Brewers acquire Shaun Marcum for Brett Lawrie 1 for 1; 3/24/12 -- Jayson Stark article

[HiAndTight]

He's not a true ace but if he could be "our" ace, or close to it, what does that say about how desperate we are for pitching?

We are desperate for pitching....time will tell if this was worth it. I hope I'm proven wrong.

 

And I don't believe he'll be our ace over Yovani either. Yo's younger, more durable, and throws about 5-6 MPH harder.

[sveumrules]

Marcum was top 20 in value last year amongst AL starters so while he may not be an "ace" he is a solid #2.

[strawbossisevil]

He's not a true ace but if he could be "our" ace, or close to it, what does that say about how desperate we are for pitching?

We are desperate for pitching....time will tell if this was worth it. I hope I'm proven wrong.

 

And I don't believe he'll be our ace over Yovani either. Yo's younger, more durable, and throws about 5-6 MPH harder.

The same could be said about Parra...ok, maybe not the durable part. But there is more to a pitcher than being young and throwing hard.

[Thurston Fluff]

While some may think we should have got more in return we didn't. Seems to me Melvin has been around long enough and has shown himself to be able to make decent trades when available to think this was indeed the best he could get. So to me the real question isn't what we could have got for him. We already know that Marcum is indeed the best we can get. The real question is are we better off with Marcum or having kept Lawrie?

We have a lot of defensively challenged players who can hit. We have virtually no legit major league ready 2/3 pitchers. We took some of our excess and used it to get a much needed commodity in return. I don't know how to rate the value of a player who has yet to play above AA, has yet to prove he can play effectively in the field and has reportedly been less than stellar in the clubhouse but can flat out hit. But I do know we have several of those players on the team already, minus the attitude, and we stunk. Maybe it's time to look less at the value of each player in a vacuum and more at what each would have contributed to actually improving on the number of wins the team has.

Count me in as happy they found someone good and didn't lose irreplaceable players in the process.

[HiAndTight]

I do not understand those who do not like the trade. I was talking to my son after the Packer game yesterday and told him that with the meetings starting, he better be prepared for what the cost will be for starting pitching. It was going to be at least one of these - Hart, McGehee, Weeks, Lawrie, LuCroy, Rogers, Odorizzi, Lo Cain or even Braun. The price tag is expensive plain and simple. The answer is plain and simple. Pay the price or get out of the business. Those who expect to getting a QUALITY starter for a couple of mid range prospects with a bench player thrown in are delusional.

I quite literally would have been alright trading ANY other player on that list for pitching. Obviously your expectations go up or down with the player. I'd have expected more for Braun obviously, a nice return for Hart, McGehee's a guy I think we should trade now, Rogers is a fun guy to watch, but his history suggests he has a high liklihood of being a bust, same with Jeffress. Cain...I don't think he'd bring much in return. Weeks is probably my favorite player, but from a more detached place, I'd have been alright with trading him. Odorizzi would have been tough as well.

 

I appreciate being called delusional, in particular when I've never once suggested we'd get a QUALITY(since it must be in all caps) pitcher for mid range prospects. I also haven't seen anyone else suggest that. I'm not sure how my issue with trading our top prospect for a guy who has the issues surrounding him that Marcum does automatically qualifies as "being delusional" because we thought we could get a quality starting pitcher for a couple of mid range prospects. Lets not superimpose other issues into this. I have a problem with trading Lawrie for Marcum, nothing else. I have no preceding issue with Melvin, nor do I have any deluded expectations of what pitching costs.

 

These other things being thrown around, about no matter what Melvin does people will complain, about what YOU think I expect to have to give up for "quality" starting pitchers aside, I don't like giving up the player we gave up for the player we got. Now if everyone else wants to rejoice that we got a good starting pitcher, I'll be right there with them. That's great. I don't think it's great what we gave up for him.

[HiAndTight]

He's not a true ace but if he could be "our" ace, or close to it, what does that say about how desperate we are for pitching?

We are desperate for pitching....time will tell if this was worth it. I hope I'm proven wrong.

 

And I don't believe he'll be our ace over Yovani either. Yo's younger, more durable, and throws about 5-6 MPH harder.

The same could be said about Parra...ok, maybe not the durable part. But there is more to a pitcher than being young and throwing hard.

I think some things SHOULD have been assumed in there. Yo's also proven himself a capable front of the rotation type pitcher at 23 and 24 years old. That's as far as I'm going to entertain the Parra-Gallardo conversation however.

[HiAndTight]

While some may think we should have got more in return we didn't. Seems to me Melvin has been around long enough and has shown himself to be able to make decent trades when available to think this was indeed the best he could get. So to me the real question isn't what we could have got for him. We already know that Marcum is indeed the best we can get. The real question is are we better off with Marcum or having kept Lawrie?

We have a lot of defensively challenged players who can hit. We have virtually no legit major league ready 2/3 pitchers. We took some of our excess and used it to get a much needed commodity in return. I don't know how to rate the value of a player who has yet to play above AA, has yet to prove he can play effectively in the field and has reportedly been less than stellar in the clubhouse but can flat out hit. But I do know we have several of those players on the team already, minus the attitude, and we stunk. Maybe it's time to look less at the value of each player in a vacuum and more at what each would have contributed to actually improving on the number of wins the team has.

Count me in as happy they found someone good and didn't lose irreplaceable players in the process.

If you don't mind, I'll bookmark this for future discussions on Melvin. If we're going to blindly have faith in Melvin on this issue because he's been around for a while, then I suppose the same arguments could be made for Suppan, Hawkins, the Lee trade, the Sexon trade, the lack of a Prince trade and other moves that he generally gets lambasted for.

 

In fact I've seen quite a few posts mocking him with regard to Pavano, or aging middle relievers.

[chadomac]

We got 2 years of the Blue Jays ace for a prospect. I guess I can understand people being worried about Marcum's injury history, but I'm still surprised how many people think we could've gotten more for a guy that has not even played AAA ball yet.

 

I don't really want to get into an argument about whether or not Marcum is a "true ace", because it's really obnoxious and it seems there are only 5 "true aces" in all of baseball by a lot of people's standards... but we got 2 years of one of the best pitchers in baseball. A friend and I were discussing the deal through email and he said this about Marcum:

 

"Garza would be wonderful. His WHIP is 1.25, which is awesome in the AL.

He'd really benefit from a move to the NL. (BTW, Marcum had the 5th

lowest WHIP in the AL at 1.15...which is staggeringly low. That's better

that Sabathia and Price. To put that in perspective, Gallardo's WHIP is

1.37 and he pitches in the NL, in the weakest division in baseball)."

 

Made me feel even better about the trade. I think it was worth the risk - especially if we end up keeping Weeks.

[kramnoj]

I'm not sure how my issue with trading our top prospect for a guy who has the issues surrounding him that Marcum does automatically qualifies as "being delusional"

 

I'm not really sure what issues you think Marcum has. Pitchers can be successful throwing less than 90 MPH. That's why they are called pitchers, not throwers. I don't think that Marcum having gone through TJ surgery is an issue. If anything, it seems to be a plus. Most pitchers that go through TJ don't have a second one, do they? What evidence is there to suggest that Marcum having gone through the surgery is an issue?

[HiAndTight]

I'm not sure how my issue with trading our top prospect for a guy who has the issues surrounding him that Marcum does automatically qualifies as "being delusional"

 

I'm not really sure what issues you think Marcum has. Pitchers can be successful throwing less than 90 MPH. That's why they are called pitchers, not throwers. I don't think that Marcum having gone through TJ surgery is an issue. If anything, it seems to be a plus. Most pitchers that go through TJ don't have a second one, do they? What evidence is there to suggest that Marcum having gone through the surgery is an issue?

I think I've explained these multiple times, but he had TJ two years ago, hasn't thrown 200 innings, has 2 years left on his contract and is a soft tosser. Still a good pitcher, but for people who are already calling him an ace, or our ace....and I get called delusional for not wanting to have made this particular trade......

 

Second, going through TJ is not a plus. Some pitchers come back and add velocity, but I hardly think it can be argued that having just about the most devastating injury to a pitcher can be called "a plus."

[EdgarDiazRocks]

LoCain's still here right? Win.

 

I can't believe how all year I heard "Impact Arms" and now all i'm reading is "Best Prospect" ....

[RobDeer 45]

Hiandtight, all I will say on the DM thing is that the grass is not always greener on the other side. Overall our club is in a better place then it was. Also, when you are handcuffed by money and location like DM is, it's much harder to look like a great GM. You have to make bold risky moves at times and if they backfire it hurts a lot more then if the Yankees screw up.

 

I agree the word ace shouldn't have been used. That term is thrown around too much. Better off saying that he is close to our best pitcher, which shows that we need pitching bad.

 

Also, someone said something about being worried if he starts to lose control. I think you have to be more worried about a power pitcher losing some velocity because typically they aren't as good at location and "pitching." They can get away with throwing because they have a power arm, once it dips they have to learn how to pitch.

[HiAndTight]

Hiandtight, all I will say on the DM thing is that the grass is not always greener on the other side. Overall our club is in a better place then it was. Also, when you are handcuffed by money and location like DM is, it's much harder to look like a great GM. You have to make bold risky moves at times and if they backfire it hurts a lot more then if the Yankees screw up.

 

I agree the word ace shouldn't have been used. That term is thrown around too much. Better off saying that he is close to our best pitcher, which shows that we need pitching bad.

 

Also, someone said something about being worried if he starts to lose control. I think you have to be more worried about a power pitcher losing some velocity because typically they aren't as good at location and "pitching." They can get away with throwing because they have a power arm, once it dips they have to learn how to pitch.

I really don't understand the grass is always greener argument. As I've said, this isn't me bashing Melvin because I don't like him. This is the first move I've vehemently disagreed with and I've always been a Melvin supporter. I think others have tossed the comment around in regard to my complaining about this trade that some people will complain about Melvin no matter what, which is an easy way to disregard an argument, but that's just not the case. I've been a very big fan of Melvin for the most part.

 

I just think he traded away Ryan Braun for....a better version of Dave Bush.

 

 

 

Quite a bit better, but still, a guy who doesn't throw that hard, who had great peripherals coming over from Toronto.

[kramnoj]

Being a soft tosser doesn't preclude one from being successful. That in and of itself isn't an issue.

 

Having two years left? I don't see that as an issue. If we wanted to trade for someone with more control, we would have given up more.

 

How is going through TJ an issue? I am curious to see some documented evidence that this should be an issue. When I say it's a plus, if anything, this is my reasoning: A certain number of pitchers will undergo TJ. The majority of them will not need a 2nd one. By picking up somebody who has already gone through it, we have minimized the risk that a pitcher that we are obtaining will need TJ while under team control.

 

Not having had 200 IP isn't an issue. It's a matter of opportunity. He lost a year due to TJ and was recovering from it last year and did quite well. I don't see any reason to believe that he won't be capable of being a 200 IP for the next two years.

[HiAndTight]

LoCain's still here right? Win.

 

I can't believe how all year I heard "Impact Arms" and now all i'm reading is "Best Prospect" ....

I can't believe it either as I've never used the term "impact arms" and there are more ways to get them.

 

 

And LoCain's still here...for the time being. He's apparently being shopped as well. Which I have no problems with......if anyone cares.

[PKBadger]

[quote author=HiAndTight wrote:

[/b]I'm also curious how you come to the conclusion that Lawrie's value is at it's "Peak"? For a guy who was compared to Rogers Hornsby(which I'm not arguing he's going to be, just that there are those out there who are more than just a little high on him) I find it stunning we can say at 20 years old, "yup, this is his peak value."

I find it stunning that someone actually compared Brett Lawrie to Rogers Hornsby.

[EdgarDiazRocks]

HiAndTight]I can't believe it either as I've never used the term "impact arms" and there are more ways to get them.

 

 

And LoCain's still here...for the time being. He's apparently being shopped as well. Which I have no problems with......if anyone cares.

I might not have been referring to you. The Melvin thread was heated all summer.

 

And who on earth would prefer Gomez/Dickerson over LoCain?

[HiAndTight]

[quote author=HiAndTight wrote:

[/b]I'm also curious how you come to the conclusion that Lawrie's value is at it's "Peak"? For a guy who was compared to Rogers Hornsby(which I'm not arguing he's going to be, just that there are those out there who are more than just a little high on him) I find it stunning we can say at 20 years old, "yup, this is his peak value."

I find it stunning that someone actually compared Brett Lawrie to Rogers Hornsby.

I couldn't tell you who it was, I'm sure someone else on here could. It was from a ranking list and I THINK it may have been Sickels.

 

Either way, that wasn't really the point. The point was I'm not sure how exactly the conclusion was drawn that THIS right now is and will be his peak value.

[RobDeer 45]

Point taken Highand Tight http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif I didn't mean to bundle you in with the Melvin haters. I just think some people want to run everyone we have out of town because there is a better option out there.

[HiAndTight]

EdgarDiazRocks]

I can't believe it either as I've never used the term "impact arms" and there are more ways to get them.

 

 

And LoCain's still here...for the time being. He's apparently being shopped as well. Which I have no problems with......if anyone cares.

I might not have been referring to you. The Melvin thread was heated all summer.

 

And who on earth would prefer Gomez/Dickerson over LoCain?

??? I'm not sure if that Gomez/Dickerson comment was directed at me or not, but since you're quoting me I have to assume it was. Sure as hell not me. Nor have I ever said that. But look at this ENTIRE thread. Everyone who wants to trade Lawrie, does that automatically mean you "prefer" whoever to Lawrie? Gamel, McGehee? No, I think they're saying they are alright with trading him for pitching help.

 

 

Obviously I'd rather have Cain than those two.

[HiAndTight]

Being a soft tosser doesn't preclude one from being successful. That in and of itself isn't an issue.

 

Having two years left? I don't see that as an issue. If we wanted to trade for someone with more control, we would have given up more.

 

How is going through TJ an issue? I am curious to see some documented evidence that this should be an issue. When I say it's a plus, if anything, this is my reasoning: A certain number of pitchers will undergo TJ. The majority of them will not need a 2nd one. By picking up somebody who has already gone through it, we have minimized the risk that a pitcher that we are obtaining will need TJ while under team control.

 

Not having had 200 IP isn't an issue. It's a matter of opportunity. He lost a year due to TJ and was recovering from it last year and did quite well. I don't see any reason to believe that he won't be capable of being a 200 IP for the next two years.

Throwing 87 rather than 95 isn't an issue? It sure is when you lose 2-3 MPH on that fastball.

 

Also I guess maybe I'm stubborn. I think huge injuries to pitchers arms the year before we trade for them is KIIINDA a negative and not a plus. Would you like me to get James Andrews to write a published article proclaiming it's better to not have been hurt than to have been hurt? Provide me with evidence that having TJ is a plus? Not just that pitchers can come back from it, but that it's a good thing.

 

And I guess we disagree on the 2 years. I don't know, but you've asked me a couple times now what his issues are. I've given my opinion on what I view them to be. If you don't agree, so be it, but by asking me again, my answer isn't going to change.

 

He's a very solid pitcher. But he's not a guy I'd have given up this ONE player for(actually two, throw in Yo).

[EdgarDiazRocks]

I actually do prefer Gamel and McGehee to Lawrie, but that's neither here nor there. This trade is all about need and a blocked prospect. Any trade of LoCain makes a hole in center that we JUST got fixed with his arrival.

 

I would prefer finding more pitching help with Colby Lewis type gambles (Chien-Ming Wang?) than trading a Major League ready CF with a solid Minor League track record.

[strawbossisevil]

It would be if he was dependent on his fastball, then yes it would be a problem.

 

For a pitcher who throws 95 and works off of his fastball, losing a few MPH could be critical, since that is almost certainly the pitch he depends on to make outs.

 

Marcum isn't that type of pitcher, however. He is a breaking ball artist who depends mostly on offspeed. He isn't very dependant on his fastball to make outs. So losing a MPH or so would not necessarily be as huge a deal as someone who relies heavily on their fastball.

[HiAndTight]

It would be if he was dependent on his fastball, then yes it would be a problem.

 

For a pitcher who throws 95 and works off of his fastball, losing a few MPH could be critical, since that is almost certainly the pitch he depends on to make outs.

 

Marcum isn't that type of pitcher, however. He is a breaking ball artist who depends mostly on offspeed. He isn't very dependant on his fastball to make outs. So losing a MPH or so would not necessarily be as huge a deal as someone who relies heavily on their fastball.

For a guy who's best pitch is his change, losing a few MPH on his fastball is the most devastating. He starts throwing his fastball at 85, that change is going to become a LOT less effective. At least that's the case for 99 pct of the pitchers out there.

[HiAndTight]

I actually do prefer Gamel and McGehee to Lawrie, but that's neither here nor there. This trade is all about need and a blocked prospect. Any trade of LoCain makes a hole in center that we JUST got fixed with his arrival.

 

I would prefer finding more pitching help with Colby Lewis type gambles (Chien-Ming Wang?) than trading a Major League ready CF with a solid Minor League track record.

I'm with you on the 2nd part. Wang's a guy I wanted to take a flier on last year. I always like the Smoltz, Webb type ideas.

 

As for the Gamel and McGehee over Lawrie....that's one I don't think I'll ever get behind. And again, I'm a very big Gamel fan. Not so much a Casey Fan, but I think Lawrie's a unique talent. As I've said, a Ryan Braun type talent. Gamel's still iffy to make it in the big leagues...though I believe he will, and McGehee just seems like he's come off a prolonged career season(s).

 

But those are impossible to prove at this point, so we're just going to have to wait and see. I certainly hope Gamel ends up better than Lawrie however. Especially now.