Gagne said he doesn't deserve to pitch the 9th, removed from role (reply #40), says he's ready to be the closer again (reply #81)

[Team Canada]

It's a tad ironic that for all Turnbow's unhappiness about not being considered for both the closer and setup roles, if he'd done a decent job this year he very well could be closing right now..

[jackalope02ca]

If Gagne doesn't turn it around in the next month he could be the first 10 million dollar DFA in the history of the Brewers.

 

Who would trade for him even if we paid his entire salary right now?

[JJHardy7]

This is a guess on my part, but I imagine Attanasio cares more about winning games than whether one employee hire works out. If Yost wants to make his boss look good, he should try to win as many games as possible this season, and not focus on the results of one player.

 

I'm sure winning as many games as you can makes your boss look good. I didn't say it wasn't. I am saying that winning as many games as you possibly can might only get the Brewers to .500, under, or over. We don't know at this point, but having a failed $10 million investment in May isn't good and how Gagne is used might be what makes or breaks the future career with guys like Melvin and Yost. Having him in mop up roles on a team that underperforms isn't going to look good -- if that is what happens.

 

An investor that recognizes a sunk cost realizes that a risk was taken and it failed, and then he moves on, putting the bad investment out of his mind, because he can't do anything about it anymore. Gagne is going to get his salary no matter if he pitches another inning, or what inning he pitches in. The team should try to objectively determine what value Gagne has for this team going forward, and ignore that 12 % of the payroll is involved in the decision.

 

How can he not do anything with it? How Gagne is managed is the key to this part of the investment? If you simply write him off in May, there are huge issues with the front office. This also isn't the Yankees and you simply can't cut your losses and move on. The Brewers have to try and figure out a way to get something back from Gagne. This could be the biggest financial blunder the Brewers have made under this management. How it's handled could very well go a long way in determining the future with some within the organization. I also have a feeling the Cameron signing could possibly go this way also. It's May and we're talking about "sunk costs"? That's not even an investment -- that's poor financial management.

 

And I think you're using the term "investor" in the wrong term. It wasn't Melvin's money, but it very well could be his job. I don't personally think Mark makes any decisions in relation to who plays and when. He lets his staff do that. Melvin isn't any different than anyone else that works -- making a big mistake with someone else's money is not a good think. If Mark looks past the "sunk cost" and realizes it was a risk, that's fine. I just don't think he'd be fine paying $10 million without receiving any results. I believe Mark A values $10 million by saying that.

[kramnoj]

Having him in mop up roles on a team that underperforms isn't going to look good -- if that is what happens

 

At this point, that doesn't matter. Only winning matters. Gagne isn't going to be part of this team after this season, so the only objective is determining what role he can perform that will be most beneficial to the Brewers, whether that role is closer, 7th inning guy, mop up duty, or being DFA'ed.

 

The Brewers have to try and figure out a way to get something back from Gagne.

 

Why? This is the tough thing about recognizing a sunk cost. There is an emotional attachment to the money spent. The Brewers don't have to try to get anything from Gagne if he doesn't have anything to give. If Gagne was a bad investment, the Brewers don't gain anything by giving him innings to try to save face.

 

It's May and we're talking about "sunk costs"? That's not even an investment -- that's poor financial management.

 

There's no reason to put the quotes around sunk costs. It's a real thing that people have to deal with. Poor financial management is throwing resources at a bad investment to try to make it look good. Throwing good money after bad. If you have a sunk cost, it helps you to realize it early, so that you can mitigate the damage that it will cost you.

 

I just don't think he'd be fine paying $10 million without receiving any results. I believe Mark A values $10 million by saying that.

 

Of course he wouldn't be fine with paying $10 million without receiving any results, unless there were more important factors. The overriding factor is the $80 million spent on this seasons team. Mark wants this team to succeed, and if the best chance for that to occur is to have Gagne DFAd, I doubt Gagne's salary would delay him one second in approving that.

[JJHardy7]

Why? This is the tough thing about recognizing a sunk cost. There is an emotional attachment to the money spent. The Brewers don't have to try to get anything from Gagne if he doesn't have anything to give. If Gagne was a bad investment, the Brewers don't gain anything by giving him innings to try to save face.

 

There isn't an emotional attachment. My point is that it may not be a sunk cost -- it's May. You can say it's only 12% of the payroll, but having 1 player make that number up and not contribute is not good. Based on a 25-man roster it should be 3 players. Gagne is one of the most highest paid players and my point isn't at the owner. He invested in Gagne. He signed off on it. My point is though that in terms of Melvin and Yost it is in their benefit to get something out of Gagne. This isn't the Yankees, the Red Sox, or any other team with deep pockets. The decision to sign Gagne could cost jobs. That's my point and you can take this high level investor view at it or in my mind take the Milwaukee view. If at the end of the year Melvin and Yost don't get the team to .500 and Gagne (and others) who the Brewers acquired didn't work out chances are that's not going to help keep them around.

 

There's no reason to put the quotes around sunk costs. It's a real thing that people have to deal with. Poor financial management is throwing resources at a bad investment to try to make it look good. Throwing good money after bad. If you have a sunk cost, it helps you to realize it early, so that you can mitigate the damage that it will cost you.

 

There absolutely is a reason to put quotes around it in my mind. If you think the costs for Gagne can't be recovered at all that's your opinion. I'm of the opinion that it is only May and the costs aren't useless at this stage. It's in Yost and Melvin's benefit to find a way to get him to be of value to the organization. Your using the term "sunk cost" reflects that the cost can't be recovered and Gagne is of no use. I'm just not of that opinion at this point. I honestly don't think "sunk cost" applies to anything in May. If you want to use that type of financial terminology, the Brewers would've easily made the playoffs and done well because in May last year they were 24 - 10.

 

Of course he wouldn't be fine with paying $10 million without receiving any results, unless there were more important factors. The overriding factor is the $80 million spent on this seasons team. Mark wants this team to succeed, and if the best chance for that to occur is to have Gagne DFAd, I doubt Gagne's salary would delay him one second in approving that.

 

I guess I just disagree with you. I believe Gagne's salary would dealy him from approving that. The money is guaranteed and to DFA $10 million in May means Melvin should be gone today. It's that simple. Again it's not a 10/80 equation. It's that one of the highest paid players on them this year (I believe he is the 3rd highest paid, but I may be wrong) isn't working out and there will be a signficant price to pay by DFAing him. Again, this isn't really on Mark at all...it's on Melvin and how Gagne is dealt with in the next few months could go a long way in determining Melvin's future or at least the confidence Mark will have in dealing with free agents. And for your "sunk cost" I'll throw out the "opportunity cost" factor. The Brewers look like they could've used that $10 million a lot better somewhere else...but again it's only May and hopefully Gagne turns it around and this becomes a moot point.

[kramnoj]

This isn't the Yankees, the Red Sox, or any other team with deep pockets. The decision to sign Gagne could cost jobs.

 

Why do you think this, and why do you think Attansio thinks this? It only cost the team money, and it only committed them for one year. You think Mevlin should be fired for that? Do you have any evidence that Attansio believes that?

 

I honestly don't think "sunk cost" applies to anything in May. If you want to use that type of financial terminology, the Brewers would've easily made the playoffs and done well because in May last year they were 24 - 10.

 

This doesn't make any sense at all. There's zero reason to dismiss the concept of a sunk cost, because it is something the Brewers have to consider. A sunk cost in baseball can occur any time from spring training to the end of the season. The fact that it is May has no relevance. I think I should also point out that I haven't said that Gagne is a sunk cost. It's just something the Brewers have to consider.

 

The money is guaranteed and to DFA $10 million in May means Melvin should be gone today.

 

You believe that a move made that impacted the team for only one year, that didn't cost any talent, that didn't bankrupt the team should be used to dismiss Melvin? Why do you think this? You think Mark would allow Mevlin to sign Gagne without accepting the possibility that Gagne wouldn't be worth the money?

 

And for your "sunk cost" I'll throw out the "opportunity cost" factor. The Brewers look like they could've used that $10 million a lot better somewhere else

 

I don't think anybody disagrees with this. But that doesn't really matter today. Finding what value Gagne has to the team, and ignoring how much he is being paid, will help this team for the rest of the year.

[Fatter than Joey]

Any chance he would accept a week or two in the minors to try to get himself right?

 

Since he has 5 years he can refuse the assignment the Brewers have to pay him.

 

If there is something wrong with his mechanics, he could get injured and make some rehab appearances in the minors

[eanelson4]

I appreciate the honesty, but I won't go as far as to say I feel bad for him. The guy is making $10M this season regardless of how he pitches. Now I am sure he wants to get it done as much as the next person, but he can't anymore. That being said, he's getting paid $10M when he's really worth maybe 1 or 2. Sounds like a lucky guy in my book.

[mikerollins]

Gagne needs to be the closer on this team for them to make a deep run in September. You're talking about a guy that saved about 160 out of 170 games in his career until this year. He's run into a string of bad location and bad luck. It doesn't help to get booed after the first single yesterday. We have to get him straightened out and the playoffs are a real possibility.

[BrewCrewForever]

I'm probably the biggest Gagne fan on this entire board and I even have to admit he needed to be removed after his latest outing. I'm glad Eric was a man and knew he wasn't getting it done and pretty much made Yost make the switch. I do think it is temporary as long as Gagne can figure out whatever his problem may be.

[JJHardy7]

Why do you think this, and why do you think Attansio thinks this? It only cost the team money, and it only committed them for one year. You think Mevlin should be fired for that? Do you have any evidence that Attansio believes that?

 

I said "could". Look at it this way -- if the team doesn't perform where the owner thinks they should and they cost him $10 million extra I'd imagine that wouldn't sit well for Melvin or Yost. That's just my logic. If the team makes the playoffs, it probably doesn't matter. Look at the past deals with free agents Melvin has made -- besides Suppan I believe this is the most per year. It had risk, but Mark didn't go looking for Gagne -- Melvin did.

 

This doesn't make any sense at all. There's zero reason to dismiss the concept of a sunk cost, because it is something the Brewers have to consider. A sunk cost in baseball can occur any time from spring training to the end of the season. The fact that it is May has no relevance. I think I should also point out that I haven't said that Gagne is a sunk cost. It's just something the Brewers have to consider.

 

You brought up "sunk cost" and such so you really did imply Gagne is or would be a "sunk cost" I think there is reason to dismiss it -- it's May. At list point last year on that logic the Brewers would be worth more than gold. And a "sunk cost" in the business world and baseball are night and day. I'd like to know the last time a $10 million dollar player got DFA'd and how frequent it is. "Sunk cost" doesn't exist there -- jobs lost because of bad signings do exist. Again, I might be wrong, but I don't recall too many players in that money category being DFA'd.

 

Finding what value Gagne has to the team, and ignoring how much he is being paid, will help this team for the rest of the year.

 

I'd like to agree, but I think where the Brewers are now it's just too hard to do. I'm talking in terms of Melvin -- if this is his second biggest signing per year and the guy is doing mop up this month that's not good. If you were his boss what would you think? I've enjoy this little conversation so I hope I'm not coming across as rude or anything, but my opinion this deal might cost Melvin his job. The Brewers haven't signed too many $10 million/year guys and it comes down to a few things:

 

1. Gagne gets back on track -- all is well

2. Gagne struggles -- Melvin is on the hot seat more than he would be without Gagne

3. Gagne gets released -- Melvin wasted $10 million of the owner's money -- this could cost him his job if the team doesn't perform

 

A signing like this does have an investment risk. Mark didn't buy the Yankees or Red Sox that have revenue despite this signing. The Brewers have revenue in part because of the success and hope they've given fans the past year. A bad year and a few bad contracts make Melvin a man who may be on the hot seat -- and a "sunk cost" in May doesn't help that at all.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

I have no problem with signing someone for 1 year and 10 million because it's one year! We could afford it and Gagne had the repuatation of being a good closer so it looked good. It hasn't worked out yet, but I think Gagne will get back in the closer role and save 20 more games yet before the season is over. Who were we supposed to sign to be our closer? Did you want us to trade Weeks or Hardy for Chad Cordero? If anyone can think of a better option than the Gagne signing this offseason based on potential at the time, please let me know. 1 year and 10 million is going to affect nothing with our future. We can still sign our young guys and the Gagne signing will have no affect on it.

 

So here comes the argument: "Well we could have spent that 10 million on someone else"

 

My question is who? The Free Agent market was so depleted unless you wanted to extremely overpay to get a Jeff Suppan type pitcher.

 

I would still do the Gagne signing all over again because I think he's going to come back and be a good closer yet. It's not like he forgot how to pitch. He's just in a minor slump that gets magnified as a closer.

[kramnoj]

I'd like to know the last time a $10 million dollar player got DFA'd and how frequent it is. "Sunk cost" doesn't exist there

 

Frank Thomas was cut this year, he will make $8 million. It doesn't happen often, but it wouldn't be unprecedented.

 

I said "could".

 

You actually said should.

 

I think there is reason to dismiss it -- it's May.

 

Timing is irrelevant. If the team determines that Gagne has no value to the team, they shouldn't wait, they should cut bait. The money at this point is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is what value he has to the Brewers.

 

you can take this high level investor view at it or in my mind take the Milwaukee view.

 

This is from your previous post, but I don't understand why you feel there should be a difference. You keep bringing up New York and Boston, and saying that the Brewers can't cut somebody with a huge contract. It is true that a long term mistake would cripple the Brewers far more than it would affect bigger market teams, but this is a one year deal. If the Brewers focus on his salary instead of whatever value he has, that would have a much bigger effect on this team than the money that is already committed.

[Ennder]

It all really depends on who wanted Gagne on the team. For all we know Mark is the one who pushed for Gagne in the first place. Maybe Mark thought it was a bad idea and Melvin convinced him otherwise, if that is the case than yeah this hurts Melvin's security a lot. It all depends on what happened being the scenes which we just don't know.

[rluzinski]

Frank Thomas was cut this year, he will make $8 million. It doesn't happen often, but it wouldn't be unprecedented.

 

His option would have vested with enough AB, so that $8 mil wasn't the only money on the line.

 

Gagne shouldn't be expected to be the worst reliever on the team, so DFAing him at this point doesn't make sense, IMO.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

There's just no way you can DFA him. If anything you hold onto him until July and try to trade him for a bag of balls if it really gets that bad, but once again, it's May, and he's gonna get a few more chances to shine.

[Brawndo the Thirst Mutilat]

You're talking about a guy that saved about 160 out of 170 games in his career until this year.

 

I guess my point was that in my view, all but the 25 games he saved in Texas last year and Milwaukee this year are essentially irrelevant in trying to figure out how well the Eric Gagne we signed is going to pitch this season. He's pretty obviously not the dominant Gagne who could run it up into the high 90s and spot his change perfectly from '02 - '04. He missed basically all of two consecutive seasons (Tommy John surgery and a serious back injury). You wouldn't want to use Mark Prior's Cy Young-caliber season to project his '08, and the same is true for Gagne, even though Prior is admittedly a more extreme example. All we have to clue us into who the new Gagne is is 77 IP this year and last. The first 33 of those IP went pretty well in Texas, but the last 34 have been atrocious. Both of those are small samples, so there's still a lot of uncertainty projecting his performance, but...

 

1) I'd weigh the more recent info more heavily.

2) Even if you don't, you're looking at @ a 4.50 straight ERA projection, xFIP is around 4.25. To me, that's the ceiling for what we should reasonably expect Gagne to do. He could outperform that, but if he does I'd say we got lucky.

 

To Russ's point that Gagne shouldn't be expected to be the worst reliever on the staff, and therefore you can't DFA him, I agree for now. From a purely performance analysis standpoint, you'd have to expect both Mota and McClung to be worse, and Torres perhaps around the same. But the team makes claims to have "fixed" the former two, and Torres can at least go multiple innings, so he's got much more value as a middle man. I'd say it won't take many more bad Gagne outings before you really should expect him to be the worst reliever on the staff going forward.

 

I will admit, this is as unscientific an attempt to crystal ball gaze as I'm ever likely to make, but I suspect that at some point in the next, say, 6 weeks, it is going to become very evident that Gagne isn't good enough any longer for high leverage innings at the end of games, and I worry that he's going to get Yost's patented Derrick Turnbow mold'ring-away-in-the-closet treatment. At that point, they will really need to DFA him, but I worry that, in part because of the PR nightmare lurking should that move be made (at bottom, this is what I think is relevant about all of JJ's points about the public perception of the deal and of Melvin), the team will be extremely reluctant to do it.

 

If he does start getting the Turnbow treatment, I'm going to need to try to dig up a link for a study I read (I think over the offseason) that used Pitch FX data to investigate the effects of consecutive day reliever usage and long layoffs between reliever appearances on the velocity and break of various pitches. If I recall correctly, long layoffs had almost as much negative effect as consecutive day usage. Offspeed pitches were particularly hurt by long stretches with no appearance. I was thinking about that when Turnbow was rotting away on the bench but never brought it up here.

 

Even if you want to hope that Gagne might get it straightened out and give you some return on your investment, the dead roster spot will be a huge problem, especially when your manager is as prone as Yost to wear out the effective pitchers in his bullpen even without a designated bullpen leper (should it come to that with Gagne as it did with Turnbow).

[TooLiveBrew]

I wanted them to sign Troy Percival (8 for 9, 2.08 with the Rays)

 

Percival wanted more than one year, which is why not many teams were willing to gamble on him ('08 is his age 39 season). Maybe the Rays are your true team -- Floyd + Percival! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif Pay no attention to the .174 BABIP behind Percival's curtain... he's totally pitching sustainably.

 

 

"The closer role will now be filled by the entire bullpen, and Yost said it might be as many as three pitchers in the ninth inning if the opposing team's lineup dictates such moves."

 

Yeeehaaa! This might be the only good thing to come out of Gagne's struggles. We now are 'allowed' to pitch to the best matchups, when needed, late in ballgames! This might prove to be huge... the only snag I can think of is that we'll hear that Shouse 'needed to be saved' in case there was a thermonuclear war in the 9th.

[Blazer25]

We now are 'allowed' to pitch to the best matchups, when needed, late in ballgames! This might prove to be huge

If only we didn't have Nedly deciding who those "best" match ups are. This could be like giving a monkey a Swiss army knife...too many choices and too much cool stuff to play with.

[bklynbrewcrew]

I may be one of the only believers in Gagne but I think he can be straightened out. He just needs to get his confidence back. This is not a Turnbow situation where he cant get a pitch anywhere near the strike zone. He has had issues with location but nothing like Turnbow. He has also had some bad luck with bloop hits and such. This is not a DFA situation at all. Gagne will get straightened out and will be the closer again.

[Tbadder]

heck no. the closer by committee needs to stop now. Insert Gagne back now. He's the only viable candidate unless Luis Pena takes off.

[JJHardy7]

Frank Thomas was cut this year, he will make $8 million. It doesn't happen often, but it wouldn't be unprecedented.

 

Are there more? I can't think of any, but Thomas is a pretty close example. I wonder what the highest contract value was of a player DFA'd in his first month and a half with a new team or even first half of the season? I would have to believe Gagne would set the record.

 

You actually said should.

 

Simply go back to what you quoted me at "could cost jobs". I didn't say should.

 

Timing is irrelevant. If the team determines that Gagne has no value to the team, they shouldn't wait, they should cut bait. The money at this point is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is what value he has to the Brewers.

 

I think this is more opinion related. In your opinion (if I'm understanding this right) you don't think Gagne has any value. That is fine, but I would really hope that Melvin and Co. would have scouted Gagne a little better than have signed the third highest paid player on the team only to release him a month and a half into the season. That would be a major failure both on the field and in terms of an investment.

 

This is from your previous post, but I don't understand why you feel there should be a difference. You keep bringing up New York and Boston, and saying that the Brewers can't cut somebody with a huge contract. It is true that a long term mistake would cripple the Brewers far more than it would affect bigger market teams, but this is a one year deal. If the Brewers focus on his salary instead of whatever value he has, that would have a much bigger effect on this team than the money that is already committed.

 

The Brewers obviously can cut any contract they want. The point is because we are talking about Milwaukee and not L.A., Chicago, or New York there comes a point and time where spending more money by the Brewers won't bring in additional revenue. The Brewers simply cannot DFA Gagne and then use that money somewhere else via trade. Their pockets aren't that deep.

[Thurston Fluff]

Interesting how La Russa and Yost handled the same situation in the same manner yet Yost is an idiot and LaRussa isn't. Somehow I thought maybe some would give him a bit of credit for handling similar situations in a similar fashion as a "winning" manager does. I think this was a situation that was handled properly. He was given a long leash based on his past but not so long as to unduely harm the team. Before anyone says the obvious that he has already harmed the team Gagne, like Isringhausen, had enough of a history that they very well could have worked their way out of it and been the best option. The fact that it didn't work out that way isn't the fault of either manager since they played the odds/cards dealt them. Even going with the odds sometimes doesn't pay off. In both situations that seems to be the case.

[endaround]

If by the same way you mean completely different, then yes. LaRussa removed his closer, Yost would still be sending Gagne out there if Gagne didn't tell anyone who'd listen that he shouldn't close right now.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Yost doesn't make moves until his own players talk about what they should and shouldn't be doing to the media...the Braun/Fielder flip-flop in the lineup, Gagne removing himself from the closer role. He acts like he's the most knowledgeable baseball man ever when questioned by the media, yet the only changes/tinkering he does with his roster is stuff reporters tell him that his players said.