Anyone else concerned by this? (Hardy's future in Milwaukee)

[1992casey]

We have control of Weeks until the end of the 2011 season at least.

--------------------

OK, I thought I read differently on rotoworld, but I realize their info isn't always 100% accurate anyway.

 

Tom Haudricourt reported Rickie's arby situation inaccurately a few weeks ago. Rotoworld probably picked that up.

[TheCrew07]

I've offered my opinion plenty including the belief that Escobar's season in AA was a lot like Iribarren's 2007 in AA and I expect Escobar's AAA in 2009 to be a lot like Iribarren's AAA season of 2008

I didn't discuss Escobar at all, I made the point about AA and MLB being the 2 significant jumps in a prospect's career, salary, and the return for Hardy and Fielder when they walk. This is not an Escobar issue, the prospect behind the players doesn't matter, in Fielder's case we don't even have one, the prospects aren't the issue, roster management is the issue.

 

You pulled a fragment on a side issue that I clearly stated I wasn't going to take the time to research, what's the point in that? Then you used Fielder who actually came up and DH'd mid season, Adam Jones, and Chipper Jones (who I was right about) from 93... It's much more telling if a prospect fails at AAA than if they succeed, AAA is pretty much a storage area for minor league vets, MLB players on the comeback trail, and players that are depth like Green, Wright, Neimann, etc... Hart was wasted repeating AAA, his treatment before he broke through remains a mystery, I have no idea why they played inferior players over him 2 years in a row but that's another topic entirely.

 

How would you build the roster and why? I don't need a refresher on why people don't like Escobar, it's abundantly clear. Most of my post was devoted to roster creation and value. What's the proper way for the smallest market to build it's roster and maintain a mid market payroll? Does signing vets approaching FA like Hardy make sense if the pre arby window was missed? Does it make it sense to resign him with 2 propsects in the pipeline behind him? Do you address the rotation with filler and wait on the kids or do you aggresively look to make some moves? Forget about Escobar, he has very little to do with the point that we've been trying to make.

[kramnoj]

Get rid of, let go, trade, ship off, package, embark, whatever wording you want to use - replacing Hardy with Escobar means Hardy isn't here anymore.

 

Saying that "jettison" is the equivalent of "make a good trade" is like saying that walking and running get you to the same place. It's true, but it doesn't really paint a complete picture. I'm not disputing that both results would end up with Hardy gone. That's clear. But I don't think anybody is saying that the Brewers should cast off Hardy, and it seemed a bit dismissive when addressing the points that were made.

 

sbrylski06 is pointing out that trading Hardy and utilizing the best prospect at his best position would probably be the best use of organizational resources. I don't know how long it will take before Escobar is a better player than Hardy, but he will certainly be a more valuable player than Hardy to the Brewers in 2011, and possibly before then.

[WisconsinSportsRule]

Ultimately, this year is key for Escobar in AAA. That's really all this whole debate is about. We all know JJ can hit and field, but can Escobar hit? Maybe his defense and price won't outshine JJ. I continue to go back and forth on this debate, so just let the season start.

 

What's with Escobar having 3 errors in ST? It seems like he makes great plays and boots the easy ones.

[sveumrules]

I've offered my opinion plenty including the belief that Escobar's season in AA was a lot like Iribarren's 2007 in AA and I expect Escobar's AAA in 2009 to be a lot like Iribarren's AAA season of 2008

so you give no creedence to escobar putting up his line during his age 21 season and the hurricane doing so in his age 23 season?

 

i'm perfectly fine with giving escobar a full year in nashville, barring injury to weeks or hardy. there is no advantage for the organization to rush him at this point. now, if escobar gets off to a great start in nashville and the giants call and offer baumgarner/alderson for hardy after renteria goes down with an injury? i could be persuaded.

[monty57]

Crew07, I think you made some very good points in your post, and I agree it's about what is best for the present and the future of the Brewers' franchise. I think Escobar spending a year at AAA isn't for him to prove anything, it's that we have Hardy for a reasonable price this year, and he is (at least in my mind) a much better player at this time. After this season, Melvin will have to determine whether another year of Hardy + the draft picks is more valueable than Escobar + what you receive in trade for Hardy. Another variable in all of this is Brent Brewer. If it looks like he'll be our SS of the future, then Melvin could trade Escobar to the highest bidder, play Hardy for the next two seasons, lose him for draft picks, and plug Brewer in.

 

Like any team on a budget (which appears to be everyone except the yankees), management has to decide which players are the cornerstones they'll build around. Braun has already been selected. Gallardo would seem like the next most logical pick. I'd guess Melvin will select 1 or 2 players out of our current crew to extend, and then try to lock up players like Gamel, Jeffress, Escobar as they arrive, keeping their price tags lower.

 

The trend of offering long-term contracts to pre-arby players came around a little late for this crop of Brewers, as they were entering arby, and their long-term contracts would be too expensive for the Brewers to lock up many of them. If Hardy or Hart gets an extension that eats up some FA years, it will be at a high price, making them less likely targets. I think it could happen, but it would be at the expense of signing someone at another position. In other words, signing Hardy to a 5-year / $60MM deal might mean not only do you trade Escobar, but you may have to trade players like Gamel and Jeffress when they hit arby in order to stay under budget.

 

If I had to guess:

 

-Hardy will be traded next offseason, hopefully netting us a young pitcher. Escobar will fill in nicely and will likely get a long-term offer, making him our SS for a long time.

 

-Fielder will play at least through his 2-year deal, possibly being traded after 2010 for young players at positions of need. As noted, we don't have anyone that can take over for him, so the opportunity cost of trading him is way too high. We'll see who's there in the offseason before 2011 to see if he gets traded or if we ride him out and take the draft picks.

 

-Weeks will be around until a decent replacement is ready. This may be Taylor Green, in which case Weeks may be gone next offseason, or it may be Brett Lawrie, in which case he'll be here through 2010 or maybe even 2011. Weeks is relatively inexpensive, and for as much flak as he receives, he is a serviceable MLB 2B.

 

-If Gamel shows he can play a serviceable 3B, he will be up mid-season, when the Crew will release Lamb (if he makes it out of ST) and situating Hall as super-sub through the rest of his contract (if we aren't able to somehow pawn him off on another team). Gamel should be offered a Braun-type contract (maybe lower numbers) sometime next season.

 

-Hart will play until someone like Gillespie shows he's ready to take over, at which point Hart will be traded for younger players at positions of need

 

-Cameron will play out this season and leave, unless the Brewers falter, making him the prime trading chip (along possibly with Hardy) during this season. Cain is waiting in the wings to be our CF of the future.

 

-Braun will be the face of the franchise for years to come

 

-Salome will take over as Catcher next season. With Lucroy a couple years behind him, Salome won't probably be offered a long-term deal, and we'll have a discussion in a few years much like this Hardy vs. Escobar debate as to which of these two should be traded.

 

-Gallardo should be extended right now, before his price tag goes up

 

-Parra should also be extended soon, although right now may be too soon. Wait to make sure his body can hold up, but start talking to his agent no later than next offseason.

 

-Looper, Suppan and Bush are here through their contracts (arby for Bush) and we move on

 

-Barring injuries, Jeffress will be the next star pitcher to come from our system and will likely be here a long time

 

-We should net a couple of starting pitchers in the ensuing Hardy, Fielder, Hart deals that will fill out our rotation for the foreseeable future

 

-Players like Dillard, Stetter and Aguilar are beginning to make me feel that we won't always have to pick our bullpen off the scrap heap every offseason

 

-Counsell will keep getting contracts from the Brewers until he can no longer walk, at which point he'll be made team mascot.

 

 

Sorry to take this somewhat off-topic, but I thought Crew07 was spot on in that the debate isn't necessarily Hardy vs. Escobar, but rather what is best for the future of the team. If I'm more optimistic than some about the future of the Brewers, I've tried to outline why above. Throw in that if we can do do a marginally decent job drafting, I think we can even afford to make a mistake or two, and should still be set for the next decade at most positions on the field, including pitching.

[logan82]

Like any team on a budget (which appears to be everyone except the yankees)

 

Every team is on a budget it is just that some have a really high budget(Yankees, Red Sox amongst others) and some have very stingy owner with a crappy budget(Marlins). All the rest fall somewhere in between.

 

Weeks will be around until a decent replacement is ready. This may be Taylor Green,

 

Have to disagree with this since Green is expected to miss time at the start of this season(a couple months I think) and he hasn't played a game above A+ ball yet.

 

I thought Crew07 was spot on in that the debate isn't necessarily Hardy vs. Escobar, but rather what is best for the future of the team.

 

I think that everybody has been arguing whether Hardy or Escobar is the best choice for the team's future thus the arguement is really Hardy vs Escobar. There are many variables though most importantly when will Escobar be ready for the majors, will JJ sign a long term contract, is it better to invest our money in Hardy or go with the cheaper Escobar and get another player as well, and what is the return in trade we can get for either player.

[pebadger]

I'll echo the sentiment that Hardy, along with Braun and Gallardo, is one of the three guys I'd build the team around if I were the GM. I didn't take the comments are JJ necessarily wanting to leave Milwaukee, just that if they had another SS in mind (Escobar) that would mean the Brewers would move JJ. frarnkly, if teh Brewwers beleive in Escobar over Hardy in teh long run at SS, then they should move JJ. I just wouldn't make that move with the evidence at hand.

[TheCrew07]

JJ would sign here if the Brewers offered enough money, in that I have no doubt. In the end, it usually comes down to money... That being said, knowing what we know about the situation, that Hardy was never offered an extension by the team nor did he open negotiations with the team on an extension, I feel it's reasonably safe to say that lack of interest in an extension means nothing is going to happen. I personally feel the team missed it's window if they wanted to sign Hardy to a multiyear that included a team discount. At this point he's much too close to FA to be signing any contract that is below market value, if I were his agent I would advise him against it. Is there hope that he still might? I guess sure, in the same way that there was a very small chance of Sabathia resigning with the crew. However just as I felt with Sabathia I feel that both Hardy and Fielder will walk in FA, I've been of that opinion for sometime and nothing that's happened the last 12 months has changed my opinion.

 

Since I see it as reality that Hardy and Fielder are going away, losing their production is a given, which is why I don't consider this arguement as prospect vs MLB Player at all. For me the issue is once again getting the best value in losing the MLB player. For example I feel we missed our window to move Hardy this last off season, now he's too close to FA to get an established young pitcher for him, so we're now talking about getting prospects for him. There's no way I'm into moving Hardy for another back of the rotation starter. We have a ton of 4/5 types, even before we acquired Wright and Green, I'm looking for top of the rotation talent, Parra quality and above. To me the issue is if 2 draft picks are worth more than 2 prospects? In the Hardy example Escobar or Brewer will take his place in '11 anyway, so the production issue is really moot. The question is if it's better to ride out Hardy's production for a season and get draft picks, or move him for talent that's closer to being MLB ready which can have a more immediate impact while we still have other pieces in place?

 

This is somewhat similar to the Sheets conversation over the winter... it takes 2 to tango... would Hardy be willing to sign a below market contract to stay in Milwaukee and does the team have any interest in spending that much money on him when there are 2 players in the pipeline right behind him at AAA and AA? Is it even in the team's best interest to make that deal with cheaper alternative's behind him? It's easy to say there's no replacing replacing Hardy or Fielder's production so they should be resigned but that sort of statement ignores the financial ramifications of the move as well as if the player would even be willing to stay? Milwaukee isn't in a position to overbid for players, that's just not realistic. I'm not sure why losing Hardy and Fielder spells the end for the offense anyway... we'll downgrade 2 positions offensively, but we'd upgrade the defense and offense at other positions off setting the loss. For example in the near future C is going to get a significant offensive upgrade regardless of which prospect lands the starting gig. All these moves will happen in conjuction with each other, which is why I think the team will actually be better in '10 or at the latest '11 than it was in '08.

 

See all the moves together... Escobar/Brewer for Hardy, Gamel/Green for 3B, Gamel/? for Fielder, Green/Lawrie for Weeks, Cain for Cameron, Salome/Lucroy for Kendall. The combinations of players will work themselves out in time but I see this club being better defensively and at least holding the status quo offensively, if we can add some better talent to the rotation I'll really like this team going forward.

[pete]

Based on bits and pieces of Melvin and Ash comments it sounds as if the team floated the idea of trading Hardy for pitching in the off season and were only offered back 4/5 starters. I'd say the chances of the return for trading him will go up, especially if he is traded at the deadline to a team like the Red Sox or Yankees.

 

I also wouldn't be surprised if Hardy were willing to sign an extension at a decent price if he was allowed to play SS.

[Never Outhustled]

The problem that I focus on is getting the best possible talent for that 90 mil.

You haven't really focused on $90 million, as your team falls well below 90 million, and you've said repeatedly you are against signing FA pitchers (which I do agree with). Your focus should be on 95 wins, but your moves don't increase the win total. Your moves create depth at the minor league level, but eliminate some of the high impact talent at the major league level.

 

If the Brewers pick up the option on Looper and bring back everyone who's not an FA (Cameron, Kendall, Hoffman, Counsel), with generous arby raises figured, have a payroll of $88 million for a full roster of considerable quality. That roster includes cheap young talent in Cain, and Salome or Lucroy.

 

Not included in that projection is Mat Gamel, who will start somewhere next year, I think most would agree with that. The position is unknown, with the possibilities being 1B, 3B, or LF (with Braun in RF). Trading away 1 of those 3 players will trim another $6 to $10 million from the payroll. Hart or Fielder could provide some high quality young pitching to compete with our already full rotation. Hall's value could be anywhere from negative to decent, depending on if he bounces back this year, which looks like a possiblity.

 

Replacing Hardy with Escobar shaves off roughly $14.6 million.

 

Hardy projects to have significantly more value wins than Escobar in 2010. Hardy could be dealt for young pitching with upside, the kind of talent Phil Huhges, Clay Bucholz, and Homer Bailey were entering 2008. Predicting when, if at all, a young pitcher will establish himself is a form of gambling.

 

If its Hardy versus Escobar plus Hardy trade haul, why can't it be Hardy plus Escobar trade haul, versus Escobar plus Hardy trade haul. By midseason, the Brewers will have a much better idea if Brent Brewer is the prospect I think he is, which gives the Brewers a SS to replace Hardy in 2011.

 

Dealing Escobar as the main part of a package for Halladay at the deadline makes the Brewers a WS contender on 2009. In 2010, the Brewers could decline Loopers option, and still have finacial flexibility with Halladay aboard.

 

I'll always take prospects over draft picks, always. Draft picks do not excite me at all, never have, I guess that's obvious but I'd rather have a known quanity than a draft pick who's value is somewhat nebulous.

I'll agree that our own prospects are known quantities, but traded prospects should come with red flags. Jose Capellan was a top caliber pitching prospect when we aquired him. Will Inman was considered a top pitching prospect when we dealt him. Both players faded quickly. Teams consistently use their insider knowledge to deal away only the prospects they don't hold in high regard. I'm just as comfortable drafting my own prospects as I am with some elses lemons. The kicker is, we get to keep our established players in their highest win value year by chosing draft picks over prospects. We have our own prospects, we don't need somebody elses.

[TheCrew07]

Your focus should be on 95 wins, but your moves don't increase the win total. Your moves create depth at the minor league level, but eliminate some of the high impact talent at the major league level.

I know we don't agree on rental player deals and likely never will, but how do you figure that statement is correct? If we improve the defense, the pitching, and maintain similar run production won't the Brewers win more games? A couple of months ago I posted numbers but the teams that made their runs in this decade did it in years where their defense and pitching were as good as their offense. People point to the Cardinals as proof that anything can happen in the playoffs, you just need to get there, and that's partially true. The Cards shortened their rotation (their pitching was horrible all season) and get almost flawless SP through the playoffs to go with their excellent defense and solid offensive production. The Phillies won the series the year their pitching was the best, the Brewers made the playoffs the year they had the best pitching and defense to go with their run production, and so on. I used ESPN's stats page to do the research but it was pretty obvious that winning in the post season requires excellent production in all 3 phases of the game. Assembling an offense that's capable of winning 95 games doesn't mean much if we don't have the pitching and defense to go with it and the cupboard is pretty bare after Jeffress.

 

As far as the whole rental player idea goes, I don't mind deals here and there if they are that one key piece that's missing but the Brewers haven't put together a roster yet that's been that close.. Last year I was looking at what the rotation would be this season which is why I argued for a longer term solution than Sabathia, the year before Linebrink wasn't going to put the Brewers over the top in 20 innings. My point on trying to make a yearly run at a Sabathia type deal is that it bleeds the top of the system dry of prospects, fans shouldn't have the expectation that a deadline deal to improve the club is going to happen every year when the team is contention. If they do make the deal yearly eventually we're going to hit a 3 year period where the cupboard is bare. We should absolutely trade off depth for positions of need, but I'd rather acquire lasting solutions because I pretty much know exactly what I'm going to get. Dykstra and Frederickson might turn out to be excellent additions, we'll see.. but I'd rather have a 3rd stud at the top of the rotation that those 2 guys in Appleton. We'll get enough extra picks when our players walk in FA like Hardy and Fielder... my gut feeling is that Melvin plans to ride out Hardy and Fielder into FA.

[logan82]

We'll get enough extra picks when our players walk in FA like Hardy and Fielder... my gut feeling is that Melvin plans to ride out Hardy and Fielder into FA.

 

I think Melvin will as well, but mostly because the return on those players will not justify trading them. There seems to be a notion that we would get top of the rotation talent that we would control for 4+ years for either of those players. I really doubt it. More likely would be a top guy that we would only have for 1-2 years. In my opinion, if we trade either, we should be getting talent we would control for longer than the players we gave up.