Derek Lowe - the name I covet most...well, second most

[pogokat]

Derek Lowe at Rotoworld

 

Pros:

 

Derek Lowe has been consistently great since he signed with the Dodgers. He's also ben improving at striking players out over the last several year. On top of that, his walk rate has remained consistently good (if not improving). He's pitched more than 180 innings in every season since he became a starter in the bigs. He's supposedly looking for a four year deal at 16 million a year, but has suggested he'd take less to play for a contender.

 

With that in mind, a 4 year 50 million dollar offer to Derek Lowe might just get it done.

 

Cons:

 

He definitely wants to pitch in Boston. He's also entering his age 36 season (he'd be 39 at the end of a four year deal). He's been pitching in Dodger Stadium, and that's where he's been the most consistenly dominate---his road ERA has been roughly 4 Even in his time in LA.

 

So:

 

I hate it when people just project a players road stats as his expected stats when he moves from a pitchers park. Undoubtedly, Derek's stats will take a slight hit with a move out of the Ravine, but I would think he'll throw 200 innings with a 3.7-3.8 ERA and a 1.30 Whip with about 140 k's versus 50 or so walks...

 

He's not Sabathia...he's also not Sheets...but at nearly half the cost of Sabathia and being much more likely to throw a bunch of innings over his 4 year, he seems like an actual bargain in this market. It would be like the Suppan signing, except that derek Lowe wouldn't suck.

[joepepsi]

He needs a pretty good defense behind him, doesn't he? I'm not opposed to him at all, but a little cautious.

[Crewin06]

So he's older, pitched in extreme pitcher's parks known as the NL West and is looking for a 4 year deal.

 

I'd have to say no. If it was a 2 year deal, sure. But 4 years at big money for a 36 year old pitcher does not interest me.

[StearnsFTW]

So he's older, pitched in extreme pitcher's parks known as the NL West and is looking for a 4 year deal.

 

I'd have to say no. If it was a 2 year deal, sure. But 4 years at big money for a 36 year old pitcher does not interest me.

Agree with this completely. I wouldn't mind him on a 2 year deal, but I would hate a 4 year deal.

 

Of course, I pretty much hate all long-term deals for any free agent pitchers.

[endaround]

If it was just giving up more hits away from Dodger's Stadium, that's one thing. But his K's go down and his BB go up.

[pogokat]

The reason I was looking towards Lowe is because the Brewers are most likely going to sign a pitcher this off season...i predict that lowe will be the healhiest of the semi-affordable starters...and a decent value...

 

as for the K thing, in 2007 he struck out more away and in 2008, his k9 was basically the same...the walk totals do go up, but even so his avg. away whip has been right around 1.30

 

i think it's reasonable to think he'll k very close to the same number of guys and have slightly more walks next year...his ERA will go up, but he should still be under 4...

 

finally, and i hate myself for saying this, because its a small sample, but his road stats are skewed by one terrible outing at angels stadium and another at busch...

 

nonetheless, i see your point...but i definitely think at same price, i'd rather have lowe for 200 innings than sheets for 120

[colbyjack]

You missed a big con: Scott Boras. Chances are this would be Lowe's last big contract, but Boras knows that as well, and rarely do you ever associate a team getting a deal with any of his clients. Now, it would seem more likely that Lowe might actually sign for less than reported, but I guess I'll believe it when I see it.

 

If you throw out that factor, I agree, Lowe is one of the more appealing options out there. He has been durable throughout his career (at least after the late start to his career), and has put up some pretty good, and consistent, overall numbers.

[BrewCrewForever]

I like and have liked Derek Lowe for quite sometime. But he just does not fit in with the Brewers and the amount of money we would have to pay for a pitcher like him.

[endaround]

The reason I was looking towards Lowe is because the Brewers are most likely going to sign a pitcher this off season...i predict that lowe will be the healhiest of the semi-affordable starters...and a decent value...

 

as for the K thing, in 2007 he struck out more away and in 2008, his k9 was basically the same...the walk totals do go up, but even so his avg. away whip has been right around 1.30

 

i think it's reasonable to think he'll k very close to the same number of guys and have slightly more walks next year...his ERA will go up, but he should still be under 4...

 

finally, and i hate myself for saying this, because its a small sample, but his road stats are skewed by one terrible outing at angels stadium and another at busch...

 

nonetheless, i see your point...but i definitely think at same price, i'd rather have lowe for 200 innings than sheets for 120

 

But right now it seems like 3 years can get Sheets. I'd much rather do that than 4 years of Lowe. Of course I still think if there was someway to get Millwood out of Texas that might be best.

[JohnBriggs12]

I like Lowe a lot but not at the figures that have been thrown around. Given his age, you need more of a discount.

[Invader3K]

I agree...I would like Lowe as well, but signing him to more than a three year deal would be extremely risky.

 

You would think the Boras factor could work for the Brewers at some point...not saying he would give the Brewers a discount, but Melvin has certainly been willing to work with him before...maybe he would let Lowe sign for something that wasn't a completely insane amount.

[phxMILWfan]

Invader that completely goes against all that is Scott Boras. He gives no discounts. I go 3 years of Sheets before I do 4 years of Lowe. Does it surprise anyone that Lowe is worth more than Sheets? Other than the health factor if I had to pick one player to start one game for me I take Sheets over Lowe.