Is there any scenario where we WANT to extend Gallardo during this season?

[TwinsBrewersWorldSeries]

I realize we are only 3 games in, and I'm not suggesting we do something now... but if Yo is sitting at a sub 2.75 ERA and sub 1.25 WHIP at the All-Star break, do we try and extend him for say four years (wipe out the option year)

 

If we're in it, no way we trade him, though that would probably bring maximum value with 1.5 years left of control. I really don't want any part of a 5-6 year deal (probably in the $100 million + range) after 2015, and if he had a solid year, I highly doubt he'd sign for anything less.

 

That said, our fast start has gotten me really excited about our pitching, only to realize that 3/5th of our rotation isn't under team control after 2015 (Lohse, Estrada, Gallardo)

 

Time will tell, but Yo, coming off last year, was probably looking at a 3/35 to 4/45 type deal after 2015, and while a strong first half would enhance those prospects for him, it also leaves his subject to repeating a 2012 or 2013 type season.

 

He's 28 now, and would will be entering his Age 30 season (2016) as a FA... would he/we take a chance on a 4/60 deal (2015-2018) maybe with an option year for 2019 ($5M buyout or $20M team option) that would make the deal 4/65 or 5/80?

[PrinceFielderx1]

He will sign a team friendly deal. The brewers have the cash. I'm all for it. 3-4 years with an option. 4/50 million with a 5 th year option with 5 million buyout.

[ewitkows]

No way he takes a 4/50 deal with the way pitching has been getting paid. He'd probably get closer to 20 a year in the open market. We may have to go 4/75 to get him extended .

[lcbj68c]

Yes. A scenario where he accepts market value. Whatever that may be.

[HiAndTight]

I'm all for extending guys most of the time, but Gallardo just isn't the type of guy I want to extend at this time. He's got a lot of millage on his arm, he's still got a year left after this year, and he's lost some velocity.

 

I think for a pitcher who's not a #1 and doesn't have the upside to be a #1, I'd rather just let this year play out, pick up the option and then at that point, offer him arbitration and let him walk.

 

I'm also not all that concerned with losing 3 of our starting pitchers in two years. A lot can happen in the meantime. We have Thornburg, Nelson and Will Smith, all of whom I believe can be really solid pitchers. Especially Thornburg at this point, the guy I had the least confidence in coming into the year given the change that he's shown this year which has been just filthy. I see no reason why Smith can't be a legit 2/3 type starter. Nelson has everything you're looking for. Peralta. We'll also have a lot of money coming off the books, so we can sign someone.

 

I just honestly don't have a ton of confidence in Gallardo. I don't believe he's going to age particularly well if his FB velocity drops to 88-90.

[vegasbrewcrew1993]

I'm in a wait and see mode. Gallardo at his best is probably a true #2 SP. I wouldn't pay him big money unless he pitches like Yu Darvish or King Felix. I definitely would not trade him though. Best thing to do would be to wait until his contract is up. If the kids are ready and there are still good veteran SP's on the roster, then you let him go. If Loshe or Garza have fallen apart and/or the prospects are failure, then you keep him.

[PrinceFielderx1]

No way he takes a 4/50 deal with the way pitching has been getting paid. He'd probably get closer to 20 a year in the open market. We may have to go 4/75 to get him extended .

 

Actually I could see that getting conversations serious. 12.5 million a year for 4 years is more than Lohse is getting paid. Lohse is a good comparison for Gallardo and IMO better than him. He'll get more than 3 years, though. $50-60 million should do it. Gallardo I think will without question sign a deal like this. He will never get 20 million. Not even close. Maybe closer to 13.5 a year max.

[PrinceFielderx1]

I'm all for extending guys most of the time, but Gallardo just isn't the type of guy I want to extend at this time. He's got a lot of millage on his arm, he's still got a year left after this year, and he's lost some velocity.

 

I think for a pitcher who's not a #1 and doesn't have the upside to be a #1, I'd rather just let this year play out, pick up the option and then at that point, offer him arbitration and let him walk.

 

I'm also not all that concerned with losing 3 of our starting pitchers in two years. A lot can happen in the meantime. We have Thornburg, Nelson and Will Smith, all of whom I believe can be really solid pitchers. Especially Thornburg at this point, the guy I had the least confidence in coming into the year given the change that he's shown this year which has been just filthy. I see no reason why Smith can't be a legit 2/3 type starter. Nelson has everything you're looking for. Peralta. We'll also have a lot of money coming off the books, so we can sign someone.

 

I just honestly don't have a ton of confidence in Gallardo. I don't believe he's going to age particularly well if his FB velocity drops to 88-90.

 

These are all valid concerns that will drive his cost way down. He's not a number 1 let alone an ace. I put him at a low #2. He doesn't pitch deep into games and has proven he can't over his career and teams will notice that, milliage on him, lower velocity etc.. He's like Kyle Lohse, but not as efficient and smart on the mound with his great control. Kyle Lohse got 11 million a year with Boras as his agent, yes his cost was reduced due to the draft pick and him being older, but gallardo has some equal concerns with him as well.

[trwi7]

Yes. A scenario where he accepts market value. Whatever that may be.

 

If we're paying him before he hits the market, why would we pay him market value?

[umphrey]

I don't think the market for him will be that strong no matter what he does. If he throws a sub 3.5 ERA I think he will get 4/60. He's probably still going to end up in the 3.75-4.00 range honestly, test the market and sign with the Brewers for 4/50.

[James Zumstein]

I would say no. Last year, when he was struggling, we considered trading him, but we were smart enough to not trade him when his value was at its low point. Let's hope that DM is again smart enough not to pay him when his value is at its peak.

[SoupTown]

It seems to me we just accept our good luck. That is, he is pitching well. We pick up the option for next year. He pitches well again. Then we offer a qualifying offer. It means you have him for two years at good cost - with little risk. And you pick up a draft pick if he is lights out next year. Win-win.

[brewcrewdue80]

No way he takes a 4/50 deal with the way pitching has been getting paid. He'd probably get closer to 20 a year in the open market. We may have to go 4/75 to get him extended .

 

Actually I could see that getting conversations serious. 12.5 million a year for 4 years is more than Lohse is getting paid. Lohse is a good comparison for Gallardo and IMO better than him. He'll get more than 3 years, though. $50-60 million should do it. Gallardo I think will without question sign a deal like this. He will never get 20 million. Not even close. Maybe closer to 13.5 a year max.

 

Um, Let's go ahead and attach Lohse to 1st rd compensation and being older than Gallardo. and Garza being an injury concern to why those 2 are being paid far less than what Gallardo could command on the open market as a 3.6ERA under 1.2Whip guy should he be so. after next season.

 

My guess would be 4years 68mil. His next deal. Lincecum money.

 

Now, for the main thought on the topic do we want to extend Yo during this season? NO not I. Yo was compared as a #4 Starter at the trade deadline last year by GMs. I'm buying in to that assessment. I don't even think Yo is worth his option year with it but maybe some team does and we can move 2015 on them for some young prospect. Yo's velocity is down as we all know and look at what it does to the best of pitchers. C.C Sabathia anyone? Why extend Yo to years where his velocity should ACTUALLY begin declining. It shouldn't be declining now, he's in his prime but it has. So at age 30?31,32? You want to buy in to those years around Age 27's Market value years?

My guess is if Yo goes Year to year his Salary would look like this: 2016: 18mil. 2017:11mil 2018:9mil 2019: 4mil option of 12mil 2020. Do the math on that in 4 years. That's only 42mil. You extend him on a 4year deal though he's going to look for 18mil per based on history not his projection career arc throughout his contract.

Do you really commit 18mil in 2016 or 2017 when Yo is throwing 87-88MPH FBs? This from a guy who has never been a spot on locate his pitches on the corners type guy? Sure I can be wrong, but I'm not a fan of signing Free Agent Starters at Market or near value. Lohse and Garza we got for under perceived value due to special situations. Those are the only kind of deals I think Milwaukee can handle and take on. This notion to sign these guys prematurely because you care about saving 1-4mil maybe a season by doing so now? Yeah it's worthwhile to save 1-4mil per if we're staring at 10mil per when doing so. But when you're commiting 15mil or more per? I'll take my 15mil or more saved and use it with current assessments when that time comes, not current assessments and future hope stays current assessments.

[Roderick]

It seems to me we just accept our good luck. That is, he is pitching well. We pick up the option for next year. He pitches well again. Then we offer a qualifying offer. It means you have him for two years at good cost - with little risk. And you pick up a draft pick if he is lights out next year. Win-win.

 

This is what I do. I am not going to give him an extension, unless it was very team-friendly. I really don't think he has a great season left in him, but if he does it will be the next year or two when we have control already anyways.

 

He just doesn't pitch deep enough in games to be paid as much as someone will probably give him. And who knows, maybe some Dave Duncan can fix something or add a pitch that can keep him in a game longer.

[JohnBriggs12]

It seems to me we just accept our good luck. That is, he is pitching well. We pick up the option for next year. He pitches well again. Then we offer a qualifying offer. It means you have him for two years at good cost - with little risk. And you pick up a draft pick if he is lights out next year. Win-win.

 

 

This is the course of action I'd follow. Lohse comes off the books in 2016 as well, but Estrada will be getting more costly. You think about extending one of those two perhaps, but all in all, a Garza type deal is about the Brewer ceiling for starting pitchers. To stay within budget ideally they need room for one or two pre arby starters in their rotation.

[monty57]

We're getting to the point where we are going to have to trade away someone in order to make room for Thornburg, Nelson and any of the other youngsters that step it up this season. I think the likely scenario (mind you, it's pretty early so a lot can happen) is that one of Lohse, Gallardo or Estrada will be traded next offseason and Thornburg or Nelson will take their spot, with the other in the bullpen. Then we'll see how next season goes to see whether we trade the others mid-season, or lose them to free agency/make a qualifying offer.

 

I'd rather look into extending Peralta than any of the older, more expensive guys. Ideally, Gallardo would have a great season this year, and he could be the one traded for some prospects who can take over for Lohse when he walks via free agency. Then someone else can extend him through his 30's.

 

Note: this is assuming we aren't out of it at trade deadline this year (which is already looking unlikely), and that we don't trade Nelson in order to upgrade this year's team.

[HiAndTight]

It seems to me we just accept our good luck. That is, he is pitching well. We pick up the option for next year. He pitches well again. Then we offer a qualifying offer. It means you have him for two years at good cost - with little risk. And you pick up a draft pick if he is lights out next year. Win-win.

 

 

This is the course of action I'd follow. Lohse comes off the books in 2016 as well, but Estrada will be getting more costly. You think about extending one of those two perhaps, but all in all, a Garza type deal is about the Brewer ceiling for starting pitchers. To stay within budget ideally they need room for one or two pre arby starters in their rotation.

 

 

I certainly don't want to extend Gallardo right now for...a lot of reasons that have been covered, but I can think of even more reasons to NOT extend Lohse or Estrada either.

Especially Estrada. He's a guy who's never-once had a full/healthy season as a starter. He's not a power pitcher and he's going to be 33 the first year of any extension. So that being the case, why would we even consider extending someone who would cost so little to sign if he were a FA right now, is still unproven, and who has never been anything but a 4/5 starter at 30 years of age?

 

Lohse, even if he has another two outstanding years, how much is he going to get as a FA? He's going to be 37 years old and he signed for 3/36 when he was coming off an outstanding two year run in St Louis.

 

63 starts 30-11, 3.11 ERA, 1 World Series win, 1 NLCS loss and he won big games for them.

 

So I can't find any possible scenario in which it'd make sense to extend Lohse right now either.

 

 

 

We've got a pretty nice looking team playing really good right now. But I don't think there is a single player on this team worth extending right now save for Segura who won't and Peralta who wouldn't for what I think would be worthwhile for the Brewers. We can sign guys. I'd rather sign a guy coming off a big year(ie, an aging Lohse coming off a big year after next season) and maybe have to overpay him in a 2 year deal than hope that Lohse has 4 more years in his arm(assuming it's only a 2 year extension) or that Estrada is going to suddenly be able to pitch 200 innings and will continue to do so for the next 4 years.

[HiAndTight]

We're getting to the point where we are going to have to trade away someone in order to make room for Thornburg, Nelson and any of the other youngsters that step it up this season. I think the likely scenario (mind you, it's pretty early so a lot can happen) is that one of Lohse, Gallardo or Estrada will be traded next offseason and Thornburg or Nelson will take their spot, with the other in the bullpen. Then we'll see how next season goes to see whether we trade the others mid-season, or lose them to free agency/make a qualifying offer.

 

I'd rather look into extending Peralta than any of the older, more expensive guys. Ideally, Gallardo would have a great season this year, and he could be the one traded for some prospects who can take over for Lohse when he walks via free agency. Then someone else can extend him through his 30's.

 

Note: this is assuming we aren't out of it at trade deadline this year (which is already looking unlikely), and that we don't trade Nelson in order to upgrade this year's team.

 

 

I understand this fear given the way the Brewers have operated in the past, but I think the Brewers, and in particular Mark Attanasio are smarter and are going to protect those young arms moreso than the last couple times they were in contention.

 

Of course on the flip side, the way the Brewers have operated in the past, I have my doubts they'll seriously consider trading any of their good starting pitches if they're coming off good years. I don't think the major league roster as been as badly mismanaged as others on here believe over the last 5-6 years, but they have never once been a team that's moved a guy coming off a good year(ie a year too early as opposed to a year too late).

[Warning Track Power]

It seems to me we just accept our good luck. That is, he is pitching well. We pick up the option for next year. He pitches well again. Then we offer a qualifying offer. It means you have him for two years at good cost - with little risk. And you pick up a draft pick if he is lights out next year. Win-win.

Great post...and as others have mentioned this should be the way the team plays it with Gallardo.

 

However, what happens if another scenario is developing here. What if we are witnessing the first year of Yovani's career being re-defined? Could Yovani be developing into a Kyle Lohse-type of pitcher who relies less on heat and more on movement and control? Say Yovani goes the next two years at around 3.5 ERA and a 1.15 WHIP all while continuing to refine his curve, cutter, slider and, most importantly, his control all while working with the lower velocity fastball of 90-91. Do you extend him then?

[And That]

No way he takes a 4/50 deal with the way pitching has been getting paid.

Like Garza?