Would you trade John Axford as part of a package for Matt Garza or James Shields?

[And That]

There's a possibility that in order to improve the team's rotation, the Brewers will have to trade major league talent. Perhaps the team with the most available major league starting pitching is the Rays and not surprisingly, we've heard a lot of rumors linking the Brewers to Matt Garza and James Shields.

 

The Rays' main areas of deficiency on their big league roster are the bullpen and corner outfield. Even more importantly, they need to cut payroll. Forgetting about their outfield needs for a second, they would clearly covet John Axford in a trade for either of the aforementioned starters. Axford is under team control for longer than Garza or Shields and won't be eligible for arbitration for a few more years. Clearly Axford alone wouldn't be enough to close to deal for either Rays pitcher, but he would go a long way to getting it done.

 

Of course, Axford has a ton of value to the Brewers as well. It would be a tough pill to swallow to trade him away, even if it makes the rotation (and team) better. The Brewers would need to find another closer, which would either necessitate giving up even more talent in trade, signing a free agent to a risky contract, or relying on someone already on the team such as Hawkins, Braddock or Jeffress, none of whom have much closing experience.

 

So, to trade Axford or not to trade Axford, what do you think?

[GAME05]

a good starter is harder to find than a good closer. obviously tough to lose Axford, but at least we have multiple options for the closer position to see if one of them might work out.

 

plus it seems pretty difficult for us to bring good starters in here, and getting an arby-eligible guy in here and then trying to work out an extension seems like a better way of building the roster than the alternative of paying the DeLaRosa type of middling starter $11M a year to be here.

[Warning Track Power]

Absolutely I would make this deal.

 

I believe we have a closer in waiting already on the Major League roster in Braddock. As much as losing Axford would pain me because I love his makeup/attitude, I need to only look at the implosion of Derrick Turnbow as evidence as to the fragility of closers. Besides, we went to the playoffs in 2008 with Salomon Torres as our closer.

 

If it were to come out that trading Axford held up a Shields/Garza deal and they end up a Cub or Ranger because of this, I will be extremely mad.

 

EDIT: Additionally, an Axford deal for Shields/Garza in the rotation gives the Brewers the option of allowing Jeffress to develop as the future closer in the event Braddock fails. Doesn't rule Jeffress out as a SP, but Shields/Garza allows flexibility with Jeffress they don't currently have.

[dlk9s]

I definitely don't want the Brewers to trade Axford (for all the obvious reasons, plus he seems like a good kid), but as GAME05 said, a good starter is harder to find than a good closer and we have what seem to be decent options for the position.

[DocBrewPack]

I would if it didnt take a whole lot more with him, seems like getting a solid bullpen pitcher is much easier than good SP. Would be tough to loose him tho.

[RockCoCougars]

I don't like the idea of weakening the bullpen, but I'd probably bite, however only for Garza- I wouldn't include anyone like Cain, LuCroy, or any of the top end arms either. I'd throw in Gomez, but otherwise it would be some A ballers coming with him.

[craigharmann]

I like Axford, but there are options like Hawkins, Braddock or any other host of guys who could take over.

[crewcrazy]

In a hearbeat. While the organization is now pretty thin when it comes to position prospects, if Jeffress and Rogers both end up in the bullpen like so many people are expecting, they're going to have more bullpen arms than they can shake a stick at (or fit onto the big league roster). Axford's value probably isn't going to get any higher, and while he showed pretty good control last season, I'd be scared about him reverting back to his career BB/9 norms.

 

It's going to take more than just John Axford to get either Garza or Shields, though. 3+ years of a starting pitcher is a lot more valuable than a bullpen arm.

[And That]

It's going to take more than just John Axford to get either Garza or Shields, though.

My next poll is going to be, "Who wouldn't trade Mat Gamel for Garza or Shields?" or;

 

"Wouldn't you not not not not not ever trade Mat Gamel not for Garza but also not for Shields, never?"

[Invader3K]

I think Gamel/Axford for either one would be pretty fair.

[Warning Track Power]

How about a mega super-duper stupendous blockbuster deal of:

Brewers get: Shields & Garza

Rays get: Axford, Jeffress, McGehee & Gomez

Yes please!

[Schlitz001]

If being a Brewers fan has taught me anything it's that you can find a closer just about anywhere, but a good starter is hard to come by. The only "prospects" I wouldn't trade for one of those guys would be Lucroy, Cain and Odorizzi. We have another potential closer in Braddock. We have 2 options at third base and Jeffress and Rogers both still have some question marks.

[Hate those Rodents]

If we did this deal, I'd expect the Broxton/Loney for Fielder rumors to swirl.

[Spidey]

"Wouldn't you not not not not not ever trade Mat Gamel not for Garza but also not for Shields, never?"

I actually tried to figure out the "nots" and reverse double negatives, but gave up and laughed at myself.

[rluzinski]

Some background information:

 

ZiPS Projections:

PLAYER ERA/IP

Axford: 3.62/70

Garza: 3.84/209

Shields: 4.38/216

 

You have to subtract at least a half a run from Garza and Shields' ERA if you want to translate their projections into the NL Central.

 

I'm sure many will take great issue with Axford's ERA projection but statistically, there isn't much of a sample to go on. As a result, it is heavily regressed. I guess you have to rely more on scouting information in that case. Even then, I don't think we should pencil him in for a 3.0 ERA.

 

I believe that both Garza and Shields have two years remaning before they are free agents? Rule of thumb is that they'll get paid roughly 60% and 80% of market value for those 2 years. Axford will be basically paid 0% of his market value for 2 years and then be eligable for arbitration.

 

Because of the uncertainty in Axford's projection and the fact that he will only pitch about 70 IP/year, I guess I don't see him as that valuable but if another team does, I'd certainly use him as the major chip to aquire a starting pitcher. It just depends on what else needs to be thrown in.

[Hate those Rodents]

I am guessing TB would start with Gamel and Axford for Shields. Whether we'd accept or reject and counter is the question. I'd reject and counter.

[GoudaBrew]

I believe that both Garza and Shields have two years remaning before they are free agents? Rule of thumb is that they'll get paid roughly 60% and 80% of market value for those 2 years. Axford will be basically paid 0% of his market value for 2 years and then be eligable for arbitration.

I believe Garza is entering his first year of arbitration. Garza was a Super Two in 2010 so he is entering year 2 of 4 in arbitration. So he has 3 years left of team control. In 2008, Shields signed an extension that includes several club options that could keep him under contract through 2014. Not sure if anything changes with those options if he is traded. Here are the details I grabbed from Shields' player page on rotoworld.

 

I think I might prefer Shields because the asking price will be lower and the contract he is under seems pretty reasonable to me. It all depends on what the Brewers would have to add to get one of these two.

 

01/23/08: Signed four-year, $11.25 million extension w/2012-14 club

options. 2009: $1.5 million, 2010: $2.5 million, 2011: $4.25 million,

2012: $7 million club option w/$2 million buyout, 2013: $9 million club

option w/$2 million buyout, 2014: $12 million club option w/$2 million

buyout, 2015: Free Agent

 

edit: To clear up Garza's arbitration info.

[Warning Track Power]

If we trade for Shields, I hope he can be more on target with the fastball on the outside corner than he can target a punch

[sbrylski]

Sorry if I'm behind, but is this poll just based on speculation right now? Or is there a legit rumor that I missed?

[Hate those Rodents]

I think I might prefer Shields because the asking price will be lower and the contract he is under seems pretty reasonable to me.

I have a feeling that, whatever Doug is willing to offer, will be his high offer for either Shield or Garza. In better words, I see Doug making the same exact and his best offer for either pitcher, allowing TB to choose which one they'd rather deal.

[And That]

Sorry if I'm behind, but is this poll just based on speculation right now? Or is there a legit rumor that I missed?

It's a hypothetical.

[Warning Track Power]

80 votes in and only 6 people are not in favor of trading Axford. Should this tell us that Axford really isn't worth a Garza or a Shields barring some other heavy pieces?

[Hate those Rodents]

I think it'd take more than Axford, and I fear the Rays would demand Gamel too for either. I am actually surprised Axford's name hasn't been floated in rumors for one of these two. We surely have what's projected to be a pretty strong bullpen and could afford losing Ax. Braddock, after all, was probably pegged to be our closer a year ago anyway. I would not trade Axford AND Gamel for either, but I know many here would. I think we end up signing Pavano for better or worse to make this all moot anyway.

[Outlander]

Sorry if I'm behind, but is this poll just based on speculation right now? Or is there a legit rumor that I missed?

It confused me also, if it's just a hypothetical I guess I don't understand why it's not in transaction rumors/proposals.

 

 

[And That]

It confused me also, if it's just a hypothetical I guess I don't understand why it's not in transaction rumors/proposals.

Primarily because it's a question of John Axford's value to the organization and the fans of the organization, and not a trade rumor or proposal.