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

[baybeachbum]

I voted 'no' , because I feel the best path to winning more games this year lies in the Brewers adding major league contributers without giving up major league contributers. Adding Marcum for a Lawrie (who may very well be future a Major-League contributer, but isn't at that level right now) addresses this.

 

Signing Pavano, or trading for a starting pitcher without giving up anyone from our Major League roster also addresses this most efficiently. This is a pivotal year. Attendance dropped below 3,000,000 and needs to go back above that mark. The Brewers have minor league talent, but it is a few years away. They need to win now to keep the public's interest and give time for the minor leaguers to develop and hopefully contribute in the future.

[paul253]

Closers are almost a dime a dozen. They can be found a lot easier than starters. We have two pitchers we could put there now (Loe and Braddock) and I'd be willing to guess we could sign another reliever who could do it if necessary. If trading Axford significantly lowers the cost in prospects you have to do it.

[dadofandrew]

There are also many fine relievers available as FA's, and while spendier than Axford, they are also more proven.

[MadScientist]

If they trade Axford, they could always re-sign Hoffman.

The problem with thinking closers are easy to come by is that not having a reliable one can knock a team out of contention early, like what happened last year.

[logan82]

What happened last year was we had a bad team. The other problem is we went into the season with a designated closer and stuck with him longer than we should have. Closers are easy to come by. The trick is knowing when to cut your loses and move on to the next guy. Also know when to sell high like we did with Kolb.

[MadScientist]

They did stick with Hoffman too long, but I also remember an early switch to Hawkins, and watching him blow a save as well. Hoffman and Hawkins blew 7 saves early in the season, and I think the Brewers lost them all (someone can correct me here). Even winning 5 of them would have made a significant difference in the standings and the feel of the season early. Just 5 more wins in the season would have given them a winning record, plus some possible excitement in August or beyond.

 

It's possible to find a good closer anywhere, but not everyone is going to pan out. How many losses are you willing to take before you find the right guy.

[Schlitz001]

The Rays just acquired 4 players from the Padres in exchange for Jason Bartlett. Two of them are relievers who spent some time in the big leagues last year. LINK

[LouisEly]

Well, I would definitely not trade him for Shields. Shields has gotten worse each of the last two years, and led the league in HRs given up last year. Not a good trend.

 

I voted neither because with the addition of Marcum I don't think the Brewers need to trade for another starter. Capuano would be a great #5 (IIRC the average ERA for a #5 is something like 5.50 and for a #4 is something like 5.00) who they could sign for the same or less salary than Shields without having to give up talent. Heck, Bush would make an above-average #5. And they will have Rogers and Rivas - possibly Jeffress if they move him back to starter - at AAA if something goes awry. Gallardo, Marcum, Wolf is a good enough 1-2-3 for a team with Milwaukee's offense; Narveson and Capuano would be above-average for a #4-#5 combo. Then in 2012 you have Gallardo, Rogers, Marcum, Wolf, and Rivas as your starters - pretty darned good. Plus you will have Peralta, Heckathorn, Scarpetta, Lamontagne, and Fiers at AAA knocking on the door in 2012.

 

So IMO they only need a one-year patch at SP, and since Rogers and Rivas will be ready in 2012 - if not mid-2011 - I don't think it is worth giving up Axford for a one-year need.

[JohnBriggs12]

I certainly wouldn't trade Axford for Shields. Shields has been very hittable the last couple years. I'd take Joe Blanton over him and Blanton won't cost your closer.

 

I'd have to think long and hard about Garza too. As good has his numbers look, he's been on winning teams all 5 years of his career and he's just 42-44. Blanton on the other hand is 72-60. I know wins and losses are out of favor in judging pitchers, but last I checked there's no sub .500 pitchers in the Hall of Fame. Not saying Blanton is better or even equal to Garza, but maybe one guy pitches just well enough to win and the other pitches just well enough to lose.

 

More than any one factor, the failures of Hoffman are what put the Brewers out of the race by mid May last year. Unless the Brewers went out an threw a boatload of money at Soriano to become their closer, I'd hang on to Axford. Nothing I've seen from Braddock, Loe or any other in house option makes me think they could close in 2011.

[RockCoCougars]

but last I checked there's no sub .500 pitchers in the Hall of Fame

 

Satchel Paige is, but you have to cut the man some slack due to his Negro League career, and the fact that he was over 40 when he made his MLB debut. If he's the only one, that would be a good trivia question.

 

EDIT: Just checked, and Satch is the only one. Next time you want to stump your buddies at the bar, this would be a good one.

[And That]

Obviously a moot point now, but thanks to everyone for voting. I like these polls - we'll probably put up some more of these on a regular basis.