Rockies Sign Aaron Cook to $30 Million Extension

by Charlie Wilmoth on Dec 11, 2007 6:15 PM EST in News

The Rockies have signed starter Aaron Cook to a three-year, $30 million extension that doesn't begin until 2009.

My initial reaction was that this was a bad move for the Rockies, but upon closer examination, it's probably actually a smart one. Cook's not the sort of pitcher you notice much unless he's killing your fantasy team, but he's quietly put up terrific numbers in the last four years. True, he never strikes anyone out, but with his sinker, he doesn't really need to. Cook had the fifth best grounder/fly ball ratio of any pitcher in the big leagues who threw at least 100 innings, and in Coors Field, that'll win games. Cook is actually perfectly suited to pitch in Colorado.

He's missed a bunch of time with injuries in the last four years, but those weren't arm problems - in 2004 he was diagnosed with blood clots that kept him out of action for much of 2005, and in 2007 he had a rib cage problem. I'm not sure why he can't be as healthy as any 28-year-old pitcher going forward. The only problem is that this deal doesn't kick in until 2009, so the Rockies are taking on a big risk here. If Cook remains effective, though, and if the market stays like it has been the past couple of offseasons, Colorado will be getting a bargain.

Tweet Comment 6 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Former alleged

DL target Craig Monroe takes a deal with the Twins for a year and $3.82M. That's a 20% pay cut. Even so, I don't think he's worth it.

by bucdaddy on Dec 11, 2007 10:32 PM EST reply actions

Pirates seal the deal

with Chris Gomez, the PG says. 1 year/$1 mil. I don't know what this gives us that Jose Hernandez didn't, Jose walked about as often (i.e., as little) and had a bit more pop, and probably would have come cheaper at roughly the same age. Oh, wait:

" ...positive veteran presence ..." -- NH

Thank God, I don't know what we'd do without that. Probably only win 69 games.

Oh, wait ...

by bucdaddy on Dec 12, 2007 3:00 PM EST reply actions

What it gives us:

A UT IF who's slightly better with the bat and slightly cheaper than Jose Castillo.

Why is this a bad thing?

by Vlad on Dec 12, 2007 5:44 PM EST up reply actions

Because ...

slightly better than Castillo still means he sucks.

by bucdaddy on Dec 13, 2007 12:22 AM EST reply actions

So who...

...would you take as the UT IF instead, for a million bucks?

We need one, or else there are going to be a lot of ground balls through the hole if Jack or Freddy gets hurt. Gomez can at least fake it at short, and his aggregate OPS for the last few years is a little above .700, which is pretty good by MIF standards and OK for a corner backup.

Seriously, I don't see the problem. You were hoping for Jeter?

by Vlad on Dec 13, 2007 8:34 AM EST up reply actions

Is it really the Jose K thing?

Because he hasn't had an offensive season as good as any of Gomez's last few since 2004, he'll be 38 next year, and his performance at AAA last season fell off dramatically.

by Vlad on Dec 13, 2007 8:37 AM EST up reply actions