Could there be a strong market for Lohse?

[HiAndTight]

Right, teams realized that the third year has negative value, so in a trade, the last year of the contract would have negative value. Plus, the deferred money is all negative value. The only way to eliminate this negative value is to add money to the deal. Then, you're not just looking at the market for Lohse, but also the market for money which of course is pretty strong. I'd guess that the Brewers could get some pretty solid prospects from a team if they were to offer them $18MM... forget about adding a player.

 

So yes, if the Brewers were willing to eliminate the negative value of the third year and the deferred money, they would probably be able to get a return greater than the value of a first round pick. But that seems like a pretty expensive half-year rental of a free agent. They could've kept their draft pick and signed him for $1MM or so, and instead they end up paying around $20MM and end up with similar value to their first rounder they gave up, meaning the half year of Lohse cost the Brewers around $19MM.

 

 

So we're just making wild assumptions? The third year IS a negative value? The Brewers would HAVE to pay X amount of dollars? Now negative since you already seem to have it worked out? Plus how much positive value does he add in year one and two? THIS I think is comical. I mean, who suggested the Brewers would take on 20 million dollars in this trade? By that logic, Lohse' value $ wise is 13 million over 3 years? I don't even know where to begin with this line of thinking.

 

Yeah, because it's really hard to imagine a team like the Dodgers spending money to bring in a guy like Lohse after losing Billingsley for the year and having their starting pitching depth depleted, or the Red Sox atop the standings when they may not have thought they would be willing to sign him. The Angels aren't having any issues with their rotation! There are a number of teams that I could envision being more than happy to take Lohse and his salary and I REALLY doubt he signs anywhere near 3/33 if he doesn't have the 1st round pick tied to him.

 

He's also 34, not 38. 3 years and 33 million for a pitcher who since the start of 2011 has been an extremely dependable, 3.00-ish type pitcher? Teams are willing to take on money on the backend if they believe adding a player could get them to the post-season. And again, the money was not the reason Kyle Lohse didn't sign according to most reports, it was the loss of a 1st round pick and the pool money.

 

 

And as I said in my first post, I doubt the organization would make such a trade, I was simple asking a rhetorical question about what type of prospects they could get. I think Lohse has continued to pitch better than teams thought he would, especially in Milwaukee, however I don't buy this team as a playoff team, regardless of the fact that they were just really hot or that they have Aram and Hart coming back. I simply brought it up to speculate as to his value, what teams may or may not want him, and where we may be at the end of July, not to make absolute statements where they cannot be made.

[monty57]

Ahh H&T, always tactful :-)

 

Do a quick search and see how many starting pitchers make it to age 35 or 36. It's not a lot, and many of them are headed for the Hall of Fame, throw left-handed, or throw a knuckleball. There seems to be a big drop off from the early 30's, where pitchers seem to be able to remain productive to the mid-30's, where most can't. Expecting Lohse to still be good for the next couple of years is to expect him to defy age. It's not an impossibility... I just wouldn't expect it. I doubt many teams would expect it either (which is why they didn't want to give him a 3+ year deal), hence my statement that the third year would have negative value in the trade (they'd get more in trade if the obligation were for one less year and $11MM less dollars).

 

Of course it's not a certainty that he'll have negative value in year three. Lohse may be one of the handful of pitchers who remain successful at that age. But with age factoring against him, and the fact that he will be owed $29MM of his $33MM, his value would be diminished. The receiving team wouldn't get what should be his best year, but they'd owe 88% of the contract.

 

But, what I can't get is why you feel that teams wouldn't sign him to a 3 year / $33MM deal because they were worried about giving up a first round draft pick, but you expect them to give up more than the value of a first round pick when they would get him for a 2.3 year / $30MM deal. Have his six starts in Milwaukee made that much of a difference?

[brewcrewdue80]

But, what I can't get is why you feel that teams wouldn't sign him to a 3 year / $33MM deal because they were worried about giving up a first round draft pick, but you expect them to give up more than the value of a first round pick when they would get him for a 2.3 year / $30MM deal. Have his six starts in Milwaukee made that much of a difference?

 

 

I won't lie, this makes a heckuva lot of sense and that's why I already know that any trade Milw. would make of Lohse would have to include money.

 

The 6 six starts just may have made a difference already in that he's still pitching well at a hitters park for a different team.

 

Stated above by another poster:

Angels just have to be ultimate desperate for a SP and that's today. Other teams surely will come to needing SPs if positioning for a Playoff push. So, I just can't believe there's no chance of Lohse being traded because there is a chance.

 

Is there a Strong market? I doubt it but only because rentals from teams like the Cubs/Astros are going to be likely sought after first giving up less talent than what a 2+years of Lohse would cost a team.

 

I do wonder though if any team would change it up on trading for rentals through the end of the season after the lack of success in Grienke/Dempster rental deals. That a team instead takes on an added year and in Lohse's case 2 so to maybe give the player acquired a chance to play the trade in to being worth it.

 

I just think the Angels will have to address pitching, if they even remain in the race come near tradeline, not solely for a playoff run, but to justify more and more the Pujols/Hamilton contracts that are already looking like utter mistakes. To spend like they have and then not make the Playoffs in B2B seasons? It just looks bad publicly. I just think guys like Garza/Feldman/Villanueva/Norris/Harrel will be looked at before Lohse is considered even though Lohse may be the best pitcher they get its all about at what cost of talent and money.

[SoupTown]

I honestly cannot think of why you would trade Lohse. We actually have three 'number 2' pitchers, IMO. And that can make you do well in the playoffs. With our offense - and three very good starters and at least one more good one (Estrada - who is a three pitching in the four spot) - we honestly should just play and see what happens. If we are really poor this year that will tend to say we will be poor next year, too. So, if we are dead in the water in July, then I guess everyone is available. As dead in July this year, means dead all of 2014 - and likely 2015.

 

In that case you would try to do an A's and trade all your older expensive, good, guys... Lohse, Gallardo, Rameriz... for AA / AAA prospects.

 

The more I think about it... with good to very good starters and a very, very good offense, if we are no good this year, it will be bleak times for a couple of years, unless you are finding three young number two style starters. It seems sad to me the Segura and Gomez are playing like Hall of Famers and the team is struggling. That is really sad.

[trwi7]

I honestly cannot think of why you would trade Lohse.

 

Because it's likely his contract will exceed his production in the next couple of years and it would be nice to not have that happen if at all possible.

 

I don't view this as a playoff team, so having a "#2 starter for the playoffs" doesn't really make much of a difference to me.

[Raw Biz]

I honestly cannot think of why you would trade Lohse. We actually have three 'number 2' pitchers, IMO. And that can make you do well in the playoffs. With our offense - and three very good starters and at least one more good one (Estrada - who is a three pitching in the four spot) - we honestly should just play and see what happens. If we are really poor this year that will tend to say we will be poor next year, too. So, if we are dead in the water in July, then I guess everyone is available. As dead in July this year, means dead all of 2014 - and likely 2015.

 

In that case you would try to do an A's and trade all your older expensive, good, guys... Lohse, Gallardo, Rameriz... for AA / AAA prospects.

 

The more I think about it... with good to very good starters and a very, very good offense, if we are no good this year, it will be bleak times for a couple of years, unless you are finding three young number two style starters. It seems sad to me the Segura and Gomez are playing like Hall of Famers and the team is struggling. That is really sad.

 

I disagree with just about everything here.

 

There's always a reason to trade somebody: when the value you get in return is greater than the value you are giving up. Obviously you have to determine what those values are but there is always going to be a reason.

 

Who's the 3 number twos? Yo, Lohse, Peralta? I'd say Yo is a 2, Lohse is borderline for me, and Peralta's ceiling is a 2. However, I don't think he will hit that ceiling this year.

 

I really disagree with your logic on if we suck this year, we will most likely suck next year and the year after. Sure guys like Weeks, Hart (who may not be around), ARam, Lohse, etc. will age and most likely regress. But Braun will still be in his prime, Aoki should hold his own, Lucroy, Segura, Gomez, and co. could very well continue to progress. Plus, there are some young guys at AAA/AA who may be able to contribute soon. Obviously you don't know what will happen but just because you suck one year doesn't automatically mean it carries over, especially if there is roster turnover. That being said, I would consider trading just about anyone at the deadline this year if the value in return is there.

 

Obviously having good to very good starters and good to very good offense would suggest you should be good. I just don't think we have good to very good starters right now, as I believe we have a mid 2, low 2, mid 3, 5, and borderline 5. And I am a huge fan of Segura and Gomez but it's highly unlikely they play as well as they have over the course of the entire season. Sure they will still have solid seasons but I don't see Gomez finishing where he's at.

[SoupTown]

The point I make re 'if we are bad this year, we will be bad for next year, and even the year after' is this: where does our UPSIDE come from between this year and next and the next.

 

Our team is very 'etched in stone' and there really is no one in the minors you could point to, to come up and have a great year in their first year or two. We seem to have a bunch in the minors that may 'grow' into average type guys.

 

Well, on paper, our team is above average everywhere (if you consider the starters are my thought of three 'number twos'). So if our 25 guys this year are no good, they aint gonna be no good next year, and there is no one in the minors to help a lot.

 

Anyone saying we should trade our free agent signing after 5 weeks, is saying we should not have signed him. So their opinion does not count. I agree in July, if we stink, then the entire MOB can be considered for trading. Which is what I said. Throwing the towel in now... after five weeks, is likely not the right thing to do. Hence, 'I see no reason you would consider trading Lohse' (now)

[HiAndTight]

Ahh H&T, always tactful :-)

 

Do a quick search and see how many starting pitchers make it to age 35 or 36. It's not a lot, and many of them are headed for the Hall of Fame, throw left-handed, or throw a knuckleball. There seems to be a big drop off from the early 30's, where pitchers seem to be able to remain productive to the mid-30's, where most can't. Expecting Lohse to still be good for the next couple of years is to expect him to defy age. It's not an impossibility... I just wouldn't expect it. I doubt many teams would expect it either (which is why they didn't want to give him a 3+ year deal), hence my statement that the third year would have negative value in the trade (they'd get more in trade if the obligation were for one less year and $11MM less dollars).

 

Of course it's not a certainty that he'll have negative value in year three. Lohse may be one of the handful of pitchers who remain successful at that age. But with age factoring against him, and the fact that he will be owed $29MM of his $33MM, his value would be diminished. The receiving team wouldn't get what should be his best year, but they'd owe 88% of the contract.

 

But, what I can't get is why you feel that teams wouldn't sign him to a 3 year / $33MM deal because they were worried about giving up a first round draft pick, but you expect them to give up more than the value of a first round pick when they would get him for a 2.3 year / $30MM deal. Have his six starts in Milwaukee made that much of a difference?[/quote]

 

 

I apologize, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be looking for here, but you did fail to answer my question. By suggesting that Lohse will have a negative value of 20 million dollars when the trade deadline comes around, you're saying his valule at the time of his signing was esentially 3 years and 13 million dollars.

 

Please do a quick search and paste where you came up with such a valuation?

 

While we're at it, please do a quick search and look at how many veteran pitchers have been traded at the traded deadline by teams who wouldn't have or didn't express interest in them prior to the season(ignoring the fact that signing Lohse ALSO would have required a 1st round pick as well as the money allotted to the team.)

 

I'm simply wondering where you're coming up with these numbers you're presenting as fact in terms of how much negative value he's going to have(and again, you've determined it would be 20 million dollars).

 

Lohse was rated ahead of Gallardo on MLB's list of top 100 players.

 

As for the bolded part, perhaps you could use some of that pretentious condescension and go back and read my post. Contending teams lose players. Starting pitchers are worth more IN season than out of season. In fact, I think I already used a couple examples, so you asking a question I've already given an answer to is an attempt to be intentionally obtuse. Just as you are when you suggest that reason other teams didn't sign him was because they didn't want to give him the 3rd year.

 

And finally, as far as his age, Lohse is not a pitcher who relies on big velocity of on a sharp slider. He relies on command, keeping the ball down. Skills that don't see the precipitous drop you seem to think they do.

 

Oh, and while we're "looking things up," perhaps you could "look up," how much money teams such as the Red Sox, Yankees, Angels, Rangers, Phillies and this other team from LA took on in recent years in order to make a playoff push? I mean, seriously, you have the Brewers eating a larger portion of Lohse's contract.

 

 

It's almost as if it's a foreign concept for you....teams taking on bad money in order to add a player who may help them win THIS YEAR at the trade deadline. Literally-every-single-year it happens. But I've been told that there is literally zero chance of it, and also if they do it, his contract will have negative 20 million dollars worth of money into it because you VERY rarely see starting pitchers not headed for the HOF pitching at 34-35...we'd better issue alert Kuroda and the likes of Tim Hudson that they actually have negative value(as well as dozens of others I had no desire to actually look up as it was never the point).

[brewcrewdue80]

Here's a quick thought:

If the Brewers picked up the deferred money on Lohse, then essentially a team that wants to trade for him, is looking at Lohse really only being owed 2mil for the remainder of this season.

Monty's argument has been that his contract isn't good but in this idea you're essentially getting the best of Lohse for half a season at 2mil, and 22mil the other 2 years so 2.5seasons at 24mil.

A team in a win now mode that needs SP but has a higher priced contract coming off the books say next season or 2 from now probably has good cause to trade for Lohse. I've said Toronto for Gallardo since Johnson is a FA after this season. But that makes Lohse very attractive imo to them as well. Especially since Lohse is more an innings eating guy vs Gallardo. You could add Washington in the mix with Haren being sidelined as well as a FA after this season. Boston could look at him and buyout Lester this offseason. Baltimore as we know seeks SP.

 

So long as Milwaukee agrees to pay the deferred money I see a strong market for Lohse as he's as cheap as you can get for this season then, not to mention one of the best options to trade for pitching help.

[Roderick]

and the fact that he will be owed $29MM of his $33MM,

 

I would like to see where this is a fact. Lohse contract was $11M each year. It is just that $7M of this years contract is deferred. For example to be clean, if the Brewers trade him after the season, the trading team would pick up his 2 year and $22M contract and nothing more. This isn't ARam's contract that was truly backloaded.

[brewcrewdue80]

Buster Olney @Buster_ESPN

 

Some teams are evaluating Kyle Lohse to see if he's a worthwhile trade target

[splitterpfj]

Let me adjust my GM hat here...if I'm looking to trade for a SP right now...I would have more interest in Kyle Lohse than either Gallardo or Garza.

 

Lohse is really pitching well, and he's under club control beyond this season. My guess is, someone is already pushing for him. Some will say teams won't want his contract, but look at what just happened with Nolasco. Teams were offering better prospects if the Marlins would pick up some of the money, or lesser prospects if they had to pay all of the money themselves.

 

The Brewers have already committed to a total of 33 million for Lohse, that's done. They could agree to pay part of what he's still owed, to get a deal done. It gets Milwaukee out of part of the money, and it gets some good talent over here, while getting the other team a good, experienced pitcher, who won't leave after two months of baseball.

 

If I wanted a quick deal for this season, sure, I'd ask about Garza. If I wanted a young, affordable pitcher, who will be here again next year, I'd ask for Gallardo. If I wanted the best combination of results, and contract, right now, that's Kyle Lohse.

 

Depending on how high a team is willing to go with prospects, Lohse plus a bullpen arm, would probably get the Brewers the best return right now. I'd watch for Arizona, the Dodgers, Cleveland, and possibly both Texas and Boston to ask for Lohse and a reliever. Someone will probably get Garza first, because it's an easier deal to work out, but once he's gone, this is actually the deal I expect to see.

 

The thing starts with a team offering lower prospects for Lohse, then Melvin says he has to have more. The other team mentions the money left on Lohse's deal, so Melvin adds a reliever to the mix, to get the other team into the prospects he wants. The other guy wants the reliever, so he moves, but he still can't take on that money.

 

In the end, either the other guys stop right there, paying Lohse's contract, while giving the group of prospects they want to give...good, but not as good as it might have been, or the Brewers put some dollars on the table, to get the prospects they really want.

[markedman5]

I think his age will also limit other teams interest.

 

 

He is pitching better then Gallardo but doesn't have as much value because of the age difference.

 

Just don't see a big return for him but if we get a great offer he will definitely be moved.

[brewcrewdue80]

Each start that Lohse has where his ERA remains below 3.5 and the closer to 3 he gets it will definitely make him a hot commodity. I hope the team can come away with some kind of 1st round player kind of talent that suddenly makes the signing worthwhile for Milwaukee.

As MLBTR stated, the Free Agent class for pitching isn't filled with real solid pitchers. And a team would be looking at 3-4year deals where Lohse is just a 2year guy signed below market value. Can he continue pitching to that value or better? That's the question, but so far Lohse clearly has earned the money he's making.

[narwhalattack]

I wonder if the Padres would be interested in Lohse and a reliever. Asking for Fried may be a stretch but perhaps getting Ross would be possible.

[SRB]

I wonder if the Padres would be interested in Lohse and a reliever. Asking for Fried may be a stretch but perhaps getting Ross would be possible.

 

I don't see Melvin trading either Lohse or Gallardo if he's not getting a close-to-ready SP in return. If he doesn't get someone for the 2014 rotation he's just going to have to sign another free agent this offseason.

 

What about a Boston trade with something like Lohse/Axford for one of Barnes or Webster (and some lower-level fliers)?

[brewcrewdue80]

The idea of trading with the Padres, should be over. 9games Under .500 after 9 straight losses. They need more than 1 pitcher to get them to be competitive with Playoff teams. I would say they've crossed that line from Buyers in to sellers now.

[PrinceEatMeat]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/07/rosenthal-on-.html

 

"The Brewers' Yovani Gallardo and Kyle Lohse wouldn't figure to be in high demand, but their respective contracts make them attractive to contending clubs. The upcoming free agent market will be thin in starters and guys like Garza, Josh Johnson, and Ricky Nolasco will want at least three or four years. Gallardo and Lohse are under club control for two more years at below market salary - Lohse makes $11MM in 2014 and 2015 while Gallardo makes $11.25MM with a $13MM club option for 2015."

[monty57]

I wonder if the Padres would be interested in Lohse and a reliever. Asking for Fried may be a stretch but perhaps getting Ross would be possible.

 

I don't see Melvin trading either Lohse or Gallardo if he's not getting a close-to-ready SP in return. If he doesn't get someone for the 2014 rotation he's just going to have to sign another free agent this offseason.

 

What about a Boston trade with something like Lohse/Axford for one of Barnes or Webster (and some lower-level fliers)?

 

Melvin made a comment a while back that any moves he makes will be for 2-3 years from now. That doesn't mean he wouldn't take an MLB-ready guy, but I think it means that the guy doesn't have to be MLB ready.

 

If we make a few veteran-for-prospect trades this season, I don't think we'll be expected to compete next year, making it a good opportunity to allow our own MLB-ready guys to battle it out in the MLB rotation, so we'll see what we have for 2015 and beyond. If we traded for some stud talent that isn't quite MLB ready, I'd be upset if we signed a couple of FA starters that kept our MLB ready prospects in the minors. Not because I think our current prospects are great, but we should have several #3-5 starters there, and they need MLB playing time to see where they stand. Then, when the studs we traded for make it to the show, we'll know who will fill out the rotation, who will be in the 'pen, and who won't make it as MLB players.

[fondybrewfan]

I think Lohse has to be a highly sought after guy. He is pitching well and has a reasonable contract with 2 more years of team control. His stuff isn't sexy but if a team needs a #2 starter then he is a great guy to go after. I think the return for Lohse would be higher than most people think. Maybe even better than Gallardo considering Yo's poor year and troubling peripherals

[Warning Track Power]

If we were to be able to trade Lohse + Ramirez to say Boston for a return of Barnes and Middlebrooks (even though some don't like Wil) I think it would make people forget about the draft pick the Brewers gave up to sign Lohse. I think that should be a huge focus on the trading of Lohse, assuming DM does so.

[brewcrewdue80]

If we were to be able to trade Lohse + Ramirez to say Boston for a return of Barnes and Middlebrooks (even though some don't like Wil) I think it would make people forget about the draft pick the Brewers gave up to sign Lohse. I think that should be a huge focus on the trading of Lohse, assuming DM does so.

 

What about taking Webster and Owens with MiddleBrooks?

Or tabbing Renaudo and Middlebrooks with Webster or Owens?

 

I just think I'd rather take 2 SPs over 1SP...one that has some poor numbers in AA. I'm not a fan of seeing a Prospect Pitcher who allows over 10hits per 9Innings. Meanwhile Renaudo allows just 6 per 9. Let them keep that (#1 Pitching prospect in their system) and tab the next 2 in line. They'll think the fanbase will appreciate keeping their best pitching prospect while getting Lohse.

 

Best case would be Owens and Renaudo with Middlebrooks. I like the idea of getting Middlebrooks for ARam as ARam's contract should expire in time to give up 3b to Cecchini. Now we just have to sell it to them in the same manner.

[Warning Track Power]

I think any combination of Barnes, Middlebrooks, Owens and Ranaudo for Lohse and Ramirez would work for me. I would even go Lohse, Ramirez, Gonzalez and one of Axford/Henderson/K-Rod for all four of them if the Red Sox were willing.

[TooLiveBrew]

I think Lohse has to be a highly sought after guy. He is pitching well and has a reasonable contract with 2 more years of team control. His stuff isn't sexy but if a team needs a #2 starter then he is a great guy to go after. I think the return for Lohse would be higher than most people think. Maybe even better than Gallardo considering Yo's poor year and troubling peripherals

How badly would you want the Brewers to add him, if they were contending? Would you really want to see the organization part with someone like Jimmy Nelson to acquire Lohse with the requirement that you'd owe him a minimum of $22M more through his age 35 & 36 seasons?

 

While I agree that Lohse is an attractive pitcher, results-wise, right now, I think too many on this forum are pretty drastically overrating what kind of return he'd bring.

[Warning Track Power]

@TLB:

 

I agree as a Brewers fan that it would be difficult to part with a Jimmy Nelson for a Lohse. However, as a big market fan of say the Red Sox, I would not worry too much about parting with a Nelson for a chance at the World Series this year. In today's baseball economics, teams like the Red Sox can always buy another solution down the line and not have to worry about what that Nelson-type will turn into.