Would You Extend Gallardo Now?

[reillymcshane]

Here's a fun project - Let's say you give Yo an extension to cover 2016-19 - his ages 30-33 seasons. I went to baseball-refernce.com and looked at the 'Similar pitchers through 27' category for Gallardo. For each player, I looked at the their WAR totals for ages 30-33 - the ages that a four year extension would cover. Here's the results:

 

Josh Becket: 5.1

Freddy Garcia: 0.8

Andy Pettitte: 14.2

Barry Zito: 4.4

Rich Culp: -1.1 (retired after age 31 season)

Kevin Millwood: 7.6

Jack McDowell: 2.3

Kevin Appier: 7.5

 

I didn't include players who are still playing that haven't reached their age 33 season since their totals would be incomplete. That left eight players.

 

I realize that this isn't any particularly scientific. It's only eight players, and some of these guys are different types of pitchers. Still, it does show some of the pitfalls of extending a player. The numbers aren't very good, with Pettitte being the only player to excel during the time frame.

 

Injury is a huge factor for many of these players. But I suspect injury would be a large factor for just about any pitcher did this same test for.

 

I guess for me it reinforces the belief that extending any pitcher is a significant risk. It's the nature of the industry. Pitchers hurt their arms. Add in Yo's struggles in 2013, including declining velocity and heavy pitch counts - and I'd really avoid any sort of extension. In two years (and thousands of pitches later), Yo's arm could easily be shot.

 

For me, we are better off waiting for 1-2 years and see how Yo does - and how our young pitching matures. I'd rather wait and see if Yo's healthy - and more importantly - if we need him. Because even if Yo is healthy at age 30, there is still a lot of risk giving him a large extension.

[Warning Track Power]

If Gallardo pitches like he has historically in 2014 & 2015 and proves the 1st half of 2013 was an aberration, I think 4 years $60 million is about the floor of where he will be looking. Brings me back full circle to the premise of the original post, if Gallardo would do a 3 year $39 million extension today, which would include his 2015 option vesting, making it a 4 year $52 million contract, would you do it? Seems like most here would not...I would given what you just said about inflated player salaries and the lack of high end pitching in the Brewers system. Risky on both ends, the Brewers may be paying a ton for another Suppan, and Yo may sign a below market contract if he returns to the pitcher he was in 2008-2012.

[TheCrew07]

Reillymcshane basically put numbers to what I was saying in theory.

 

When you extend a player, in most cases you are paying them for what they've already done, rather than what they are going to do.

 

FanGraphs posted a recent article The Cost of a Win in the 2014 Off-Season. As many people have posted the super contracts have always skewed the average cost per win, so as Dave points out the median is the best number to use, which came out to $5.9 million per WAR. In terms of actual value, counting stats like WAR are best because they account for injuries and such over specific time frame, you aren't able to contribute if you aren't on the field.

 

So going to back to reilly's numbers which he posted, where's the ultimate value in extending pitchers into their early to mid 30s when the majority of those contracts turn out badly? I'm not willing to completely close that door, but I'd have to be pretty confident in a pitcher remaining dominant and durable over that time frame. Look at Sabathia; he's remained healthy, continues to pitch 200 innings per season, but yet 3 of the 5 years he's been a Yankee he hasn't been as good as his $23 mil/year salary according the FanGraphs numbers. On average those guys reilly listed accumulated enough WAR to have 2 good seasons over that time frame... a good season being in that 3-4 WAR range so think of guys like Wolf or most of the FA acquisitions the Brewers have made over the years... a couple of good years, then garbage.

 

As is so often discussed around here, it's not about this year, or next year as much as it the potential for dead money on the back end of the contract. There really is no excusing away that dead money when every dollar spent counts so much for a team like Milwaukee than it does for the Dodgers, Yankees, or Angels for example. I despise the "we got a couple of good years so the contract wasn't all bad" argument... wasting money isn't a solid business model regardless of your enterprise. I fully understand that the Brewer franchise continues to appreciate in value, but I'm really not interesting in making Mark A. and the other owners money. I'm interested in winning a WS and every dollar misspent pushes the Brewers farther away from that goal. Regardless, spending money isn't a guarantee of performance or wins... ultimately talent is what wins, the battle between the pitchers and hitters, especially in the post season where it's only the best teams competing against each other and the rest of the cannon fodder is at home watching. We need to match-up best on best to have realistic WS aspirations, not be right around average, good enough to win games to put fans in the seats but not good enough to really get over the hump.

 

At some point you absolutely need a warm body to put on the mound but that's why I've been so pro cycling talent (turning over the roster) so we have more than 1 option we hope pans out. Spending almost $6 million per marginal win isn't all that exciting to me. Gallardo only has had 2 seasons over 3 WAR in his professional career, the drop from him to a Nelson may be not be as great... maybe you go from a 2.8 to a 1.8 or something in that first season, and hopefully Nelson would settle in somewhere around a 2 maybe a 3 in his best seasons. However if you can spend that money on 3B for example where we have no legitimate prospect, maybe you can maintain a 3 WAR player at that position instead of dropping back to some scrub who's around 0 or worse, like 1B last year. I'd rather spend money where I can get the most bang for my buck for the team rather than pay someone else simply because they are "proven". It's silly to me to spend $12 million or more per season a position hoping to just be average there if we have someone in house who has a decent chance to be a 2 WAR player at that same position. Spend money on the places we don't have options and for goodness sake acquire enough impact pitching through other means so that we can quit counting on 30 somethings to carry us.

[PrinceFielderx1]

No. I wouldn't extend Gallardo. If he has a good season this year I'd trade him and give his spot to Thornburg or Nelson. Actually, I'd find a way to work both of them in, because Estrada days in Milwaukee are numbered in my view. He'll get expensive and not be worth it.

[DHonks]

I only extend him if he offers a discount. But realistically we need to take the Rays' approach and trade pitchers while they have value. Given that Thornburg, Jungmann, Fiers, Burgos, and Nelson are capable of contributing at the MLB level, I would have no problem trading Yo for 3 AA/AAA prospects.

[Gormans sideburns]

No, and right now is a perfect example. I am watching them play the White Sox in Spring Training and he has 55 pitches in the 3rd inning. Seems like every time I turn them on he has tons of pitches in the early innings and can only make it til the 5th or 6th.

[fondybrewfan]

It would be nice to know what kind of velocity he is showing this Spring.

 

Gallardo seems to waste a ridiculous amount of pitches like he is afraid to just go after guys. You just can't expect him to ever make it through more than 6 innings.