2013 FA arms

[Bnowell4evr]

Nice post Reily. Thats exactly how I break down each potential signing. I weigh the positives to the negatives and in Dempsters case the positives greatly outweigh the negatives.

 

The only thing that concerns me with Dempster was a 1.3 MPH drop in velocity over the past two years and him getting up there in age. If signed him for 2 years and still planned on getting another #2/3 starter in FA or trade then I would be 100% behind a Dempster signing.

[Bnowell4evr]

The thing to be wary of with Dempster specifically, or older players in general, is that the 'end' can arrive very quickly. He lost velocity on his fastball in both '11 & '12, and unless he resorts to doping, we should probably expect that velocity loss to continue in '13. And, while he was very much a workhorse from '08-'11, he missed time last season (173 total IP) with lat tightness -- injuries & missing time are other trends we can expect to continue or increase with older players. Imo paying him $10-$15M (or whatever AAV he gets) to watch him decline over the next 2-3 seasons is a big risk. I don't want the Brewers to be stuck holding the bag again like they were with Wolf this past season.

 

Great point about the end arriving quickly. Thats why I'm torn between Edwin Jackson and Dempster. The difference in years makes me favor Dempster but Jackson has a better chance of being productive through whatever contract he signs.

 

What makes me lean Dempsters way is that the market most likely will overpay for Jacksons Fastball. For as good as Jacksons "stuff" is his FB has been below average to downright pathetic his entire career. He only started becoming more successful when he stopped leaning on his FB so much and started throwing more CB's and CU's. Dempster seems just as likely to post an ERA around or below 4 as Jackson does and for 2 years instead of 4 or 5 I would go that way. The thing that gives Jackson an edge is his bat. The guy can rake and seems to stick it to the Brewers every year.

[monty57]

Reilly laid out pretty well why Melvin will probably make an effort (and will probably be successful) at signing Dempster. TLB showcased the biggest concern. Another concern I'll add comes from a cost perspective. He, Weeks, Yo, Braun and Ramirez would cost around $60MM in 2014, making us very dependant on young guys like Schafer, Gamel/Morris, whoever takes over in RF and the young pitchers to all come through big time. It would be tough to fill any holes when the majority of your salary is going to five guys.

 

If Dempster were to "fall off a cliff" in the second year, then we would be very hard-pressed to field a competitive team. Not so much because he'd be irreplaceable as a pitcher, but because his salary (along with the other committments) may disallow Melvin from finding upgrades/depth in other areas in that one-year pinch before Ramirez's contract is off the books.

 

I like the thought of Dempster on a two-year deal more than the thought of signing Jackson to a three or four-year deal. I still like the idea of getting a vet on a one-year deal, but maybe that's not feasible. In that second year I think we'll have enough SP, and I'd rather have "Dempster's salary" to fill in other holes, like a RF or 1B if the young guys (and Gamel) don't prove effective.

[Bnowell4evr]

Reilly laid out pretty well why Melvin will probably make an effort (and will probably be successful) at signing Dempster. TLB showcased the biggest concern. Another concern I'll add comes from a cost perspective. He, Weeks, Yo, Braun and Ramirez would cost around $60MM in 2014, making us very dependant on young guys like Schafer, Gamel/Morris, whoever takes over in RF and the young pitchers to all come through big time. It would be tough to fill any holes when the majority of your salary is going to five guys.

 

If Dempster were to "fall off a cliff" in the second year, then we would be very hard-pressed to field a competitive team. Not so much because he'd be irreplaceable as a pitcher, but because his salary (along with the other committments) may disallow Melvin from finding upgrades/depth in other areas in that one-year pinch before Ramirez's contract is off the books.

 

I like the thought of Dempster on a two-year deal more than the thought of signing Jackson to a three or four-year deal. I still like the idea of getting a vet on a one-year deal, but maybe that's not feasible. In that second year I think we'll have enough SP, and I'd rather have "Dempster's salary" to fill in other holes, like a RF or 1B if the young guys (and Gamel) don't prove effective.

 

You gotta remember we have Lucroy, Maldonado, Segura, Bianchi, Gamel, Green, Schafer, Fiers, Rogers, Peralta, Kintzler, Henderson, Thornburg and Narveson all making under a mill and a couple others like Aoki and Estrada who won't be making much more than that in the near future. If we resign Hart like it sounds like we plan on doing then all you have to do is replace Gomez in 2014 and guys like Schafer, Gamel or Morris can do that for the ML minimum. The bullpen and rotation will continue to be filled with cheap pre arb talent which will alleviate your payroll concerns going forward.

 

Care to elaborate more on that statement I bolded though? What particular arms do you see emerging that much by then? I'm not talking cheap #4/5's who can give you a 4.50 ERA. I'm talking #3's or higher where you can expect around 200 innings of 4.00 ERA or under from them?

[reillymcshane]

No doubt Dempster has risk in the signing. But two years would hopefully minimize the long term pain if he suddenly fails.

 

I don't see us going big on a player like Sanchez. Or even Jackson. I think Jackson will at least four years - maybe even more. As crazy as that sounds, he's young and a decent pitcher. It only takes one person to offer him the bank.

 

The other alternative would be to sign a pitcher with upside, but with some health issues. McCarthy is someone that might be had for one year at a reasonable price due to his health issues. Roy Oswalt pitched poorly last year, but he might be had at a low salary with a lot of incentives. You might even sign two of these types. I'm guessing at prices, but perhaps McCarthy gets a one year deal around $8 million. Oswalt gets a one year deal at $2 or 3 million and a bunch of incentives. Hope one of them does well. The nice thing is that you aren't mortgaging future years for these guys, and they bridge the gap to some younger players.

 

Just a thought.

[monty57]

Reilly laid out pretty well why Melvin will probably make an effort (and will probably be successful) at signing Dempster. TLB showcased the biggest concern. Another concern I'll add comes from a cost perspective. He, Weeks, Yo, Braun and Ramirez would cost around $60MM in 2014, making us very dependant on young guys like Schafer, Gamel/Morris, whoever takes over in RF and the young pitchers to all come through big time. It would be tough to fill any holes when the majority of your salary is going to five guys.

 

If Dempster were to "fall off a cliff" in the second year, then we would be very hard-pressed to field a competitive team. Not so much because he'd be irreplaceable as a pitcher, but because his salary (along with the other committments) may disallow Melvin from finding upgrades/depth in other areas in that one-year pinch before Ramirez's contract is off the books.

 

I like the thought of Dempster on a two-year deal more than the thought of signing Jackson to a three or four-year deal. I still like the idea of getting a vet on a one-year deal, but maybe that's not feasible. In that second year I think we'll have enough SP, and I'd rather have "Dempster's salary" to fill in other holes, like a RF or 1B if the young guys (and Gamel) don't prove effective.

 

You gotta remember we have Lucroy, Maldonado, Segura, Bianchi, Gamel, Green, Schafer, Fiers, Rogers, Peralta, Kintzler, Henderson, Thornburg and Narveson all making under a mill and a couple others like Aoki and Estrada who won't be making much more than that in the near future. If we resign Hart like it sounds like we plan on doing then all you have to do is replace Gomez in 2014 and guys like Schafer, Gamel or Morris can do that for the ML minimum. The bullpen and rotation will continue to be filled with cheap pre arb talent which will alleviate your payroll concerns going forward.

 

Care to elaborate more on that statement I bolded though? What particular arms do you see emerging that much by then? I'm not talking cheap #4/5's who can give you a 4.50 ERA. I'm talking #3's or higher where you can expect around 200 innings of 4.00 ERA or under from them?

 

In 2014, we will have Lucroy at $2MM, Gamel (Year 2 arby)/Morris (pre-arby), Weeks at $11MM, Segura (pre-arby), Ramirez at $16MM, Braun at $10MM, Schafer (pre-arby) and no RF. Pitching we'll have Yo at $11.25MM, Estrada (Year 2 arby), Rogers (Year 1 arby) and about ten pre-arby guys.

 

I'm cautiously optimistic about the number of pre-arby guys we'll have, as that will keep salary low. I'm far more at ease with the situation now than I was last offseason, thinking we were going to spend $20MM/year on Greinke and not knowing how guys like Estrada, Rogers and Fiers would pan out. However, none of our position prospects are highly touted, and relying on so many young, unheralded position players bears risk. Looking at the list above, 1B, RF, SS and CF are all filled by young guys who have yet to prove anything with their bat at the MLB level, Ramirez will be 36, and Weeks is coming off a season in which many wanted him kicked out of town. We're looking two years out, so anything can happen. Having the ability (re: money) to fill any holes that pop up is a good thing.

 

To the point of starting pitching, TheCrew07 posted a good run-down of the prospects on the previous page (pg 12) of this thread. Peralta, Rogers, Thornburg, Jungmann, Nelson, Hellweg and Pena all have the potential to be better than middle-of-the-rotation starters, and all should be MLB-ready before or around 2014. Additionally, we will still have Gallardo, Estrada (who has pitched well as a starter)and Fiers, and Burgos, Stinson, Scarpetta, Gagnon, Bucci and Bradley should be MLB-ready. Some of these guys will flame-out, some will end up in the 'pen, but we should have an excess of pitchers vying for the MLB rotation. We may even be in a position that we have to trade away some MLB starting pitching.

 

I'm not against signing Dempster to a two-year deal, and I like that a lot more than some other options out there, but there is the chance he pitches in 2014 in a similar fashion to the 2012 version of Randy Wolf. I just think it's worth noting that we may have some needs on the position side in 2014 that are far more pressing than having another starting pitcher.

 

The perceived need for a starting pitcher for 2013 is more for "veteran presence" and innings limits than it is about lack of SP talent on the roster. I agree with the innings limits part of that, which is why I think getting someone on a one-year deal, if possible, is probably the best idea, as we won't have the innings limit concerns in 2014 and beyond, and we'll have plenty of MLB tested SP.

[wisniewski]

JohnBriggs12 - So, if I've read your last few posts correctly - giving someone like Jackson (at 29 years old) 3/36 is a very risky and franchise damning move, but giving Hiroki Kuroda (at 38 years old, and received a QO from his own team which would cost any team a first round pick to sign) a 2/26 deal would be something you could endorse.

 

I'm having a hard time following the logic.

 

First of all Jackson is nowhere near the pitcher Kuroda is regardless of age. Kuroda has a career 3.42 ERA and a 1.182 WHIP vs. Jackson's 4.40 ERA and 1.438 WHIP. Secondly, I'd offer Kuroda more like 1 year $15-16 million, not a 2 year deal. He's not going to turn down a one year $13.3 million deal to take 2 years at less per year than that.

 

The one year offer accomplishes this for the Brewers, (vs. Jackson). They are getting a true no. 1-2 pitcher (vs Jackson who is at best a 3), and they aren't tying a spot or money beyond this year. The risk is that Kuroda at 38 will suddenly drop off, but that risk isn't any worse than Jackson throwing in a clunker year like he has at times in the past.

 

Couple things.... First, so then you'd be ok giving up the 1st round pick for Kuroda? You didn't mention that in your post. Secondly, let's be realistic, if Kuroda wants a one year deal he'll stay in NY.

[RockCoCougars]

Dempster would be a horrible signing, followed closely by Lohse. I'm not a big fan of signing Jackson either, because there has to be a reason teams find him expendable each off season. That said, I'd go for Jackson in a hot second ahead of the other two. Even though I don't think he's an impact guy, Kuroda is a pipe dream. My guess is that he won't play anywhere not on one of the coasts, and I'd almost guarantee he is a Yankee next season.

 

The bottom line is that I really hope the Brewers don't waste big money on a free agent pitcher. None of the guys mentioned in this thread are worth the money they will be asking for. My greatest fear is that history repeats itself, and that one or more of these guys will find the market lukewarm (a la Suppan, Wolf) causing their agents to make the hard sell to Melvin. Wolf wasn't a horrible signing, but wasn't a good signing either...Suppan was a disaster. I really hope that Melvin has learned his lesson on bidding against himself, doling out big money multi year deals to guys that no one else really wants.

 

Go with the young guys,along with maybe someone who falls through the cracks on a one year deal or maybe somebody in a trade. If one of the aforementioned names finds a cold market and is willing to go for a reasonable one year deal, I'd listen. Otherwise, no way.

[trwi7]

I'm not exactly sure why everyone is so concerned with Jackson playing for a bunch of teams.

 

The Dodgers stupidly traded him for win now help.

 

The Rays traded him for offensive help when they had Price, Shields, Garza, Kazmir, Niemann in their rotation and Sonnanstine and Davis as backups. He was excess pitching that was traded for a position of need (Matt Joyce).

 

The Tigers traded him as part of that huge deal with the Yankees and D'Backs. They traded Jackson and Granderson for Scherzer, Austin Jackson, Phil Coke and Daniel Schlereth. It's not like they gave him away.

 

The Diamondbacks traded him at the deadline in 2010 when they were 38-65. They got Daniel Hudson and David Holmberg (turned 21 during the season and posted a 3.32 ERA and 153 strikeouts and 37 walks in 173.1 innings last year between A+ and AA.)

 

Then the White Sox traded him to the Blue Jays for basically nothing who then flipped him to St. Louis for Colby Rasmus who was still and still may be highly regarded.

 

It's not like he's been released and traded for peanuts or anything like that.

[RockCoCougars]

I'm not exactly sure why everyone is so concerned with Jackson playing for a bunch of teams.

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, two words.... Johnny Estrada. I gave him the benefit of the doubt at the time- 'wow he hits pretty good for a catcher, etc.'. Never again. I look at it this way, if Jackson were really the type of talent to command a three year, eight figure per deal, would that many teams have let him walk?

[trwi7]

That seems pretty silly. And if we're going to talk about Estrada we'll just ignore that he got traded by the Braves to make room for Brian McCann and got traded by Arizona because they had Miguel Montero and Chris Snyder.

[RockCoCougars]

That seems pretty silly. And if we're going to talk about Estrada we'll just ignore that he got traded by the Braves to make room for Brian McCann and got traded by Arizona because they had Miguel Montero and Chris Snyder.

 

I'm sure that Estrada's attitude issues and general laziness contributed as well.

 

In this day and age, young cost controlled guys with talent don't move around that much without a reason. Don't you question why Washington didn't even tender Jackson an offer? It appears to be more of a talent thing in this case than another 'issue', but I certainly wouldn't dole out a big contract to find out.

[Kelbysdaddy]

Whenever I think about Johnny the first thing that pops in my head is then rock said he looks like hes running with a refrigerator strapped to his back going from 2nd to 3rd. I'm glad our catching situation has improved.

[RockCoCougars]

Not to derail this thread too much, but Johnny Estrada was the only MLB player I've ever seen gain roughly 40 pounds during a single season. By September, I was fully expecting him to give birth.

[MNBrew]

In 2014, we will have Lucroy at $2MM, Gamel (Year 2 arby)/Morris (pre-arby), Weeks at $11MM, Segura (pre-arby), Ramirez at $16MM, Braun at $10MM, Schafer (pre-arby) and no RF. Pitching we'll have Yo at $11.25MM, Estrada (Year 2 arby), Rogers (Year 1 arby) and about ten pre-arby guys.

 

Small detail, but per baseball-reference.com, 2014 is Gamel's 1st year of being arb-eligible. . . . . Probably helps make your point even better.

[TooLiveBrew]

I'm not exactly sure why everyone is so concerned with Jackson playing for a bunch of teams.

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, two words.... Johnny Estrada. I gave him the benefit of the doubt at the time- 'wow he hits pretty good for a catcher, etc.'. Never again. I look at it this way, if Jackson were really the type of talent to command a three year, eight figure per deal, would that many teams have let him walk?

I thought trwi7's initial post summed up pretty nicely that no team has yet "let him walk". I really think that, with Jackson, it's as simple as his results don't live up to his stuff & teams don't view him as a centerpiece. Nothing wrong with that, and it definitely doesn't imply anything further about him unless you want it to (short of anyone coming up with some evidence that he's had character concerns or whatever it is we're implying in this thread).

[RockCoCougars]

I'm not exactly sure why everyone is so concerned with Jackson playing for a bunch of teams.

 

I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, two words.... Johnny Estrada. I gave him the benefit of the doubt at the time- 'wow he hits pretty good for a catcher, etc.'. Never again. I look at it this way, if Jackson were really the type of talent to command a three year, eight figure per deal, would that many teams have let him walk?

I thought trwi7's initial post summed up pretty nicely that no team has yet "let him walk". I really think that, with Jackson, it's as simple as his results don't live up to his stuff & teams don't view him as a centerpiece. Nothing wrong with that, and it definitely doesn't imply anything further about him unless you want it to (short of anyone coming up with some evidence that he's had character concerns or whatever it is we're implying in this thread).

 

Point taken. As I said above, I really don't suspect character issues in this case. However, I would argue that both the Cardinals and Nationals have let Jackson walk in the past year. I find both cases a bit perplexing, because both teams had/have the money to spend to retain him. Also, I find the lack of interest last off season (Pittsburgh was the only team to go at him hard....also a bad omen, in my opinion) to be telling. At a glance, Jackson seems to be a solid middle of the rotation guy, and the pitching market wasn't exactly brimming last off-season. I won't deny that Jackson has solid stuff and a decent track record, but there are too many red flags for me to want the Brewers to be 'that team' that finally locks him up. The major issue that I have with Jackson is that he seems to be inconsistent, I've seen him look unhittable, but I've also seen him get knocked around. If he were willing to take a one year deal, I'd be interested, but not on a 3/4 year deal. When it comes to free agent pitchers, the Brewers are basically in no man's land, in that they will never be able to keep up with the big boys in bidding wars for the top guys, so they are left to settle for the leftovers with low interest elsewhere. It follows that I'd stick with low risk signings.

[trwi7]

I think you're overthinking this. The Cardinals had Carpenter, Garcia, Westbrook, Lynn, Wainwright and Lohse under contract this year. That's 6 major league starters and they had some good arms down in the minors as well.

 

The Nationals have Strasburg, Zimmermann, Gonzalez, Detwiler and Lannan under contract. I read they declined to offer arbitration to Jackson because they like some other free agent starters better. Maybe they make a play on Greinke or Sanchez, Lerner certainly has the money to do so. I don't think them not wanting to possibly get locked in on Gonzalez without exploring other options is a slight against Jackson in any way.

 

By the way, this is not my endorsement of the Brewers going after Jackson or any free agent pitcher for that matter. Just giving my opinion on why Jackson has bounced around so much.

[JohnBriggs12]

Jackson is in a lot of people's consciousness because he's pitched for a lot of good teams. But he's not the guy that made those teams good. The fact is he's rather mediocre, with a 70-71 record and a lifetime 4.40 ERA. I only bring up the .500 record because again, that was with good teams for the most part. That he hasn't gotten a long term deal is probably a strategy employed by his agent who's advising him to wait for that one big year. He's still waiting in my opinion. I'd stay away from a long term deal with him too. If he wants to do another 1 year deal then fine, he's a good fit.

[endaround]

Jackson is in a lot of people's consciousness because he's pitched for a lot of good teams. But he's not the guy that made those teams good. The fact is he's rather mediocre, with a 70-71 record and a lifetime 4.40 ERA. I only bring up the .500 record because again, that was with good teams for the most part. That he hasn't gotten a long term deal is probably a strategy employed by his agent who's advising him to wait for that one big year. He's still waiting in my opinion. I'd stay away from a long term deal with him too. If he wants to do another 1 year deal then fine, he's a good fit.

I'm not sure you need one hand to count the number of people here who want Jackson due to his W-L record.

[JohnBriggs12]

Jackson is in a lot of people's consciousness because he's pitched for a lot of good teams. But he's not the guy that made those teams good. The fact is he's rather mediocre, with a 70-71 record and a lifetime 4.40 ERA. I only bring up the .500 record because again, that was with good teams for the most part. That he hasn't gotten a long term deal is probably a strategy employed by his agent who's advising him to wait for that one big year. He's still waiting in my opinion. I'd stay away from a long term deal with him too. If he wants to do another 1 year deal then fine, he's a good fit.

I'm not sure you need one hand to count the number of people here who want Jackson due to his W-L record.

 

 

Congrats endaround. I had set the over/under for someone deriding my bringing up a W/L record at 2 hours. Remind me again. How many starting pitchers with an under .500 record are in Cooperstown?

 

Kidding aside, of course it's not all that significant, but it's not a small sample and how do you explain away his 4.40 career ERA? His stats say he's a number 3 starter at best and more like a 4. It was also not the main point of my post, which was that his frequent appearences in the postseason have led to the perception that he is better than his actual numbers say he is.

 

Pavano Alert: MLB Traderumors quotes Nick Carfado in the Boston Globe that Carl Pavano was given a clean bill of health and his agent has fielded a few premilimary calls. We all recall that prior to the Greinke trade, Melvin was hot on the trail of Pavano. Before anyone gets up in arms, MLBtraderumors speculates that he'll get a minor league deal. Whew!

[brewcrewdue80]

Haven't gone through all the posts in this thread. Just a quick my thinking on 2013FA pitchers.

 

I hate this year's offering of FA pitchers. I mean sure there's a few that seem ok. The problem is cost. I think at best with any of these FA pitchers you're looking only to get equal value in production at best and likely less than value on the contract signed. Some are going to flat out be disgustingly bad.

Annibel Sanchez asking 6yrs/90mil? This is a pitcher that in Fantasy Baseball in last 3years I could consistently find him on Waiver wire for Spot Starts. If that's not a clue at his talent/worth I dunno what is.

Now Sanchez seems to be #2 after Grienke in the market and he's asking 15MM!

To me this puts Jackson,Haren,Dempster on that pay range. I just don't trust these pitchers for that price.

 

So my FA suggested strategy be not to sign any of them! Ignore the urgency to sign a "#2" Go in to 2013 with the arms we have. Figure out the rotation where they all fit. When the trade deadline approaches you know by then what this young staff is offering you on the team. Fill in the cracks if possible/needed then. Save the teams payroll now and potentially for 3-4years by not signing these soon to be overpaid, major team risks.

Let your rivals make the mistake tying up to much payroll in to a player who can't possibly equal its contract value.

[nate82]

There is value in the FA market for SP. Brandon McCarthy on an incentive deal would bring a lot of value to the Brewers the same could be said about Liriano. If the Brewers could get either on a incentive deal the value can be rather huge.

 

I would prefer McCarthy over Liriano but either would be fine. As for Sanchez he is a rather good pitcher regardless of if he was on the fantasy waiver wire or not.

[jerichoholicninja]

Any player on an incentive laden deal is a good deal. However, there are teams that are going to offer guaranteed money that teams that need to be fiscally responsible can't compete with.

[JohnBriggs12]

brewcrewdue80 makes some great points. This team, assuming it can add one or two more solid bullpen pieces, is certainly capable of being right in the thick of it for half a season. Then evaluate if adding a veteran starter makes sense. We know some will be available as close as 90 miles away (Matt Garza for instance). Of course there's that policy of not dealing with division rivals, but the Cubs are so far away from contending, that they hardly qualify as rivals at this point.