Next Year & Pitching

[JohnBriggs12]

The Cubs had no pitching, and had to fill out a rotation by taking fliers on veterans. The Brewers have talented young pitching, so they don't have the need to throw millions of dollars on a reclamation project.

 

They have their "I hope he turns it around so we can flip him for prospects" veteran in Garza and they really don't need another. The next in line for "let's hope he has a big season and ups his trade value" is Peralta.

 

The rest of the guys should have enough team control that we just need to get them innings to see how they play before determining what their future holds.

 

They need to bite the bullet and just jettison Garza like the Cubs did with Edwin Jackson. Garza's signing was done by the previous regime. The new regime shouldn't have to live with it. Lets see if Stearns has the ba..s to go to Attanasio and tell him just that. To me that's his first big test as GM.

 

Get your Cub point, but Pirates had young pitching and they still picked up Liriano in 2013 for a song. They didn't flip him because they contended that year but had they not, they could have struck gold.

 

Brewers can use at least one veteran for first four months of 2016. They'd be a lot better off with a buy lower guy like Kennedy than Garza as that guy. Even if Garza returned to respectable numbers and an ERA around 4, he's got little trade value. Kennedy's upside is considerably higher.

[monty57]

Brewers can use at least one veteran for first four months of 2016. They'd be a lot better off with a buy lower guy like Kennedy than Garza as that guy. Even if Garza returned to respectable numbers and an ERA around 4, he's got little trade value. Kennedy's upside is considerably higher.

 

But they still have to pay Garza, and they would be adding Kennedy's salary. I understand that big numbers get thrown around in baseball and we become numb to them, but there is a good chance that neither of these guys do well. In that case, the Brewers would just be doubling the wasted money this year. I understand that payroll will be down, and we could afford to eat another bad contract, but there isn't a big enough reason for me to want to take that risk. It kind of feels like going to Vegas since you have "too much" money in your bank account... who cares if you lose because it's just money, but think of how much you could win. Odds are you will just end up with no money.

 

I'll agree with you that Garza will probably be dumped, but since we already owe him guaranteed money, I think we should give him a few months to see if he can straighten things out enough that some team would at least take some of his salary off our hands. The potential gain is big money savings and maybe a prospect, while the potential loss is negligent, since we aren't planning on making the playoffs, and we already owe him the money. Plus, it gives us a little "pitching injury insurance," and allows some guys who may need more time in the minors the time to develop.

[Baldkin]

Bartolo or Bust.

 

He's the only SP I want the Brewers to go after this off season.

[JohnBriggs12]

Brewers can use at least one veteran for first four months of 2016. They'd be a lot better off with a buy lower guy like Kennedy than Garza as that guy. Even if Garza returned to respectable numbers and an ERA around 4, he's got little trade value. Kennedy's upside is considerably higher.

 

But they still have to pay Garza, and they would be adding Kennedy's salary. I understand that big numbers get thrown around in baseball and we become numb to them, but there is a good chance that neither of these guys do well. In that case, the Brewers would just be doubling the wasted money this year. I understand that payroll will be down, and we could afford to eat another bad contract, but there isn't a big enough reason for me to want to take that risk. It kind of feels like going to Vegas since you have "too much" money in your bank account... who cares if you lose because it's just money, but think of how much you could win. Odds are you will just end up with no money.

 

I'll agree with you that Garza will probably be dumped, but since we already owe him guaranteed money, I think we should give him a few months to see if he can straighten things out enough that some team would at least take some of his salary off our hands. The potential gain is big money savings and maybe a prospect, while the potential loss is negligent, since we aren't planning on making the playoffs, and we already owe him the money. Plus, it gives us a little "pitching injury insurance," and allows some guys who may need more time in the minors the time to develop.

 

I would have agreed with you back in say July when he still was occasionally posting a decent start. Why risk turning off fans that suffered through the awful start in 2015, by subjecting them to more of Garza, the latest poster boy for what was wrong with the Melvin regime? If the 2016 Brewers are going to struggle out of the gate, at least have some fresh faces. The absolute best case scenario is if he pitches to some level of competence that a team out there will take a flyer on him if the Brewers eat 75% of his salary. Even then the return in talent back would be negligible. I'd rather risk a bit more and get someone who actually has an upside and who'll have a contract that isn't a deterrent to a deal.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Bartolo or Bust.

 

He's the only SP I want the Brewers to go after this off season.

 

 

http://deadspin.com/bartolo-colon-heads-to-the-locker-room-eats-it-1737655931

 

 

When I saw this headline, I literally thought they meant that he had eaten the locker room. Then I realized that they meant "eats it" as in "slang for fell down".

 

I wouldn't have been surprised if he had actually eaten the locker room though.

 

 

And before anyone says it for me.......

 

 

http://i.imgur.com/U7Ghu2s.gif?noredirect

[monty57]

Brewers can use at least one veteran for first four months of 2016. They'd be a lot better off with a buy lower guy like Kennedy than Garza as that guy. Even if Garza returned to respectable numbers and an ERA around 4, he's got little trade value. Kennedy's upside is considerably higher.

 

But they still have to pay Garza, and they would be adding Kennedy's salary. I understand that big numbers get thrown around in baseball and we become numb to them, but there is a good chance that neither of these guys do well. In that case, the Brewers would just be doubling the wasted money this year. I understand that payroll will be down, and we could afford to eat another bad contract, but there isn't a big enough reason for me to want to take that risk. It kind of feels like going to Vegas since you have "too much" money in your bank account... who cares if you lose because it's just money, but think of how much you could win. Odds are you will just end up with no money.

 

I'll agree with you that Garza will probably be dumped, but since we already owe him guaranteed money, I think we should give him a few months to see if he can straighten things out enough that some team would at least take some of his salary off our hands. The potential gain is big money savings and maybe a prospect, while the potential loss is negligent, since we aren't planning on making the playoffs, and we already owe him the money. Plus, it gives us a little "pitching injury insurance," and allows some guys who may need more time in the minors the time to develop.

 

I would have agreed with you back in say July when he still was occasionally posting a decent start. Why risk turning off fans that suffered through the awful start in 2015, by subjecting them to more of Garza, the latest poster boy for what was wrong with the Melvin regime? If the 2016 Brewers are going to struggle out of the gate, at least have some fresh faces. The absolute best case scenario is if he pitches to some level of competence that a team out there will take a flyer on him if the Brewers eat 75% of his salary. Even then the return in talent back would be negligible. I'd rather risk a bit more and get someone who actually has an upside and who'll have a contract that isn't a deterrent to a deal.

 

You're kind of defeating your own argument. If Garza couldn't resurrect his trade value, then why could Kennedy? Garza has a decent enough track record in baseball that a hot start next year could allow for teams to disregard his 2015 numbers, especially if there were any injuries hampering him this season. He has at least as good a chance of bouncing back as Kennedy.

 

If you just want to dump Garza, I wouldn't be too upset by it, but I don't see any reason for dumping Garza (paying his full salary) and then adding on Kennedy, who has a high likelihood of being yet another bad contract, even if it is for only one season. If the fans are going to be put off by seeing Garza on the mound, they would be more upset by paying him not to pitch and then signing another veteran FA who stinks.

 

To me, Garza is kind of a "stick with the crap you're stuck with" option.

[Crash2303]

I don't see any strong indicators that this year is a trend for Garza, but rather an "off year" that many players seem to have in baseball from time to time. it is crazy the over reaction fans have to these types of seasons from consistent vets. He'll be 32 for the entire next season, which although no longer "young", it by no means suggests a steep or sudden decline due to age (aka Lohse) or significant injuries. and his pitch velocities were pretty consistent with previous years, especially 2014. he just wasn't locating as well.

 

He has consistently been a quality (though oft injured) middle rotation starter for the past 8 seasons. here are his ERAs in recent years:

2011- 3.32

2012- 3.91

2013- 3.82

2014- 3.64

2015- 5.63

 

It is asinine to release him at this point and still be paying him. so, you start him off the year next year, hope he rebounds and chances seem likely that he will, and then dish him hopefully at the trade deadline or at the end of the season for what you can get.

 

2017 is a different story, however, that we'll be in a place to possibly compete again for a playoff spot, and we'll have young pitchers "pushing" him out of the rotation by then, at which point, we'd almost certainly have to unload him regardless of what we'd get for him.

[danzig6767]

Feldman was hurt in 2011 and not very good in 2012. That's why he was available on a 1 year deal. Hammel wasn't good in 2013. That's why he was available on a 1 year deal. Liriano was hurt and ineffective. That's why he was available on a 1 year deal.

 

Samardzija was the reason the A's gave up Russell, not Hammel. Even the Cubs didn't expect Arrieta to turn into a Cy Young type pitcher.

 

Kennedy was hurt this year with a minor hamstring injury in the beginning of the season and he wasn't ineffective enough where he would only be able to find a 1 or maybe 2 year deal. So your comparisons don't really hold much water to me.

 

If there's a 1 year deal to build value at a position we don't have very much depth at and isn't blocking a young player, I'm fine with it but signing Kennedy long term isn't good value for a team in our position.

Yea, Theo certainly deserves credit for trading for Arrieta, but no way did he envision getting Cy Young quality pitching from Arrieta. Sometimes a GM simply gets lucky in pro sports where a player becomes much better than you could have imagined after picking him up via a trade, waivers, or in later the draft.

[endaround]

Garza has been a solidly above average pitcher when healthy, a #2 starter. That "when healthy" is why the Brewers even had a shot at him. He almost certainly pitched this past season hurt trying to get the option to vest. And the option is why he didn't get to start at the end of the year even when Peralta who was just as bad was kept in the rotation.