No Arby for any of Brewers' FAs

[JJHardy7]

The Brewers were only 3 games back in the NL Central and 3.5 game back in the Wild Card race when they traded for Lopez. Methinks they traded for him to try to bolster the lineup in order to make the playoffs.

 

I guess I just didn't think we really had much of a chance despite what the standings were. I guess my point is if we get Lopez for two minor leaguers (one was ranked as a top 10 prospect a year before traded), make or miss the playoffs, and get a high draft pick...that would be a very, very good trade. The way the season ended up going I guess I would have rather used a AAA type guy and just give him a shot. I'm not saying the guys we gave up are going to be All-Stars or anything of that sort...I just don't like trading minor leaguers for a rental that isn't going to net anything at all. Again, to be clear I'm not saying the guys we traded would've brought in some ace pitcher. They could've been a small part of a larger deal or we could've simply traded two minor leaguers for a rental and a high draft pick. Worst case is that Lopez comes back and given Weeks injury history that might not be a bad thing.

 

Obviously there could be a master plan here, but I guess I'm tired of not being able to see what DM's plan is. I guess we'll see in the next few months what the plan is.

[logan82]

I don't think any of these moves that we have made in the off-season are getting us closer to decent pitching -- I just think we are shedding payroll.

World coming to an end. I agree with FTJ. I don't think any of the FA pitching is good enough to really help us much. Hardy was probably our best trading chip to bring back some decent pitching without damaging our farm system.

 

I think Bush would be a non-tender candidate if we had better pitching depth. As it is right now, we probably only have 4 starters right now and Bush is one of them. We probably need 3 more which seems like it would be pretty tough, 4 would seem impossible. That is provided we are going to actually try and compete in 2010.

[CheezWizHed]

They don't need Lopez.

That isn't the point. As a small market organization, you can't allow talent to just walk out the door for free. There is always a point where you can't afford to offer arby (like Cameron), but I think the consensus here is that Lopez wasn't at that point.

 

You hoard as much talent as you can keep and make trades from positions of strength to fill gaps. If Lopez accepted arby (which I think was unlikely), and we couldn't trade him, I wouldn't have been opposed to trading Weeks and keeping Lopez instead.

 

Or we could treat him like Scutaro is being treated by Toronto. If he accepts arby, they are putting him in the OF. Less incentive for him to accept, I think...

[GAME05]

a little surprised at Lopez, but then i don't think it's appropriate for a mid-payroll team to be spending top dollar for backups on the chance that someone gets hurt. we'll make the playoffs if everything goes right, not if we have expensive backups for if things go wrong. not only that, but we had a good offense last year, so no sense in spending payroll to strengthen that more.

 

all this screams to me as cutting budget to make some bigger run at one or two good SPs. I'm not ruling out Lackey, either, because that would be a big splash and sell some tickets, expensive as he'd be.

[rluzinski]

Instead of simply calling Melvin stupid and ending the analysis there, let's at least try to figure out how Melvin rationalized his decision. This ended up being a much longer post than expected, so feel free to skip to the last 2 paragraphs if you want to know my opinion on all this.

 

First, we need to make some guesses on what Melvin's assumptions were.

 

Question #1: What is Lopez worth on the open market?

 

I'll simply formulate a rough projection for Lopez and use Tango's/Fangraphs' methodology to give that projection a dollar value. Here are the run values that Fangraphs has for Lopez's offense over the last three years (as basically a full time player):

 

07: -17.3 runs, 08: -3.5 runs, 09: 13.1 runs

 

Weighing 2007, 2008 and 2009, 20%, 30% and 50% respectively, I get 2 runs. Add in a little regression, age adjustment and I would say he's about an average hitter. Not bad at all for a 2B.

 

Now let's do defense. Since UZR data isn't as reliable as hitting stats, I'll weight the last 4 years at 10/20/30/40. The UZR run values:

 

06: -17.5 runs, 07: -6.6 runs, 08: -7.7 runs, 09: 7.8 runs

 

I get -2 runs. Add in Fangraphs' replacement level baseline and positional adjustments from last year, and we get:

 

0 runs (offense) + -2 run (defense) + 22.7 runs (replacement) + 2.2 (positional)

 

= +23 runs

 

Using 10 runs/win and $4.5 mil/win (it's debatable what is the "right" $ number to use), we get Lopez worth about $10 mil next year. Let's assume Lopez's reputation for having a bad attitude costs him $1 mil (complete guess). That leaves us with a free agent value of $9 mil. Others might find that way too high but considering the kind of year Lopez had last season (.310/.383/.427/.810 line over 680 PA), I don't think that estimate is unreasonable.

 

Question #2: What would Lopez get in arbitration?

 

As end pointed out, comps is a big part of the arbitration process but how those comparisons are formulated is probably not the most sophisticated process (I suspect BA, RBI and fielding % plays a prominent role). Personally, I think $5 mil would be the around the minimum that he would be awarded in arbitration. I would assume somewhere between $5-$8 mil. Let's split the difference and call it $6.5 mil.

 

Question 3: what is Lopez's value to the Brewers?

 

We estimated his FA value to be $9 mil over a full season but I can't see Melvin having projected more than 300 AB for him in 2010. That effectively cuts his value to the Brewers in half, to $4.5 mil. It's funny, but I bet most fans would be OK with Lopez being worth that in 300 AB but most probably wouldn't agree that he's worth $9 mil in 600 AB. I could be wrong on that, but when you get close to $10 mil, people start freaking out, it seems.

 

Question #3: What is a sandwich pick worth?

 

That's a tough question to answer but here's a study on the topic:

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/valuing-the-draft-part-one/

 

He estimates it at $2.63 mil. For the sake of argument, we'll assume Melvin valued the sandwich pick at $4 mil.

 

If Melvin would have offered Lopez arbitration, the risk was that Lopez would accept and Melvin would have had to pay $6.5 mil for $4.5 mil of value (a net loss of $2 mil). Had Lopez declined arbitration and signed elsewhere, the reward would have been the sandwich pick, worth $4 mil. If the odds of Lopez declining were greater than 33%, this analysis suggests that Melvin should have offered arbitration. Indeed, since I estimated that Lopez's FA value was greater than his likely arbitration salary, we would have expected Melvin to offer arbitration and Lopez to decline it. I can only imagine that Melvin estimated Lopez's value in 2010 as being less than I have. It's either that or Melvin and/or Mark A. are desperate to clear as much money as possible off the books, so they can maximize their available cash for what they see as a greater need (pitching).

 

What's more enlightening, though, is that the dollar figures we are talking about are all pretty darn low. $2 mil? $4 mil? Melvin's decision may reflect poorly on his ability to make good baseball decisions but it will probably not have a large effect on the 2010 season. The tens of millions Melvin and Mark A. predictably wasted on Suppan pisses me off. This is a slight annoyance.

[joepepsi]

The GMs just flooded the market with free agents. This should drive the market down for all but the handful of elite players. I like your line of thinking Russ, but I don't think the New Market is going to pay $9 million for a 30 year old average-ish 2B.

 

Arbitration however, will look at comparable players many of whom have salaries dating pre-New Market. So, I think his value will be inflated through arbitration, as it almost always is. He could argue he had a comparable year to Brian Roberts, who is making $10 million per season over the next 4 years.

[kramnoj]

Would anyone be bothered if they had to find a place to play a .300 hitter with on base skills?

 

You can't be talking about Lopez, of the career .269 average and career OBP of .338 can you?

 

If you think this is any evidence of Melvin not being able to do more than one thing at a time, you are completely wrong. Lopez doesn't play a position that the Brewers desperately need for 2010, and he would be eating up resources that need to be used on pitching. Melvin not wanting Lopez back is only evidence of proper use of resources.

 

As for not offering arbitration, it was a move where the reward is a 2nd round pick, and the risk is getting a player that you don't need and don't want to pay. A 2nd round pick can provide value, but most of the time doesn't. In this particular case, the risk, however small, outweighed the reward, in Melvin's mind. I don't agree with it, but he wants every available dollar for pitching, and that's a reasonable goal.

[logan82]

I think it would be a reasonable goal if FA pitching looked better. As it is, they are mostly uninspiring except for the top players who are likely to go for more than we want to commit in dollars or years.

[HiAndTight]

Well, I won't slink into the shadows after saying at the time of the trade that it was almost certain that Lopez would be offered arby and was completely wrong.

 

Also a very dumb decision by the Brewers.

 

Hey, you could also say it's almost a certain that an NFL player won't headbut a concrete wall with an inch and a half of padding. Doesn't make YOU an idiot when you end up being wrong.......

 

Seriously though, I just don't see why you don't do this. What, you think Lopez is going to get 12 million next year? If he is awarded 5.5 in arbitration, tell me you couldn't have traded that contract?

 

What if he would have been a Type A FA as he very nearly was. Would Melvin have still declined?

 

The good news? The Brewers should be looking at going after many more high, high ceiling guys who are falling, ala Del Howell and Scooter Gennett(as well as Brooks Hall). So perhaps we end up making up for the lost draft picks.

[TheCrew07]

And we had a need for a leadoff hitter at the time. Melvin didn't give up anything valuable to get him either.

I keep seeing this posted but it's not necessarily true or that simple. McGehee would have been fine at 2nd, Gamel could have played 3rd, the trade was completely unnecessary given the state of the team.

 

Furthermore, it's not about what we gave up to get him, it's the return beyond just his rental, and in the greater look at all of the expendable assets that Melvin has moved without addressing the gaping organizational hole that is the starting pitching? It's a rather large list of players for nothing tangible long term.

[HiAndTight]

You can't be talking about Lopez, of the career .269 average and career OBP of .338 can you?

Actually, I think he's talking about the guy who hit .320/.401 for us last year, .310/.383 overall last year and who for the last year and a half has been a great 2nd basemen.

Guys develop late. It happens all the time. Lopez is starting to get to the point now where he's been really very good for about a season and a half.

It's not unheard of for a 27/28 year old guy to finally bust out. Lopez is just 29 years old right now. I think he's proven he's not the player that posted those career lines. Now he hasn't "proven" he's the player who posted the aforementioned lines, but from watching him last year, his approach, his swing, suffice to say, he's a good ballplayer.

[HiAndTight]

One final thought on this subject. I keep hearing we didn't give up anything to get him. I disagree.

 

We gave up a young OF'er who I liked an awful lot and who I think could be an average big league starter, or a very, very good 4th OF'er, and a young reliever who I think had considerable potential to help us out in the not too distant future.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see both Gillespie and Mercedes playing for the D-backs at some point in '10 and making contributions.

 

All of this was mitigated by the fact that you could have hoped to get some value back from one of those picks....until this.

[sgtcluels]

Offft hard formatted read Russ. Remember we also gave up two minor leaguers for Lopez. Doubt they really had a future with the club, but that void needs to be filled with someone. And I'd think a draft pick could possibly pay off in the future. As I mentioned in another thread, it seems that if we are that concerned of $4.5m, then our budget has to be razor thin. I don't have much hope in getting any kind of pitching,.

[Invader3K]

I keep seeing this posted but it's not necessarily true or that simple. McGehee would have been fine at 2nd, Gamel could have played 3rd, the trade was completely unnecessary given the state of the team.

Perhaps they were concerned with McGehee's apparent nagging injury issues and Gamel's almost complete lack of MLB experience. Also factoring in Counsell's age, I still think trading for Lopez is a solid move. I do agree that getting a draft pick as compensation would have made it make a lot more sense going forward.

 

The "razor thin" budget comment seems spot on. Though if they don't make a big splash and sign John Lackey or trade for another upper tier pitcher, this is all going to look pretty pathetic.

[rluzinski]

Offft hard formatted read Russ.

 

I'm not sure what you mean. Hard to read?

 

Remember we also gave up two minor leaguers for Lopez. Doubt they really had a future with the club, but that void needs to be filled with someone.

 

As far as I can see, what Melvin gave up to get Lopez has nothing to do with whether Melvin should have offered him arby. I'm treating a win in 2009 as equal to a win in 2013. of course, Melvin and mark A. probably isn't.

 

And I'd think a draft pick could possibly pay off in the future.

 

Well, sure. The average sandwich pick might be worth $4 mil. That means maybe 60% are worth a slight negative (pay signing bonus and salary and get no production in return), 20% are worth $5 mil and 10% are worth $20 mil. Could be bad to great.

 

As I mentioned in another thread, it seems that if we are that concerned of $4.5m, then our budget has to be razor thin.

 

That might be somewhere between 30-45% of the total surplus money, so it's not trivial.

[Thurston Fluff]

Given Melvin's desire for cost certainty I'm not surprised by this. Year's past I would have been against it thinking it would hurt the team's long term. I'm ok with taking the conservative approach this time around. I think the financial risk of another losing season would be worse for the team's future than losing a potential second round pick. After last season's disappointing performance and seeing things like the recent article from another tread it seems this team has to do what it takes to win now. Otherwise they risk losing any semblance of a legitimate franchise. That is irrelevant on the national level but very important for the fan base. Doubly so for the casual fans.

This team has to think short term in order for the long term to be as bright as it can be. Draft picks would have been nice but I'd rather not risk losing a pitcher due to salary constraints just to have a chance at a second round pick next year.

I think the only one I would have taken a chance on would have been Lopez but even he might not get the same in free agency as he would have in arby. It's also somewhat of a risk to think he would repeat last year. I always worry about players who do their best in contract years. It really depends on whether the market stays as depressed as it was last year or not. If it does Melvin might have been wise to decline all of them. If it doesn't he'll look bad. Even worse if Lopez does maintain his level of play. Time will tell if not offering Lopez is a good move or not. Even if he does the risk of more losing short term outweighs the benefits of Lopez or a second round pick IMHO.

[MNBrew]

Maybe I'm reading the tone wrong, but it sure seems many folks are confusing 3- to <6-year arbitration with FA arbitration. The difference is in speculating what a guy might get awarded. If a 6+ year player accepts arby, he does it knowing the team is willing to spend the money to sign him. And he accepts it because he feels it's going to be his best playing & paying situation.

 

RARELY does a 6+ year FA who accepts arby actually go to arby. That version of arby is a whole different landscape (albeit with similar formats, tenets, premises, etc.) than arby for players w/ 3-6 years of experience.

[kramnoj]

Actually, I think he's talking about the guy who hit .320/.401 for us last year, .310/.383 overall last year and who for the last year and a half has been a great 2nd basemen.

 

It's not even a year and a half. It's 194 games. In the other 100 games in 2008 he was hitting in the Hall/Kendall territory and he's been a below average hitter all but one other season before 2009.

 

I think he's proven he's not the player that posted those career lines.

 

His time in Washington in 2007-2008 was longer than his last 3 stops combined, and he OPSed like the 2009 version of Hardy in that timespan. That doesn't represent what he has been for most of his career, but it does help demonstrate that that using less than 2 years of data isn't enough to get a firm evaluation of a player.

[colbyjack]

I think it's clear that the team has nearly zero payroll flexibility to be able to make such moves and address their pitching needs. I don't like the thought that we're losing both Cameron and Lopez with zero draft pick compensation, but the way the market appears to be going, they both may have been crazy not to accept arby. As already noted, that kind of arbitration pits them in court, with two figures to choose from, if the two sides can't agree somewhere in the middle.

 

I believe endaround pointed out earlier that Lopez could very well have commanded $8 million via arby. His agent his Scott Boras, and you have to believe he would have advised Lopez to accept if he didn't think he would get many takers on the open market, at least not for that kind of money.

 

And I'm sure Melvin did his homework to gauge other teams' interest. Again, it sucks not to get any compensation, but with the way the offseason has been going already, I think it's pretty clear a lot of teams are dealing with some pretty serious payroll limitations.

[Tbadder]

I'd be willing to bet that Lopez and Naverson will be worth more than Davis or Washburn and maybe even Wolf. Melvin can save all the money he wants, but the pitching that's available is not very good, and they got a better chance of pulling a "Suppan" than acquiring a starter that will make them competitive. This is a poor decision.

[HiAndTight]

I'd be willing to bet that Lopez and Naverson will be worth more than Davis or Washburn and maybe even Wolf. Melvin can save all the money he wants, but the pitching that's available is not very good, and they got a better chance of pulling a "Suppan" than acquiring a starter that will make them competitive. This is a poor decision.

 

 

I agree it's a bad decision, I also agree signing Wasburn and Davis to anything beyond 2 years and 8 million per(which is almost a certainty) is a bad idea.

However I'm still confident that we're going to be able to acquire pitchers who can help us a great deal. I've advocated signing 2-3 of the injury type low risk/high reward type guys, and then perhaps one legit starter via trade or FA. If you can pick up either of the available Braves starters, Lowe or Vazquez and then Mulder and perhaps Sheets I think you're greatly improving your rotation.

Of course virtually everyone is in agreement that while Washburn and Davis would help us, they'd be very poor signings.

I'm also enamoured with the idea of Vincente Padilla....despite all logical conclusions regarding him, he looked just so damn electric in LA last year. My head says he'll revert back to the Rangers Padilla, but my small sample size guys says maybe he's a great buy this off-season. Seriously though, how can someone who can be THAT good pitch soo poorly most of the time? 95 on the black in and out.....anyway, I digress...

[sgtcluels]

Rus, I meant the formating. It looked horrible rendered on my monitor, much better on this laptop.

[jhart05]

"Lopez's past salaries have no bearing on FA arbitration cases. Its all about comparables. Lopez put up a season comparable to Brian Roberts who just signed for $10m per last offseason. And going to arby versus Boras for a guy who you have penciled in as a backup?"

 

 

Exactly.

 

There is no way Lopez would have turned that down, he's not going to be able to get that on the FA market this year.

 

Melvin made the right move in all of these arby cases.

 

Does anyone know exactly how many free agents HAVE signed with a team so far this off season? I have no idea, but I bet you could count them on one hand. Everyone is sitting back waiting for the one big free agent to sign then everyone else will fall into line. Isn't that the way it goes every year? It's going to be even more so this year with everyone using the economy as an excuse for everything. Have patience people. Take your mind off of it and com'on down to the Mecca (US Cellular Center) and watch some college hoops!! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif