Could there be a strong market for Lohse?

[monty57]

Whoever would trade for Lohse would still have to have him and pay for the next two years. For a young player, that's a bonus, but for a mid-30's player, it's not. That's the reason no one wanted to sign him this offseason. It wasn't that no one thought he could be decent this year, it's that he will likely hit a wall at some point during the contract, and no one wants to be stuck with a washed up pitcher making eight figures. We also signed him to a deal with a low 1st year salary which balloons in years 2 & 3 and includes deferred money after he's done playing. Therefore, the best year of his ability is gone, but very little of the monetary obligation has been spent, so whoever would trade for him would pay almost the whole contract, and get him for the decline years.

 

Meanwhile, Ramirez is on the DL with a knee injury which has affected him the entire season. He may not even be playing when the trade deadline comes around. He's still owed around $25MM, and I would not be surprised if he misses a significant portion of the remainder of his contract due to his injuries. Huge injury risk, old player and huge monetary obligation. I can't imagine anyone will trade for him this month. Maybe this offseason if he proves to be 100% healthy, but not before the deadline.

 

So no, I don't think the Red Sox or anyone else will be lining up to give us three or four top prospects in return for taking a couple of bad contracts off our hands.

[splitterpfj]

Monty, in today's game, the money doesn't have to be what it used to be. The Brewers are on the hook for two more seasons...if they kick in half of what's owed, they can get the prospects they're after, and the other team is only paying for next season.

 

This would get someone else a good pitcher, and it actually gets the Brewers out of one season of the deal they've already guaranteed.

[MJLiverock]

I doubt the money owed to Lohse is that scary to some of the big market teams. The mindset that anything over $10 million is big money in today's market is just living in the past. The going rate for veteran starting pitchers is $10MM+, with Lohse managing to pitch well this year outside of STL, for a bad team, in a hitter friendly ballpark in front of a mediocre defense, teams probably see his risk diminished vs. where it was in the offseason.

 

Edit: I will add that I agree that getting a lot of top prospects is probably a pipe dream. I mentioned it in a post elsewhere but I think the return expectations for a lot of the Brewer's players seem a bit high. I just don't think teams are willing to part with legit prospect profiling as top half of the rotation starters without getting all star ML caliber players back that aren't on their last contract.

[Warning Track Power]

I will add that I agree that getting a lot of top prospects is probably a pipe dream. I mentioned it in a post elsewhere but I think the return expectations for a lot of the Brewer's players seem a bit high. I just don't think teams are willing to part with legit prospect profiling as top half of the rotation starters without getting all star ML caliber players back that aren't on their last contract.

I have struggled with this sentiment all season long. The Brewers have a lot of individual talent on this roster but for whatever reason (manager, personalities, injuries), the sum of the parts is a bad mix. I think that an astute GM, be it the Brewers GM or a trading partner's GM, will recognize this and offer something of substance for the likes of Lohse, Ramirez, Aoki and the bullpen. Like Splitter said, I truly believe the Brewers would kick some serious salary if it meant bringing on higher quality prospects, given the Brewers SP and bullpen next year will likely be made up of a lot of players on their initial contracts in baseball.

[TheCrew07]

I don't necessarily agree with the notion the Brewers don't have talent whom could bring back the impact talent we're looking for.

 

I do agree that people are generally unwilling to move the pieces like Gomez which would command that kind of return.

 

It's not that we don't have the talent to trade, it's that people are unwilling to give the talent necessary to get the talent back.

 

No one is going to give us talent for spare parts that we don't want, an yet every year those type of trades are suggested on this forum. To get value we need to give value... unfortunately Ramirez most recent knee injury is going to give teams pause, it's not worth trading for a position player whom can only play 3 games a week. Lohse doesn't have great stuff and is old by professional sport standards without a great career track record, just small a window of success in STL. Gallardo's velocity and effectiveness are down, Hart may not play all season, and so on.

 

We have to strike when the iron is hot, not when it's convenient, which is why we always seem to be selling low and missing opportunities to sell high. I like our prospects, but I also believe in make an effort to be realistic about what they are exactly are. I firmly believe that for Milwaukee pitching has to come first because we haven't been able to buy impact pitching in FA or develop it internally, so to get it we have to trade for it. I also firmly believe that trading 1 or 2 position players to get that talent wouldn't have hurt the Brewers as a whole and the team would have been much stronger.

 

I disagree vehemently with Mark A, fans don't need players to attach to, that idea is a relic of the past, it's not possible given the economics of the sport and Milwaukee's limited means. If he wants attendance, he has to put a good product on the field and the only way to for the Brewers to keep the window from closing is to cycle talent properly keeping the organization rich with talent.

 

I don't believe Lohse will command a big return and he should have never been signed in the first place. I don't want to be a team that's always pseudo competitive, making marginal signings to be .500 ish, that's not building for any specific goal and the easiest way to mire the franchise in mediocrity. Casual fans are bandwagonish, worry about building the most talented organization possible, the MLB team will be truly competitive year and year out, and winning will put fans in the seats. Sign that impact talent early, lock it up for the player's first 8-10 years, then cycle it out and move on.

 

Brewers for life? Rarely... maybe never.

 

Lohse could bring back an under the radar type in the low minors, but I'd be shocked if the Brewers could get any big time prospect for him, which is why I haven't suggested a trade package around him on this forum. The Brewers best bet for that kind of return is an unfortunate injury to an impact pitcher from a team with WS aspirations who doesn't have impact pitching near MLB ready which would make the team desperate for a pitcher. That's a pretty short list of teams.

[RockCoCougars]

I'd trade Lohse and Ramirez together for nothing, just to shed their salaries, but I don't think Ramirez is tradable at this point... maybe as an August deal, but I doubt it. Lohse alone might get you a low minors guy with some upside and warts or a failed prospect like the Cubs got for Feldman, but it all depends on how gun shy his contract makes teams.

[brewcrewdue80]

I thought Lohse was a Fluke. But here he is once again pitching at or below 3.5ERA. This while having an increase in HRs this year.

 

Monty while you want to argue his contract or his loss in ability, what Lohse is doing isn't unprecendented. Just look at Hiroki Kuroda. 37 and 38 aged seasons in the AL East and his ERA for they Yankees sits at 3.13 in 51Starts.

 

If I were Arizona, or Washington I'd be right there pushing to get him. This would have followed with San Fran, and San Diego but both are now Sellers. In the AL, Texas,Cleveland, Baltimore, Yankees, Toronto are all teams that to me have every bit of reason to go out and take Lohse as a viable #3/4 in their rotations.

 

That's the thing, Lohse is performing at a top shelf #3 pitcher. He was every bit the #2 for the Cards the last 2 years, and the questions were if he'd be a #2-3 or a 4-5 like in years past changing teams. I mean prospects like Owens or Renaudo it's that their CEILING is one of a #3 SP not

Lohse pitching every bit a #3. If those 2 don't reach their ceiling they are pretty much useless to a team like Boston who can buy all the #4s and 5s they want at any time.

So again, as a Franchise with a poor record of SP production, we view these arms as being of great value. But to big markets, if they aren't dealing with #1-2 ability Pitchers, these guys aren't worth a lot when they can spend the money for a "Proven #2-4" type pitcher vs. let a potential #3 get ripped apart in the AL East.

 

I think the Lohse is worth at least 2 B prospects and a C in trade from organizations like Washington,Texas,Boston,NYY, and even Toronto. I'm on the fence for Arizona/Baltimore. and Cleveland, I think they take Lohse for the 2Bs and 1 C prospect if money is included.

 

What Lohse isn't going to get is an A prospect....At least I wouldn't think so, but Dickey got D'Arnaud/Syndergaard.

 

I love the fact Feldman failed in his last start for Baltimore. I think these Fringeish #4s/5s that are pitching like 3s this season will be frowned upon with every start Feldman fails with Baltimore. Making a Stong #3 like Lohse much more Desirable.

 

Melvin Needs to...Read Must....trade at least 1 of Lohse/Gallardo before this year's deadline.

Let's look at it between Gallardo/Lohse. Gallardo is owed more money the next 2 years(assuming Milwaukee takes on the deferred amount they owe Lohse for this year) And Lohse has the better last 2 seasons history and this year going for him. The only negative is age really.

So, as 'Stache said to begin the topic, if I had to trade for either of the two, my target would be on Lohse, not Gallardo.

[sheetskout]

I thought Lohse was a Fluke. But here he is once again pitching at or below 3.5ERA. This while having an increase in HRs this year.

 

Agreed. I did not buy into his talent during his recent success in 2011/2012. To me he was the pitcher that epitomized the "good luck" pitcher with the Cardinals. I am starting to believe now.

 

I don't think you can trade both of them. But you need to deal one. And Gallardo's age makes him way more attractive.

[torts]

I thought Lohse was a Fluke. But here he is once again pitching at or below 3.5ERA. This while having an increase in HRs this year.

 

Agreed. I did not buy into his talent during his recent success in 2011/2012. To me he was the pitcher that epitomized the "good luck" pitcher with the Cardinals. I am starting to believe now.

 

I don't think you can trade both of them. But you need to deal one. And Gallardo's age makes him way more attractive.

 

C'mon, he's no Suppan...

[sheetskout]

I thought Lohse was a Fluke. But here he is once again pitching at or below 3.5ERA. This while having an increase in HRs this year.

 

Agreed. I did not buy into his talent during his recent success in 2011/2012. To me he was the pitcher that epitomized the "good luck" pitcher with the Cardinals. I am starting to believe now.

 

I don't think you can trade both of them. But you need to deal one. And Gallardo's age makes him way more attractive.

 

C'mon, he's no Suppan...

 

LOL. Yikes.

 

I wasn't trying to go to that extreme. However, Lohse certainly doesn't have stuff that misses a ton of bats.

[brewmann04]

Keep Loshe has pitched very well as of late and has to be on other teams radar.

[monty57]

Monty while you want to argue his contract or his loss in ability, what Lohse is doing isn't unprecendented. Just look at Hiroki Kuroda. 37 and 38 aged seasons in the AL East and his ERA for they Yankees sits at 3.13 in 51Starts.

 

And every time there's a $100MM lottery, someone wins. However, if your financial plans hinge on winning the lottery, you're probably going to be disappointed. Of course there are players (Randy Johnson, Greg Maddux, Jamie Moyer) who can remain in a starting rotation into their late 30's or even early 40's. However, the vast majority of MLB starting pitchers' careers are over by then. It is much more likely that Lohse will "hit a wall" before his contract is up than it is that he will defy the odds and pitch well for the next two seasons. As a GM, do you want to take that risk? Are you willing to give up anything of value and inherit a big guaranteed obligation for the "privilege" of taking on that risk?

 

Monty, in today's game, the money doesn't have to be what it used to be. The Brewers are on the hook for two more seasons...if they kick in half of what's owed, they can get the prospects they're after, and the other team is only paying for next season.

 

This would get someone else a good pitcher, and it actually gets the Brewers out of one season of the deal they've already guaranteed.

 

I have no doubt that money has value. That's different than saying that Lohse has value. What you're telling me is that Lohse plus $15MM could buy a decent prospect. I'd argue that $15MM alone would buy a pretty darned good prospect, so why not just keep Lohse and offer a team $15MM for their prospect? It seems to me that in your scenario Lohse has negative value, as the "B level" prospect everyone's espousing isn't worth the $15MM we'd have to pay just to get rid of Lohse.

 

I doubt the money owed to Lohse is that scary to some of the big market teams. The mindset that anything over $10 million is big money in today's market is just living in the past.

 

The biggest reasons teams didn't sign Lohse this offseason were (1) they didn't think he was worth giving up a first round draft pick, and (2) they figure that he will "hit a wall" before his contract is up prior to the end of the contract... he wanted a multi-year deal and the Brewers were the only team crazy enough to give him one. The money is an issue, but not as much as these two points. The future "control" probably acts as a negative in our trade negotiations (meaning Lohse would probably be worth more in trade if he became a free agent at year's end than he is worth being under a guaranteed contract until he's 36).

 

Now I'll get a little off topic. $10MM (really the remaining $28MM or so we owe Lohse) is still a good amount of money, especially relative to what a pre-arby guy makes. But to me, percentages (more than nominal values) are what matter. We have to weigh aggregate salary inflation with an individual team's payroll inflation, and while the Brewers have seen a rise in payroll, recent (and probably future) payroll gains in Milwaukee are dwarfed by those in big media markets. This has created (and will continue to create) a situation in which player salaries will continue to rise faster than Milwaukee will be able to keep up.

 

This is why I've been so negative on the Brewers' "plan" for the past few years. An $11MM payroll is somewhere around 12.5% of this year's Brewer payroll. It's only around 5% of the Dodgers' payroll (if they even have a max), so we can't just say "in today's market," because "today's market" differs from team to team. The problem is that Attanasio wants to run the Brewers as if they played in the same market as the Yankees or Dodgers. Some laud the Brewers when they sign a "market value" contract/extension, but the "market" is set by teams with far greater resources than the Brewers, so they've really got to be careful when offering anyone "market value."

 

Simply put, we need 25 players, so if everyone made the same, we would spend 4% on each player. Therefore, anyone taking up 10% of our payroll means that two players have to play for around 1% of payroll, which is around league minimum. Anyone making 15% of payroll means that around 4 players have to play for around league minimum. Signing Lohse necessitated around three more league minimum guys to step up.

 

As you can see, the problem is that the more eight figure salaries the Brewers have, the more need for league minimum guys. Posters have went on and on about why we don't have much good, young talent, but the fact is that we don't have it. The aggregate moves (or non-moves) made by Melvin and company have left the cupboards bare. When you have to pay someone league minimum, and you don't have good prospects, you end up playing whatever you can afford, which may mean putting four or five shortstops and three catchers on the field at the same time, or pulling re-treads from the bullpen to start games.

 

If we had a strong farm system, we could possibly afford to have so much of our payroll tied into a handful of players. I wouldn't recommend it, but it could be possible. Playing for the "window," mixed with poor drafting and development have left us without a strong farm system, which makes tying up all of our payroll on a few players a recipe for disaster. This is why the Brewers can't be run like the big boys. Paying "market value" for more than a few players will kill them.

 

Back to topic, to your point in trade, you're correct that the salary isn't as big a concern for the big market guys as it is the small market guys. The biggest reason I don't think he's worth a lot is his age, and the fact that no one really wanted him prior to this season. His back-ended contract is just another negative. It's a good sum of money for a player who is likely to "hit a wall" before the contract's up. If the Brewers eat the contract in order to trade him, they are admitting he has negative trade value.

 

I'd trade Lohse and Ramirez together for nothing, just to shed their salaries, but I don't think Ramirez is tradable at this point... maybe as an August deal, but I doubt it. Lohse alone might get you a low minors guy with some upside and warts or a failed prospect like the Cubs got for Feldman, but it all depends on how gun shy his contract makes teams.

 

This is pretty much where I am. I don't see any way Ramirez is traded, which is why I really wanted them to trade him last year when the Dodgers were apparently willing to give up something like Eovaldi or Lee for him, while taking on his entire salary. It's why I wanted to trade Hart last year. It's why I'd like to get something for Lohse now when maybe, if we pay someone to take him, we could potentially get a back-of-the-rotation starter or middle reliever for him, but more importantly will get rid of his contract, as we are very likely still going to be paying Ramirez and Weeks next year. If we don't trade Lohse now, even for a miniscule return, I'd bet that people will be screaming for his DFA before the end of his contract.

[splitterpfj]

Monty, what I'm saying, exactly, is...Lohse as a pitcher has plenty of value, but the contract he signed diminishes some of that value, given his age. In most cases, I think teams would just deal for Lohse, just as they would have gladly signed him for two years, but they didn't want to go to three.

 

I just think the Brewers may be asked to get rid of that third year, and they only way to do that is to send the money for it. The team getting Lohse wouldn't clear one penny in the deal, because they'd have to pay that money to Lohse, so your point about 15 million dollars buying a good prospect doesn't exactly match the way I see this.

 

In any event, I think teams will want Lohse, which is all I care about.

[gregmag]

The biggest reasons teams didn't sign Lohse this offseason were (1) they didn't think he was worth giving up a first round draft pick, and (2) they figure that he will "hit a wall" before his contract is up prior to the end of the contract... he wanted a multi-year deal and the Brewers were the only team crazy enough to give him one. The money is an issue, but not as much as these two points. The future "control" probably acts as a negative in our trade negotiations (meaning Lohse would probably be worth more in trade if he became a free agent at year's end than he is worth being under a guaranteed contract until he's 36).

 

No one knows for sure why other teams wouldn't take on Lohse this offseason, but I would bet that a lot of teams didn't believe he could keep up his performance without the Cardinals' defense, coaching staff, and whatever other organizational voodoo allows them to squeeze blood out of stones year after year.

 

Lohse has now proved that he can pitch at a high level for a bad team with big defensive holes. He has also, on a more basic level, pitched well for 1/6 of his current contract. When teams evaluate players past peak age, I assume they look at two things: the player's age and his performance level. Lohse is half a year older than he was last winter, but if I'm right about the "St. Louis mojo" factor, he has now effectively increased what people will gauge as his established performance level.

 

Another factor that helps Lohse's trade value is the "sniffing the postseason" thing. Teams that think they're a starting pitcher away from the postseason will feel that need more acutely now than they did in the offseason. In Lohse's case, that factor ups the risk from the last two years of his contract that teams will be willing to absorb. If I'm right that the risk has decreased based on Lohse's first half, several teams have very good reasons to like Lohse more now than they did six months ago.

 

I'm a big advocate of paying attention to age in evaluating players, but age, like everything else, has a context. I like Lohse's chances over the next 2.5 years now better than I did last winter, and I suspect a fair number of teams will as well. We'll see.

[monty57]

Yes, Lohse alone has value, but the whole package, which includes the guaranteed contract that is attached to Lohse, has negative value. They cannot be viewed separately.

 

That means that whoever is behind the signing made a colossal mistake. How many people could get away with a $15MM mistake (in an $88MM budget) and still be considered remotely competent? This isn't the end of an eight-year deal, where the team got loads of value and now have to pay for some mediocrity. We're a few months into the deal and already saying that we'll need to eat $15MM just to get a B level prospect back!

 

The Brewers as a whole are hurt by this, which is what I care about. The guy they'll likely get will probably top out as a role player, while payroll will need to be cut significantly. They were already a sinking ship and Melvin/Attanasio went and shot another cannonball through the deck.

[brewcrewdue80]

I didn't want to go over to quote you Monty but:

 

2 yrs./28mil is not the issue here with Lohse or even his age or fear of decline. Because what is Boston's excuse for signing Dempster to 2/26.5?

Kansas City signing Jeremy Guthrie 3/25 with age 35/36 years being at 2/20?

 

 

The issue was losing the 1st rd. draft pick and the assigned slot value with it. The draft is a crap shoot. A B prospect is different than being able to sign away a HS kid with projectability but needing refining skills. Signing Lohse the way I look at it, cost Milwaukee Sean Manaea. That's a Game Changer for KC now. Manaea would be the best prospect in our system if we followed Scouting Book's rankings. We lost Manaea by signing Lohse.

The other teams didn't cave and lose out on that opportunity. Now, Jungmann/Bradley/Roache/Coulter are they even B prospects? But if we had drafted Jose Fernandez,Taylor Guerrieri, Joey Gallo, or Lance McCullers I think all of them are B or B+ prospects with Fernandez an A.

 

So to me giving up a B prospect or 2 for Lohse with anything else is of less hurt to a Franchise, than to give up the draft pick if the possibility lurked to come away with an A prospect. That's how Lohse went unsigned. I can probably find 1st rd. picks ahead of Milw's last season that would be like C or worst level prospects that would be given up now with knowledge of the outcome of selected that player vs. signing Lohse. But you can't know that until a year goes by after the draft.

 

The question Monty is. If Kyle Lohse were a FA after this season and he commanded a 2yr contract w/o worry on losing a draft pick....What does he get?

 

I wouldn't doubt 2/25 minimum if not 2/30. Yankees bought back Kuroda for 15mil when the guy wanted to retire. Again Dempster 2/26.5 I thought the rumor mill was Lohse was asking for 3/45 to begin with.

 

@Buster_ESPN

 

Club officials say Scott Boras continues to ask for $14 million-$15 million a year from those interested in FA pitcher Kyle Lohse.

6:03 AM - 24 Mar 2013

 

So what Lohse is "Owed" the next 2 years is exactly what he was commanding last year. It just comes at the cost of at least a couple prospects vs. losing a Team's #1 draft pick.

 

So to me Lohse's money owed isn't a problem to have to deal with in trade. Just agreeing on the right prospect package for him.

[gregmag]

Yes, Lohse alone has value, but the whole package, which includes the guaranteed contract that is attached to Lohse, has negative value. They cannot be viewed separately.

 

That means that whoever is behind the signing made a colossal mistake.

 

You keep making declarations like this, with great confidence, as if your view is obviously true. But it isn't obviously true, as you can tell from the fact that some reasonably smart people here disagree with you. I think, for whatever my novice's take is worth, that your assessment of Lohse's contract is probably wrong. If you take what he's doing now and assume normal age decline over the length of the contract, then the contract looks like a good market value. I think -- and here I may just be echoing part of your point -- that, even as a good market value, the contract probably doesn't make sense for the Brewers to hold onto. But it would seem to make much better sense for a team that thinks Lohse can help get it over the playoff hump, which is why I think Lohse has more trade value than you believe.

[monty57]

Greg, of course everything I say is an opinion, same as everyone else. I try to say "seems like," "likely," "probably," etc as often as I can, but I can't put a disclaimer on everything.

 

Most everyone seems to think that we can't get anything back in a Lohse trade unless we pay a decent portion of his contract. I don't see how that can be anything but a negative value. Maybe you see it differently, but I know if one of my employees did something that made me pay to get rid of the problem, I wouldn't praise them for it.

 

I really hope I'm wrong about a lot of what I see regarding the Brewers, just like I wish I had been wrong for the past couple of years. I really hope Lohse is able to bring back a good young player without us having to pay a big portion of his contract. But, in trying to look at the whole picture, I don't see it happening. Again, I hope I'm wrong.

[JohnBriggs12]

I disagree with the notion that either Gallardo or Lohse "needs" to be traded. They don't "need" to trade either of them. I'll be fine if they go into next season with both in the rotation. Now is the time you see if either can bring you a deal you can't pass up. It's not the time to "settle", and take just anybody. The payroll for next season even with both back is fine. Yes dealing either frees up payroll, but for what? Another middling overpriced starting pitcher?

[monty57]

I disagree with the notion that either Gallardo or Lohse "needs" to be traded. They don't "need" to trade either of them. I'll be fine if they go into next season with both in the rotation. Now is the time you see if either can bring you a deal you can't pass up. It's not the time to "settle", and take just anybody. The payroll for next season even with both back is fine. Yes dealing either frees up payroll, but for what? Another middling overpriced starting pitcher?

 

They may not "need" to be traded, but I don't see us being able to get rid of Ramirez or Weeks' contracts, and Gomez and Braun aren't getting traded. The Brewers' ownership group is paying $88MM for a last place team this year, and I really don't think they want to pay $100MM next year for a last place team, which I would guess is their outlook right now. They're probably wringing their hands over the projected attendance numbers and trying to figure out how not to lose lots of money next year. I don't think they can sell the "average Joe" that these past two years have been unlucky, and the same group of guys are worth buying season tickets to see.

 

This unfortunately is what leads owners to green light fire sales. I'd like to see them get good young players for some of our good-but-expensive pieces, but we may just start dumping decent players for nothing other than salary relief.

[fondybrewfan]

Well even if they don't bring Hart back and somehow trade Axford their payroll will be less going into next year. The Brewers aren't going to make any trades purely for payroll reasons; they are going to make them to get something worthwhile in return.

 

Even with lower attendance I wouldn't expect the Brewers to be losing money if their payroll is in the $75-85 million range. And if you take Hart and Axford off the books they are definitely around there without having to trade anyone else. There will be substantial salaries coming off after next year too; I really think that payroll is not a major concern right now.

[igor67]

Even under a tear it all down scenario I do think there is some substantial danger to the development of the pitchers in trading both Lohse and Gallardo. Too many young unknowns introduces a lot of variability that can put undue stress on the development of other players and continually burn out bullpens. This is basically what happen practically every year from the 90's to the mid-2000's. Based on performance at this point Lohse seems like the better bet to keep, and the contract is a better match for a building type of atmosphere. You can pencil him in the next couple of year and try to build around that. If you go the other route and hold onto Gallardo the circus comes to town again next year and either you are left scrambling in the offseason for a new veteran, trying to extend him or trading him mid year for something (which if you aren't extending him probably wouldn't be the deal to turn things around). It only works out if somehow a very solid rotation develops behind him in the next year which would require (even with new talent from trades) an awful lot of prospect luck.

Keeping Lohse on the other hand you hope to find a couple of pieces next year to the longer term rotation puzzle, and hopefully in 2 years things are rounding into shape better that you deal Lohse in the last year. If the rotation does develop faster you still retain the option to deal Lohse next year at the deadline at which point he is probably at his peak value if he is still performing.

[monty57]

Well even if they don't bring Hart back and somehow trade Axford their payroll will be less going into next year. The Brewers aren't going to make any trades purely for payroll reasons; they are going to make them to get something worthwhile in return.

 

Even with lower attendance I wouldn't expect the Brewers to be losing money if their payroll is in the $75-85 million range. And if you take Hart and Axford off the books they are definitely around there without having to trade anyone else. There will be substantial salaries coming off after next year too; I really think that payroll is not a major concern right now.

 

Not offering arby to Axford is probable, and may keep them in the low-to-mid $90MM's, but with the bumps in other salaries, unless they trade some salaries, they're going to have a big payroll next year, mostly tied into a handful of players. I guess there's a chance we won't have to pay Braun for 50-100 games, so that would have an impact I hadn't figured in.

 

I don't want to take this off-topic, but I think part of (maybe most of) the discussion of trading away some of their high-priced guys is due to next year's obligations mixed with fear of falling attendance. Increased expenses with falling revenues can cause owners to take dramatic action.

 

It will get better after 2014, but if we don't get some good young prospects for our "trading chips," we will have less payroll but significantly less talent, especially if Lohse "hits a wall" in or prior to his third year when he's 36. We'd have Lucroy, Segura, and Gomez along with a now-past-his-prime Braun, with below average pitching and a bunch of average prospects taking the other positions. The extra money we'd have to spend won't be enough to fill the holes through free agency, and we wouldn't really have any trading chips, unless we'd do something really dumb like trading away the guy will get with next year's (likely top 5) draft pick.

 

This is why I've wanted to make some trades in the recent past, and why I'm worried that many of this year's "trading chips" have lost some or all of their value due to injuries or poor play. Right now, I'm really hanging my hopes on Gallardo being able to bring back at least one really good prospect, and Aoki at least bringing back an everyday player, because I don't think we'll get much for Lohse, Weeks or our relievers, and Ramirez and Hart are probably both untradeable due to injuries. I don't think Braun could be traded even if we wanted to, and I don't think we'd trade Gomez.

 

Fortunately, it appears the Brewers' management has finally decided it's time to look to the future. I just hope it isn't too little, too late.

[Roderick]

His back-ended contract is just another negative. It's a good sum of money for a player who is likely to "hit a wall" before the contract's up. If the Brewers eat the contract in order to trade him, they are admitting he has negative trade value.

 

His contract is $11M each year of his contract. That is not back-ended contract. ARam has a back-ended contract. A team picking up Lohse would pick up approx $4.3M for this year and $11M for 2014 & 2015. The Brewers may include money to get a better prospect or may package with someone that has negative value, but there is definitely positive value in his contract at this point. And if I was a playoff team and all I cared about was the results I would get from the pitcher this season, I would rather have Lohse then Gallardo.

[monty57]

His back-ended contract is just another negative. It's a good sum of money for a player who is likely to "hit a wall" before the contract's up. If the Brewers eat the contract in order to trade him, they are admitting he has negative trade value.

 

His contract is $11M each year of his contract. That is not back-ended contract. ARam has a back-ended contract. A team picking up Lohse would pick up approx $4.3M for this year and $11M for 2014 & 2015. The Brewers may include money to get a better prospect or may package with someone that has negative value, but there is definitely positive value in his contract at this point. And if I was a playoff team and all I cared about was the results I would get from the pitcher this season, I would rather have Lohse then Gallardo.

 

 

From Cot's

 

Kyle Lohse rhp

3 years/$33M (2013-15)

 

3 years/$33M (2013-15)

signed by Milwaukee as a free agent 3/25/13

13:$11M, 14:$11M, 15:$11M

$7M of 2013 salary deferred, to be paid in 2016-18, reducing contract’s present-day total value to $31.95M

annual performance bonus: $0.35M for 190 innings

 

He's owed $11MM for playing this year, but $7MM of that is deferred to 2016-18. The Brewers are only really paying him $4MM this year, so roughly $2MM of the $33MM owed has been paid by the Brewers so far.

 

You can negotiate whatever you want in a trade, but a team picking up Lohse right now would owe around $31MM for 2.5 years of Lohse