Why does everyone want to trade Hart?

[3Putt]

Does anyone have any theories on why Hart has lost his base stealing ability at age 29? I can't recall any significant injuries. He's not the Lollygagger he once was but for some reason his time to first and his base running ability in general has fallen off. Also, I thought the team might consider him at 1B. He'd certainly make a huge target and it's not like he's a world beater in RF.

[DHonks]

Most guys Hart's size are slow. So perhaps taller players start losing their speed earlier. It started 2-3 years ago with poor OF play, but I still think that's primarily because he refuses to wear contacts or glasses, or get lasix surgery.

[TheCrew07]

Speed is a function of applied force, it's simple physics... how much force is being applied to ground with each step.

 

If a player is putting on weight without gaining muscle, he's going to get slower. If a player is gaining muscle mass but becoming less flexible he'll lose speed. Flexibility is such a key component because it allows for the application of extra force at the end range of athletic movements. The less flexible you are, the less force you'll be able to apply throughout an athletic movement... doesn't matter if it's throwing a ball, swinging a bat, or something as a simple as running. Also a player gains muscle mass(weight) in muscles that have nothing to do with speed (body building, beach muscles like bis and tris, etc), he'll get slower. Finally as players age, regardless of muscle to weight ratios, they will get slower. As far as I know no one has pegged the exact reason for the decline of the athlete as they age yet, prevailing wisdom suggests something neurological, but it may be just as simple as repeated use wearing the body down over time. The decline of the athlete isn't really a topic covered much at the clinics I attend, that's an issue that professional teams would be concerned with where as us lowly high school and college teams are simply looking to maximize athletic potential as the body matures. I'd be fascinated to read more on the subject of athletic decline if anyone comes across anything.

 

I would like to believe that since hitting is mostly a core function that players working to develop power wouldn't be hurting their speed because you'll need many of the same muscles. I can tell you exactly what the Packers and Badgers are doing with their weight training because I've listened to their coaches and players talk and have personally watched what they do, but I have no idea what the Brewers are doing. I've witnessed the Brewers and T-Rats doing all of the good dynamic warm-ups during pregame, but I wouldn't venture a guess what the actual training regimes are given the heavy game schedule in baseball. Peak performance studies have suggested that players that were serious about lifting should have it completed prior to 10 AM on a game day for a 7 PM game or should wait till after the game. Obviously it's not a good idea for athletes participating in more grueling sports where hydration is critical to work hard on a game day, but it's been proven that lifting on a game day can improve athletic performance if the body is given enough time to recover.

[danzig6767]

List of Brewers making more than $5M next year per BF.net and my arby guessing:

Greinke 13.5M

Rodriguez 10M?

Weeks 10M

Wolf 9.5M

Hart 9M

Braun 6M

Ramirez 6M

Gallardo 5.5M

Marcum 5M+?

 

Most here believe we need more pitching (and that you always need more pitching). So let's take starting pitchers off the list.

 

Now we have: Rodriguez, Weeks, Hart, Braun, Ramirez

We aren't trading A-Ram, Weeks, or Braun.

 

That leaves Rodriguez and Hart as the "expensive" players to trade to reduce payroll. Since no one seemed interested in K-Rod in the open market, I'm not sure there would be many trading partners that would make a trade giving us payroll flexibility.

 

So it's less about wanting to trade Hart and more of Hart being the best piece to trade with the combination of lowering payroll, actually getting something back in the trade, and being expendable on the team. He's not really expendable but seems so compared to Braun (HoF talent) and Weeks (plays a position with less talented players).

While in general i'd lean towards not trading Hart, the problem with threads like this is that besides Braun/Gallardo who are pretty much untouchable, whether any other player on the roster should be traded or not is all about who the Brewers would get back in return.

 

Given that we as fans really don't really have a clue what other teams might truly offer for Corey, not what some blog could say as a rumor, it's nearly impossible to be strongly for or against the thought of trading Hart without knowing the exact details of what another team would offer Melvin.

[monty57]

I'd ride out his prime years, get 25-30 HR from him each season, and then say 'thanks' and let him walk when he gets a $12 million/year deal just as he starts to age.

 

But we keep doing that with everyone, and therefore we are less and less able to replace players after we "say thanks and let him walk." Eventually this will lead us to a position where we have a number of high-priced players taking up a high percentage of your payroll, and no good, young, pre-arby guys to fill out the roster to make the team competitive. In other words, we'll look a lot like the 2011 version of the Cubs, only with a smaller payroll, and therefore longer "down period." That period could start as soon as next year, and it's really looking bad in 2014.

 

When was the last time we traded a veteran for prospects...Overbay six years ago? Every trade we do is either veteran for veteran or prospects for veteran, and then we let the veteran walk and get little to nothing in return. Even when we've been pretty much out of it, we've still spent prospecst for vets rather than selling off some chips to stock the farm. Now we have a new CBA and have just been burned by K-Rod, so we will probably not even get some of the draft picks we always say are going to revive the farm system. Hart's production and his reasonable contract make him tradeable... someone may actually give us good, young, pre-arby talent for one of our veterans for whom we have some decent replacements who are MLB-ready.

 

I certainly wouldn't give him away, and with the way things have played out, if we have playoff hopes this year (which we do), then we're not trading Hart this offseason, as we don't have any position that we could upgrade enough in trade that would offset the downgrade we'd get by losing Hart. However, I'd trade Hart either mid-season if we're out of it, or next offseason for sure.

[Mike]

monty57[/b]]When was the last time we traded a veteran for prospects...Overbay six years ago? Every trade we do is either veteran for veteran or prospects for veteran, and then we let the veteran walk and get little to nothing in return.

Why don't we try picking more efficiently with the picks we do have. Take a look at the last seven (7) years.

2005-Braun the only guy left. 2nd, 3rd and later rounders not worth a darn.

2006-Jeffress 1st rounder, the only guy with a chance and that seems remote at best.

2007-Lucroy 3rd round made it. Ferris 4th not going to help, Gindl in the 5th might. LaPorta 1st round is still arguable.

2008-Schafer in the 3rd is the only guy standing from that class! Lawrie and Ordorizzi will be good, but we got into the 2011 playoffs making that trade.

2009-Heckathorn potentially, Kentrail maybe and D'Vo in the 5th may be good.

2010-Thornburg in the 3rd round will pay dividends.

2011-Jungmann, Bradley and Lopez in the 1st and 2nd rounds remain to be seen.

 

My point is there are many more swings and misses than hits. Notice every year on the Power 50 that the top guys are from the most recent draft? Who can forget supplemental Evan Fredrickson in 2008? Eric Arnett 1st round 2009? Seth Lintz, Thomas Adams, William Inman, Evan Anudsen, Brent Brewer, Cutter Dykstra all of whom were top 3 round picks that are gone. Out of baseball in many cases. It would be fun to do a study.

Now I also recognize many teams face the same hit rate, but doesn't it seem we are in the lower half? Really since 2002 (10 yrs of drafting) we got five stars; Prince, Braun, Gallardo, Hart and Weeks. That is .50 star players per draft. I would expect that number to be more like .75 and serviceable MLB guys at 1.5 which the Brewers cannot claim.

[nate82]

Really since 2002 (10 yrs of drafting) we got five stars; Prince, Braun, Gallardo, Hart and Weeks. That is .50 star players per draft. I would expect that number to be more like .75 and serviceable MLB guys at 1.5 which the Brewers cannot claim.

That is actually a rather good rate. You are expecting way to much out of the draft if you think it is going to be something like .75 or higher. The only other teams that have done as good as the Brewers or better in the draft have been the Rays and the Reds recently. The Rays have been getting a return from the draft at a rather high rate of return at some point this will end. Having 5 players that you have drafted in about 10 years become all star talent and above is nothing to be concerned about. Look at the other teams and I bet you can't find many that have the same success the Brewers have had. Right now the Rays have Jennings, Price, Longoria, Hellickson, Upton, Young, and Moore. The Rays also have misses in their draft Wade Townsend in 2005 at the #8 pick and Dewon Brazelton #3 in 2001. The only thing the Rays have done better than basically anyone in baseball is getting great players in the later rounds. Jake McGee #135 and Wade Davis #75 in 2004; Jeremy Hellickson #118 in 2005; Alex Cobb #109 in 2006 and Desmond Jennings #289. In 2005 their best pick was in the 4th round at pick #118.

The Rays right now are the best in baseball in terms of drafting and getting a good return. In terms of the last 10 years no one has been better than the Rays and no one even comes close to them but they have had busts in their drafts like every other teams have had. In the draft there are the Rays and then there is everyone else.

Last 10 Major Leaguers drafted

Year Rnd Overall Player

2007 1 1 David Price

2007 8 245 Matt Moore

2006 1 3 Evan Longoria

2006 2 47 Josh Butler

2006 4 109 Alex Cobb

2006 10 289 Desmond Jennings

2005 4 118 Jeremy Hellickson

2004 1 4 Jeff Niemann

2004 2 45 Reid Brignac

2004 3 75 Wade Davis

[logan82]

nate82 wrote:

The Rays right now are the best in baseball in terms of drafting and getting a good return. In terms of the last 10 years no one has been better than the Rays and no one even comes close to them but they have had busts in their drafts like every other teams have had. In the draft there are the Rays and then there is everyone else.

Last 10 Major Leaguers drafted

Year Rnd Overall Player

2007 1 1 David Price

2007 8 245 Matt Moore

2006 1 3 Evan Longoria

2006 2 47 Josh Butler

2006 4 109 Alex Cobb

2006 10 289 Desmond Jennings

2005 4 118 Jeremy Hellickson

2004 1 4 Jeff Niemann

2004 2 45 Reid Brignac

2004 3 75 Wade Davis

Sure they drafted well. Look where they picked over that time frame. They had a 10 year run of picking in the top 5 of the draft almost every single year including several #1 overall picks.

[TheCrew07]

That's the common claim about the Rays, they're good because they drafted so high. How is that different than the Brewers who drafted Braun, Fielder, and Weeks in the first 7 picks in the draft?

 

They've had much better success after the first round than we have. Sure Longoria, Price, and Niemann were top 5 picks but what about everyone else? Jennings, Davis, Shields (16th), Hellickson, and Moore were fantastic draft picks. The Brewers could have taken any of those players before the Rays, every other team in baseball could have taken those players before the Rays...

 

The simple truth is that TB has managed their talent better, managed the payroll better, and drafted and developed players better than the Brewers have. Freidman is far and away the best GM in the game and he has a very good scouting dept that keeps giving him additional resources to work with. My affinity for the Rays comes from a great appreciation for how different they've operated from even the other small market teams. The contract innovations were genius and the player moves (trades) incredibly savvy. Freidman hasn't been perfect, he's missed on Burrell, but every GM is going to miss on FAs here and there, which is part of the reason I view FA with a wary eye.

 

I don't envy the league or the division the Rays play in but I sure do wish we had their pitching talent and GM.

[TheCrew07]

I was going to edit but I'll throw this into a different post.

 

The Brewers have actually had better success in the 1st round (under Z) than the Rays if you throw Lawrie and Odorizzi into the mix, I don't buy the draft position angle at all, especially given how TB got itself off the ground.

 

Back to the Hart discussion...

[logan82]

We already had this discussion and you are well aware the Rays picked higher than the Brewers by several slots over the same time frame.

[Ennder]

The Rays most certainly had an advantage over all of baseball when it comes to where they drafted and that helps for sure. They also have done well picking, it is really part of both. The Rays also took 10 years to build a winning team, it isn't like they magically did it over night or something. While the Brewers might not stack up directly to the Rays they stack up very well compared to most other teams that were dismal as recent as 10 years ago. A 582-552 record over the last 7 years is very nice given the state of the franchise the 10 years before that and the overall payroll they have had to work with over that time frame.

[M Skjellyfetti]

It's interesting that we're having this discussion in a thread about whether or not the Brewers should trade an all-star 11th round pick.

 

I think everyone has decent points. I'm not convinced that what the Rays have done can be completely chalked up to superior scouting and front office staff. I think a lot of it has been good fortune with draft slot and good luck that their picks have turned out. Yes I wish the Brewers had that fortune, but I'm fairly content with the high level of talent we have found.

[MNBrew]

M Skjellyfetti, who's your avatar?

 

Back on topic, I keep going both ways on Hart. It often seems he could be better, especially playing 25-30 lbs. lighter. But there also seem to be lots of ways -- some more overt than others -- that he makes the Brewers a better team than they'd be without him.

 

I'd be up for trading him if he's playing great & the team's on a contention-decimating skid. Then you move a few fringe-of-the-core guys at positions where you do have depth (such as the OF: Gindl, Schafer, and a few other younger guys like Haydel, Richardson, Davis, Davis, and the A-ball & lower guys whose names don't come to mind) for promising younger players and let the guys coming up in your system get their MLB-legs under them with the PT they need to start delivering (or, of course, prove that they can't).

[TooLiveBrew]

Morgan Ensberg, from back when there were Morgan-Ensberg-to-the-Brewers? discussions!

[TheCrew07]

We already had this discussion and you are well aware the Rays picked higher than the Brewers by several slots over the same time frame.

Yes and you're still not getting it, a couple of draft slots means nothing. The Brewers have actually been more successful in the 1st round than the Rays.

 

They didn't build their team with better draft picks than everyone else was getting, that's a totally superficial dismissal of what actually happened. As I pointed out Weeks, Fielder, and Braun were all top 7 picks and 2 of those picks may end up being in the HOF. They were the first organization that figured out that young impact pitching is the most valuable commodity in baseball. They traded for Kazmir in 2004, Jackson in 2006, and Garza in 2007 and in 2008 they were in the WS which is something we haven't accomplished and we had a head start. It certainly didn't take Friedman 10 years to build a WS team, he was the director of baseball operations in 2004 and 2005, and after the 2005 season was promoted to his current position.

 

It's entirely possible he wouldn't have taken the tact that he did if the Rays could afford more payroll, but he was smart enough to figure out what a small market needs to do to compete pitching wise when they can't afford the impact free agents. He also figured out the best way to retain his impact talent through their peak years was to lock them up right away buying out FA years with team friendly options on the back end, there's no messing around going to year to year in arbitration and having to pay market rates to retain players. Not only do you get players through their peak, you also buy wins at discounted rate, the only down side is the team has to pay more up front to save much more on the backend, and the team assumes all of the risk. Value wise it's an incredibly shrewd way to do business.

 

As I said, there's been much more going on than simply drafting at the top of the draft, claiming such is a gross over simplification of the issues and an incredible disservice to the truth.

 

Back to your regular scheduled programming.

[logan82]

We already had this discussion and you are well aware the Rays picked higher than the Brewers by several slots over the same time frame.

Yes and you're still not getting it, a couple of draft slots means nothing. The Brewers have actually been more successful in the 1st round than the Rays.

Wow, that is pretty condescending and dismissive. I get it, you think the Rays drafted better. Sure they did. The only real difference I see is that they were a little better at picking pitchers. Friedman also inherited a much better situation than Melvin did. The Rays were part way through their rebuild when he came along.

 

he was smart enough to figure out what a small market needs to do to

compete pitching wise when they can't afford the impact free agents.

I doubt it. He was just better at identifying pitchers.

 

I believe you are setting your standards for what constitutes a good GM way to high. The Brewers got several good players in the later rounds. Feel free to ignore Hart, Gallardo, Lorenzo Cain, Lucroy, and Gamel though.

 

The Rays advantage over the Brewers was more than just a couple slots.

 

 

Overall picks 1999-2008

Brewers Rays

16		1
7		1
16		3
5		8
5		4
2		1
7		2
12		3
11		6
10		1

[endaround]

Its the Rays great drafting and identifying of pitchers that allowed Ben Zobrist to break out at age 27

[strawbossisevil]

The Rays traded the number #1 ranked prospect in all of baseball for Matt Garza. It's easy to forget that. If Delmon Young had turned out to be a Ryan Braun or Prince Fielder type player as he was being billed, that trade would have looked much worse.

 

Garza was/is a solid pitcher, a solid #2. He is not, however, in the class of a C.C. Sabathia or the top pitchers in baseball. He has a career ERA a hair under 4 and his strike out to walk ratio is only about 2-1.

 

In retrospect it looks good for the Rays because Young never panned out. They got a #2 for an average MLB outfielder.

[TooLiveBrew]

They also got Garza for 3 full seasons, & he's still under team salary control through next year, too. So to compare that trade with the Sabathia trade is almost apples to oranges, & ultimately makes TheCrew07's point for him.

[strawbossisevil]

My point wasn't to compare it to the Sabathia trade. My point was if we want to talk about trading prospects for other prospects, it took the #1 prospect in all of baseball to get a prospect pitcher who peaked as a #2.

 

They got lucky in that the #1 prospect amounted to nothing. Can you imagine if Melvin did the same thing? Trading a player like Fielder or Braun for a player like Garza? If those are the deals that are out there, the Brewers are best served keeping their hitting prospects or trading them for more difference making starters like Sabathia or Greinke.

If anything, right now with the shift toward developing prospect pitching the pendulum has swung to where the best way to upgrade a pitching staff is by trading for players with a couple of years left on their contract. Both Greinke and Sabathia were absolute steals for the Brewers. To say they could have used the players in those deals to get a prospect the likes of Garza is naive...as I pointed out above, that would take a #1 prospect type players. Neither of those trades included players of that calibre.

[trwi7]

point was if we want to talk about trading prospects for other prospects, it took the #1 prospect in all of baseball to get a prospect pitcher who peaked as a #2.

In 2007 BA had Young rated as the #3 prospect in baseball. They had Garza rated as #21. The Rays also got Jason Bartlett and Eduardo Morlan while they gave up Brendan Harris and Jason Pridie. So basically they got a decent starting SS in addition to Garza for Young. That seems pretty fair.

 

They got lucky in that the #1 prospect amounted to nothing. Can you imagine if Melvin did the same thing? Trading a player like Fielder or Braun for a player like Garza?

 

Geez, you're making it sound like Garza was a garbage prospect. For reference, Prince topped out at #10 in BA's list. Greinke topped out at #14. Gallardo topped out at #16. Garza topped out at #21.

[monty57]

My point was if we want to talk about trading prospects for other prospects, it took the #1 prospect in all of baseball to get a prospect pitcher who peaked as a #2.

 

To the topic of the thread, I think it's more about trading Hart for prospects. Since we in a "go for it" year, we aren't trading him this offseason, but for discussion sake, what would Hart bring in trade? He's an All-Star player with a reasonable contract for two years, so I'd have to think he'd bring back a pretty good package of prospects. What would be a reasonable return if we were to trade Hart?

[nate82]

My point was if we want to talk about trading prospects for other prospects, it took the #1 prospect in all of baseball to get a prospect pitcher who peaked as a #2.

 

To the topic of the thread, I think it's more about trading Hart for prospects. Since we in a "go for it" year, we aren't trading him this offseason, but for discussion sake, what would Hart bring in trade? He's an All-Star player with a reasonable contract for two years, so I'd have to think he'd bring back a pretty good package of prospects. What would be a reasonable return if we were to trade Hart?

Something a little bit more than what the White Sox got in return for Quentin. If a team like the Tigers were looking to trade for a bat Jacob Turner would be a very long stretch but you would be getting back a #2 or #3 type pitcher with the potential to be a #1 or an ace.

[strawbossisevil]

point was if we want to talk about trading prospects for other prospects, it took the #1 prospect in all of baseball to get a prospect pitcher who peaked as a #2.

In 2007 BA had Young rated as the #3 prospect in baseball. They had Garza rated as #21. The Rays also got Jason Bartlett and Eduardo Morlan while they gave up Brendan Harris and Jason Pridie. So basically they got a decent starting SS in addition to Garza for Young. That seems pretty fair.

 

They got lucky in that the #1 prospect amounted to nothing. Can you imagine if Melvin did the same thing? Trading a player like Fielder or Braun for a player like Garza?

 

Geez, you're making it sound like Garza was a garbage prospect. For reference, Prince topped out at #10 in BA's list. Greinke topped out at #14. Gallardo topped out at #16. Garza topped out at #21.

He was BA's 2006 #1 prospect and Milb player of the year. To put it in 2011 perspective that would be trading Bryce Harper for Mike Montgomery. Yes, in the end it worked out for Tampa, but that is an extreme gamble.

Garza wasn't a garbage prospect, but going from #1 prospect in the game to #21 is a pretty significant drop in talent. Even with the addition of a mediocre SS. Tampa Bay lucked out with Young never coming anywhere close to his immense potential, otherwise we would all be talking about how foolish Friedman's move for Garza was.

Point remains, if you want a prospect pitcher in the top 20-30 range, the cost is going to be extremely high. It cost Tampa the top prospect in baseball to get Garza. The idea that the players included in the Sabathia or Grienke trades could have been used to acquire prospect pitchers like that is totally bogus. That was my chief point, and it is the point that you are refusing to address.