer for more than 3 yrs, 30+ mil are all doing “bad business.”

If we lost DLR and Garland or Francis come (back in Francis’ case) to Coors Field, you really feel one of these guys can produce a solid ERA and eat innings or at least post better numbers than DLR. I think not. Even if the market wasn’t so thin and DLR got the money he should, it would still be heaps more than Garland and Francis will get, and there is a reason for that: he is superior to both of them.

Listen, I’ve never said that DLR has earned the money he will receive. In fact, you could say he got lucky in being an FA in such a thin market. He will get over paid where ever he ends up, we’ve already established that, but I really feel as though he gives us a far better chance to win than Jon Garland and Jeff Francis will give us. If you disagree, you must Dick or Charlie Monfort in disguise giving us Rox fans another round-about “how we feel as though there are other guys who could get the job done, if not do a better job.” When all it is, is the organization is too scared to spend some money.

BobbyJohn
4 years 9 months ago

I really don’t understand. You basically make the case that DLR is not worth the money that is being projected for him, and then you turn around and think that the Rockies ought to go ahead and pony up anyway. That is completely illogical.

As far as DLR being “superior” to Garland, I do disagree, but I probably value other things in starting pitchers than you do.

I’m a fan of guys who can make 30+ starts and toss 200 or so innings while producing a league-average or better ERA. Guys like that give their team a much better opportunity to win on a regular basis as well as not burning out the bullpen along the way.

Based on their track records, Jon Garland is significantly more likely than DLR to accomplish that. If you disagree with that, then you haven’t been paying much attention to their careers.

It’s not about spending money or not spending money, but it IS about spending money when it makes sense. And it does NOT make sense to hand out $10 million per season for 3-4 seasons to a guy who has not given any indication that he can give you 200 innings of league-average pitching.

bleedrockiepurple
4 years 9 months ago

Yeah i have paid attention to their careers, so making accusations that i haven’t done something or haven’t followed a particular player etc, is moronic on your part, you don’t know me, you don’t know who I’ve paid attention to or not.Since i have paid attention to both players, and it seems you have too, then we would have both see what ballparks the players have played in. Petco and even Dodger stadium can skew pitcher’s stats, just like Coors can skew batter’s stats. Any pitcher coming from a very pitcher friendly park to the most extreme hitter’s park in the history of the game, will make me pause for a second and wait for the particular pitcher (Garland in this case) to prove that he can pitch here, DLR has already proven he can. I’ve never once said Garland is a bad pitcher, his groundball/flyball ratio isn’t all that bad so he does have a chance to thrive in COL, but i still feel as though DLR is the superior player. I don’t disagree with the fact that innings and starts aren’t important, look at my first post, “stats on walks and IP etc. which definitely aren’t where they should be. . .” But those stats aren’t the only thing that I value in a starting pitcher.You’ve clearly not understanding my “illogical” posts because this entire time I’ve said that DLR is not worth 30+ over 3 years, in a usually years market, but because of the thin market this year, the Rockies need to pony up and pay him the money because he gives them the best chance at winning the West (in my opinion), I’ve said that all along. Never once have I gone against that and said the other. For example, the post before this one, ” I’ve never said that DLR has earned the money he will receive. . .but I really feel as though he gives us a far better chance to win.”

bleedrockiepurple
4 years 9 months ago

I’m not disagreeing with you on the fact that a team that gives the guy 3 years may regret it and also it could turn into a Randy Wolf situation but what i will disagree with you on the fact that he isn’t a “top of the rotation pitcher in this weak market, where in all reality, he’s really a bottom of the rotation type of arm.” The guy has a 96-98 mph fastball, with a good slider/curve and a very deceiving changeup and in the 3 seasons with Colorado has posted a 8.9 K/9 ratio. If that is at the end of my rotation I’m feeling very good about where my rotation is at.

I understand that most people don’t see him pitch and only sees the stats on walks and IP etc. which definitely aren’t where they should be and by no means am i condoning the thought that he deserves anymore than 3 years 33+ mil but the guy is definitely more than an end of the rotation guy. At the same time is he a #1, go-to guy? He is not that either.

BobbyJohn
4 years 9 months ago

I am very much a fan of the Rockies (split season tickets with a friend). There is NO WAY this team should offer De la Rosa a deal on-par with what Ted Lilly got, which seems to be the “logic” going around. The track record to pay this guy $10 million per season simply isn’t there. For that money you need to be almost a mortal lock for 30+ starts and 190+ innings, and De la Rosa simply isn’t.

BobbyJohn
4 years 9 months ago

I am very much a fan of the Rockies (split season tickets with a friend). There is NO WAY this team should offer De la Rosa a deal on-par with what Ted Lilly got, which seems to be the “logic” going around. The track record to pay this guy $10 million per season simply isn’t there. For that money you need to be almost a mortal lock for 30+ starts and 190+ innings, and De la Rosa simply isn’t.

DempseyK
4 years 9 months ago

If he wants more than 3 guaranteed years i would think that rules him out of the Pirates plans also. No way we would lock him up for longer than that. But the above thought of a club option I guess would be possible.