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

[logan82]

The Brewers also have two of the top 15 picks in the June draft this year. Lawrie was #16 overall. The lack of hitting prospects can change quickly.

Not really. Those 2 picks won't even be close to contributing until June 2014 best case scenario. Probably 2015.

Then he goes and trades a prospect whose value is at it's peak for a legit #1 pitcher who has put up very respectable numbers in baseballs toughest division - and he still gets bashed by some

The problem is that we will only have Marcum for 2 years. Had this trade been done midseason where we were leading our division I would have less of a problem with it than it being done right now because I don't think this makes us playoff contenders.

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

Who was blocking Lawrie? He was slated for AAA next year. We could have easily left Lawrie in AAA all of next year and moved him up when Fielder moved on. Gamel is the blocked prospect.

[gobrew23]

HiAndTight]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.

I just don't get why everyone is talking about him losing a few MPH on his fastball. What out there suggests this is going to happen? He's 29 years old and his arm is recovering from TJ surgery. It usually takes over a year to get the arm completely back. Who says he couldn't gain a MPH on his fastball.

 

 

[HiAndTight]

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.

I just don't get why everyone is talking about him losing a few MPH on his fastball. What out there suggests this is going to happen? He's 29 years old and his arm is recovering from TJ surgery. It usually takes over a year to get the arm completely back. Who says he couldn't gain a MPH on his fastball.

 

First of all, who's "everyone"? I mentioned it to point out there is very little margin for error for a guy like Marcum, much like Bush.

 

And nobody said he can't gain MPH on his fastball, but it's pretty unlikely at this point that he's going to start throwing 90. Losing MPH as you age is a bit more likely than gaining them.

[TheCrew]

I think I'm one of the few people who is adamantly against that, and I've been a HUGE Melvin defender, so that comment just blindly thrown out there.

 

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."

IMO his value is at his peak because of 2b - I don't think he'll stick there and he'll end up as a corner OF'er and his bat is much easier to replace at that point and that is with the assumption that he continues to progress as a hitter.

[gobrew23]

I'd have to go back and look, but I'm fairly certain the losing MPH on his fastball has been mentioned a couple different times, by different people. "Everyone" was obviosly a stretch.

 

I just think that basing part of an argument on something that hasn't happened (losing velocity) seems pretty silly. Hell, Prince wouldn't be nearly as good of a hitter if he starts to lose his plate discipline.

[HiAndTight]

I'd have to go back and look, but I'm fairly certain the losing MPH on his fastball has been mentioned a couple different times, by different people. "Everyone" was obviosly a stretch.

 

I just think that basing part of an argument on something that hasn't happened (losing velocity) seems pretty silly. Hell, Prince wouldn't be nearly as good of a hitter if he starts to lose his plate discipline.

And I think it's pretty "silly" to argue that his value has peaked as a 20 year old.

 

So there you go. And I think 3rd base is far more likely than a Corner OF for him.

[TheCrew]

And I think it's pretty "silly" to argue that his value has peaked as a 20 year old.

 

So there you go. And I think 3rd base is far more likely than a Corner OF for him.

Is his value likely to go up anymore though? Everyone knows he can hit - the only way it could go up is if he sticks at 2b and he rakes this next season. Even if he hits well this next season, but has to move to a different position - I'd say his value takes a hit.

[trwi7]

He's 29 years old and his arm is recovering from TJ surgery. It usually takes over a year to get the arm completely back. Who says he couldn't gain a MPH on his fastball.

Pitchers lose velocity as they put more wear on their arms. Dave Bush went from 89.7 in his rookie year to 89.1, 89.2, two years of 88.7, to 87.9 to 86.5. From 2004 to 2010 he lost 3.2 mph on his fastball.

 

Marcum went from 89.4 in his rookie year to 88.1 to 87.8 to 86.8 to 87.1. He's already losing velocity. Over 2 mph since his rookie year. I don't know how that's not a concern if that trend keeps up.

 

 

[gobrew23]

And I think it's pretty "silly" to argue that his value has peaked as a 20 year old.

 

So there you go. And I think 3rd base is far more likely than a Corner OF for him.

Well then it's a good thing I never argued that point. If he tears up AA/AAA as a 21 year old I think his value will be quite a bit higher.

 

My only point was to look at Marcum for what he is. He was able to have an excellent season in the AL with the velocity he has. I see no reason why he would pitch worse in the NL. And I see no reason to expect his velocity to drop.

 

 

[gobrew23]

Marcum went from 89.4 in his rookie year to 88.1 to 87.8 to 86.8 to 87.1. He's already losing velocity. Over 2 mph since his rookie year. I don't know how that's not a concern if that trend keeps up.

 

It seems to me that he has actually started to gain velocity back after TJ surgery.

 

 

[TooLiveBrew]

FanGraphs with two different perspectives on the deal: from the Brewers' p.o.v., from Toronto's p.o.v.

 

Both takes agree the Jays sold high. Jack Moore felt that, from the Brewers' perspective, "it’s hard to imagine [Lawrie's] value at a higher point in the near future."

[EdgarDiazRocks]

Who was blocking Lawrie? He was slated for AAA next year. We could have easily left Lawrie in AAA all of next year and moved him up when Fielder moved on. Gamel is the blocked prospect.

Do y'all know something about Lawrie that I don't? It's certainly possible, but even BEST CASE, he's reminded me A LOT more of Daric Barton than Ryan Braun. Braun showed much more power at albeit an older age through the minors.

 

Yes Gamel's still blocked and he needs to be platooned, but there's NO evidence that Lawrie's better and he's on the wrong side of the platoon/power battle.

 

A promising hitter, yes, but certainly worth even a #3 starter straight up. Especially because his defensive limitations limit him basically to LF/1B.....now if he stayed at Catcher....

[SoCal Brew Crew Fan]

Overall I like the trade. No trade is certain...they only have probabilities and values that represent current expectations. In that regard DM seems to have gotten a decent return for a top prospect. The Brewers have a plus offense, a decent bullpen and rotten starting pitching...but starting out with Yo, Wolf and Marcum is not bad. They would have been serious playoff contenders with simply average starting pitching the last two seasons. If they can find an acceptable #4, they should be there in 2011.

 

It's not like they have completely mortgaged the future to get Marcum. They have him for 2 years vs. 6+ for Lawrie, but Marcum has a little more certainty given he's a proven player. Lawrie looks good at a young age, but is still developing so his future is less certain...maybe more upside, but downside as well. We have Braun, Hart & Weeks (hopefully with an extension) and hopefully Gamel can fill a portion of the hole left by losing Prince. It would be nice to hang on to a player like Lawrie, but they do have options and if they don't get some pitching it won't matter. I've also heard enough second hand that Lawrie is not exactly a model citizen in the clubhouse to not be that sad to see him go.

[NievesNoNO]

chadomac[/b]]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.

I couldn't agree more. Marcum is an ace. I get the injury concern but the guy has a decent track record for being very good. I'm not sure what some of you need for proof, but he's got around 500 innings of proof and consistency. Yes, everything being equal I'd take the guy that throws harder, but he's proven he can get outs without lighting up the radar gun. He's probably an exception to the hard throwing ace type, but there have been others. Brandon Webb didn't light up the gun either, but I don't think anyone would argue with his success (not that they have the same type stuff).

 

[rluzinski]

I few random thoughts:

 

* I don't pretend to follow minor league prospects anywhere near as closely as many of you but Lawrie doesn't look like a stud prospect to me. Good? Of course. I see a future corner outfielder who so far has shown a very high BABIP, a little power, not many walks and a decent amount of K's. If he was a legitimate 2B prospect, I would be a lot more uncertain about this move but he apparently isn't.

 

* I would think Marcum's velocity will likely be OK over the next couple of years, which is all the Brewers will likely have him for anyway. I don't WANT the Brewers to sign him to an extension, anyway. Unless Marcum wants to sign away his first year of free agency for below market, what's the upside of doing so? This always seems to come up when a player is traded for. "This trade will look a lot better if the player is signed to an extension." Is the assumption that the player WILL sign for below market?

 

* Marcum might project to be something like a 3.5 ERA pitcher in the NL and will be affordable for two years. The Brewers are one average pitcher away from having a solid rotation, IMO.

[chadomac]

Yes Gamel's still blocked and he needs to be platooned, but there's NO evidence that Lawrie's better and he's on the wrong side of the platoon/power battle.

I'm pretty sure Gamel hits lefties better than righties, actually. He wouldn't need a platoon partner, he just needs to be able to play defense.

[thebruce44]

Yes Gamel's still blocked and he needs to be platooned, but there's NO evidence that Lawrie's better and he's on the wrong side of the platoon/power battle.

I'm pretty sure Gamel hits lefties better than righties, actually. He wouldn't need a platoon partner, he just needs to be able to play defense.

 

 

I didn't want to go off topic so I was trying to avoid responding, but you are correct about Gamel. I don't get why people assume he should be platooned.

[EdgarDiazRocks]

I'm pretty sure Gamel hits lefties better than righties, actually. He wouldn't need a platoon partner, he just needs to be able to play defense.

His splits at AAA for 2010:

 

LHP: .234/.337/.416

RHP: .333/.404/.543

[trwi7]

* I don't pretend to follow minor league prospects anywhere near as closely as many of you but Lawrie doesn't look like a stud prospect to me.

Why would you think that? BA had him rated as the 15th best prospect in baseball in their midseason rankings ahead of Kyle Drabek (main piece in the Halladay deal), Casey Kelly (main piece in the Adrian Gonzalez deal). What qualifies as a stud prospect to you?

[logan82]

I'm pretty sure Gamel hits lefties better than righties, actually. He wouldn't need a platoon partner, he just needs to be able to play defense.

His splits at AAA for 2010:

 

LHP: .234/.337/.416

RHP: .333/.404/.543

Look at his whole MiLB career not just last year.

[RobertR]

I'll like this deal a lot better if Melvin is able to sign Weeks and Marcum to extensions. As it is, I think it's pretty fair. Lawrie's a good prospect, but IMO, he's not an elite prospect. If he can't stick at second base and he takes a period of adjustment, there's good reason to believe that his pre-arby years won't be much of a bargain. And given that the division is winnable, a pitcher that can represent a 3 or more game improvement right now is pretty darn valuable to the Brewers.

 

While I hate to give up a good prospect, you sometimes have to give something to get something. And the Brewers window of competing for the post-season is still open, IMO.

 

Robert

[trwi7]

His splits at AAA for 2010:

 

LHP: .234/.337/.416

RHP: .333/.404/.543

Minorleaguesplits.com took their site down and I don't want to start a whole argument, but Gamel was better against lefties than righties. He even did an interview about it in 2009 about how he felt more comfortable against lefties.

 

 

[clint1313]

I'm not really sure why so many people are hung up by the fact that he is only under control for two years. There are a lot of people calling for a Greinke trade and he is only under team control for two years as well. I don't think two years is a bad thing at all. You can extend him, let him walk in two years when there should be some minor leaguers ready to step in and you get draft picks, or you trade him. I don't think there are many people out there who thought we could get a #1 starter this off season and it looks like we may not be done yet.

[logan82]

I'm not really sure why so many people are hung up by the fact that he is only under control for two years. There are a lot of people calling for a Greinke trade and he is only under team control for two years as well.

Not the same people. Most people who don't like this deal wouldn't want a Grienke deal for the same reason.

[Invader3K]

He could lose velocity or get hurt just like any other pitcher on the planet. Those aren't good reasons not to make a trade.