Garza to the Pen?

[MVP2110]

any chance we move Garza to the pen next year, either as a set up man or possibly even the closer, He is already expensive so putting him at closer helps keep Smith and Jeffress' arb numbers down, and could possibly build value as a good bullpen arm. Plus this would let us start a young rotation next year of Nelson Peralta Jungmann Davies and Lopez. Kind of an outside the box idea.

[pacopete4]

No. If he's on this team at the beginning of this season he will be there for one reason and that would be to build his value back up to trade him for young, controllable player(s).

[Thurston Fluff]

I really hope keeping a good player's arbitration numbers down never enters into the thinking of the team. I just don't see how essentially telling a player you couldn't care less about their career helps.

[brwrsfan]

I really hope keeping a good player's arbitration numbers down never enters into the thinking of the team. I just don't see how essentially telling a player you couldn't care less about their career helps.

 

Eh, on a contending team I'd 100% agree. Do whatever you can to win now if you think you have a shot at the playoffs.

 

On a team that's projected for maybe 70 wins and is in the middle of the road for budget, I don't have much issue with it.

 

I'm not saying potentially sabotage careers, but future salaries should be something to consider on a bad team with budget constraints.

[MrTPlush]

Matt Garza will be in the starting rotation if he is healthy and on this team. Moving him to the pen would be dumb in my mind. Just dump him at that point.

[MNBrew]

I really hope keeping a good player's arbitration numbers down never enters into the thinking of the team. I just don't see how essentially telling a player you couldn't care less about their career helps.

 

Eh, on a contending team I'd 100% agree. Do whatever you can to win now if you think you have a shot at the playoffs.

 

On a team that's projected for maybe 70 wins and is in the middle of the road for budget, I don't have much issue with it.

 

I'm not saying potentially sabotage careers, but future salaries should be something to consider on a bad team with budget constraints.

The Brewers may be a bad team, but they've pitched the situation well to the public and the fan base overall seems to get the situation and support the team. On top of that, they only have a couple guys making large (or really large) bucks and much of the rest of the roster is pretty inexpensive. In other words, I don't think the the Brewers are facing budget constraints given the current roster construction.

[ZBTMP]

Revisit in June/July...

 

Lopez is a good enough prospect, yet with still raw enough (walk rate) to not start his service clock yet. While I don't agree with completely tanking in 2016, the hope is our playoff probability is high in 2022. Therefore, Id rather have Lopez under control for the extra season than whatever gains will happen by entering next season in Milwaukee.

 

However, if Garza can't reinvent himself as a contact manager or rebound his k rate, and is still sitting with an ERA around 5 in the middle of next season; hopefully, Lopez, Hader, Houser and Wagner are knocking down the door and he is the most logical candidate to remove....

[brewerfan82]

In other words, I don't think the the Brewers are facing budget constraints given the current roster construction.

 

Pretty sure "budget constraints" was meant in a broader sense than pertaining to just this specific year. The Brewers are never going to have as much money available to spend as teams like the Yankees, Dodgers and Cubs. So positioning themselves to have as much financial flexibility as possible down the road, when it's time to max out their budget on a contending team, is very important and having an extra year on a guy before free agency here and there could be the difference between contending for the division and contending for the World Series.

[Roderick]

I really hope keeping a good player's arbitration numbers down never enters into the thinking of the team. I just don't see how essentially telling a player you couldn't care less about their career helps.

 

You are not keeping Smith/Jeffress from pitching in games, or even pitching too many innings even. You just aren't saving them to pitch in the last inning of every game that we are ahead in, as that would cost the team millions of dollars every arbitration season after.

 

Just like not bringing Braun up until later in the season, it is just smart money management.

[JohnBriggs12]

No. If he's on this team at the beginning of this season he will be there for one reason and that would be to build his value back up to trade him for young, controllable player(s).

 

Do you really see Garza doing enough as a starter for a team to hand over anything of quality for him without the Brewers picking up 75% of his remaining contract? Frankly I think the chances of that are slim and none with the edge to none. Even then, he'd have to revert at least to his 2014 form just for a team to show any interest in picking up 25% of his contract with a non-prospect as return. Brewers are in the same boat with Garza that the Cubs were in with Edwin Jackson last year. Keeping him in the rotation takes away innings from younger arms you are trying to develop. If he has to be on the roster (and I'd just release him), stick him in the pen as a $12 million mop up guy and see if he can earn some trust to use him later in the game. Basically put him in the role Lohse was in after he got demoted. If he doesn't like it, so be it, cut him and see if anyone picks him up for major league minimum.

[pacopete4]

No. If he's on this team at the beginning of this season he will be there for one reason and that would be to build his value back up to trade him for young, controllable player(s).

 

Do you really see Garza doing enough as a starter for a team to hand over anything of quality for him without the Brewers picking up 75% of his remaining contract?

 

He's one year removed from having a very good year. I truly think he was injured more than not last season, tried to pitch through it, and it backfired on him and the Brewers. Do I think the Brewers will get a bunch of stud prospects for him? Probably not. But if he returns to form, they could at least flip him for a younger, controllable player. Definitely. It'd be very silly of the Brewers to not give him the beginning of the year to prove otherwise.

[brwrsfan]

In other words, I don't think the the Brewers are facing budget constraints given the current roster construction.

 

Pretty sure "budget constraints" was meant in a broader sense than pertaining to just this specific year. The Brewers are never going to have as much money available to spend as teams like the Yankees, Dodgers and Cubs. So positioning themselves to have as much financial flexibility as possible down the road, when it's time to max out their budget on a contending team, is very important and having an extra year on a guy before free agency here and there could be the difference between contending for the division and contending for the World Series.

 

Yes, this is exactly what I meant. For this season and probably another 1-2 seasons, sure, the money really isn't an issue. But when we start contending again, every dollar and every salary is going to matter as under the current system, we simply will never be able to compete with the big boys from a salary standpoint.

 

As others have stated, I'm not saying not pitch them or send them down to the minors, I'm saying if we have options on a team that is going to suck, it makes perfect sense to think about the future and how todays roles can potentially impact future salaries (and thus the future chance of said player leaving when he hits FA).

 

I don't see how it's much different than guys staying in the minors to avoid super 2 status and all that. The Brewers did it with Braun and the Cubs (who have a ton of cash) toyed with doing it to Bryant last year, though they caved a bit too early and brought him up.

[MrTPlush]

You guys do understand the Brewers are a business and have investors right? You can't just say, "Oh well it won't really effect us competing so who cares if we make players $5mil more expensive when we can avoid it." Saving $10mil on Garza or avoiding high arbitration numbers with Will Smith is the smart business thing to do.

 

Do you typically spend extra money just because you can? Do you get the expensive soap vs. the cheap stuff just because you can? I would assume no...and if you are then NEVER start a business.

[Thurston Fluff]

I really hope keeping a good player's arbitration numbers down never enters into the thinking of the team. I just don't see how essentially telling a player you couldn't care less about their career helps.

 

Eh, on a contending team I'd 100% agree. Do whatever you can to win now if you think you have a shot at the playoffs.

 

On a team that's projected for maybe 70 wins and is in the middle of the road for budget, I don't have much issue with it.

 

I'm not saying potentially sabotage careers, but future salaries should be something to consider on a bad team with budget constraints.

 

That just seems very short sighted to me. How you treat players today effects how they, not to mention others around the league, work with you tomorrow. You need look no further than our last decade. At about the time the Brewers started to contend we couldn't get free agents to come here unless we seriously overpaid them. Thus the Suppan type contracts we saw back then. Melvin treated players who did well right. Then suddenly players like Ramirez and K-Rod wanted to come here and did so for about what you would expect to pay for players of their caliber. Ditto for players on the team like Lucroy and Gallardo signing deals that bought out free agent years. Players don't generally do that if they see players who are doing their job well get jerked around. I think players are ok with guys like Garza or JJ Hardy get shafted because they were not producing. To do that to players who are productive really hurts the team long term. It would be serious step back from the goodwill Melvin built up to start to jerk players around for short term gains. Especially at a time when those gains are not even needed.

[MrTPlush]

That just seems very short sighted to me. How you treat players today effects how they, not to mention others around the league, work with you tomorrow. You need look no further than our last decade. At about the time the Brewers started to contend we couldn't get free agents to come here unless we seriously overpaid them. Thus the Suppan type contracts we saw back then. Melvin treated players who did well right. Then suddenly players like Ramirez and K-Rod wanted to come here and did so for about what you would expect to pay for players of their caliber. Ditto for players on the team like Lucroy and Gallardo signing deals that bought out free agent years. Players don't generally do that if they see players who are doing their job well get jerked around. I think players are ok with guys like Garza or JJ Hardy get shafted because they were not producing. To do that to players who are productive really hurts the team long term. It would be serious step back from the goodwill Melvin built up to start to jerk players around for short term gains. Especially at a time when those gains are not even needed.

 

I know what you are trying to say, but neither Smith or Jeffress is an Aroldis Chapman. They are just good, but not great relievers. Smith and Jeffress both have not so great splits too so that doesn't really help their cases either. Will Smith can be inconsistent at times and go through very rough stretches, not something I would want closing. Jeffress has the high heat one would like in a closer, but I really question his command. Some days it is on and other days he is just chucking the ball and hope the batters miss.

 

No one is going to lose their mind if we never let one close. Neither has the resume or stuff to demand a closing gig.

[Point Beer Is Best]

When the Brewers told him that they were going to remove him from the rotation in September to take a look at younger players, he reacted predictably (with anger). The team responded by sending him home for the rest of the season and told him to stay there.

 

I don't think that conversation will change, since Garza knows the best way to earn another contract next offseason is to pitch well in the starting rotation. I don't think he's going to play nice with a plan that involves a demotion to the pen.

[jerichoholicninja]

Garza is probably the opening day starter, isn't he? There is no clear cut ace in the rotation and typically the manager goes with the "veteran gamer" in that situation, which is Garza. Putting him in the bullpen would just be stupid. The team isn't winning anything next year, so who cares how he performs. If he does well in the rotation he gets traded, if he fails he gets released. Bullpen should not even be a consideration.

[And That]

1) As others have mentioned, if the Brewers are going to extract any value from Garza this year, he's got to be in the rotation. If he's mediocre this year, maybe it's something you revisit next year...

 

2)...except that I don't know if the Brewers want to deal with the fallout from informing Garza that he's going to the bullpen. I imagine his side of that conversation would make Andrew Dice Clay blush.

[reillymcshane]

Garza's ERAs from 2007-2014 - 3.69, 3.70, 3.95, 3.91, 3.32, 3.91, 3.82, 3.64

 

While I don't put stock in stats more than 2-3 years old, I just want to point out that the guy has had a remarkably consistent run until he imploded last year.

 

Even just looking at his 2013-14 seasons, he was a solid starter in this league. With this club not having to be overly concerned about wins and losses in 2016, it's well worth it to see if the guy can rebound to the pitcher he was previously. He is 32 - not old for pitcher - but not young either.

 

Garza's value is nil right now. Put him in the pen and he does decent, he might get you 10 or 20 cents on the dollar. But put him in the rotation, and see if he can rebound to an ERA more indicative of his career, then he's worth far more to another team. Are we going to get a top 20 prospect for him? No. And we'll still likely have to kick in some cash to facilitate a deal - but maybe it's only $10M instead of $20M.

 

Also, none of our prime, upper level pitching prospects (Hader, Wagner, Lopez) has pitched above AA except for a few games. Having them work another 1/2 season at AAA will likely help them more than anything.

 

So, Garza isn't blocking anyone right now. He's got no value - and the best way to build value is to let him pitch. So make it happen.

[Ennder]

One bad year almost never kills someone's trade value. If he get off to a good start he will be easy to trade mid season.

[3and2Fastball]

I am expecting Garza to be a salary dump/trade player prior to the season. The Brewers will likely have to pay most of the contract but in doing so might get a decent lower level prospect back. Garza might still have value as a 5th starter in a pitcher's park (thinking San Diego, for instance)

[LouisEly]

One bad year almost never kills someone's trade value. If he get off to a good start he will be easy to trade mid season.

Exactly. Garza's a 2-year, $30M risk. The Reds are paying Homer Bailey almost that much to not pitch in 2015 and 2016 due to TJ. Zimmermann's a 5-year, $110M risk. Plenty of GMs would rather take a $30M risk that Garza will rebound than a $100M risk on a free agent pitcher.

[MNBrew]

When the Brewers told him that they were going to remove him from the rotation in September to take a look at younger players, he reacted predictably (with anger). The team responded by sending him home for the rest of the season and told him to stay there.

Reacting not to PBIB specifically but to the sentiments/slants expressed, which some folks do believe to be truth based on comments that continue to surface.... The first sentence above is correct. The rest isn't.

 

- The Brewers did offer him the chance to pitch out of the pen, which he declined.

- They encouraged him to stay with the team. They didn't send him home, let alone tell him to stay there.

- It was Garza who chose to leave the team. He wasn't going to pitch again and his wife was late in her pregnancy with twins.

 

I'd guess the Brewers would've preferred that Garza make different choices than he did, starting with accepting the chance to pitch out of the pen just like Lohse did. But at least in terms of how the whole episode was reported (publicly, anyway), Garza didn't go against any team mandates and chose options that the team made available to him or otherwise allowed.

 

I'm not too keen on Garza, but it skews the picture to portray it inaccurately. I'd also guess that the Brewers know they're on the hook for two more years with a guy who, (uncontrolled/unclassy/immature?) petulance notwithstanding, has a good arm and a very solid track record, so it does them no good to do anything other than hope for the best out of him going forward -- the exact slant Counsell & the front office have voiced publicly.

[jerichoholicninja]

When the Brewers told him that they were going to remove him from the rotation in September to take a look at younger players, he reacted predictably (with anger). The team responded by sending him home for the rest of the season and told him to stay there.

Reacting not to PBIB specifically but to the sentiments/slants expressed, which some folks do believe to be truth based on comments that continue to surface.... The first sentence above is correct. The rest isn't.

 

- The Brewers did offer him the chance to pitch out of the pen, which he declined.

- They encouraged him to stay with the team. They didn't send him home, let alone tell him to stay there.

- It was Garza who chose to leave the team. He wasn't going to pitch again and his wife was late in her pregnancy with twins.

 

I'd guess the Brewers would've preferred that Garza make different choices than he did, starting with accepting the chance to pitch out of the pen just like Lohse did. But at least in terms of how the whole episode was reported (publicly, anyway), Garza didn't go against any team mandates and chose options that the team made available to him or otherwise allowed.

 

I'm not too keen on Garza, but it skews the picture to portray it inaccurately. I'd also guess that the Brewers know they're on the hook for two more years with a guy who, (uncontrolled/unclassy/immature?) petulance notwithstanding, has a good arm and a very solid track record, so it does them no good to do anything other than hope for the best out of him going forward -- the exact slant Counsell & the front office have voiced publicly.

 

Same as Braun, people have already made up their minds about what they believe happened and nothing will change that.

[MNBrew]

Right. And I'm stubbornly principled enough to advocate for critical thinking and accuracy, not sound bytes and sensationalist/shoddy "reporting."