The trade value of Casey McGehee ?

[TheCrew07]

Our biggest need as an organization has been and will remain pitching until some of our prospects blossom (hopefully). To acquire valuable pitching we need to be willing to part with a piece that will hurt like a Fielder, Hart, Hardy, or McGehee when they are performing at a high level. Every time a hitter performs well people can't fathom trading him and in fact Melvin can't fathom trading him, so our pitching situation as organization has never significantly improved. You may not like McGehee as a choice, I personally don't care anymore, but the theory is much more sound that these video game trades for CY candidate pitcher deals that tend to be proposed.

[logan82]

How much longer does this guy have to produce to convince the skeptics?

 

All of this year and a good part of next year.

[JohnBriggs12]

Our biggest need as an organization has been and will remain pitching until some of our prospects blossom (hopefully). To acquire valuable pitching we need to be willing to part with a piece that will hurt like a Fielder, Hart, Hardy, or McGehee when they are performing at a high level. Every time a hitter performs well people can't fathom trading him and in fact Melvin can't fathom trading him, so our pitching situation as organization has never significantly improved. You may not like McGehee as a choice, I personally don't care anymore, but the theory is much more sound that these video game trades for CY candidate pitcher deals that tend to be proposed.

For the Brewers, as important as pitching is, being able to surround Braun and Fielder (for as long as they have him) with cheap but productive talent is just as important. The best pitching staffs are generally developed internally anyway. An exception would be a team like the White Sox. But they didn't trade everyday players to get Danks, Floyd, and Peavy. They traded more established pitching in the case of Danks and Floyd, and younger pitching in the case of Peavy. To trade for young pitching, you generally have to give up established pitching. To trade for established pitching, you have to give up young pitching.

 

Another example is the Twins. You don't see them dealing guys like Cuddyer, Kubel, Span, Young, etc for pitching. They get their pitchers internally for the most part.

[nate82]

Our biggest need as an organization has been and will remain pitching until some of our prospects blossom (hopefully). To acquire valuable pitching we need to be willing to part with a piece that will hurt like a Fielder, Hart, Hardy, or McGehee when they are performing at a high level. Every time a hitter performs well people can't fathom trading him and in fact Melvin can't fathom trading him, so our pitching situation as organization has never significantly improved. You may not like McGehee as a choice, I personally don't care anymore, but the theory is much more sound that these video game trades for CY candidate pitcher deals that tend to be proposed.

Why trade McGehee for a #3 at best pitcher when there are already a bunch of pitchers like that in the Brewers farm system. I don't know what exactly you think we would get in a trade for McGehee but it is not going to be much and I don't see the Brewers getting anything more than a #3 type of a pitcher. You are probably looking at getting a teams 20th to 25th ranked prospect in return for McGehee. So you are looking at bullpen guys or back of rotation type of pitchers. Probably someone like Butler or a better example maybe someone like McClung in return for McGehee.

 

The same questions that people have right now on McGehee would follow him in the trade market. I just do not see a big enough return for McGehee to trade him. You do need to get a return that is at least an equal value to what you are giving up and I just do not see any teams giving up that talent for McGehee at least not pitching talent maybe another position player but not a pitcher.

[RockCoCougars]

Since they have nearly nothing invested in McGehee, this isn't one of those 'sell high' situations in my opinion. I say that you ride him out. The only scenario that I could see him as a piece to bring back a good pitcher would be if a team like Florida was salary dumping anyway, and wanted someone cheap and productive coming back.

[NievesNoNO]

JohnBriggs12[/b]]

TheCrew07[/b]]Our biggest need as an organization has been and will remain pitching until some of our prospects blossom (hopefully). To acquire valuable pitching we need to be willing to part with a piece that will hurt like a Fielder, Hart, Hardy, or McGehee when they are performing at a high level. Every time a hitter performs well people can't fathom trading him and in fact Melvin can't fathom trading him, so our pitching situation as organization has never significantly improved. You may not like McGehee as a choice, I personally don't care anymore, but the theory is much more sound that these video game trades for CY candidate pitcher deals that tend to be proposed.

For the Brewers, as important as pitching is, being able to surround Braun and Fielder (for as long as they have him) with cheap but productive talent is just as important. The best pitching staffs are generally developed internally anyway. An exception would be a team like the White Sox. But they didn't trade everyday players to get Danks, Floyd, and Peavy. They traded more established pitching in the case of Danks and Floyd, and younger pitching in the case of Peavy. To trade for young pitching, you generally have to give up established pitching. To trade for established pitching, you have to give up young pitching.

 

Another example is the Twins. You don't see them dealing guys like Cuddyer, Kubel, Span, Young, etc for pitching. They get their pitchers internally for the most part.

I think you both make valid points. I'm not sure what McGehee could bring back but I don't think it would be a teams best or second best pitching prospect, but I think you could bring back someone with similar qualities as the Brewer's Rivas or Rodgers. I will agree that in general to get young pitching you must give up established pitcheing, however, just because it's not common doesn't mean it can't happen.

 

If I try to look at it from a backwards perspective I guess I'd try to think of what would we be willing to give up for guy like Ryan Ludwick? I know they don't play the same position, but I think they profile fairly similar in terms of production and age. Every organization is in a different position and that position may change as the season goes on as might the value of McGehee. He might be valuable to other teams for the same reason he's valuable to the Brewers. I like McGehee. He's valuable to the team and is cost controlled for some time, but he's not on the list of players that I wouldn't consider trading.

 

[zzzmanwitz]

My simple answer to this question is...

 

not as high as his value with the Brewers right now.

[TheCrew07]

For the Brewers, as important as pitching is, being able to surround Braun and Fielder (for as long as they have him) with cheap but productive talent is just as important. The best pitching staffs are generally developed internally anyway. An exception would be a team like the White Sox. But they didn't trade everyday players to get Danks, Floyd, and Peavy. They traded more established pitching in the case of Danks and Floyd, and younger pitching in the case of Peavy. To trade for young pitching, you generally have to give up established pitching. To trade for established pitching, you have to give up young pitching.

 

Another example is the Twins. You don't see them dealing guys like Cuddyer, Kubel, Span, Young, etc for pitching. They get their pitchers internally for the most part.

 

So we go all out making rental player deals patching the rotation every year until Fielder is gone? Then what? Furthermore I can't think of anyone who's been to a WS that's built their rotation entirely in house. The Rays are there now if they make it, but when they went in 2008 they had 3 pitchers in the rotation acquired via trade (Kazmir, Garza, and Jackson). I don't care if McGehee is the guy or not, it's not like he's irreplaceable from within the system... we have plenty of 3B candidates between AA and AAA in Gamel, Green, or Lawrie. The point I made that you guys are missing is that you never want to trade anyone who's performing at the MLB, it's the same arguments every single time. We made our prospect deals folks, we had 1 maybe 2 shots to acquire a meaningful rotation piece with prospects, I've been saying that since before Sabathia, but it didn't happen, all of the surplus prospects were moved for rentals. Who's left? Gamel and Green have had their value plummet, and no one but 20 or 30 posters here on bf.net and a writer at MiLB.com have ever liked Salome.

 

Milwaukee will always be overspending to be average until we get a dominant rotation, it's that simple. I love following the minors, and I'm definitely down with building from within, but what if Rogers, Jeffress, Peralta, and Arnett don't make it? What happens if Yo gets hurt? We have enough depth that we could easily supply 4th and 5th starters, but whom do we slot with Yo? I completely agree that in Milwaukee's case the pitching should come from the system, but what if it doesn't,. just like it hasn't?

 

And no you don't have to trade pitching to get pitching, but generally speaking that's what happens when CY candidate pitching gets moved, and I've never advocated trading for that kind of pitching. It's too expensive to acquire and too costly to retain. I'm looking for projectable pitching on the rise in AA or AAA, I'm not looking for Peavy, Sabathia, Holliday, Lee, Webb, whomever... People around here keep limiting themselves to those types of "name" pitchers. As an example, what if we had acquired Niemann from TB like I wanted? At the 2008 deadline they couldn't give him away for the hitter they so desperately wanted.

 

I'm not saying that McGehee is the guy, I'm saying Melvin needs to make pitching a priority, and people around here need to be willing to give value to get value, we need to be willing to give up a piece that will hurt. If we continue to horde our valuable hitting like we have in the past, then this cycling of having to patch the rotation with FA pitching every year will continue.

[pete]

we need to be willing to give up a piece that will hurt. Braun? Weeks? Both?

 

McGehee, Green, Heether, even Gamel isn't going to get you a high likelihood top of the rotation starter. You might be able to package Lawrie and some other pieces. FWIW, over the past year I can remember discussions of or by Melvin of attempts to trade with Baltimore, Toronto, Detroit and others. I know a lot of people think they should have signed Lackey. That could have been a bad signing.

[804Sox]

I've been a McGehee skeptic since the beginning, but I'm starting to come around to the fact that he's a legit hitter. I doubt he'll be the type of power bat you want at 1B or 3B (more of an 18-25 HR player), and reports on his defense have indicated he might not be a great option at 2B or 3B (where his bat plays best among positions he "can" play), but I was wrong - kid can hit. I don't know how, I don't know why, but kid has become a legit hitter.

 

Still, I think it will take a bit longer for his trade value to catch up - probably not until this offseason.

[logan82]

I think turning 28 this offseason will cut into his value a bit. Of course wherever he plays that team will have him through his peak years before he even hits arbitration. He will turn 32 during the offseason in his first FA year.

[TooLiveBrew]

I've been a McGehee skeptic since the beginning, but I'm starting to come around to the fact that he's a legit hitter. I doubt he'll be the type of power bat you want at 1B or 3B (more of an 18-25 HR player), and reports on his defense have indicated he might not be a great option at 2B or 3B (where his bat plays best among positions he "can" play), but I was wrong - kid can hit. I don't know how, I don't know why, but kid has become a legit hitter.

 

Still, I think it will take a bit longer for his trade value to catch up - probably not until this offseason.

I think you hit the nail on the head. He can hit, but not well enough to have a lot of value at 1B. And his lack of mobility severely hurts his value on defense at 3B (even moreso at 2B). I agree with zzzman's last post -- his best value at the moment is on the field for the Crew.

[ILuvDaBush]

I am definitely of the opinion that McGehee is going to be our best trade chip in the near future. I think of how Doug Melvin used Scotty Po, a scrap heap nugget, to entice the Pale Hose into shipping us Carlos Lee. In these trying economic times, the ability to supplement one's big contract with a frugal/efficient contract like McGehee's is very valuable. And while he does hold value for us, I am still of the opinion that Gamel is the future at the hot corner. What about:

 

McGehee

Suppan

 

for

 

Oswalt

[nate82]

McGehee

Suppan

 

for

 

Oswalt

Not going to happen. Plus with that Podsednick trade the Brewers also had to give up Luis Vizcaino who was a rather decent bullpen arm definitely better than Suppan. Plus getting rid of McGehee for Oswalt doesn't really enthuse me at all I think the Brewers actually go backwards in win projection with Oswalt on the team than with McGehee on the team and that is even considering Suppan is still on the team.

 

I don't see the Astros trading Oswalt for anything less than a top 15 prospect from a team and a couple of lower tier prospects along with Oswalt. The Astros would be looking to be rebuilding and not taking on older players for Oswalt. This isn't the same as the Podsednick deal at all. The White Sox were still looking to contend when they traded Lee they were not looking to rebuild at that time. If they were looking to rebuild they wouldn't have traded Lee for Podsednick and a relief pitcher. So this deal makes absolutely no sense for the Astros and for the Brewers.

 

A more reasonable trade that the Astros would be looking at would be something like Scarpetta and Farris would be something more along the lines that the Astros will be looking at for a return for Oswalt. The Astros will definitely be looking for a pitcher to replace Oswalt in the near future and probably one or two positional players. If the Astros would have been looking to deal Oswalt in the beginning of the year or doing the off season then yeah maybe McGehee could have been an option but it still would have taken another prospect along with McGehee to get that trade done.

[ILuvDaBush]

The reason I throw McGehee out there as a possibility for the Astros is that their owner would probably prefer not to believe his team is rebuilding as much as it is re-tooling. If they were to get McGehee, they would control him for 4+ years, through his prime and then easily jettison him when he is nearing free agency with little regret. Prospects are great, but they're much more of a crapshoot than a player who has been doing it at the major league level for a year-plus. And the reason I throw Soup in there is because supposedly if the Astros want to move their once-and-former ace, they would need to eat salary. In this deal, they just have to eat the Soup.

[nate82]

The reason I throw McGehee out there as a possibility for the Astros is that their owner would probably prefer not to believe his team is rebuilding as much as it is re-tooling. If they were to get McGehee, they would control him for 4+ years, through his prime and then easily jettison him when he is nearing free agency with little regret. Prospects are great, but they're much more of a crapshoot than a player who has been doing it at the major league level for a year-plus. And the reason I throw Soup in there is because supposedly if the Astros want to move their once-and-former ace, they would need to eat salary. In this deal, they just have to eat the Soup.

No if they wanted to just eat salary they would take back a lesser prospect like McGehee I don't see the Astros taking back Soupan just to not take back much of a salary and I doubt the Astros would help us out like that with Suppan.

[3Putt]

You're both spot on. McGehee is delivering everything we could ask. Take a look at the pix of him in the dugout after a bad AB and you can see how seriously he takes his job. That's the difference between him and guys like Hall & Hart. Also, I can't understand why fans are still talking about Gamel like he's the next Braun. Gamel has shown that he has a long way to go to be considered a MLB 3rd baseman plus he has holes in his swing that pitchers are still exploiting. Casey's one of the best values out there. Trade Prince since we won't be able to resign him anyway plus we're going nowhere this year and next with our pitching staff.

[HiAndTight]

You're both spot on. McGehee is delivering everything we could ask. Take a look at the pix of him in the dugout after a bad AB and you can see how seriously he takes his job. That's the difference between him and guys like Hall & Hart. Also, I can't understand why fans are still talking about Gamel like he's the next Braun. Gamel has shown that he has a long way to go to be considered a MLB 3rd baseman plus he has holes in his swing that pitchers are still exploiting. Casey's one of the best values out there. Trade Prince since we won't be able to resign him anyway plus we're going nowhere this year and next with our pitching staff.

I completely disagree.

 

People never want to trade someone who is playing well at the Major League level, but at some point we need to actually pull the trigger and sell high on some of these players. Casey McGehee is performing as well as he's likely to ever perform in my opinion.

 

As for all the holes in Gamel's swing, I just don't see them. Gamel was too patient last year taking too many called 3rd strikes, a side effect of limited playing time for a young player in his first real big league experience, but he's got a beautiful short, compact swing that has very few holes in it.

As I said in another thread, I'd be very surprised if Casey McGehee out performed Mat Gamel over the next 3-4 years(McGehee's prime years). If he continues to hit as he has, and a team such as the TWins who are very poor at 3B at the moment with the likes of Nick Punto, and a LH'ed heavy lineup come calling offering something of substance for him, I think we'd be fools not to jump on that.

 

As for how seriously he takes his job, I agree it seems like he's a good guy, but we're not even close to being privy to how seriously most players take their job to be able to make any informed judgment regarding it.

 

I think predicting Casey McGehee's precipitous decline is far easier than predicting Bill Hall's, Corey Hart's or JJ Hardy's.

 

I understand the love for McGehee, but I really hope Melvin uses this opportunity to capitalize on that all too elusive "sell high" concept that's doomed the Brewers in recent years.

[Invader3K]

I guess my thinking is that if the Crew deals Fielder, there is no way they can also trade McGehee. Dealing both players would weaken the offense way too much. Hopefully Gamel is ready by next season, but who really knows at the rate he's been going?

[nate82]

Both McGehee's and Gamel's trade value should sky rocket this off season if Chipper Jones decides to retire. If McGehee continues to play like he has then I think you could get back a pretty good AA or AAA player. Gamel will probably still have some good value left but if the Brewers trade Fielder that makes this a moot point. You can't trade Fielder and McGehee/Gamel in the same year and expect the Brewers to be anything but a cellar dweller for the next 2-3 years while the next crop of talent comes up. That is just way to much offense to be giving up in a one year span and expect one of Gamel or McGehee to pick up the offense.

[Polish Falcons]

I wonder what McGehe's trade value would be given that everyone who follows baseball knows that his success has come practically out of nowhere, and everyone from analysts to writers to fans to fantasy baseball gurus was/is predicting that he will decline to his minor league norms at some point. I think that's the other thing to keep in mind when complaining about management for not "trading high". We don't know what kind of offer the Brewers might get for him. It's no secret that he is outperforming everyone's expectations. Given that he is one of few bright spots on the team, it better be good offer to pull the trigger on any McGehe trade.

[HiAndTight]

I guess my thinking is that if the Crew deals Fielder, there is no way they can also trade McGehee. Dealing both players would weaken the offense way too much. Hopefully Gamel is ready by next season, but who really knows at the rate he's been going?

I understand this, but our pitching isn't going to be good enough most likely next year to win anyway, so I'd rather our moves be more concerned with 2-3 years down the road.

 

Not likely, but it'd be nice.

[endaround]

And McGehee has a chance of being valuable and cheap in 2-3 years. You can only make so many trades and if the Brewers do tear it down (the rest of this season will likely decide) you'll have Fielder, Hart, Weeks, Coffey, Hawkins and Wolf all out there. The Brewers' payroll next season could easily be under $30m but that's another topic.

[HiAndTight]

And McGehee has a chance of being valuable and cheap in 2-3 years. You can only make so many trades and if the Brewers do tear it down (the rest of this season will likely decide) you'll have Fielder, Hart, Weeks, Coffey, Hawkins and Wolf all out there. The Brewers' payroll next season could easily be under $30m but that's another topic.

Man would I like to see the Brewers payroll drop to about 55-60 million over the next couple years with the idea of building up a reserve to supplement their payroll when they're back in a position to contend. 30 million would be all the better, but that's not likely to happen. With our new TV deal, if we could bank say 50 million the next 2-3 years, it could put us in a position to go out and sign a Matt Cain type pitcher when our next wave comes up.

 

Anyway, I just see Casey McGehee as clearly being a guy who's going to regress a great deal. I think we missed the boat on on Hardy, Hart(though it may be coming around again) and Hall, I'd really hate to see us hold on to him when we could get a important piece for the future only to watch him see a precipitous decline over the next 2 years and wishing we'd done something. I posted a thread about it, and would love to see us pursue a trade with the Twins aggressively and suggested a McGehee+Hart+Villanueva+Cash for Gibson+Ramos+Perkins deal.

 

 

 

Of course it helps that I'm still completely convinced that Mat Gamel is going to be a very good Major League hitter. I believe with his swing which again I think is one of the prettiest from a Lefty I've seen in a Brewers uniform in a long time will make him a good offensive 3rd basemen.

[pete]

As for all the holes in Gamel's swing, I just don't see them. Gamel was too patient last year taking too many called 3rd strikes, a side effect of limited playing time for a young player in his first real big league experience, but he's got a beautiful short, compact swing that has very few holes in it.

As I said in another thread, I'd be very surprised if Casey McGehee out performed Mat Gamel over the next 3-4 years(McGehee's prime years). If he continues to hit as he has, and a team such as the TWins who are very poor at 3B at the moment with the likes of Nick Punto, and a LH'ed heavy lineup come calling offering something of substance for him, I think we'd be fools not to jump on that...

 

I think predicting Casey McGehee's precipitous decline is far easier than predicting Bill Hall's, Corey Hart's or JJ Hardy's.

 

The hole in his swing is up and in. I'd like to think that Sveum could work with him and close it. The Twins are short of pitching. They don't even have a dominant starter now. They're not going to move one for Gamel or McGehee. People who think that players can't improve past a certain age have been predicting a moderate decline for McGehee, but you see it as precipitous. I think there's a chance Hart does ok. I don't see him in Milwaukee for very long though.