Rickie Weeks to be dangled?? (per ESPN Insider)

[KCBrewerfan34]

About a week or so ago ESPN Insider had something to the affect that Weeks would be dangled for pitching this off-season?

 

I found it curious because I was under the impression both sides were interested in doing a long term deal.

 

Any thoughts on this and does anyone have Insider to paraphrase the article.

 

 

GO BREW

[Invader3K]

My stupid ESPN Insider login doesn't seem to be working yet again, or I'd let you know.

[dadofandrew]

Much like Hart, if he's not signed to an extension, he'll be dealt.

[Never Outhustled]

Any thoughts on this and does anyone have Insider to paraphrase the article.

 

It was just speculation.

 

 

Much like Hart, if he's not signed to an extension, he'll be dealt.

That's just speculation too. Not every player who's a pending FA is dealt.

[dadofandrew]

The Brewers sign guys or deal them. The only reason they would not is if they felt the 2 picks were worth more. History will repeat itself.

[Never Outhustled]

The Brewers sign guys or deal them. The only reason they would not is if they felt the 2 picks were worth more. History will repeat itself.

 

Can you tell me who we traded Ben Sheets or Mike Cameron for?

[MJLiverock]

And what do the Brewers have to show for Sheets and Cameron?

[Never Outhustled]

And what do the Brewers have to show for Sheets and Cameron?

 

For Sheets we have a playoff appearance, which is the goal. I'm not saying they can't deal Weeks, just pointing out that Al's generalization once again lacks fact.

[thebruce44]

The Brewers sign guys or deal them. The only reason they would not is if they felt the 2 picks were worth more. History will repeat itself.

 

Can you tell me who we traded Ben Sheets or Mike Cameron for?

Surly you can see a difference between Cam's 2 year deal, Sheets unique injury situation, and a player coming to the end of his team controlled 6 year run.

[kramnoj]

I don't see a need to call x surly.

 

The likely scenarios may be that Weeks is extended or traded, but the statement is far too assertive. If the Brewers are lucky enough to be in contention next year with Weeks at 2B, I don't see the Brewers trading him away.

[thebruce44]

I don't see a need to call x surly.

http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

Freudian typo on my part?

[Never Outhustled]

The Brewers sign guys or deal them. The only reason they would not is if they felt the 2 picks were worth more. History will repeat itself.

 

Can you tell me who we traded Ben Sheets or Mike Cameron for?

Surly you can see a difference between Cam's 2 year deal, Sheets unique injury situation, and a player coming to the end of his team controlled 6 year run.

 

I'm not sure what you mean about Sheets injury situation? Al claims when players enter their final year of contract, their extended or traded. Sheets entered 2008 in the last year of his contract. Under Al's generalization, he'd been dealt before the year started.

 

Also, i'd much rather be called surly than Shirley, so no offense taken.

[BREWCREW5]

This thread has gone off topic. Anyone who read the article have any info?

[kramnoj]

X seemed to answer the question by saying it was just speculation. Which of course is all it is going to be right now.

[Invader3K]

X seemed to answer the question by saying it was just speculation. Which of course is all it is going to be right now.

Yeah. I was able to look at it now and it just basically speculated that if Fielder doesn't bring enough in return, the team could opt to keep Prince and deal Weeks instead. Just off-season ideas more than anything substantive.

[paul253]

Stupid question, but do you think we could actually get more for Weeks than we could for Fielder? He'd be a ton cheaper to extend. He's got good speed, good power, good OBP. Defense isn't terrible, and second basemen with such offensive ability aren't as common as first basemen are.

[TooLiveBrew]

No, I think the Brewers absolutely could get more for Weeks. Provided he plays a full season, he's probably a more valuable player than Fielder unless Prince puts up like a 1.000 OPS & doesn't completely stink in the field.

[JohnBriggs12]

Everyone mentions that all you get when a player hits FA are draft picks and unless they are type A and B you don't get that. Depending on who it is, you also get considerable salary relief that in the Brewer case is usually spent (not always wisely) and roster flexibility. Even though Cameron and Sheets didn't bring any players, the money they were paid went elsewhere.

 

If they don't move Fielder or Weeks, they'll get picks and a lot of money comes off the books. If one or both can be adequately replaced internally by pre arby players such as Gamel or Lawrie (jury is out until they actually do it of course), then that money can be put to productive use where it's most needed.

[patrickgpe]

Attanasio was on TV yesterday and mentioned how strong the brewers were up the middle and mentioned, escobar, lucroy and cain, but neglected weeks. doubt that was by mistake.

[thebruce44]

JohnBriggs12[/b]]Everyone mentions that all you get when a player hits FA are draft picks and unless they are type A and B you don't get that. Depending on who it is, you also get considerable salary relief that in the Brewer case is usually spent (not always wisely) and roster flexibility. Even though Cameron and Sheets didn't bring any players, the money they were paid went elsewhere.

People don't mention it because you also usually get salary relief when you trade a nearly FA eligible player for prospects. Additionally, you get more effective salary relief because the cheap prospects you get back are MLB ready or nearly MLB ready and you know what to expect from them vs giving a salary bonus to a 1st or 2nd round supplemental pick who has a very high chance of flaming out.

 

So its really not an advantage for letting players depart.

[And That]

Attanasio was on TV yesterday and mentioned how strong the brewers were up the middle and mentioned, escobar, lucroy and cain, but neglected weeks. doubt that was by mistake.

I heard that, too, but I wouldn't read anything in to it. He was talking about "young" players. The first three players he mentioned were actually Escobar, Cain and Gomez. He had to be prompted by Anderson to mention Lucroy. All four of those guys are quite a bit younger than Weeks... Weeks is 28.

[paul253]

At this point, I think I might be willing to trade both Weeks and Fielder. If you manage to trade them to the same team, you should be able to get at least two high ceiling pitching and one good positional prospect. If you trade them separately, you should still be able to get two good pitchers in return plus something else. You'd have to make arrangements to replace Fielder, which I'd say could easily be done by moving McGehee to first and Gamel to third. You'd also have to sign a one year stop gap to play second until Lawrie is ready (Felipe Lopez?). But I think it's a good way to improve the team in the long run without spending a ton of money on average players.

[ramssuperbowl99]

At this point, I think I might be willing to trade both Weeks and Fielder. If you manage to trade them to the same team, you should be able to get at least two high ceiling pitching and one good positional prospect. If you trade them separately, you should still be able to get two good pitchers in return plus something else. You'd have to make arrangements to replace Fielder, which I'd say could easily be done by moving McGehee to first and Gamel to third. You'd also have to sign a one year stop gap to play second until Lawrie is ready (Felipe Lopez?). But I think it's a good way to improve the team in the long run without spending a ton of money on average players.

I think if we trade Weeks and Fielder, we'd have to completely embrace the blowup. I'd rather have Weeks extended for 4 years, maybe at $10M per or so, but if not, his value will probably never be higher. McGehee is likely going to end up getting 100 RBI, so it might be a good opportunity to go out and trade him to someone that needs an affordable 1B/3B. Any GM who uses archaic stats in player evaluation would be all over him.

If we did that to boost the farm system, then drafted aggressively with our 2 first round picks, we'd dramatically increase our chances of competing in 2012/2013.

[logan82]

If we did that to boost the farm system, then drafted aggressively with our 2 first round picks, we'd dramatically increase our chances of competing in 2012/2013.

The draft in 2011 is highly unlikely to have any impact until at least the 2014 season. More like the 2015 season.

[ramssuperbowl99]

logan3825]

If we did that to boost the farm system, then drafted aggressively with our 2 first round picks, we'd dramatically increase our chances of competing in 2012/2013.

The draft in 2011 is highly unlikely to have any impact until at least the 2014 season. More like the 2015 season.

Depends on how we draft. A high end college pitcher should make the big leagues relatively quickly. 2 years wouldn't be out of the question there, but if we draft a high school arm, yes, the odds are pretty good he won't help a big league club for a while.