I'll Believe It When I See It (Brewers selling big at the deadline)

[adambr2]

We don't need to get value back equal to Gomez. We only need to get a guy back who is better than our worst starting pitcher by more than we are stepping back starting Schafer instead of Gomez. That isn't a huge step back while there is a lot of room for improvement in the starting pitching.

 

I get the point you are trying to make but IMO if we trade Gomez, yes we need to get value back equal to Gomez. Gomez is one of our most valuable potential trading chips. I would never concede losing a trade to part with these guys just to fill a hole somewhere else that may constitute a net improvement if we acquire a pitcher over our #5 who is a greater help than Gomez over Schafer. Gomez is a CF with pluses across the board -- power, average, speed, and defense. These guys are so valuable, particularly one leading MLB in WAR and one with a great contract situation.

 

I put Gomez with Braun right now where you don't move him unless you get blown away. We can always re-visit a deal for him in a year or two if the price isn't right.

 

I don't see an immediate need to make room for Schafer in the outfield, as I think he's going to need to show a little more than this to get me to buy into the hype. He's going to need to do better than a .619 OPS to cut it as a starter at any OF position.

How do you get better unless you are willing to trade guys? It seems dumb to me just to stand pat because you can't get equal value. You need to get the best deal that will help your club even if you don't get equal value.

 

Well for one, they have no real motivation to trade Gomez immediately. They can always re-visit trading him in a year and a half or so, so I think it would be a lot dumber to trade him now for what you can get while accepting less than he's worth.

 

It's not about being unwilling to trade guys, it's about being unwilling to do so for a net loss. Smart GM's won't. Now there are circumstances where I understand -- particularly with rentals that will be lost to free agency without compensation anyway, or when the trade compensation is still much better than the potential draft compensation (Greinke/Segura last year).

 

But with a guy like Gomez -- why now, unless you get blown away? You've got 3 and a half more years of control. Why put him on the block and just give him to the highest bidder? You can look at doing so again in the off season, you can look at it next off season, next trade deadline, and see what the trade market is then. There's no reason to do it now.

 

Also, people keep saying that Gomez can be replaced with Schafer. Gomez is currently the most valuable player in baseball. Schafer is performing near replacement level and OPS'ing .609. Schafer can't be "replaced" with Gomez. He simply can't. We don't even know if Schafer is capable of being an average MLB starter yet.

 

I think consistently taking below value just to trade a player is a dangerous path for a GM to take, one that should be the exception, not the rule.

[nate82]

Based on past performance, when have you ever seen Doug Melvin begging for a younger team?

 

I think it is the opposite. Melvin is part of the problem here, I don't know how much input Attanasio is forcing on Melvin, and no one knows for sure, it's all speculation and nothing more.

 

Until I hear Melvin come out and say it, I don't believe that is how he feels.

 

Well for one both Suppan and Lohse have been Mark A ideas. Melvin did not want Lohse and was willing to go with what the Brewers had in terms of youth and Mark A wanted someone with more experience in the rotation which lead to the Lohse signing. Scott Boras didn't even work with Melvin in getting a contract done he only worked with Mark A this whole off season. It is not really speculation as you can follow the evidence or you can just ignore it and call it speculation and nothing more if you want. Mark A was going along with Melvin until the pitching absolutely was garbage in spring training. This then triggered the signing of Lohse which was Mark A telling Melvin sign Lohse now.

[paul253]

Well at the end of the day it doesn't matter what WE think and it doesn't matter what DM thinks. It's all in Mark A.'s hands

 

Maybe so, but Doug Melvin is still the GM and he should be in Mark's ear telling him "look if you want the team to succeed in the near future this is what you need to do". I'm getting more and more irritated at Mark as he is treating Brewers fan like how Kohl is treating Bucks fans. Kohl thinks he can throw out some team that lands in the 7-10 spot in the East, maybe make the playoffs every now and then, and the fans will accept that as good enough. It seems like Mark is acting as though "competing" for a wild card spot each year is good enough. Or that the token free agent signing will get us excited. Don't get me wrong I was excited over the Greinke and Marcum moves from a few years ago. But that time has come and gone and we are now witnessing the downside of the trades. I'd rather a slow, steady incline that we can support over 5-6 years than a rapid incline for a year followed by a drastic decline like we've been seeing. I think most fans feel the same way.

[3and2Fastball]

If we had won the Furcal sweepstakes in 2011, got some more "luck" out of Marcum/Wolf/Greinke in the playoffs, and had a manager smart enough to not start Mark Kotsay in CF in the NLCS and made it to the World Series, then folks might say it was all worth it.

 

That is a lot of "Ifs" though. And a bunch of them fall on DM (and RR who is an extension of DM's decisions)

[danzig6767]

Who said anything about trading Segura?

 

 

It was a hypothetical which I didnt really think was that hard to figure out.

 

In any case, if the Cards offered a trade like that, would you take it if you were Milwaukee? It would give the Brewers a frontline pitcher with 5 more years of control. As someone put it earlier, would Segura + #5 Starter > Shelby Miller + Replacement Shortstop?

 

I don't know the answer to that.

 

I wouldn't trade a talent like Segura for Miller mainly because the injury factor is just much higher for pitchers and also because i think Segura would have more impact over 162 games than Miller over 30 starts a year.

 

Watching Segura this year, i really am blown away at just how good he is in nearly every facet of the game besides not drawing more walks and he's only a 23 year old rookie. He literally has every tool you'd want from a young shortstop. Great range. Great arm. Speed. Power. Hits for average. Sprays hits all over the field. Instincts. A fabulous attitude.

 

Given his age, skillset, and and salary status, when trying to think of who i'd consider trading Segura for, besides Mike Trout being a for sure yes, there is nobody else i'd easily trade him for. Bryce Harper would definitely be a consideration and among pitchers, Harvey and Miller would be the two guys, but like i said before, the injury risk with pitchers is much higher over an extended length of years.

[brewmann04]

Mark is going to mke the moves necessary to help this team he wants to win. I think he realizehe needs to add some young prospects and everyone not named Srgura and Braun will be available.

[Oxy]

This will be anathema to this board, but would it be beneficial to package some of our marginal prospects along with our veterans in order to up the quality of return? I'd like to keep Braun, Gomez, Segura, Lucroy, Gallardo and Peralta. The problem, of course, is that nobody else's contract will garner a top prospect. Right now we are flush with AAAA type players who are at their peak value in terms of control, but don't project to be better than average at best. I know this "seems" like it would be going in the wrong direction, but if we can get a top 20 or 2 top 50 prospects back by trading away a veteran along with a few of our mediocre prospects I think it is the way to go. We don't need all of Schafer, Gindl, K Davis, Prince, and the dozen or so okay arms that have spent plenty of time in the minors. If a couple of those guys along with Weeks/Ramirez/Hart is what it will take to get a young front of the rotation pitcher I think it needs to be done.

[trwi7]

The problem with that thought is every other team has marginal prospects. What makes our so special that they'll garner a top prospect if they're included with our veterans?

[Invader3K]

Yeah...it sounds like the old "Let's package Kieschnick, Ginter, Obermueller, Quevedo, etc. for something good", type threads that used to pop up around here all the time.

[3and2Fastball]

I think some of the people here need to readjust their concept of "trade value" now that there are 2 Wild-Card teams. That means less teams are sellers and more teams are buyers. Simple supply & demand

 

Add in the fact that many of the Brewers' best trade pieces (Gallardo, Lohse, Ramirez) are not simply 2 month rentals but instead are players a team can control for a year or 2. That ups their value also

[Oxy]

The problem with that thought is every other team has marginal prospects. What makes our so special that they'll garner a top prospect if they're included with our veterans?

 

Those guys have some value. I would consider their value pretty equal to the value of the expiring contracts of our veteran players--which means if Ramirez/Weeks/Hart would net us a Khris Davis type of player in return, when you add that type of player in to the "selling" team you should be able to up the return considerably.

 

For a contending team, our veterans and bullpen arms have quite a bit of value in the here and now, and throwing in some young guys along with those veterans would offset the loss of a top prospect for a contending team quite a bit.

[LouisEly]

Yeah...it sounds like the old "Let's package Kieschnick, Ginter, Obermueller, Quevedo, etc. for something good", type threads that used to pop up around here all the time.

I don't think that is what Oxy is getting at. I think he is thinking along the lines of this example: Cleveland has nothing for LHRP, and their closer is on the DL and may be in legal trouble; Mike Gonzalez would give them the LHRP they need and he also has experience closing. Cleveland also has Michael Brantley and his .701 OPS playing LF, and they have no upper level OF prospects. Khris Davis would likely give them an upgrade in LF if given regular playing time over Brantley (at the minimum a good platoon partner). An upgrade who is team/cost controlled for several years would be very valuable to a lower payroll team. Those two won't get Lindor or Bauer, but what Oxy is getting at is that in this example the Brewers could get better prospects by including Khris Davis with Gonzalez than just trading Gonzalez alone.

 

Khris Davis is kind of the prime example here, but others like Morris, Gennett, Gindl, Ke. Davis, Gagnon, Burgos, or Fiers with a veteran could upgrade the quality of pitching or 3B prospect the Brewers get in return. Would be willing to package Haniger, Roache, or maybe Coulter if it could get stud pitching/3B prospects in return.

[brewcrewdue80]

I'd have a hard time seeing Haniger go in the trade scenario as well as Coulter. Roache though, definitely underwhelming thus far. Maybe some other team would overvalue him and his potential and give up a couple hott prospects..a SP a year away and another High upside SP a few years away if panned out. Something in the lines of ARam and Roache to LAD for Zach Lee and say Ross Stripling. Sure LA has a set OF for awhile but Roache could be the late blooming type in development with his plus power that is there when the Crawfords/Ethiers are removed.

 

Sorry to post a proposal here, just meant more as an example of what tossing one of our prospects along with the veteran could accomplish.

[HiAndTight]

we've now won 4 of 5 series. We're not back into the division, but if we had a nice stretch of winning 15 of 17, including some divisional wins, that would be a huge help. in 2011 we weren't in first at this point, and people were declaring that we should sell everything.

 

15 of 17? LOL come on now, how is that even realistic at this point?

 

 

By only losing 2 games in their next 17? I don't know, how realistic is it almost every single year when a team goes on a similar type run?

 

I'm sure the Blue Jays fans would have said the exact same thing in the same tone two weeks ago.

[brewcrewdue80]

H&T it wasn't 15 of 17 games. Was stated or miss-stated as 15 of 17 series. So you are looking at pretty much 53 games winning better than 2/3rds so 70% which means the Brewers going 37-39 wins and 14-16losses in such a stretch. Okay I forget losing 2 series so drop down 2 wins so 35-37wins and 16-18losses in the stretch.

 

15 out of 17 games is also suspect as it's an 88% win pct vs. the near 70% to win 15 of 17 series.

 

I think it is tougher to do in the NL than the AL currently as clearly the better ACE pitching resides in the NL.

I guess this is more in line that I thought Toronto would win the East. Detroit the Central. And then Baltimore 1 of the Wild Cards. No one else in the AL stands out to me. In the NL clearly Atlanta/Washington/St. Louis/Cinncy were head and shoulders above the next tier of teams who are competitive in Pitt/San Fran/Ariz/LADodgers.

Facing competition like that, it isn't likely to go on either runs. I think losing 15 of 17 or 15 of 17 series is more likely to happen than winning but even that is hard to fathom.

[PrinceEatMeat]

Anthony Witrado ‏@WitradoSN 2h

More Melvin: "It's not a slam dunk that I'm going to trade Yovani or Kyle Lohse, but you never know. A lot have to consider (about future)."

 

Anthony Witrado ‏@WitradoSN 2h

Brewers GM Doug Melvin on Yovani Gallardo: "The (trade) package from another team has to be something that will wow me."

 

This is good news to me. Melvin always downplays things when he's out there shopping players. I think he's shopping both Gallardo and Lohse. It's encouraging that a rebuild seems like a possibility. Melvin has lots of leverage here, because he can always wait to trade either guy. Obviously their value is higher now though, which is why he'll explore it if a good offer is out there.