Brewers Offer Arby to Prince and Krod

[nodderman]

You can't pay Krod that and justify it because Axford is on the cheap. It is like somebody being on a diet and justifying an ice cream because of the 'good foods' they at that day. If we want to be competitive we need to be as cost effective as we can be. KRod at that salary will not do. I trust Melvin to realize this.

[1992casey]

KRod at that salary will not do. I trust Melvin to realize this.

 

I think that Doug's already acknowledged that the salary situation isn't optimal. "Will not do" is probably a little strong, and it indicates a level of desperation that I don't think is present.

 

The available options need to be examined. The best option may be to keep him. Paying him a bunch of money to play elsewhere isn't going to do a lot of good.

[StearnsFTW]

If he was the closer, it'd be different. And what Axford makes is irrelevant to this discussion.

So let me get this straight, if he pitched the 9th and Axford the 8th, you would be ok with this? How does that make any sense? K-Rod is A closer, not THE closer. We basically have closer 1a and 1b and that is not a bad thing at all and K-Rod will close when Axford needs a rest. I would want someone in the bullpen for next year who is capable of filling in for Ax should anything happen. Who on the team would fit that role without K-Rod?

 

What Axford makes is extremely relevant to the discussion. If we were paying Ax over $5 million a year then having K-Rod on the team doesn't make any sense. But since we are paying Ax and several other members of our bullpen next to nothing K-Rod at $10-12 million won't hurt us as much.

 

 

I give up. I cant explain it any better than it's already been explained. Agree to disagree I guess.

[strawbossisevil]

I look at it this way. I don't mind spending this kind of money on K-rod as long as there aren't better options available for us to use that money to improve our team. It probably isn't the most efficient use of our money, but I guess I don't see a player that can vastly improve our team available in Free Agency.

 

If the question is whether I'd rather have AmRam or K-Rod...I'd gladly take K-Rod on a one year deal, versus spending big bucks on a guy who is likely going to get paid significantly more than he is worth over multiple years. The same is the case for Rollins. Signing those players for what they would like would hurt the Brewers in the long run. K-Rod is a short term budget hit.

 

Another poster mentioned getting both Saito, Hawkins and Hairston for the same price. However, I think expecting both of those pitchers to remain healthy and effective is a roll of the dice (as we've seen the past couple of years). K-Rod is the more dependable pitcher at this point because he is nearly a decade younger. Hairston would have required a major overpay and a two year contract to keep him from going out west. I don't think that would have been a wise use of our money either as he also is an ageing player.

 

At this point, I don't think there are any really good options for using K-Rod's allocated contract dollars to make a significant improvement to the team. Perhaps there is one available via trade...and its even possible that K-Rod could be used in such a trade.

 

In the end, the only way this is a bad deal is if it prevents the Brewers organization from signing a player who will truly help make us better (not only this year but long term). So, I won't complain about it until it becomes clear that is the case.

 

In fact, the contract may help us avoid making moves that would really serve as negatives to our club's ability to compete in the long term. It will also encourage our team to focus on making use of the prospects that we currently have at positions like 3b and 1b, which I applaud. It's time to give Gamel and Green their shot. I don't think there are many better options than those two on the Free Agent market anyway, and especially not any worth spending significant money on.

[berniebrewer4life]

I think the odds are he will be traded. The "we don't need to trade him" talk by Doug reminds me an awful lot of the Lyle Overbay/ Prince Fielder situation a few years back.

As long as we get a better haul this time, I'm fine with that comparison.

[endaround]

I think the odds are he will be traded. The "we don't need to trade him" talk by Doug reminds me an awful lot of the Lyle Overbay/ Prince Fielder situation a few years back.

As long as we get a better haul this time, I'm fine with that comparison.

We got a great haul for Overbay, if we could get the same for KRod it's be a steal. Pace certain posters, the Brewers got a cost controlled starter and a solid pitching prospect. The prospect (Jackson) busted but Bush provided great value for his years here for the money he was paid.

[TheCrew07]

I think the odds are he will be traded. The "we don't need to trade him" talk by Doug reminds me an awful lot of the Lyle Overbay/ Prince Fielder situation a few years back.

As long as we get a better haul this time, I'm fine with that comparison.

We got a great haul for Overbay, if we could get the same for KRod it's be a steal. Pace certain posters, the Brewers got a cost controlled starter and a solid pitching prospect. The prospect (Jackson) busted but Bush provided great value for his years here for the money he was paid.

That's just so wrong on so many levels. Any pre-arbitration player is cost controlled, the pitchers I advocating taking instead of Bush and Jackson were also young and cost controlled. Gross was young and cost controlled as well, the issue wasn't the cost. Furthermore, Bush wasn't highly paid because he was never very good, it's nearly impossible to overpay an average/below average player prior to free agency. The issue I've always attacked was the ceiling of all of the players involved. For the record I would have been fine with taking McGowan, and that move would have backfired horribly, I would have been terribly wrong given the health issues that emerged post trade. So in the sense that something is better than nothing, I guess one could claim the deal was a "great haul". From a pure talent standpoint the deal was quantity over quality, 3 high floor/low ceiling players for an established MLB 1B.

 

In Toronto's system at the time of the trade McGowan was the highest ceiling MLB ready prospect, he had everything to be a top of the rotation starter. Marcum was the best pitcher of the 4 (and he was still topping out in the low 90s at that time). Jackson was nothing more than finesse lefty with a funky delivery who was highly drafted, and Bush was a bulldog who got the most out of what he had, but he always had the worst arm and poorest stuff of any of the RHP in this discussion.

 

Melvin took the 2 lowest ceiling starters and position player who never profiled to be an everyday MLB player. That was, is, and always will be my problem with Melvin, he doesn't trade for true high ceiling prospects. He trades for established MLB talent or high floor players without much of a ceiling. Sure they all at least give you *something* in MLB, but they don't ever help you build towards anything significant. I'd rather miss on a couple of trades than have a rotation full of 4/5 starters like we had all those years because we made the safe/conservative trade every time. I'd beat the "cycling talent" drum again but most people just don't care enough about anything other than the MLB team to have a meaningful discussion about the subject.

 

Queue the, "he did the best he could" apologist posts...

[xisxisxis]

Melvin took the 2 lowest ceiling starters and position player who never profiled to be an everyday MLB player.

 

 

Yeah I'm sure Riccardi said "take any 3 players from our organization because we really want the future HOF Lyle Overbay and we will pay everything". Sheeeshh

[docduany]

Rather than starting a new thread I thought I would ponder this question here. Assuming the Crew doesn't trade K-Rod, with the three signings of ARAM, K-Rod and Gonzalez that's a fair chunk of change. If K-Rod hadn't accepted arby, how or would the Brewers have spent that extra 9-13 million dollars? I personally don't know that they would have. The ARAM signing when they had internal options for third makes me wonder if they had another signing in mind if K-Rod hadn't button hooked them.

[brettac1]

No, they probably wouldn't have spent that much. Which makes me think that he'll certainly be traded for whatever they can get.

 

Most likely they would have spent a little bit of it on Hawkins and Saito, though. K-Rod accepting arby certainly seems to have been what caused them to not be able to sign those guys.

[FoxyFoxes]

I think with Saito signing the Crew needs to hold on to KROD. I get he is very expensive but it is only one year and this is a very underrated part of this team. I do not want RR to have any incling to trot out Loe in the 8th inning and right now a KROD trade would create a mess of guys for the 8th that I do not really trust right now. The team might even be one good reliever away from a great bullpen but I will take what we got right now and go to war with these guys come spring.

[ilovebeer]

At first I was upset that he accepted Arby, but the more i think about it we need a good 8th inning guy and in case Ax falls apart or if we get a great offer for him.

[umphrey]

Rather than starting a new thread I thought I would ponder this question here. Assuming the Crew doesn't trade K-Rod, with the three signings of ARAM, K-Rod and Gonzalez that's a fair chunk of change. If K-Rod hadn't accepted arby, how or would the Brewers have spent that extra 9-13 million dollars? I personally don't know that they would have. The ARAM signing when they had internal options for third makes me wonder if they had another signing in mind if K-Rod hadn't button hooked them.

He probably cost us bullpen depth. We have 2 elite RPs and some risky guys (best of Loe, Braddock, Estrada, Veras, Kintzler, De La Cruz, McClendon) instead of 1 elite RP and some proven guys like Hawkins and Saito.

Maybe they would have given Rollins 4 years instead of signing Aramis.

Maybe Pena would be a Brewer.

None of those things upset me at all.

He might cost us a Greinke or Marcum extension though. We could have given Aramis $10M per instead of deferring the money, which would have given us some flexibility for extensions. That would only be about $4M/year for 2 theoretical years though so don't start blaming him now.

[steve267268]

Here's one thought:

 

Hawkins is 38, Saito is 41.

 

Krod is 29.

 

Here's another:

 

Hawkins made 4.25M last year, the most he's made since 2006. Is he expected to make more than that in 2012?

[Ennder]

Overbay had very little value so the fact we got what we did for him was good. We were never going to get a high upside guy in trade for him. So many of the Melvin complaints are based around unrealistic expectations.

[paul253]

Melvin complaints are based around unrealistic expectations.

 

I think Melvin does better when he goes for quality vs quantity. Even though he misses on some of the guys (Capellan) I'd rather take the chance that a high ceiling players reaches that ceiling than a bunch of low to mid ceiling players perform better than expected.

[jjfanec]

I love when people act like they know who was available in a trade and then trash a GM for not trading for said players. No one know if Marcum and McGowan were available. McGowan was the 48th ranked prospect before the 2006 season. It is probably safe to assume he wasnt even on the table for a bat like Overbay and maybe Marcum was available but who knows. How do you bash a gm for not trading for a guy who may not of even been available.

[Thurston Fluff]

Furthermore, Bush wasn't highly paid because he was never very good, it's nearly impossible to overpay an average/below average player prior to free agency. The issue I've always attacked was the ceiling of all of the players involved.

 

Keep in mind Overbay was pretty much an average 1st baseman himself. It isn't like we traded Prince for those guys.

 

Most likely they would have spent a little bit of it on Hawkins and Saito, though. K-Rod accepting arby certainly seems to have been what caused them to not be able to sign those guys.

 

If that's the case then I'm glad K-Rod accepted arby. I'm not a fan of relying on ancient players in key roles. Especially in the post steroid soon to be HGH testing era.

 

I think Melvin does better when he goes for quality vs quantity. Even though he misses on some of the guys (Capellan) I'd rather take the chance that a high ceiling players reaches that ceiling than a bunch of low to mid ceiling players perform better than expected.

 

Jackson was a high ceiling guy. That he failed to get to that ceiling shouldn't be confused with what he projected to when he was traded for. In reality that deal was for one prospect with a fairly high ceiling and some stop gap players who ended up helping us get to the playoffs for the first time in decades. Don't forget Bush was a very big part of that. It was after that season that he fell apart.

[TheCrew07]

LHP that don't crack 90 aren't not high ceiling players. That's like claiming a RHP with an average FB velocity south of 90 is a high ceiling pitcher. Nor does Gross being a QB at Auburn mean he was great athlete relative to his peers in MLB. He had a great arm and a decent eye, but wasn't special in any other way, which is why he's out of baseball. Where someone was drafted in the MLB draft has often times has nothing to do with how talented the player is, draft position and talent are not necessarily tied together. There are numerous reasons for that in the past, signability, shortest path to the majors, etc. Especially in the post Moneyball era when a handful of teams tried to copy what Oakland had done and ruined their farm systems because they ended up very little impact talent... the same position we find ourselves in today through a different set of circumstances.

 

I'm still shocked that people see legitimate talent traded every year and truly believe that Melvin did the best he could and we never had a shot at that talent because the price was too high. As if we got a discount for Sabathia, Marcum, and Greinke? I would argue we overpaid in every case and seriously overpaid for Greinke. Acquiring young impact talent is all about timing and willingness to think a little bit outside the box... slightly downgrading 1 position but vastly improving another for minimal cost, thus making the team better as a whole. Unfortunately it doesn't seem that many people are ever willing to downgrade any position that's being "productive" which means many deals are simply not possible because you have give up legit talent to get legit talent back. If you'll never trade a MLB player who's productive with a decent contract then you'll never get that impact talent back.

 

He clearly has a preference when making trades. When trading for prospects he's looking for players that will likely contribute to the MLB club, he's not making deals for a high ceiling pitcher in the low minors like Neftali Feliz with a huge arm and upside but without a prototypical body. He's looking for pitchability guys, players with good control, that will likely fill a role someplace down the road and aren't as likely to flame out. Sometimes that's all you are going to get for the piece you are giving up, sometimes not. Mostly Melvin prefers trading for established MLB talent in quantity. He's also willing to overpay to get a name player for a position of need as in Sabathia, Marcum, and Greinke. Getting Villanueva for Estrada and Franklin was fine, there was no way Melvin was going to get anything with upside for those 2 turds. Overbay wasn't a turd, he was a MLB average 1B in an era when prospects carried little value and pitching prospects in particular were viewed with great cynicism (anyone who follows the minor league forum will remember the "there is no such thing as a pitching prospect".

 

The Sexson, Overbay, Lee, and Davis trades were all the exact same deal. The Sabathia, Marcum, and Greinke trades were the exact same deal. The trades for Lopez and Linebrink were the same meaningless rental player deals for a team that wasn't going anywhere. As I said Melvin's philosophy hasn't evolved over time, he firmly believes that being average at every position with a few impact players sprinkled in is enough. It's been in print and he's talked about it numerous times in radio/tv interviews as well. He believes every team has a major hole or 3 someplace so he can be competitive with those teams by simply not being below average anywhere. Truthfully he's right, you can compete and be right around .500, maybe get to 90 wins with some breaks. The problem is that once you reach respectability, you stop building towards anything special and start maintaining what you have. The Brewers aren't building to be elite, they are maintaining to be competitive.

 

Melvin didn't draft any of the players the team built it's foundation on, baseball is not like the other sports, the scouting director is in total control of the draft in baseball, not the GM. The GM is kept in loop, but that's about it. The best move Melvin made was retaining Jack Z when he took the GM job. The scouting department handed him Weeks, Braun, Hart, Hardy, Fielder, and Gallardo but that scouting dept is no longer intact, it was raided and many of the best scouts are now with other organizations. Melvin then traded the little impact talent he had left from those people for Marcum and Greinke. His other marquee move was also gifted to him by the farm system when he acquired Sabathia. I don't see any genius in what he's done, it's all so obvious it was predicted up to a year in advance on our own transaction forum. He's not an innovator in any way, he's a very conservative GM that sticks to a constant philosophy.

 

The "we don't know what was available" card has been way overplayed around here over the years, and is an incredibly weak defense given the talent that has been traded around MLB. It's just as easy to say, "how do you do know he wasn't offered player X?". It's an empty standard to judge a GM by. Teams have been interested in Hart for years, San Fran was rumored to have offered Matt Cain for him prior to 2008. Atlanta was linked to Hart as recently as last year...Teams make mistakes offering up players all the time. How many teams are kicking themselves that they didn't jump on Buchholz when he was being shopped in 2009 (yes I'm aware he got hurt), or Niemann when he was being shopped in 2008, and so on? Go back and look at the transaction forum, very few posters were interested in young pitching even though we desperately needed as an organization, everyone wanted Sabathia, then they wanted Peavy, then they were upset when the pitching imploded in 2009 and 2010. When people looked at Texas they talked about trying to trade for Millwood when Texas system was loaded with better pitching talent in the minor leagues. Unfortunately Melvin agreed, because those were the types of deals that he was pursuing and continued to pursue through last off season.

 

I think Melvin's 2 best moves were Pods for Lee, and Dykstra for Morgan. K-Rod could have been a great move as New York basically gave him away in order to get rid of the option in his contract, until Melvin offered him arby and it was accepted. Now we're stuck paying a former name player who's really a finesse 8th inning guy like a starting pitcher (unless he gets traded again but now teams know Melvin has been backed into a corner). The Hairston deal was good value given the situation, but it's hard to hang your hat on a move for a utility player. Melvin clearly had his best year as a GM in Milwaukee last year, every move he made worked out perfectly, but there's no way he can repeat that success. He doesn't have the trade pieces available for impact talents and he's over budget on his payroll, nor is he going to luck his way into another K-Rod or Morgan situation where he gets critical pieces for basically nothing. How would the season have gone with Gomez as the everyday CF instead of the platoon? The acquisition of Morgan made Gomez' injury a virtual non factor in the season.

 

Everything went perfectly for Melvin in 2011 and it still wasn't enough to get to a World Series. Now he's run out of resources to sustain the MLB team through manner which he's been operating since 2007. He has no talent flexibility, he has no payroll flexibility (thank you K-Rod and Ramirez), and he has no impact prospect talent to barter with. His obsession with veteran players will end up being his undoing at some point, I just hope it's sooner rather than later. He has 1 year left with a veteran team, then we'll see how good he really is.

[jjfanec]

I tried to post a bit ago and it didnt work so I am going to post a much shorter version of this.

 

1. The rumor was Prince for Cain. Not Hart. There is no way SF would have done that.

2. You make it sound like all our talent came from Jack Z but Jack Z left the pitching cupboard completely bare. He hit on 1 starter. Just 1! Gallardo is the only starter that he gave Melvin. Parra was his second best pitcher. Well Odorizzi could become second. Try to find 4 quality starters. Young starting pitching is really valuable and pitching on the free agent market is over-priced.

3. I completely disagree we overpaid for Sabathia or Greinke. I think you over-value our prospects quite a bit. I think the jury was out on Escobar - all glove no hit SS. Not many scouts were as high on LaPorta as this board (me being one of those people). Brantley was an ok prospect not great. Cain was never considered a top prospect. I think we over paid more for Marcum than Greinke.

4. I dont like every move Melvin has made. I didnt like trading Cole Gillespie. I didnt like the Carlos Lee trade centered around Codero and Mench. I didnt like the Hardy trade. I wanted Kevin Slowey, guess I was wrong too. But you make it seem like he lucked into a talented team. With a limited payroll and no pitching talent in the minors I think he has done well

Edit - Sorry if this debate shouldnt be in this forum.

[pogokat]

we stole greinke...jeffress sucked this year and odorizzi was toast at AA

[brettac1]

we stole greinke...jeffress sucked this year and odorizzi was toast at AA

Definitely. I can see that maybe they overpaid for Marcum. but not Greinke.

[RWeeksFan23]

Marcum and Greinke were both slight overpays, but I don't see how one can say we overpaid for Sabathia... Matt LaPorta has been a bust, and Michael Brantley doesn't have ideal pop for a corner OF.

[danzig6767]

TheCrew07 wrote:

---

The "we don't know what was available" card has been way overplayed around here over the years, and is an incredibly weak defense given the talent that has been traded around MLB. It's just as easy to say, "how do you do know he wasn't offered player X?". It's an empty standard to judge a GM by. for him prior to 2008. Teams have been interested in Hart for years, San Fran was rumored to have offered Matt Cain.Atlanta was linked to Hart as recently as last year...Teams make mistakes offering up players all the time. How many teams are kicking themselves that they didn't jump on Buchholz when he was being shopped in 2009 (yes I'm aware he got hurt), or Niemann when he was being shopped in 2008, and so on? Go back and look at the transaction forum, very few posters were interested in young pitching even though we desperately needed as an organization, everyone wanted Sabathia, then they wanted Peavy, then they were upset when the pitching imploded in 2009 and 2010. When people looked at Texas they talked about trying to trade for Millwood when Texas system was loaded with better pitching talent in the minor leagues. Unfortunately Melvin agreed, because those were the types of deals that he was pursuing and continued to pursue through last off season.

This paragraph sums up perfectly why many posters don't take seriously a lot of your criticisms.

 

You read and then seem to take way to seriously "rumors" spread by people in the media or blogs who have jobs mainly just to spread rumors, even if in the vastly majority of cases, the rumors are based on little to no validity among the actual GM's who make the decisions. Hell, just take the Brewers and how often Melvin has to come out and shoot down "rumors" for having zero credibility to them at all.

 

Yet, it doesn't stop countless sports fans in all sports from seriously running with countless "rumors" and then blaming their GM when he doesn't pull the trigger on acquiring said players in the "rumors", regardless of the fact if these fans have absolutely zero concrete knowledge if a "rumored" player was truly on the block. Had absolutely zero concrete knowledge of what the other GM would be asking in return for the "rumored" player, even if that GM would listen to offers for say their young valuable arm like Cain, Bucholz, or Niemann.

 

I don't think anyone here would care that you don't like the overall way in which Melvin operates in building the team. You certainly wouldn't be alone in that belief. It's when you continually keep blaming Melvin though for not acquiring numerous certain young players, especially certain young pitchers based on "rumors" you read or heard somewhere which you have zero ability to know if the rumors actually had any validity to them. None. Zero ability to know if those players were actually on the block. And if any were actually on the block, you had zero ability to know if Melvin made some calls and if so, what the other GM actually asked for in return, not what some guy on ESPN or in a blog reported was asked for in return.

 

So go ahead and prefer that Melvin had a different approach overall to building the Brewers, nothing wrong with that. Continually blaming him though for not pulling the trigger on media "rumors" that you chose to believe as truth, well, you're are then just going to end up finding many here not buying what you're trying to sell.

[endaround]

Marcum and Greinke were both slight overpays, but I don't see how one can say we overpaid for Sabathia... Matt LaPorta has been a bust, and Michael Brantley doesn't have ideal pop for a corner OF.

Look what the Nats gave up for Gonzalez.