Moving Garza

[pacopete4]

Is it unrealistic to think he can be moved in the August waiver claim period? I would love this team to go into next season with absolutely no older vets on their staff and let these young guys go at it. It could look a lot like this:

 

1. Nelson

2. Peralta

3. Jungmann

4. Davies

5. Cravy/Thornburg/Wagner/Lopez

 

Maybe I'm missing even more options but it just would be nice to roll out the young guys and try to have a very cheap rotation while we are in rebuild mode.

[PeaveyFury]

I'd imagine Doug is crossing trade assets off the list one by one... wouldn't surprise me to start hearing more about potential Cotts/Garza/Krod/Broxton deals as we move through the next few hours now that the Parra/Gomez deals are done.

 

If not today, I think it'll be a busy August for Milwaukee.

[JohnBriggs12]

You don't deal Garza when he's sitting with an ERA over 5. Wait and hope he starts next year with an ERA in line with his career numbers. He'd be much more valuable in the midst of something other than a career-worst season, and with less remaining on his contract.

 

This is where you need a manager that knows how to keep a starter's ERA in line. You don't let him get so far into games where he's blowing up his numbers as Counsell did back in May when Garza was left in to surrender 10 earned runs. Garza gave up 5 or more earned runs in 5 of his starts. Give him a shorter leash and you can cosmetically hold his ERA to around 4.

[JackNicholson1974]

Just so I am clear on August Waivers. If a player is put on waivers and a team claims them, that player can be pulled back - I get that. But in the same scenario can the Brewers just let him go? I would love to see team put in a claim for Garza and let him go and shed his entire salary.

[reillymcshane]

You don't deal Garza when he's sitting with an ERA over 5. Wait and hope he starts next year with an ERA in line with his career numbers. He'd be much more valuable in the midst of something other than a career-worst season, and with less remaining on his contract.

This is spot on.

 

Garza isn't moving unless you eat a ton of his contract, which means it's mostly a sunk cost. Just let the guy keep pitching. If he does well over the last 10 starts in 2015, he may actually be attractive to someone this off season. Or if not the rest of the year, then see if he can come back in 2016. If he's sitting on a sub 4.00 ERA next all-star break, someone will want him. But at this point, we have to eat nearly all of his salary for someone to take him. If that's the case, just wait.

[Point Beer Is Best]

Just so I am clear on August Waivers. If a player is put on waivers and a team claims them, that player can be pulled back - I get that. But in the same scenario can the Brewers just let him go? I would love to see team put in a claim for Garza and let him go and shed his entire salary.

 

 

That's my understanding. You basically have two types of waivers - Revocable, and Irrevocable with the former being the one we're familiar with during August. Teams basically place their whole teams on Revocable waivers and one of two things happen - a) player goes unclaimed, which means he can be traded just like he was before the non-waiver deadline and b) player is claimed by a team, at which point the teams discuss possible compensation and either pull the player back (and he can no longer be traded) or let the player go with some compensation coming back to the team. I don't recall a team ever just letting a player go for nothing in return, but I suppose it would be possible.

[Raw Biz]

I don't recall a team ever just letting a player go for nothing in return, but I suppose it would be possible.

 

Alex Rios in 2009.

[MNBrew]

I don't recall a team ever just letting a player go for nothing in return, but I suppose it would be possible.

 

Alex Rios in 2009.

Wasn't that some closer going to or from San Diego once, too, a number of years prior to Alex Rios? I was thinking it was Randy Myers, but checking baseball-reference.com, it was someone else.

[LouisEly]

I don't think people realize how reasonable/average Garza's contract is for someone with his track record. Looking at recent deals given out, only counting guaranteed money (excludes buyout year salaries, includes buyout $):

 

CIN gave 29-year-old Homer Bailey 4/$86M (his career FIP, WHIP, H/9, K/9 are eerily similar to Garza)

COL is paying 34-year-old Jorge de la Rosa $25M over this year and next

SDP gave 33-year-old James Shields 3/$65M

SFG game 38-year-old Tim Hudson 2/$23M and 34-year-old Jake Peavy 2/$24M last year

PIT gave 31-year-old Francisco Liriano (look at his 2011 & 2012) 3/$39M

TEX is giving 34-year-old C.J. Wilson $38M over this year and next (on top of $16M last year)

DET gave 30-year-old Anibal Sanchez 4/$71M last year

CHW is giving 30-year-old John Danks $31.5M over this year and next

MIN gave 32-year-old Ervin Santana 4/$55M, 29-year-old Phil Hughes 5/$58M, and last year gave 31-year-old Ricky Nolasco 4/$49M

KCR gave 30-year-old Edinson Volquez (look at his 2011-2013) 2/$20M

TOR is giving 39-year-old R.A. Dickey $25M over last year and this year

BAL last year gave 30-year-old Ubaldo Jimenez 4/$50M

 

Notice how no contracts given out by NYY, LAD, or BOS (Porcello) are mentioned. This is why I say, what pitcher who is similar to Garza in age and doesn't come with significant injury history/risk could you get for 2/$30M (or 3/$38M)? What will Gallardo and Samardzija get in free agency? Yes, Garza is having a bad year; Volquez and Liriano had multiple bad years. If you want to pay anything near what Garza is owed you have to go after guys with significant injury risk (Kazmir), age risk (Hudson, Peavy), or past poor performance risk (Volquez, Liriano), and I don't think Kazmir will fall into the "paid less than Garza" category once he hits free agency this winter.

[igor67]

It's also worth recognizing that while Garza has not been good he hasn't been a disaster like Lohse. He's been better since coming off the DL and a strong finish could easily make the first half look like an aberration.

[JohnBriggs12]

It's also worth recognizing that while Garza has not been good he hasn't been a disaster like Lohse. He's been better since coming off the DL and a strong finish could easily make the first half look like an aberration.

 

Garza's also 5 years younger than Lohse. It's one thing have an off year at age 31. Guys can bounce back from that. It's another when it comes at age 36. The consensus is going to be that Lohse is done.

 

Garza's not been good but he's not been Edwin Jackson 2014 bad either (6-15, 6.33 ERA). Jackson was at similar point in his very similar contract last year. Cubs moved him to the pen this year because they couldn't live with his production and contend. He wasn't bad in a low leverage role but they just dumped him and about $20 million left on his deal because they were never gone to give him a shot to build any trade value and risk losing. Where the Brewers are now, they have nothing to lose by keep running him out there every 5 days.

[JohnBriggs12]

I don't recall a team ever just letting a player go for nothing in return, but I suppose it would be possible.

 

Alex Rios in 2009.

 

As I recall, the Blue Jays put Rios and his long hefty contract on revocable waivers and White Sox claimed him so rather than withdrawing the waivers and working out a deal, the Jays just said, fine, he's yours and the White Sox took him and his contract. He had decent years with the Sox with one clunker in there in 2011.

[Boomer5]

Until someone from the farm emerges as a clear starter for us, I see no reason we dont just start Garza until we get an offer of some sort or he works it out. He has been bad, but not dumpster fire bad and this team isn't a good Garza away from 90 wins this year, or sadly next year, anyhow.

 

All that being said, we did move Broxton, and starters are getting hurt here and there, so Id think his name and relatively modest contract should be able to be traded for something in August.

[MNBrew]

As much as I don't like how he's pitched this year, Garza's track record suggests this year is an outlier. With two years left on his contract and with him being the only significantly-well-established SP on the team, I don't think you dump him just to dump him. Salary relief for next year is NOT a need at this point. If it's next July and he still hasn't straightened his game out, then that's a whole different deal.

 

In the meantime, I still can't figure why the Yankees won't take Lohse off our hands for a song.

[adambr2]

I don't think you dump him just to dump him. Salary relief for next year is NOT a need at this point. If it's next July and he still hasn't straightened his game out, then that's a whole different deal.

 

If it's next July and he still hasn't straightened his game out, it's too late to dump him for salary relief.

 

I'd dump Garza just to dump him if someone claimed him, which I don't think anyone will. Whether we NEED the relief now or not, we have no need for a middling middle to back end starter over the next few years at $40M during a rebuilding phase. Saving money for a liability you don't need is always good, even if it's money you have.

 

In the meantime, I still can't figure why the Yankees won't take Lohse off our hands for a song.

 

Being worse than a AAA replacement level pitcher and having the 2nd worst ERA in the big leagues (Kendricks is 1st, and he pitches in Colorado) probably has a lot to do with it.

[endaround]

My guess is it comes out Garza has basically been injured and trying to pitch through it all season. He has avoided going on the DL because of his contract with its voiding of options and $1m option if he spend too much time on the DL for 2018.

[jerichoholicninja]

My guess is it comes out Garza has basically been injured and trying to pitch through it all season. He has avoided going on the DL because of his contract with its voiding of options and $1m option if he spend too much time on the DL for 2018.

 

Garza was placed on the DL before the All Star break. He admitted he hadn't been 100% for a while. Since he came back his K/9 is up almost 1 and his ERA is down 2.5 runs.

[StearnsFTW]

I don't recall a team ever just letting a player go for nothing in return, but I suppose it would be possible.

 

Alex Rios in 2009.

Wasn't that some closer going to or from San Diego once, too, a number of years prior to Alex Rios? I was thinking it was Randy Myers, but checking baseball-reference.com, it was someone else.

 

Without looking, Mark Davis maybe? He was terrible after Kansas City gave him the big contract after his huge 89 season with the Padres.

 

On topic, Garza is horrible and one can only hope someone would claim him. Not gonna happen though. He has severe negative value.

[endaround]

On topic, Garza is horrible and one can only hope someone would claim him. Not gonna happen though. He has severe negative value.

 

What would be the point? The Brewers cut salary for next season as it is. If/when Lind gets moved, they have only Garza, Braun and KRod making over $5 m and KRod may get moved. I'd rather have Garza try to return to form to be able to trade for something of value instead of passing more money to the Brewer owners.

[LouisEly]

Some people were also saying they should just release A-Ram, the Brewers would be lucky to just get any salary relief, etc., and we saw how that turned out.

[adambr2]

Some people were also saying they should just release A-Ram, the Brewers would be lucky to just get any salary relief, etc., and we saw how that turned out.

 

That's pretty much exactly what happened. They got a few million in salary relief. I didn't think he should be released, but the guy they got for A-Ram is more or less just a flyer. We were fortunate that he played well enough the last month of his time here to get us that.

[StearnsFTW]

On topic, Garza is horrible and one can only hope someone would claim him. Not gonna happen though. He has severe negative value.

 

What would be the point? The Brewers cut salary for next season as it is. If/when Lind gets moved, they have only Garza, Braun and KRod making over $5 m and KRod may get moved. I'd rather have Garza try to return to form to be able to trade for something of value instead of passing more money to the Brewer owners.

 

I think Garza is done. So I'm all in favor of moving him if possible. I'm struggling to understand why anyone would want to keep him.

 

I guess if you think he could be resurrected that makes some sense, but I don't see that at all. I'd be thrilled if they could dump his contract.

[pogokat]

On topic, Garza is horrible and one can only hope someone would claim him. Not gonna happen though. He has severe negative value.

 

What would be the point? The Brewers cut salary for next season as it is. If/when Lind gets moved, they have only Garza, Braun and KRod making over $5 m and KRod may get moved. I'd rather have Garza try to return to form to be able to trade for something of value instead of passing more money to the Brewer owners.

 

I think Garza is done. So I'm all in favor of moving him if possible. I'm struggling to understand why anyone would want to keep him.

 

I guess if you think he could be resurrected that makes some sense, but I don't see that at all. I'd be thrilled if they could dump his contract.

 

bc there is literally no harm in keeping him.

 

if he gets better, then he can be traded---also, some of you guys think this team will be competitive in 2017, well Garza might still be on it then, so fingers crossed I guess.

 

If he doesn't get better, then he's helping the team get a better draft pick while keeping innings and "loser-itis" (i'm only a little bit serious) off of our prospects. In a season like this one, you keep running guys like Garza out there.

 

Lohse has probably lost his job---but Garza? patience is a virtue

[splitterpfj]

"Dump Garza" ... no, not at this point. He's 31, having a bad season, not 36.

 

The money's already spent, baseball contracts are guaranteed, so book it, they signed him, and the money's gone. No one would claim Matt on waivers right now, and I don't see the point in paying part of the money, to get a weak return in a trade - why not bring him back next year, to see if his value improves? Yovanni Gallardo was a mess two years ago, but he has since pitched better, been traded for three young players, and will now get a nice contract in free agency.

 

One thing to watch for ...

 

Garza's contract is through 2017, with a vesting option for 2018. Assuming he's here for the next two seasons, he needs to be used out of the bullpen in 2017, here's why:

 

Garza's contract vests at $13 million for 2018 if Garza pitches in 110 games during the first four years of the contract, and he is not on the disabled list at the end of the 2017 regular season, and he pitches at least 115 innings in 2017.

 

You've got him for two more years - stick him at the back of the rotation for now, and see if he comes around. As time passes, and the guaranteed money gets smaller, his value may improve some, to at least get a viable prospect. If the cash wasn't guaranteed, sure, cut him when the season's over if you want, but since it is, you don't really gain anything by dumping him.

[adambr2]

"Dump Garza" ... no, not at this point. He's 31, having a bad season, not 36.

 

The money's already spent, baseball contracts are guaranteed, so book it, they signed him, and the money's gone. No one would claim Matt on waivers right now, and I don't see the point in paying part of the money, to get a weak return in a trade - why not bring him back next year, to see if his value improves? Yovanni Gallardo was a mess two years ago, but he has since pitched better, been traded for three young players, and will now get a nice contract in free agency.

 

One thing to watch for ...

 

Garza's contract is through 2017, with a vesting option for 2018. Assuming he's here for the next two seasons, he needs to be used out of the bullpen in 2017, here's why:

 

Garza's contract vests at $13 million for 2018 if Garza pitches in 110 games during the first four years of the contract, and he is not on the disabled list at the end of the 2017 regular season, and he pitches at least 115 innings in 2017.

 

You've got him for two more years - stick him at the back of the rotation for now, and see if he comes around. As time passes, and the guaranteed money gets smaller, his value may improve some, to at least get a viable prospect. If the cash wasn't guaranteed, sure, cut him when the season's over if you want, but since it is, you don't really gain anything by dumping him.

 

I don't think (could be wrong, haven't read too deep) that anyone is suggesting just dumping Garza and eating the rest of his contract. That would be a really bad move at this point in his deal -- completely different situation and point in his career and contract than Lohse.

 

The debate the way I understand it is whether or not we would let Garza walk for nothing (I would) in the event that someone claimed him off waivers in August and thus was willing to take on the rest of his contract like Rios in 2009 (unlikely).