Brewers want to lock up Fielder long-term

[monty57]

I'd guess that Melvin saying he wants to wait until he sees what's happening in FA means that he's taking a shot at someone like Lackey. If he signs Lackey to a 4-5 year deal, or if he takes someone like Lowe in a trade, he probably won't be able to tie up money in Fielder. If he instead signs someone like Davis/Washburn for 1-2 years, he could still sign Prince. In 1-2 years, our pitching staff and many of our position players will be filled with pre-arby guys unless we go out and sign a FA pitcher this year to a big-money deal or trade for a big money pitcher with a longer term deal.

 

Then it gets back to Russ' earlier thought on our time fram. In my opinion, if we are looking at going for it all in the next two years, signing Lackey might be a good idea. If we are we looking longer term, it might be better to lock up Prince and sign some lesser (and cheaper) pitchers to 1-2 year deals to hold the fort and hopefully keep us competitive until the next crop of prospects is ready.

[Invader3K]

 

If they sign Prince long term at $20+ million, that may become the next contract weighing them down. Prince is a great hitter, but I still have a hard time seeing him being worth 1/4 of the entire payroll.

That's a legitimate point. As much as I'd like to see them retain Fielder beyond 2011, I remember hearing similar discussions when the C.C. puruit was going on last off-season. Tom Haudricourt, I believe, pointed out that the most you would like for any player to take up on your payroll is about 15%. For a special marquee player, I think he said teams usually have the thinking that they can stretch it to 20%. If the Brewers stay around $80 million the next few years, I have a hard time seeing them give Prince approximately 25% of their on field budget.

 

It seems like the ideal would be for the team to get up around $100 million in payroll, as those teams seem to have a much better chance of being competitive and retaining their players year in and year out. Maybe that can happen in a few years, but by then Prince will be long gone.

[joepepsi]

It seems like the ideal would be for the team to get up around $100 million in payroll, as those teams seem to have a much better chance of being competitive and retaining their players year in and year out. Maybe that can happen in a few years, but by then Prince will be long gone.

If Prince isn't going to sign then they should push that $100 million payroll for the next two years, then gut the team after 2011. 2012 team is built around Gallardo and Braun and the next wave of kids.

[Invader3K]

If Prince isn't going to sign then they should push that $100 million payroll for the next two years, then gut the team after 2011. 2012 team is built around Gallardo and Braun and the next wave of kids.

I would have no problem with that personally. It just seems like we haven't gotten any indication something like that is on the table, though. Otherwise I would think they would be going after someone like John Lackey very hard, which doesn't seem to be the case.

[joepepsi]

I think even casual fans would understand this "go for it" strategy if they actually won the division or made through a round or two of the playoffs at least once in the next two years. Most people realize it's unlikely Prince will be a Brewer in 2012. It makes sense to maximize the opportunity presented by such a special hitter.

[logan82]

I think I would lean more towards signing Fielder if he was playing average defense at a more premium defensive position. The fact that he plays about average defense at the least valuable defensive position on the team, I lean more towards letting him walk. Fielder is one of the best hitting 1B in the game. However, an average NL 1B put up a line of .282/.373/.485 last year so it isn't like having only an average 1B would be terrible.

[TheCrew07]

The 2 situations are completely dissimilar in just about every way possible.

 

Yes, the situations are different, but it doesn't have much to do with markets, as originally said, and has more to do with team approach and where the teams are right now.

 

The Brewers are almost out of the big contracts that have weighed them down recently, which won't prevent them from signing Fielder if they think it's the right decision.

The poiint that you continually will not acknowledge in any thread or any discussion about the economics of baseball is the economy of scale. The market size matters because the Rockies aren't confined to an 80 million dollar payroll, they choose not to spend more money. Milwaukee is absolutely stretched as far as the market will allow, we are confined to payroll somewhere around 80 million if the team wants to break even. Furthermore 3 million fans in Milwaukee doesn't generate the same revenue as 3 million fans in places like Boston. So the draw isn't as relevant as the actual revenue the team is bringing in... and the larger the market the more opportunities for different revenue streams a team can have. Finally, there is speculation that the new stadium for teams like the Yankees will actually lower their luxury tax, thus reducing the extra income smaller teams like Milwaukee will receive from the league.

 

A team like Colorado who's a mid market can afford to have an obscene contract because even at an 80 million payroll, they still have the flexibility to go higher if they choose as their younger core moves towards FA. It's not that Milwaukee can afford it, the real question is should they afford it? Again, Milwaukee already signed Braun to a long deal., While Braun doesn't start to get expensive until 2011, that's precisely when the other contracts are coming off the books. There is a risk that Fielder will break down the older he gets, players of his body type don't tend to have very long careers. If he's healthy that 20+ million is probably well spent, but if for any reason it becomes dead money for multiple years, then the franchise is sunk for the time being. It's unreasonable to assume the best case scenario for Prince's health, at some point he'll suffer a significant injury and miss time, the key becomes how much time he'll actually miss or if it's a career threatening injury. There's no replacing production when you're 20+ million in the hole for a small market like Milwaukee, mid to large markets can probably absorb a contract of that magnitude and move on, I'm not sure that's the case for Milwaukee. The Yankees easily ate Pavano's contract, I don't see Milwaukee being able to absorb a contract like that, much less a contract Prince would sign, and still remain competitive on the field.

[Hate those Rodents]

TheCrew07 wrote:. The Yankees easily ate Pavano's contract, I don't see Milwaukee being able to absorb a contract like that, much less a contract Prince would sign, and still remain competitive on the field.

We are eating Hall's contract and I expect us to basically eat Suppan's contract by simply making him an afterthought as a long reliever. That totals over 20 million in 2010. That's a lot of money we are essentially eating. Add in Riske's as well and the point is that we can make about 25 million worth of a mistake and still be competitive. If we sign Prince and something goes bad, however, all our other money must not be "dead money" and we must hit enough on our outside free agent signings.

[RockCoCougars]

The way that I look at it, you pay Prince what you are paying him now - add what Suppan will is getting when he is gone, and you are right in the neighborhood of what it will take. Instead of using that money for mediocre starting pitching by getting into contracts with guys like Doug Davis and Washburn, spend it on the proven commodity, and hope that this organization can finally develop some quality arms to put with Gallardo and maybe find a couple of bargains like Davis was 5 years ago along the way.

 

Simply put, any offense with Braun and Fielder in the long run should be solid. I don't have anything to back me up on this, but it seems that trading superstars for multiple prospects doesn't pan out more often than it does.

[rluzinski]

Add in Riske's as well and the point is that we can make about 25 million worth of a mistake and still be competitive.

 

80 wins, sure. Playoff contenders?

[kramnoj]

The poiint that you continually will not acknowledge in any thread or any discussion about the economics of baseball is the economy of scale.

 

If you can show just one example of that, that would be great.

 

In regards to the situation discussed, we can retroactively look at how much money the Rockies spent and how much money was committed to Helton, and how they were able to be successful. If you are able to lock up an elite player, and if your system can produce good young talent around the elite player, you can make it to the playoffs, even if that player is eating up a large portion of the payroll.

 

Of course there is a risk in dedicating that much to one person, if they end up stinking or injured, it's hard to recover, but there is risk in just about any approach to building a team. I would rather take risks with elite players than hope for above average performance from a cluster of lesser players.

[Hate those Rodents]

Add in Riske's as well and the point is that we can make about 25 million worth of a mistake and still be competitive.

 

80 wins, sure. Playoff contenders?

Nobody is saying it's easy to do this way. It'd be better not to have 25 million of dead money. But take this past season. Let's say Sheets resigned with us and was healthy and an ace this past year and thus we didn't have the Looper money. And also that the bottom part of our rotation pitched better. You're likely looking at a 90 win team.

 

So, yes, we definitely can screw up our payroll a bit and still find ourselves in the playoffs. I don't advise screwing up with our payroll deciscions though.

[snyttri]

Financially I think you would have to choose signing a star, if you have a chance, over a group of players you would project to win the same number of games because the star will add more value to the entertainment product in gate receipts, merchandise sales and tv viewers.

[Flood Pants]

Financially I think you would have to choose signing a star, if you have a chance, over a group of players you would project to win the same number of games because the star will add more value to the entertainment product in gate receipts, merchandise sales and tv viewers.

This is a good point. The Brewers have performed extremely well in attendance, they're not likely to improve their income in that area. Merchandising and broadcast may be the two biggest avenues to improve. Increased revenue may pay a portion of Prince's salary for them. Especially if he keeps playing ball like last season. And keeps appearing in home run derbies.

 

What I especially like about this potential deal, is that even if his defense deteriorates, he could still have trade value as an elite DH. That is, if he can avoid Helton-like physical problems.

[HiAndTight]

The poiint that you continually will not acknowledge in any thread or any discussion about the economics of baseball is the economy of scale.

 

If you can show just one example of that, that would be great.

Seems like an awfully snide comment(towards you) for simply not agreeing.

 

As for the Rockies situation, what difference does speculating about what they are making hand over fist have to with anything when we know what they DID spend? It's easy to guess they're able to spend so much more, but the fact is they didn't spend so much more, and they have been competitive.

 

That right there is the argument, isn't it? That they may have been able to spend more money when they were winning, but chose not to goes against virtually everything we've heard regarding the team in their discussions with Holliday and Hawpe, but more importantly isn't relevent.

 

What actually happened seems to be far more pertinent.

[Mr Southpaw]

To Prince, we are going to have to go in the 25 million per year range. Compared to Ryan Howard, we have waaayyy underpaid for Prince. maybe someting like....

 

2010 $11 +

2111 $25

2112 $30

 

You end up buying an extra year for about whar Howard is getting now (3 years $66 or 2 years $55 however you want to look at it). If you want to win now during this cycle, I think you need to try to extend the contract at least one year. I think it works for Boris because Prince will still be able to get a big Free Agent contract for 2013-2017.

 

I just don't see the logic in spending long term money on pitchers (3-4 years Lowe, Johnson etc) unless you are going to try to keep Prince a bit longer.

[Invader3K]

I'm guessing if they are going to try to extend Prince at all, it's going to be for more than just what in reality is one more year of control.

 

I'm also guessing that about $20 million is the upper limit of what they would offer him for a single season. You absolutely will not see them allocate over 30% of their payroll to one player.

[logan82]

If the pitching prospects are good enough, we might be able to sink more money into Fielder. I would still prefer not to tie up 20%+ of the payroll in one player.

[HiAndTight]

If the pitching prospects are good enough, we might be able to sink more money into Fielder. I would still prefer not to tie up 20%+ of the payroll in one player.

It's not that I would prefer to not tie 20% up in one player, it's more that I'd rather it not be Prince.

 

Ryan Braun when he's due to become a FA is a player I'd spend the money on. A leader who wants to be here who is more likely to stay healthy, is maybe a more well rounded player.

 

Now Prince IMO is the better hitter, but I'm just too worried about him becoming Mo Vaughn 5-6 years down the road, if not 3-4 whereas I believe Braun truly is thinking about his place among the games all-time greats, works very hard and will be a great player for another 13-15 years.

[logan82]

I wouldn't be strongly opposed to trying to extend him for 2 years into his free agency. Not sure it is a good idea though. Kind of sucks that we have 2 of the best hitters in the league at their position but they are the 2 least valuable defensive positions. Forgot to add that they are suspect on defense.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

I wouldn't mind trading Prince to a team like the Red Sox who are looking for a DH with Ortiz going in the tank for Buccholz and other prospects. I think Gamel could end up being a serviceable 1B. I don't see the Brewers having much of a chance to lock Prince up long term after his monster season. I'd either trade him or wait another year and see if his value is still sky high.

[Flood Pants]

I guess what encourages me about Prince is that, even if his weight becomes an issue, I'm still confident in his hitting. He has excellent plate discipline, which should help him continue to be productive even if he slips physically. I think numerous AL teams would be happy to trade for a premier DH at $20 million per year, if that's what it came down to.

[FVBrewerFan]

Trading Braun in a couple years would be a way to afford signing Fielder to a long term deal. Think about it. Keep Fielder and Braun together for the next 3-4 years, and then trade Braun for a very handsome package in return. Braun would have huge value because he would have a couple years left on a very reasonable contract. Any reason why this wouldn't make sense?

[Invader3K]

The affordability of Braun's contract, coupled with the fact that he is a premier hitter, is the reason you don't trade him. I hope he retires a Brewer, frankly.

[Hate those Rodents]

True. In fact, hopefully we are in a position by then where we have so many good homegrown pitchers that we can afford to fleece someone for a bat of theirs to add to a Fielder/Braun - led offense.