Is Marcum worth re-signing?

[adambr2]

It's a question I've struggled to answer myself. I'm tempted to say yes of course he is, he is a mid 3's ERA starting pitcher who had a full healthy season last year and is very effective. Plus it would make me feel better about the Lawrie trade to at least keep Marcum for a few more years.

 

Then there's the part of me that says no, their money would be better invested in a true ace, I don't trust that he has the stuff to remain effective as he ages, etc.

 

What does everyone here think? I'm not totally against it, but the longer this season goes, the less chance I think we have of re-signing Greinke, and I hate the thought of a panic overpay to Marcum and calling him and Yo our new "aces" and calling it an offseason.

[logan82]

Yes and no. I wouldn't mind him on a one year deal so you offer arbitration but I would not want him for more than a year at a time.

[HiAndTight]

It's a question I've struggled to answer myself. I'm tempted to say yes of course he is, he is a mid 3's ERA starting pitcher who had a full healthy season last year and is very effective. Plus it would make me feel better about the Lawrie trade to at least keep Marcum for a few more years.

 

Then there's the part of me that says no, their money would be better invested in a true ace, I don't trust that he has the stuff to remain effective as he ages, etc.

 

What does everyone here think? I'm not totally against it, but the longer this season goes, the less chance I think we have of re-signing Greinke, and I hate the thought of a panic overpay to Marcum and calling him and Yo our new "aces" and calling it an offseason.

 

No, because as you said, I think it'd be a "panic," signing and they'd overpay for him. Plus, I don't trust him to continue to perform well for another 4 years(I think that he'll easliy get a 4 year deal).

 

I WOULD offer arbitration as I think he'll look at 13.5 for one year and prefer a lower yearly salary, but that last(and his only) chance at a big FA payout to be too much to pass up.

 

The Brewers however I fear will re-sign him and then probably go after another 2nd tier FA like a Ryan Dempster. Which wouldn't be terrible in the short term, but would probably look pretty bad in 2-3 years. By then at least we can hope for our young arms to be mainstays and contributing.

 

 

But again, if Greinke's gone, I'd rather just be realistic, gather all the picks we can(2 1st and 2 1st supps for those two, plus our own) and dump anyone who's not a part of the long term picture. Slash payroll and build up a reserve like the Packers have and when we're good again, use that money for the guys that are young and deserving.

[HiAndTight]

Yes and no. I wouldn't mind him on a one year deal so you offer arbitration but I would not want him for more than a year at a time.

 

 

 

Yeah, but he'll almost certainly never sign a one year deal. He MAY take arbitration...which I doubt, but would be worth it.

 

I doubt he goes another 2-3 seasons fully healthy, so he could be a really hard contract to swallow.

 

And that would only make the Lawrie trade look worse.

[splitterpfj]

Yes, he is worth keeping, he's a solid MLB pitcher - why not?

 

It's all about what Marcum is willing to take, I wouldn't give him a bad contract, but I'd certainly keep him here if a deal can be reached.

[DHonks]

He's a very good #3 pitcher. I'd definitely consider locking him up for 3-4 years at $10-12 million apiece. He's only 30 and has now had 4.5 very effective seasons. The concern I have is that he might get more than that on the open market. We know he's had his agent approach the Brewers about an extension and was disappointed. I think the Brewers would like him, but they first need to know if they can keep Greinke, and how much he would cost. Still, we likely wouldn't be able to land a starter of his caliber on the open market, and it's a pipedream that Peralta, Scarpetta, Rogers, or anyone else could match his numbers, especially in 2013-15

[DHonks]

Why would you be disappointed if we retained Marcum and Gallardo? We are not going to land an ace. Realistically, Yo is a solid #2 starter, Greinke a weak #1, Marcum a strong #3, and Narvy a very good number 5. But Narvy likely won't be counted on next year, Wolf was a very good number 4 the last two years but has been crap this year and likely won't be retained. If we can't re-sign Greinke then Marcum shifts from being a luxury to being a necessity. I don't want to open 2013 with a rotation of Gallardo, Rogers, Peralta, Thornburg, and Fiers. We need to retain at least one of Marcum and Greinke.

[TooLiveBrew]

With Cain's contract, and some expecting Greinke/Hamels to get $125M or more, if I'm Marcum I'd like to see what free agency brings... especially after it was public knowledge that the Brewers didn't want to extend Marcum.

 

If Cain and others get upwards of $100M, some team has to be willing to give Marcum at least $50M. On a four year deal, that'd be $12.5M AAV. If any team's willing to go to 5 years, that's over $60M. I think the Brewers would have to talk to Marcum somewhere around or north of $50M.

[JohnBriggs12]

Why would you be disappointed if we retained Marcum and Gallardo? We are not going to land an ace. Realistically, Yo is a solid #2 starter, Greinke a weak #1, Marcum a strong #3, and Narvy a very good number 5. But Narvy likely won't be counted on next year, Wolf was a very good number 4 the last two years but has been crap this year and likely won't be retained. If we can't re-sign Greinke then Marcum shifts from being a luxury to being a necessity. I don't want to open 2013 with a rotation of Gallardo, Rogers, Peralta, Thornburg, and Fiers. We need to retain at least one of Marcum and Greinke.

 

Overpaying is never a good idea. There will be plenty of other options if they don't sign Greinke and Marcum. After all, between Greinke, Marcum and Wolf, we're talking about roughly $32 million saved. Two years ago, nobody thought they'd land Marcum and Greinke in the same offseason either. There is zero chance they open next season with the rotation you fear they would.

 

I could see Gallardo, Narveson or Estrada, Thornburg, Fiers and "fill in the blank veteran". That fill in the blank veteran could be Greinke or Marcum or it could be someone else, acquired either via trade or FA. My personal wish is Anibal Sanchez and yes he won't be cheap either.

 

If you can't land an ace, then you have to grow one internally. If you are constantly sign veterans every year and block young pitching how will that happen? Greinke wants "ace money" and he's not pitched like a true ace since 09. Yes he's been very good this year save 2 starts, but those were awful.

[HiAndTight]

He's a very good #3 pitcher. I'd definitely consider locking him up for 3-4 years at $10-12 million apiece. He's only 30 and has now had 4.5 very effective seasons. The concern I have is that he might get more than that on the open market. We know he's had his agent approach the Brewers about an extension and was disappointed. I think the Brewers would like him, but they first need to know if they can keep Greinke, and how much he would cost. Still, we likely wouldn't be able to land a starter of his caliber on the open market, and it's a pipedream that Peralta, Scarpetta, Rogers, or anyone else could match his numbers, especially in 2013-15

 

I don't know why you limited it to those three pitchers, but I digress.

 

I personally would rather go after Edwin Jackson who's due to be a FA than re-signing Marcum. For whatever reason Jackson just keeps bouncing around despite putting up good numbers and being a workhorse.

 

I'm also partial to power arms in the post-season and believe Marcum will break down, and at the very least with a 4 year extension..if he loses any velocity, I think you're going to see a significant drop-off.

 

I do think it's at least reasonable to hope that Thornburg, Jungman, Bradley and Nelson could all be in line by 2013/14 and definitely 15. 1st round pitchers who are fairly refined shouldn't take more than a year at a level. Bradley and Nelson are both pitching well in HiA. Not great, but for their intro to pro-ball, well enough. Both could see AA this year, but I think Nelson alone is promoted this year. Both in AA in '13, AAA in '14 and big league ready in '15 if they move slowly. And I think that's slow if they are both healthy and as good as it's suggested they are. I think it's entirely likely if they pitch well, they get a quarter season at AA this year, start in AA next year and then are a phone call away.

 

 

Anyway, to make a long post shorter, I think we've got enough young pitching, that Marcum is just simply not the pitcher I want to invest in long term. Pitchers are simply not reliable obviously, and I look at Marcum, and it's not about how good he is right now, it's how good will he be if he loses 2 MPH? I think he turns into Jeff Suppan. And I think he's a huge injury risk. 2 years 25..great deal. 3/30...I'd even do that. But he'll get 4 years and 50 million IMO on the open market at least and I'd guess that's what he wants based on his current production.

 

And when people talk about Greinke being too big of a risk, if Marcum ends up on the shelf, or ineffective...you're looking at spending another 10 million to replace him. And while Greinke certainly could get injured, I'm FAR more confident in his body and durability, and if HE loses a tick or two and is throwing at 90-91, I think his other stuff is so good, that he can still be a frontline type guy.

[paul253]

It's not arbitration but I think I'd now be willing to offer him that one year deal that we need to offer him to get picks in return for losing him. If we lose him and Greinke (whom I'm positive we'll offer the one year deal to) that'll net us four extra picks in a draft where there should be far fewer comp picks given out. If he accepts you simply cut Wolf lose and go with a young guy like Fiers to offset the cost.

[davego]

Sign Zack. Barring his arm coming off, he is a resource that could be sold off if needed. Use the $ from Wolf.

[brettac1]

I'd rather not sign a RHP in his 30's with poor velocity to a longer deal. He's basically going to be Suppan eventually.

[Thurston Fluff]

If he'd take a Wolf type of deal I'd be fine with having him back. I don't think soft throwers are more of a risk as they age. I see those guys as ones who aren't taxing their arms as much. He doesn't throw a slider which is hard on the arm so in that respect he may be a better injury risk than Greinke. I think the idea that he can't lose a mile or two on the fastball and still be effective wrong. He never relied on that so why would losing a little off it hurt? Finally it seems like Marcum is one of the overlooked ones in the league. He may be undervalued for his level of production. If he threw 95+ and put up the numbers ha has for 2+ seasons he'd be one of the hottest pitchers on the market. Since he doesn't he isn't. If we are looking for undervalued players I think he fits that mold very well. Effective soft tossers are to pitching what hitters who take walks are to hitters. Not flashy but they win you games.

[PrinceEatMeat]

The problem with Marcum is that you know he'll eventually hit the wall, because of the type of pitcher he is. The question is when that'll happen, and it's hard to predict. He may have 3 or 4 more good years left in him, but he may only have 1 or 2. It's pretty risky to sign him. If we lose Greinke, I'd consider it for 2-3 years tops. There's no way I'd go past 3. Even then, it would have to be at a reasonable price, or I wouldn't risk it.

[Eddiehitsthefoulpole]

I think we should try and resign Marcum. No more than 3 years though, maybe a club option on a 4th. I also think that signing Zach is a pipe dream. I think that he felt that KC burned him in his last contract with their perpetual rebuilding. I don't think he will risk that in Milwaukee. He is going to go big market.

[davego]

This thread reminds me how important quality pitching under 6 years of service time really is to a big-league team.

[DHonks]

Why would we be overpaying for Marcum if he's stated openly that he wants to stay. He's likely to accept market or below market value if he really wants to stay. To get a comparable pitcher we would need to overpay by probably 10%

[gregmag]

I definitely think lower-velocity pitchers are higher risks as they age, but I also think some of you are undervaluing Marcum. Jeff Suppan never had Marcum's peripherals, or his results. Suppan never cracked 5.5 K/9 in a season of more than 80 innings; Marcum's at 7.3 for his career. Marcum, at this point, is a perfectly serviceable #2 starter on a contending team. Of course I'd rather have Greinke, but if we don't get him, and if we can have Marcum for 4/50, and (here's the key) if we think we have the other players we need to contend for the next two years, I'd sign him.

[rluzinski]

Marcum is a true 3.5 ERA pitcher, which makes him better than Suppan ever was. And I while it wouldn't surprise me, I wonder if it's really true that low velocity pitchers age more poorly. I've read it many times before but is there any real evidence to support it? I've seen the average pitcher loses 1 MPH every year (perhaps it was 1.5) and every MPH is worth so much ERA. I suppose that isn't strictly linear, though?

 

I'm hesitant to sign any 30 year old pitcher to a 4 year deal, though. 3/$30 mil would be about it. Of course, without knowing what he would accept, I have no idea if "Marcum is worth re-signing".

[gregmag]

Yeah, this is another old Bill James thing that I recall -- years ago he looked at sets of harder and softer throwing pitchers and found that the harder throwers aged better, which was counterintuitive for a lot of people. It might be true for either of two reasons: one, like you're saying, is that losing velocity from a lower starting point puts you in the red zone faster, and the other is that some off-speed pitches (on which the softer throwers place greater reliance) may put more strain on various parts of the arm.

[HiAndTight]

I think we should try and resign Marcum. No more than 3 years though, maybe a club option on a 4th. I also think that signing Zach is a pipe dream. I think that he felt that KC burned him in his last contract with their perpetual rebuilding. I don't think he will risk that in Milwaukee. He is going to go big market.

 

 

How are we in any way similar to the Royals and their "perpetual rebuilding," mode? We're the exact antithesis, even if fans on here would like us to step back and rebuild, that seems to be the exact opposite of what we're going to do, a sentiment that was only solidified when Mark Attanasio said he's more likely to look to add pieces to this team.

 

On top of that, we're in FAR-FAR better financial shape than KC is.

 

I also don't know how you can say with such a sense of certainty that "He IS going to go big market." He MIGHT, but that pretty much contradicts everything we know about him as a person.

Another thing I'd like to know is how you come to the conclusion that Greinke felt "burned," by KC from his last contract?

They had lost 100 games 3 of the previous 5 years and in the two years they didn't lose 100 games, they lost 96. Their best season was when they won 75 games. So I'm at a loss as to how he could have gotten burned by them when he'd been there the entire time.

 

 

Greinke's shown a complete willingness to re-sign with us. The issue hasn't been the fact that he felt "burned," by the Royals, or that he wants to go to a big market, it's that we're not offering enough money and years. That seems to be the extent of it.

 

How else do you explain the reports that talks broke down after Cain signed his contract, and that the Brewers and Close have had professional negotiations, but have simply been too far apart thus far?

Sign Zack. Barring his arm coming off, he is a resource that could be sold off if needed. Use the $ from Wolf.

 

I completely agree. I believe our future lies within our ability or lackthereof to sign Greinke.

 

I'd rather overpay for one dominant ace than play with fire with a guy like Marcum.

 

We have both money coming off our payroll and a lot of money coming into our system. Greinke's making 13.5 right now. Even if he gets 23 million a year, you basically just let Wolf walk and replace him with Fiers in the short term and then start to add guys like Thornburg...etc..etc..etc..

 

I feel extremely comfortable that Greinke from ages 29-35 is going to be an extremely valuable pitcher well worth 6/140.

 

AND I agree, short of a major injury, he is a guy you could trade in a couple years with inflation if you absolutely had to.

 

 

Plus, I think big market teams may be a big hesitant to sign him to a similar contract given his anxiety issues. Our best case scenario is that both Hamels and Shields hit the FA market.

 

I'll take Greinke over either, but I think that with their playoff histories and recent histories, those two may well be the top2 pitchers on the market..and lets not forget, guys like Ryan Dempster, Ervin Santana, Edwin Jackson, Kyle Lohse, Gavin Floyd, Annibal Sanchez(having a great year, 11.3 K/9 and ERA in mid 2's), Brandon McCarthy(4.9 WAR last year), Jake Peavy(dominating again)....

 

 

I think we MIGHT find that teams are willing to take a flier on Peavy for 2/3 years at 13 million or so and hope he stays healthy, or an Anibal Sanchez who's always had ace like stuff, or any number of these guys. BIG money will be thrown around, don't get me wrong, but we just might not be priced out of Greinke.

 

I certainly wouldn't guarantee it at this point.

[HiAndTight]

Yeah, this is another old Bill James thing that I recall -- years ago he looked at sets of harder and softer throwing pitchers and found that the harder throwers aged better, which was counterintuitive for a lot of people. It might be true for either of two reasons: one, like you're saying, is that losing velocity from a lower starting point puts you in the red zone faster, and the other is that some off-speed pitches (on which the softer throwers place greater reliance) may put more strain on various parts of the arm.

 

 

 

To me, it's simple.

 

1st-Pitchers who throw softer I don't believe are putting less stress on their arms. Not when we're talking about Greinke throwing 93 and Marcum throwing 88. Marcum has a high effort delivery, Greinke doesn't seem to have one. Either way, they're both maxing out their velocity(or close to it, I'm sure each could throw a little harder if they REALLY wanted to).

 

2nd-The harder you throw, the more you can get away with. If you throw 92 MPH, but leave one over the plate you have a better chance of that ball not getting hammered than if you throw 88.

 

3rd-As pitchers lose velocity, obviously their fastballs and their off-speed pitches don't have the the same difference in speeds. That's going to impact the soft tossers more.

 

Add to that Marcum has proven to be more of a injury risk thus far, and I think it's safe to say Greinke's the safer bet moving forward by a wide margin.

[DHonks]

rluzinski, I think a major difference between Suppan and Marcum is that Marcum has an elite pitch (changeup), Suppan had none.

 

Highandtight, a coworker of mine would disagree. He played with Greinke in the minors and said he's seen few deliveries that were more max-effort, specifically citing how Greinke lets out a loud grunt on every pitch. Not trying to argue, but trying to point out what I heard in a conversation last month

[Bombers]

I like Marcum. I would be willing to give 4 years with an option for 5 ... He is a really good pitcher and I think he could be had for 4 yrs 60. Which IMO, is worth it. We need good pitching and right now our only starter next year is Gallardo.