Marco Estrada 2015 and beyond

[reillymcshane]

Here's an exercise. I'm curious to see people's opinions.

 

Let's say that Lohse, Gallardo and Estrada all pitch to similar numbers this year - let's say 180-200 innings, an ERA around 3.60-3.80, and so forth.

 

You get to sign one to an extension in the off season (let's say 4 years for Gallardo, 3 years for Estrada or 2 years for Lohse). Which one do you sign?

 

What if you could sign each of the players to an extension that was a year less (Gallardo for 3 years, Estrada for 2 years and Lohse for 1 year.)?

 

Then, you have to trade one (allowing Thornburg or Nelson to move into the rotation). Which one is dealt?

 

The third player will stay with the team in 2015, with the realization that he will be a free agent at the end of the year and allowed to leave as a FA (and replaced by Nelson or Thornburg).

[adambr2]

Here's an exercise. I'm curious to see people's opinions.

 

Let's say that Lohse, Gallardo and Estrada all pitch to similar numbers this year - let's say 180-200 innings, an ERA around 3.60-3.80, and so forth.

 

You get to sign one to an extension in the off season (let's say 4 years for Gallardo, 3 years for Estrada or 2 years for Lohse). Which one do you sign?

 

What if you could sign each of the players to an extension that was a year less (Gallardo for 3 years, Estrada for 2 years and Lohse for 1 year.)?

 

Then, you have to trade one (allowing Thornburg or Nelson to move into the rotation). Which one is dealt?

 

The third player will stay with the team in 2015, with the realization that he will be a free agent at the end of the year and allowed to leave as a FA (and replaced by Nelson or Thornburg).

 

I'm not sure I would sign any of them. I guess it would be Yo if I had to but I wouldn't overpay. I'd trade whichever of Lohse or Estrada brought more value in a trade, assuming both were completely healthy when I made the trade.

[vegasbrewcrew1993]

I wouldn't trade him. He's a valuable and inexpensive member of the rotation. He's proven he can be a very good pitcher. I'd only trade him if someone was willing to overpay. He's more valuable to the Brewers remaining in the rotation than being traded for a prospect.

[igor67]

In the world of trying to make a bold move if I was dealing someone from the rotation I'd probably actually trade Gallardo. With a good start so far I think his rep is most likely to exceed future value. Which also means he could bring the most in return. A number of things would have to break right and I can't see it actually happening, but if the pitching depth does hold up he could be dealt to take care of other needs, still be competitive this year and make it easier to keep things going.

[danzig6767]

It will be interesting to see how the Brewers play this. This hot start makes it very unlikely that they will trade away anyone this year, so they will be sitting next offseason with one year remaining on Lohse, Gallardo and Estrada, with Thornburg and Nelson presumably ready for the rotation. They really need to get at least one of Thornburg/Nelson into the rotation next year, since they don't want to risk losing 3/5 of their starting rotation after the 2015 season.

 

I agree that there is little to no chance Marco gets traded this year. Plus, that really should be no surprise when you look at the dwindling amount of trade deadline deals lately. It's been lots of rumors around the league before the deadline, but then the deadline passes with mostly a yawn as few notable deals actually happen.

 

I think the main reason for that is teams more and more loathe the idea of trading cost controlled highly regarded prospects at the deadline. Hell, it's not just at the deadline anymore. In general we see less quality prospects being traded away than in the past.

 

Come the offseason though, it certainly is possible that Estrada or Gallardo gets traded. That obviously would depend on what type of year the team ends up having and how each of those two produces. If the team say makes the playoffs this year, i see the odds being higher that if they traded Estrada, it would be for a veteran firstbaseman or one in AAA ready for the majors than some hard throwing pitcher a year or two away in the minors. Who knows though right now, way to many variables only 20 games into the season.

[HiAndTight]

I don't think his fastball velocity is relevant to the amount of respect he should get. Gallardo sits at about 91, he doesn't light up the radar. Where is the line in the sand? I certainly don't think that guys who manage to be effective without overpowering fastballs should be slighted for it.

 

If you're working 90-91, you are exactly average, if you work anything below that then well... Furthermore FB velocity is absolutely relative when discussing pitchers. I don't really want to take the time to rehash the stuff vs results debate, if you can get pitchers with average FBs to out pitch their physical talent that's fantastic. However that doesn't mean we should ever get comfortable with that player.

 

Pitchers that work with below average FBs are almost entirely reliant on their command, as such they aren't pitchers you want to bank on long-term. People will look at the ultimate results from someone like that and get excited and make all kinds of statistical arguments why they are better than they are. The, "Yes he's got an average to below average FB but..." type statements, remember the "Capuano is our true ace" thread? When those guys tank, they tank fast, so again moving Estrada doesn't have as much to do with what he is, but rather what he's not.

 

He's not physically talented relative to his peers, he's never pitched more than 139.2 innings in any season in his career, he's over 30, and the team only controls him through 2015. While he's ultimately been successful at the big league level, those factors are going to work against the Brewers in a trade situation because they are obvious flaws. It doesn't really matter why Marco has never had even a 180 inning season when it comes to defining his trade value, if you're the GM on the other end of the phone that's a serious red flag. Those are actually all the same reasons why the Brewers should view him as expendable, even though he's been a good pitcher when he's been healthy. The Brewers should know it, we should know it, and the other teams certainly are going to know it when it comes to discussing his value.

 

Our best case scenario would be he's the best pitcher available at the trade deadline and someone will overpay for him in a bidding war for a playoff push, then we can talk about getting a prospect in that 30-60 range from the top 100. The problem of course is that the Brewers would actually have to be willing to deal him, which I doubt they will. In which case I'd be looking for someone from A, R+, or R with some upside who the scouts liked over the winter, I don't know that he'd draw top 100 interest. If they'd even move him then... worst case the team rides him to FA and tries to get compensation by offering him a QO or actually trying to resign him to a FA contract.

 

The Mets spent all off-season trying to trade Ike Davis to the Pirates for Nick Kingham who was #64 on the most recent 100. I think Kingham will ultimately be a #3, but there's no way I would have traded Kingham for Davis, nor would I trade a prospect like that for someone like Estrada who's yet to pitch a full season in the majors and I only control for 1 year. We're talking a pretty small number of teams who think they are in a window (I know I don't believe in the window philosophy but others do) to compete and are desperate enough for pitching they would make that kind of move.

 

For what it's worth I don't think Gallardo is going to age all that well either unless he learns to attack more through the strike zone, he's always been a nibbler and at some point it's just not going to work for him anymore.

 

 

 

First of all, I've stated a dozen times on this board that I don't believe Gallardo is going to age well(I agree with you Crew07) BECAUSE he's losing velocity and I don't think his secondary stuff is good enough, nor is his command good enough to succeed with an average fastball under 90.

 

But at least as of now, he's still throwing 91 as opposed to Estrada's 88. And while it may not be impacting his results this minute. He may be having some success, you're crazy if you don't think that other teams who are looking to trade him aren't going to take that into consideration. Someone actually said they'd much rather have Bud Norris and then used what Norris was traded for as a starting point for Estrada. Teams want power arms. Even if you're 30 years old, if you can throw 93 MPH(on average as Norris can and hit 95-96) there is at least the hope that something will click, you'll refine a 3rd pitch, their pitching coach can work with you, and you can improve. If you're maxing out around 88 MPH, what's your upside? This of course yet again setting aside the fact that one has several seasons of 170-190 innings pitched and Estrada has yet to have ONE yet.

 

But back to Gallardo, I'm SO tired of these cherry picking stats. What do you want out of your starting pitchers? To be durable. Take the ball every 5th day, throw 200 innings and do so as effectively as you can. There is a reason why relievers with a 3.50 ERA over 70 innings aren't compared to starters with a similar ERA over 200 innings. Because they add significantly less value.

 

Going back to the last two years and making an argument based on the fact that Estrada has a higher WAR is...invalid in my opinion.

What would a team rather have,

138 IP with a 3.64, 3.35 FIP, 3.48 xFIP

OR

204 IP with a 3.66 ERA, 3.94 FIP, 3.55 xFIP

 

WAR is an interesting stat in comparing players, but it's flawed. There is absolutely no doubt the guy who took the mound for 33 starts and pitched 66 more innings giving up almost the exact same number of runs per inning was more valuable.

 

But you're also ignoring that Estrada had a 3.1 WAR in 2012 and has a career TOTAL of 5.2 WAR vs Gallardo's 17.4 being 3 years younger. If you have to search so hard to try and prop up Estrada by picking and choosing what stats you're going to use to compare him to, or picking arbitrary start dates, that should probably tell you that you're not comparing equal pitchers(and again, I'm NOT a huge Gallardo fan anymore).

 

Again, my point isn't to say that Estrada isn't a very nice pitcher for us, but I absolutely believe if ANYONE suggested that the Brewers take Jimmy Nelson, a young power pitcher who can throw in the mid to upper 90's, gets GB's, and whom we control for 6 years, and were offered an 31 year old pitcher who's NEVER proven he can be an effective big league starter from April to September, I think the entire board would scoff at such a suggestion.

 

I just don't see talent evaluators out there actually recommending that they give up any top 100 or even top 150 prospect for such a guy with such a low ceiling. If fact, I think Estrada has pitched close to his ceiling the past couple years.

 

 

Estrada throws strikes, he has a nice change. A team like Detroit I'm sure would love to add him if they lost their #5...but if they were going to give up someone like Thompson or Crawford, I'm guessing they'd want more. I also think that Estrada is an awful fit in the AL with the DH and extra hitter, but that's an extension of him being a soft tosser and fly ball pitcher.

[HiAndTight]

In the world of trying to make a bold move if I was dealing someone from the rotation I'd probably actually trade Gallardo. With a good start so far I think his rep is most likely to exceed future value. Which also means he could bring the most in return. A number of things would have to break right and I can't see it actually happening, but if the pitching depth does hold up he could be dealt to take care of other needs, still be competitive this year and make it easier to keep things going.

 

 

I absolutely agree with you here. Never going to happen, but I think with Gallardo's history and the fact that he's pitching so well, I think you're more likely to get a top 50 prospect, and perhaps another intriguing couple lower level prospects. He's under team control for this year and next, plus the team trading for him could obviously make him a qualifying offer.

 

A team like the Angles or Braves would seem to be two good options. I wonder if we could even pull a Sims type prospect for him at this point. Perhaps something that may include Pastronicky who looks like a utility middle IF'er at this point?

 

The Braves are a very talented team that's suffered some really bad luck on the mound. Gallardo would slot in nicely in that rotation, but of course they'd have to have Harang come back to earth. But I doubt with all the talent they've assembled they're eager to roll the dice with Hale and Harang making up 2/5ths of that rotation.

[monty57]

Again, my point isn't to say that Estrada isn't a very nice pitcher for us, but I absolutely believe if ANYONE suggested that the Brewers take Jimmy Nelson, a young power pitcher who can throw in the mid to upper 90's, gets GB's, and whom we control for 6 years, and were offered an 31 year old pitcher who's NEVER proven he can be an effective big league starter from April to September, I think the entire board would scoff at such a suggestion.

 

Interesting point. If the Brewers are still three games up in the division mid-to-late July and someone like Lohse or Garza goes down for the season, would the Brewers be more likely to replace him with Nelson, or trade Nelson for a veteran replacement?

 

I agree that Estrada doesn't have huge trade value, but he will have his best value if he remains a starting pitcher this season, puts up good numbers (and doesn't get hurt) and is traded this offseason. I believe that if Attanasio has the choice of trading one of Gallardo, Lohse or Estrada, he will choose to trade the least known and least valuable of the three. So, I hope Estrada is able to pitch well this season, helping the 2014 team, and bring back something of value this offseason making room for one of the higher upside young guys.

[Warning Track Power]

Interesting point. If the Brewers are still three games up in the division mid-to-late July and someone like Lohse or Garza goes down for the season, would the Brewers be more likely to replace him with Nelson, or trade Nelson for a veteran replacement?

YIKES...that is a VERY interesting question. Being competitive long term in this division may be a challenge for the Brewers with the Cardinals continually churning good young players through the system, the Baby Cubs getting closer and closer and the Pirates still young. So do you go for it in the event of an injury and in the process, sacrifice even more in the long term? I say no to trading Nelson and put him into the rotation as the answer to any injury. Honestly, if Gallardo continues to pitch like the Yo of old, Lohse/Garza (whichever one is not injured in your scenario) and Estrada remain the players they have been the past few seasons and Peralta continues his ascent, Nelson's role may be to come up and simply be a league average #5, which I think he would have little issue doing.

[brewcrewdue80]

Plus, that really should be no surprise when you look at the dwindling amount of trade deadline deals lately. It's been lots of rumors around the league before the deadline, but then the deadline passes with mostly a yawn as few notable deals actually happen.

 

I think the main reason for that is teams more and more loathe the idea of trading cost controlled highly regarded prospects at the deadline. Hell, it's not just at the deadline anymore. In general we see less quality prospects being traded away than in the past.

 

 

Think about it this way. When I read this comment I immediately think to my Fantasy Baseball beginnings. 2010. And now. Dynasty/Keeper Leagues have grown.

 

Just look at MLB.com and their Prospect rankings. 2010 Non-existent. 2011 it was a top 50 with a team's top 10.

Then it happened 2012 a Top 100 list with top 20 for each team. Mike Trout and Bryce Harper emerged. And now the casual fan has easy access to what MLB.com opines is a top 100 prospect as well as top 20 prospect for an individual team.

In 2010, not there. Fans know more about their prospects than in the past and the uproar from trading the future for a half season run at the playoffs GMs just can't get away with the moves as easily as before without a fan backlash. Add to it the QO vs. FA compensation of the past involvement. The C.C. Sabathia trade never happens for Milw in 2008 with the rules today because we don't get our draft pick when he departs. Meanwhile Cleveland would know they have a QO to offer C.C. so the return would be asked for higher prospects. It's swung the Prospect receiving team in to a better trade position in their ask for return. But at the same time also costs them trade partners due to the team trading for Garza for example last year to not be able to get compensation when he leaves via FA. So why lose your top prospect? Lose the player via FA? And be left with nothing to show for it if you don't win the WS? Meanwhile, sit at home GMs will be clamoring at how poor you are as a GM having made the (Grienke trade of 2012)

So yeah, the trade deadline does look more bleak, not to mention the 2 added Playoff spots giving more teams a chance to make the playoffs and leave teams in a trade limbo whether they are sellers or buyers vs. a more concrete picture.

 

Few things are going to happen that change this. The QO system is scrapped/changed. The trade deadline is pushed back. A number of prospects are going to fail/never get out of constantly being injured thus changing the opinion of the potential future impact they really will have and the make moves for this year's WS run takes over again.

(btw Martin Perez our big hope to get from Texas, has now thrown b2b CG shutouts after an 8ip of 0s. and Olt is batting .195 with 762OPS and 4HRs for Cubs)

 

Edit Add: What's this have to do with Estrada? Just honestlyput this there in response to that comment and to me just makes a thought of Estrada being traded this season? It won't happen. He's an offseason future trade only. What's Estrada's? worth? He's going to have this year to show it. If he makes 30 Starts this season and is a 3.7 or less ERA guy. All the arguments against his inability to pitch a full season becomes mute. And he does then have a higher value than we speculate.

[HiAndTight]

Again, my point isn't to say that Estrada isn't a very nice pitcher for us, but I absolutely believe if ANYONE suggested that the Brewers take Jimmy Nelson, a young power pitcher who can throw in the mid to upper 90's, gets GB's, and whom we control for 6 years, and were offered an 31 year old pitcher who's NEVER proven he can be an effective big league starter from April to September, I think the entire board would scoff at such a suggestion.

 

Interesting point. If the Brewers are still three games up in the division mid-to-late July and someone like Lohse or Garza goes down for the season, would the Brewers be more likely to replace him with Nelson, or trade Nelson for a veteran replacement?

 

I agree that Estrada doesn't have huge trade value, but he will have his best value if he remains a starting pitcher this season, puts up good numbers (and doesn't get hurt) and is traded this offseason. I believe that if Attanasio has the choice of trading one of Gallardo, Lohse or Estrada, he will choose to trade the least known and least valuable of the three. So, I hope Estrada is able to pitch well this season, helping the 2014 team, and bring back something of value this offseason making room for one of the higher upside young guys.

 

 

I honestly believe if that happened to the Brewers this year, they'd slide Thornburg into the starting rotation.

 

Leading up to the broadcast last night they were talking to Melvin about Thornburg and where his future might be. Melvin started by kinda sidestepping the question and just offering basic platitudes. He talked about how great he's been, and when someone's having so much success in their current role and it's working it's really hard to move the guy...etc..etc..etc..basically not tipping his hand on anything.

 

He was pushed a bit then, and asked about the dramatic improvement of Thornburg's change, and how that gives him a 3rd pitch that could make him a legit starter. Melvin agreed and talked about how there are a lot of things that can happen. When you have young starters, you never know when a trade might open up a spot for them and you can just slide them in there.

 

To say I'm paraphrasing would be an understatement. He also talked about how he absolutely thinks TT CAN be a starter and how he sees some Lincecum in him in that he has that good velocity, a big curve, but really dominates now with that changeup.

 

So what I took away from that was that if there's a need for a starting pitcher for more than 3-4 starts, that it'd be Thornburg. And when he mentioned a trade, it actually gave me hope that they'd make a trade if they were in contention. That they'd trade one of their starters in order to upgrade another position or add prospects if they thought they had an equal or superior starter in their system.

 

The most value Estrada could give the Brewers IMO would be to continue to pitch extremely effectively as he has but to stay healthy in which case he actually would be comparable to Gallardo for ONE season allowing the Brewers to sell high on Yo and slot Thornburg into the rotation without losing anything and potentially gaining a kings ransom for Gallardo.

 

Yo is the exact type of pitcher that I think teams could potentially compete for and overpay for.

 

But that would take giant stones for the Brewers to do. The players would be up in arms, the fan base would be up in arms, there is a huge chance it could backfire. But I think there is an even better chance it could be a trade that helps to set up a foundation moving forward.

 

A couple potential trade targets just for fun since the Brewers are highly unlikely trade their defacto "ace," while competing, but these are teams that could contend and may overvalue Gallardo.

KC Royals-They have Zimmer and Ventura, either of which would be an awesome return, plus a whole farm system they could build a deal around.

Atlanta-Sims as I mentioned.

SF-Crick.

 

Just a few teams off the top of my head that may have an incentive to make a trade for the short term and have some elite prospects.

 

 

But this is getting way off topic. So I'll repeat myself again. The only move I'd make with Estrada right now assuming I'm correct and he's not going to net very much prospect wise would to keep him, go year to year with him as he offers the Brewers move value on their team than in terms of what he can bring back.

[HiAndTight]

Interesting point. If the Brewers are still three games up in the division mid-to-late July and someone like Lohse or Garza goes down for the season, would the Brewers be more likely to replace him with Nelson, or trade Nelson for a veteran replacement?

YIKES...that is a VERY interesting question. Being competitive long term in this division may be a challenge for the Brewers with the Cardinals continually churning good young players through the system, the Baby Cubs getting closer and closer and the Pirates still young. So do you go for it in the event of an injury and in the process, sacrifice even more in the long term? I say no to trading Nelson and put him into the rotation as the answer to any injury. Honestly, if Gallardo continues to pitch like the Yo of old, Lohse/Garza (whichever one is not injured in your scenario) and Estrada remain the players they have been the past few seasons and Peralta continues his ascent, Nelson's role may be to come up and simply be a league average #5, which I think he would have little issue doing.

 

 

In this scenario, would you object to throwing Thornburg into the rotation in the hopes that he could offer much more than a league average #5 and that perhaps Nelson could be a good late inning reliever throwing in the upper 90's and just using two pitches(FB, Slider?).

[SoupTown]

Nelson, I assume, would really benefit from being a 'get feet wet' reliever in MLB soon.

 

We have a weird problem for the Brewers. We have two AAA guys completely dominating (Nelson and Fiers). And nowhere to put them. Doug does have some options, it does appear!

[HiAndTight]

Nelson, I assume, would really benefit from being a 'get feet wet' reliever in MLB soon.

 

We have a weird problem for the Brewers. We have two AAA guys completely dominating (Nelson and Fiers). And nowhere to put them. Doug does have some options, it does appear!

 

 

I just REALLY hope that he can think outside the box just a little bit. If we get to the trade deadline healthy and maintain the status quo, ie, Nelson, Thornburg, Fiers all pitching well(in addition to Jungman and Bradley among others) that they'd at least entertain trade offers for a Gallardo.

 

 

You can say this about any team, but the Brewers are just a little bad luck and one draft away from having 3 of the top players in baseball. Tex signs with the Red Sox, the Brewers get the comp pick from the Yankees and get Trout. We select Fernandez and Gray over Jungman and Bradley and we're suddenly a team that could contend with anyone in baseball and may have the brightest future. The most extreme of examples to be certain, but my point is that even though we're in a great place right now and may be at the trade deadline, a move such as trading one of our top starters, while being counter intuitive, could yield massive gains in the future.

 

Obviously with the benefit of hindsight things look obvious, but the Brewers need to stop thinking about how they can scrape together a competitive team next year and start thinking about how they can put together a championship team in 5 years(maybe a compromise between Theo's approach and what we've been doing).

[Jose Cardenal1]

While I understand where your coming from HiandTight, I do not agree. If the Brewers are approaching the deadline with a playoff contending club and the starters are healthy and effective (presumably the reason why they would be contending) no way do I risk trading away Gallardo (and I love Jimmy Nelson). That wouldn't be just outside of the box thinking that would be unheard of thinking. Trading away your defacto #1 starter in the middle of a pennant race?? I realize that Gallardo isn't really a #1, but I think last year really soured the view of him. I believe he has returned to his 2007-2012 form.

 

I am perfectly fine holding onto Gallardo through his '15 option and then offering him the QO and when he turns it down let some other team pay him $75-$80 million for his early to mid 30's years and get the draft pick.

[HiAndTight]

While I understand where your coming from HiandTight, I do not agree. If the Brewers are approaching the deadline with a playoff contending club and the starters are healthy and effective (presumably the reason why they would be contending) no way do I risk trading away Gallardo (and I love Jimmy Nelson). That wouldn't be just outside of the box thinking that would be unheard of thinking. Trading away your defacto #1 starter in the middle of a pennant race?? I realize that Gallardo isn't really a #1, but I think last year really soured the view of him. I believe he has returned to his 2007-2012 form.

 

I am perfectly fine holding onto Gallardo through his '15 option and then offering him the QO and when he turns it down let some other team pay him $75-$80 million for his early to mid 30's years and get the draft pick.

 

 

I expect many to feel the same way and I'd imagine the casual fans would be even more upset about such a move. But in my opinion he's really only our "defacto ace," because he's home grown and he's been our opening day starter for several years. I don't think he's any better than Lohse or Graza and I think Peralta and Thornburg could very well end up being better.

 

And yes, I believe last year was an outlier. But even if you use those 2007-2012 years, he never made that step you were hoping for to become an elite starting pitcher. He was incredibly consistent and very-very valuable. My thinking is just that his velocity and his peripherals are slipping, yet his ERA is down and as such teams may be willing to really pay for it.

 

In reality it'd be a nightmare for public relations, but in theory it could be one of those types of moves you make that 2-3 years down the road pays enormous dividends.

[monty57]

GM's are usually hesitant to make a move that could completely blow up in their face. I get your point that trading one of our SP mid-season would bring the highest return and could help the future (something I've been pining for for a long time), there's too much chance that his replacement (Nelson/Thornburg) pitches poorly or that another SP gets injured and we wouldn't have a replacement. That would get fans in an uproar, and Attanasio/Melvin won't risk it.

 

I see a nice opportunity to trade one, and maybe (but not likely) even two of Gallardo/Lohse/Estrada next offseason. They should all have some trade value at that time, and it will allow for Thornburg and/or Nelson to step into the rotation while retaining four experienced starting pitchers in the rotation. Like the Aoki trade this past offseason, this would be a "safe" route to take.

[SoupTown]

And don't forget, Smith is a stater, hiding in the bullpen. So, if you needed, you could have a 2015 rotation with Peralta, Thornburg, Smith, Nelson, and let us say Fiers. Heck, that is much better than some of the five's we saw for many years. I am not advocating, but we have too many good starters.

[HiAndTight]

And don't forget, Smith is a stater, hiding in the bullpen. So, if you needed, you could have a 2015 rotation with Peralta, Thornburg, Smith, Nelson, and let us say Fiers. Heck, that is much better than some of the five's we saw for many years. I am not advocating, but we have too many good starters.

 

 

Heck, Jungman could even find his way into that rotation if he continues to improve.

 

Or Hellweg(later in the year) as pitchers coming back from TJ often times actually improve their mechanics out of necessity so that they can stay healthy and strengthen their arm. That one is a little less likely. Who knows what pitchers might make a big jump in the next 15 months. Maybe even Wang!

[igor67]

Now I know the Brewers record has us all a little giddy, but it sounds dangerously like this thread is promoting the heresy of the Brewers having pitching depth.

[LouisEly]

I wouldn't trade him. He's a valuable and inexpensive member of the rotation. He's proven he can be a very good pitcher. I'd only trade him if someone was willing to overpay. He's more valuable to the Brewers remaining in the rotation than being traded for a prospect.

This. Fastball velocity is not as important as the differential between fastball velocity and secondary pitch velocity and the ability to throw strikes with those secondary pitches. An 88 mph fastball looks like 98 if you are expecting a 78 mph changeup.

 

I agree that there is little to no chance Marco gets traded this year. Plus, that really should be no surprise when you look at the dwindling amount of trade deadline deals lately. It's been lots of rumors around the league before the deadline, but then the deadline passes with mostly a yawn as few notable deals actually happen.

I'm wondering if baseball has reached a point where prospects have become overvalued, to the point where the inefficiency in the market is that pitchers like Estrada are the bargain. Moneyball wasn't about OBP; it was about the fact that players with high OBP were undervalued and a bargain in the market at the time.

 

I think the way Thornburg has been pitching in his role you don't change anything and bring up Fiers, who is putting up HS-pitcher like numbers in AAA: 33.2 IP, 19 H, 3 BB, 47 K, 0.80 ERA.

[SoupTown]

"I'm wondering if baseball has reached a point where prospects have become overvalued"

 

Amen to that. This is why I don't really mind giving up a first round draft pick for 3 or 4 years of a solid MLB guy. You are giving up a prospect (a very good one) for a very good MLB guy. That is a Moneyball concept. Buy low. I think from a draft point of view, you can only cover for that by drafting high ceiling guys. I would free agent and trade for the medium / good guys. And to get the superstars you need to draft flyer after flyer.

[TheCrew07]

"I'm wondering if baseball has reached a point where prospects have become overvalued"

 

Amen to that. This is why I don't really mind giving up a first round draft pick for 3 or 4 years of a solid MLB guy. You are giving up a prospect (a very good one) for a very good MLB guy. That is a Moneyball concept. Buy low. I think from a draft point of view, you can only cover for that by drafting high ceiling guys. I would free agent and trade for the medium / good guys. And to get the superstars you need to draft flyer after flyer.

 

Well first I'd like to point out that real Moneyball concept draft wise was to draft college players because they are more likely to be MLB players. Like all things statistical, that argument was largely dependent on how it was framed and in practical application what was overlooked was the ultimate ceiling of those players, every team that adopted the moneyball drafting philosophy tanked their farm system and by extension their MLB success. That's why no one follows that philosophy anymore, it was a completely superficial look at the drafting process, it lacked the context of the types of players and their ceilings which are available at different points in the draft.

 

As to buying low, that's not what the Brewers did at all. Not only are they paying Lohse a decent wage, they did it in a completely lost season, which cost them not only a first round pick, but the bonus money associated with that pick which handcuffed the entire draft. It's not as simple as 3 years of production vs. a lost prospect, in fact the Brewers have never gotten full production out of a Free Agent pitching contract, Lohse may well be the first, but let's not count our chickens before they are hatched. Assuming the best case scenario it's 3 years of production vs a lost first round talent and multiple steps down in talent throughout draft, which is admittedly extremely difficult to quantify.

 

The MLB draft is extremely unique and nuanced in comparison to other professional drafts, anyone who thinks that "all" signing Lohse cost was a 1st round pick doesn't really have a good grasp of the draft and the trickle down effect of losing that pool money.

 

As to prospects being overvalued I highly disagree. I think many teams are coming around to the idea that the marginal difference in production between prospects and middling FAs isn't worth the cost, which is something a small core of posters on this site has been trying to convince people of for a long time. Is the extra win really worth the 8 million dollar difference in salary for a season? With the Brewers relative lack of success in Free Agency posters on this site should understand this concept better than most, but every year we have the same debates about an incredibly small marginal difference in production at a spot and how this new Free Agent will be better than the last ones, this one is "the guy".

[ebmackenzie]

LouisEly said, "Fastball velocity is not as important as the differential between fastball velocity and secondary pitch velocity and the ability to throw strikes with those secondary pitches. An 88 mph fastball looks like 98 if you are expecting a 78 mph changeup."

 

Don't forget about movement...late movement on pitches in the zone is deadly and causes more missed bats than velocity. You don't have to be 6'5 240lbs to have it either.

[SoupTown]

anyone who thinks that "all" signing Lohse cost was a 1st round pick doesn't really have a good grasp of the draft and the trickle down effect of losing that pool money.

 

 

I think that above statement is clearly false. If you don't have a first rounder, you lose the first rounder money from your pool. So whether you SPEND the first round money on a first rounder or LOSE the first round money... you don't have have the first round money for the later picks.

 

Now you may want to put forth that you underspend on purpose in round one to pluck on an overspend in rounds 4 or 5, but that is a different discussion.

 

Also, I did not put forth the Moneyball draft concept. As I don't know or care what it was. All I know is Moneyball was about finding (like you do on the stock market) undervalued wins. So if fat, ugly guys who get on base are undervalued, you buy them.

 

And my feeling is the prospect or the CHANCE of a prospect (the draft) is now becoming the expensive - overvalued way.

 

So, again, I think one (in 2014 can pick up talent cheap if your are willing to give up a prospect or a draft pick). Cruz was 8 mill? That seems a good buy. So, it appears the UNKNOWN person in the draft, the prospect, is worth $5 or $6 million. That is, Cruz with no draft give up, I guess, would have obtained 13 or 14 mill.

 

Lohse, we likely saved 2 mill a year for three years... $6 mill for the first rounder.

 

So, that is your weigh up... is HAVING the first round draft pick worth $6 mill. It seems the first rounder is not worth that. He can we Trout or he can be one of the guys who never make the major leagues.

 

And back to poor Marco. He is not a prospect, so he is worth not much. The most value is to keep him - or even extend him!