Should the Brewers trade John Axford?

[LouisEly]

I never bought into the trade when the value is high philosophy. If we did that the Brewers roster would be full of under achievers, unproven rookies or guys who will never be good enough for the big stage every season. The only time I think we should trade our guys is when we have a replacement for the guy or when he is about to leave anyway.

Amen, bingo, w00t, booyah, hallelujah. If you are going to go to the playoffs and win a championship you have to have a few star players and overachievers on your team. The teams that make good trades are the ones who trade players under these two scenarios - you have a replacement guy who is ready who projects to be as good or better (Fielder/Overbay, Escobar/Hardy), or when they are about to leave or you are better off if they left and the value you can get is better than any comp picks you may get.

 

Yeah there are exceptions to every rule, and yeah if someone is desperate and blows you away with an offer you make the deal. But having cheap bullpen arms will allow the team to take the salaries of Hoffman/Hawkins/Riske/etc. and put that towards FA position players to fill the holes. For example, Aubrey Huff was had for $3M in the offseason by the Giants - a player like that could fill the role of RF or 1B should they trade Hart or Fielder.

[endaround]

The big issue is Axford is 27. He probably has 4-5 really good years in his arm including this one. Of those 4-5 seasons, this is a wasted one, next year is likely a wasted one if both Fielder and Hart are moved (and Weeks coudl be moved as well).

[monty57]

The less free-agent relievers we have to being in, the better!

 

That says it pretty well. If we have say an $80MM payroll and around $78MM of that can be spent outside of the bullpen, it's a good thing.

 

We need to be able to develop our bullpen arms, and with all the arms currently in the system, we should have a cheap bullpen for quite a while. Axford is great to have now and can be flipped in the future when the price tag goes up and other cheap young players are ready to fill in.

[LouisEly]

Trevor Hoffman didn't fall apart until he was 42. Lee Smith didn't fall apart until he was 37. Mariano Rivera is still going strong at 40. Billy Wagner is still throwing gas at 38.

 

Relievers aren't like starters - they usually last longer.

[And That]

Trevor Hoffman didn't fall apart until he was 42. Lee Smith didn't fall apart until he was 37. Mariano Rivera is still going strong at 40. Billy Wagner is still throwing gas at 38.

And if John Axford turns in a fringe Hall of Fame career too, that would be wonderful. The odds of Axford, who has already had a major arm injury, not "falling apart" until age 37 or 38 or 40 or 42 seem pretty long.

[RockCoCougars]

People here get too excited about prospects. I guarantee you that many here would trade the current active man roster in it's entirety for the Top 20 through Top 45 prospects from Baseball America. I'd be willing to bet that team would never be as good as the team we have now. Look at Escobar out there. He was a Top 10-ish prospect, who was supposedly major league ready, and he looks completely lost out there. What was Carlos Gomez' peak on this list a few years back? For every bona-fide star that comes from that list, I would bet that there are 4 flameouts like Nick Neugebauer, Alex Ochoa or worse.

[kramnoj]

I guarantee you that many here would trade the current active man roster in it's entirety for the Top 20 through Top 45 prospects from Baseball America.

 

How many is many, and how are you going to back up this guarantee? That's just silly.

 

What was Carlos Gomez' peak on this list a few years back?

 

52, before 2008.

[monty57]

The big issue is Axford is 27. He probably has 4-5 really good years in his arm including this one. Of those 4-5 seasons, this is a wasted one, next year is likely a wasted one if both Fielder and Hart are moved (and Weeks coudl be moved as well).

So let's keep him while he's pre-arby and in his prime and then trade him in year 2 of arby, after he's established a reputation as a "proven closer" and is getting expensive. If he can rack up 30 or so saves a year for the next 3 or 4 years and is still hitting the mid-90's with his fastball at age 30/31, we will be able to bring in a pretty good haul in trade. At that time, some of our current A-Ballers will have proven that they won't make it as MLB starters, so they'll fit in well as cheap arms to replace Axford in the 'pen.

 

[endaround]

Yes you can keep him but you also have to deal with the fact his arm could blow out at any time. I'm not saying he needs to be moved, its that if you get offered something you think about it. Yes he could become Joe Nathan but the Twins this year are showing how much even elite closers really matter.

[bullox]

Trevor Hoffman didn't fall apart until he was 42. Lee Smith didn't fall apart until he was 37. Mariano Rivera is still going strong at 40. Billy Wagner is still throwing gas at 38.

 

Relievers aren't like starters - they usually last longer.

So what you're saying is that the best relievers of all time didn't break down until they were old. Makes sense.

[Thurston Fluff]

The big issue is Axford is 27. He probably has 4-5 really good years in his arm including this one. Of those 4-5 seasons, this is a wasted one, next year is likely a wasted one if both Fielder and Hart are moved (and Weeks coudl be moved as well).

 

While it is true the team will have some changes I'm not sure those changes mean another sub par season. Exchanging sluggers with poor defense with good pitching on a good slugging, defensively poor team who needs pitching can be the key to a turnaround not the beginning of another long rebuild.

I think there are enough examples of teams who suck for a year or two but rebound quickly to think with a few changes and next year is far from likely to be wasted. That is assuming you mean any year without a playoff is truly wasted.

I still like to watch my team play good baseball even when their overall year isn't up to specs. Having good young players getting their first taste of the majors and doing well is a pretty entertaining substitute. I just wish we'd have a little more of the other type:)

 

Yes you can keep him but you also have to deal with the fact his arm could blow out at any time.

 

The guy you trade for could get injured as well. I'm not sure how one would go about justifying a trade made of fear of a future injury that has no sign of occuring. On occasion you can get someone like Harden who is constantly injured and you trade him between DL stints but that isn't the situation here.

[GAME05]

i think of it the other way, of the Brewers trying to trade a prospect for a rookie with only 37 innings behind him. i don't think you'd get many people who'd like giving up a Gamel or Odorizzi for that.

 

the Brewers have been paying out $10M on even just a gamble that a closer will be decent (I see Gagne and Hoffmann's first year as gambles), so I doubt I'd shop Axford even in his arbitration years. contending teams need good closers and mid-market teams can't afford expensive ones. we have a win-win with Axford, so his value to the Brewers is far more than any other team would offer us in a trade for him.

[logan82]

i think of it the other way, of the Brewers trying to trade a prospect for a rookie with only 37 innings behind him. i don't think you'd get many people who'd like giving up a Gamel or Odorizzi for that.

That is a good way to look at it. I don't think we would give up much more than Hoffman and Stetter for a guy like Axford.

[RockCoCougars]

Given the shelf life of Brewers closers, Axford won't keep this up for too much longer if you go by history. They haven't had a closer put together more than 2 strong years since Plesac about 20 years ago. It seems like every year someone emerges and does a great job- from Torres, Turnbow, Kolb, Doug Jones, etc only to flame out within a year or so. That said, I still don't want to trade Axford.

[Fatter than Joey]

This has nothing to with trading Axford, but it finally occurred to me just who Axford reminds me of and that's Jim Kern

 

Whoa. That's a name from the past. He sure was dominant during his prime. Terrible as a Brewer though.

 

He was traded for another big pitcher, Len Barker. Barker was a starter though, and probably a bit thicker, he could throw gas though. He became a Brewer as well.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Given the shelf life of Brewers closers, Axford won't keep this up for too much longer if you go by history. They haven't had a closer put together more than 2 strong years since Plesac about 20 years ago. It seems like every year someone emerges and does a great job- from Torres, Turnbow, Kolb, Doug Jones, etc only to flame out within a year or so. That said, I still don't want to trade Axford.

None of the previous closer's flameouts should be used to judge Axfords future performance.

[igor67]

I doubt that Axford is that completely established as a proven closer after just a couple of months. To say nothing of needing to hold onto pitchers. If he keeps going through next year than he gets that big value that might get a nice over payment.

[logan82]

I agree that closers are mostly replaceable but I don't think it makes much sense to trade a cost controlled guy like Axford. Maybe once he hits arbitration but unless we have a good replacement it really makes almost no sense to me to trade him.

[homer]

He was traded for another big pitcher, Len Barker. Barker was a starter though, and probably a bit thicker, he could throw gas though. He became a Brewer as well.

I remember his perfect game for the Tribe.

[strawbossisevil]

Right, I agree with most here that Axford shouldn't be traded. At least not yet. That said, the closer role is something extremely overvalued, and he is a bit of an older pitcher coming off of an arm injury. If he continues to pitch well for another season or two, he might carry some significant value in a trade, but not yet.

 

If we can get a prospect with top of the rotation stuff, that to me is worth giving up a great relief pitcher for. The trouble is, Axford doesn't have the reputation yet to be able to invite other teams to overpay for his services. No team is going to give up their top SP prospects for someone who has had 2-3 months of success at the Major League level. In two years, if he continues to pitch like he has, then yes, an overpay becomes far more likely. Until then, we might as well ride his success until his value is more to some other team than it is to ours.

 

I am disappointed that some think that just because someone brings up trading a young guy, that said person must have a "losers' mentality". My understanding of his point is that closers are overvalued, therefore, if Axford is being overvalued, and we have a player who is capable of filling his role, why not trade him for a greater team need (starting pitching). I agree with the sentiment, I just don't think Axford is currently at the point of being overvalued by others around the league.

[ilovebeer]

Is he a free agent after the season?

[strawbossisevil]

No, this is his first season, he has 5 more years before he's a free agent.

[endaround]

Most likely 6-he came up after the beginning of the season and only had like 2 weeks last year

[LouisEly]

As far as coming off an arm injury, the TJ surgery was at least 5 years ago. Speaking of which, Tommy John pitched 2000 innings after said surgery, the first ever performed. John Smoltz threw 1000 more innings - 3.5 seasons as a very good closer and 3 seasons as a very good starter after a major arm injury at the age of 33.

 

Point being, the stress on a reliever's arm is not near the stress on a starters, which is why relievers have longer careers on average than starters. Expecting Axford to start declining at the age of 32 may be a bit premature.

[The Truth]

I like Axford alot. His WHIP was always a little high throughout his minor league career, but he's got some great stuff and I think he could be a Brewers closer for at least 4-5 years if he remains healthy