Matt Garza

[BrewersAA]

Hoping for a great start tonight from garza against a good lineup. If he keeps it up and finishes strong I feel like he will have pitched himself into tradability, especially not with only 1 year and 12.5 left in the off-season. If he could get the ERA under 4, which he has a chance of doing, and the Brewers were willing to eat half or more of the salary (they can afford it right now), what do you think is a reasonable return?

[pogokat]

31 year old AAAA player

[pacopete4]

Colin Walsh might be available.

[adambr2]

Somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd post here. Nothing of value.

[cjsportsfanatic100]

Its next year at $12.5M and then also a team option of $1M for 2018 correct? If we eat some of money, and finishes the season pitching well, how is that not worth more to a hopeful playoff team for the next two years for a back end of the rotation starter?

[tmwiese55]

Agreed, it would still be a salary dump with nothing of value coming back. Best case scenario would be a 19 yr old wild card (trying to avoid the term lottery ticket). As you stated, we don't need to dump salary so why not just keep until next year and hope he can keep being OK. With that larger sample maybe you can get one legitimate prospects at the deadline. It would also help eat up some innings before bringing up young guys like Hader.

[brewerfan82]

Its next year at $12.5M and then also a team option of $1M for 2018 correct? If we eat some of money, and finishes the season pitching well, how is that not worth more to a hopeful playoff team for the next two years for a back end of the rotation starter?

http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/milwaukee-brewers/matt-garza-856/

 

He'd have to miss 130 days in a single season on the DL for it to drop to $1 million, so I believe it will be a $5 million option. That should still be pretty valuable if he can show he's quasi-effective.

 

That said, I think even with a strong finish and paying some of his contract, a return would be negligible this off-season. So unless the front office thinks he's blocking someone they want in the rotation to start the year, it's probably best to hold onto him until next year's trade deadline.

 

If he can finish this year with an ERA close to 4.00 and have a couple strong, sub-4.00 ERA months to start next season, he may re-instill enough confidence in another team to pony up something more interesting for him. At that point, his salary for half a season will be manageable and if he finishes the year strong they can pick up his option for a very reasonable amount. Even then, I think you're still hoping for a package similar to what we got for Lind in return for him. But who knows, pitchers are so valuable for contending teams and crazy things happen when there aren't many options to upgrade and they feel they're one solid pitcher away. But that will only happen at the deadline, I don't think a teams will feel the same pressure during the off-season.

[MrTPlush]

Well he has been decent since the end of July. If he keeps that up for the rest of the season some teams might see him as a #5 pitcher. So basically we could hope some team would take him and we could get some salary relief.

[BrewersAA]

It's almost like some of you don't remember that last season was Garza's only season (since his rookie mid year call up with the twins) that he posted an era over 4... He has REALLY good number outside of one season, I think the resentment of that performance might be clouding some judgement, if he gets his ERA under 4 and the Brewers picked up 6 million of his contract the return could be a little better than the Arron Hill return. Since his option didn't vest into a play option because of his injury the tea option at 5 would be very attractive.

[MrTPlush]

It's almost like some of you don't remember that last season was Garza's only season (since his rookie mid year call up with the twins) that he posted an era over 4... He has REALLY good number outside of one season, I think the resentment of that performance might be clouding some judgement, if he gets his ERA under 4 and the Brewers picked up 6 million of his contract the return could be a little better than the Arron Hill return. Since his option didn't vest into a play option because of his injury the tea option at 5 would be very attractive.

 

He had a full year of being a disaster and then the first half of his 2016 season was a total disaster. Not to mention he might not even hit 100 innings this year because of an injury...which is a huge career long concern. He now has 1.5 months of being OK in the past 2 years.

 

The interest in a pitcher like that is pretty questionable. May be there may not be. A lot of that may depend on how he finishes the rest of the season.

[LouisEly]

He had a full year of being a disaster and then the first half of his 2016 season was a total disaster.

The first half of the season:

 

1) was based on all of 26 innings

B) after coming off of the DL for the first 2.5 months of the season

3) with a .366 BABIP

4) and those games were @SFG, @LAD, WSN, @STL, @WSN (every single team would be in the playoffs as of today and four of the five on the road)

 

I don't think the first half is an accurate way to gauge his talent.

[MKE81]

It's almost like some of you don't remember that last season was Garza's only season (since his rookie mid year call up with the twins) that he posted an era over 4... He has REALLY good number outside of one season, I think the resentment of that performance might be clouding some judgement, if he gets his ERA under 4 and the Brewers picked up 6 million of his contract the return could be a little better than the Arron Hill return. Since his option didn't vest into a play option because of his injury the tea option at 5 would be very attractive.

I said the same exact thing before the season started. Majority of people on this board only evaluate solely based on the previous season rather than body of work in combination with breaking down performances and using their eyes (ie they'll see 4ER for Peralta last night but he dominated the Cubs and ended up giving up that 2 run homer at very end which hurt his numbers and doesnt reflect how well he actually pitched).

 

Plush, he's been "ok" past 1.5 months? He was injured almost half the season (injured last year too) and now has 16 starts. His 3.24 ERA in past 9 starts disagrees with you. And that includes his only bad start over that span vs Seattle. Take that away and 8 of last 9 starts his ERA is 2.53

[adambr2]

If he can get his ERA under 4 before the end of the season, I could see someone being interested in taking him off our hands.

 

However I think anyone expecting to get back anything other than salary relief is going to be disappointed. Maybe he'd fit as a throw-in on a Braun trade to the Dodgers.

[DHonks]

In spring we were hearing about a revitalized Garza. He probably joined the rotation too soon. I really felt that garza could have had a great bounce back year had it not been for the injury. I think he's tradeable.

[And That]

Majority of people on this board only evaluate solely based on the previous season rather than body of work in combination with breaking down performances and using their eyes

Stop.

[MrTPlush]

Plush, he's been "ok" past 1.5 months? He was injured almost half the season (injured last year too) and now has 16 starts. His 3.24 ERA in past 9 starts disagrees with you. And that includes his only bad start over that span vs Seattle. Take that away and 8 of last 9 starts his ERA is 2.53

 

So you insult everyone else on the board on how they evaluate players and you are evaluating solely on ERA. Then you take away bad starts? Doesn't work that way. I also don't see why being injured matters. If anything that is a really bad thing and a huge reason why he is nearly worthless. The guy is lucky to give you 150innings. Last time he gave a team 200innings? 2011...yikes. He is 32 and has consistently given less innings 3 years straight.

 

Outside of his last 2 starts(now 3) he hasn't been overly impressive. I use my eyes like you want people to do and he has looked OK. He needs to continue what he has done his past couple times out. If he can do that then teams will come calling.

[CheeseheadInQC]

One thing that is working in the Brewers' favor is that the free agent crop of starters is pretty sparse. I know the list might grow as options are declined, but the few decent ones are likely to get really overpaid. If he has a solid end to the season, I could see a pitching-needy team looking at Garza as a better option than overpaying Doug Fister or Ivan Nova for more years.

[Greenleaf1]

One thing's for sure, Garza has looked terrific lately. I missed his start yesterday, but the one before that was as good as I've seen him in a Brewers uniform.

 

I think we need to be giving more credit to the Brewers pitching coaches, both DJ and the minor league coaches. Nelson may be struggling, but Anderson/Garza/Peralta/Jungmann/Davies have all shown a lot of improvement since their rough starts (granted Davies has been pretty great all season but it was rough there at the beginning). Rough is probably an understatement for several of these guys.

 

Normally I wouldn't think Garza would have a ton of value, but the FA market for starting pitchers this offseason is very thin. We'd certainly be willing to eat some money on the deal like with Aaron Hill, and Garza is still a career 4.01 ERA pitcher. I could see a lot of teams needing someone with his experience in their rotation.

 

I wouldn't wait until midseason to trade him though. Even if he does get better and could provide us with a better prospect in return, I think there's value to trading him now. Get some money off the books and open up a spot in the rotation, rather than risk being stuck with him all year and cutting him for nothing after the trade deadline if he returns to his 2015 self.

[Roderick]

I'm torn.

 

I would rather move Garza to open up another spot on the roster for someone to start the season as a starter. If Garza is back, then someone is in the pen like Peralta (maybe that is for the best) or AAA.

 

But, if someone gets hurt or underperforms you may have a big rough patch until you stretch out or get someone like Jungmann, Suter, Cravy and Burgos (if he is retained) ready.

 

If you get to midseason, you could potentially have Hader, Lopez, Wang, or Woodruff ready.

 

So, I am inclined to move Garza now, even if it costs a few bucks to do it, and risk the rough patch as we aren't going to win yet next year anyways. That is unless someone else is moved to free up spots, like Anderson or Nelson.

[gregmag]

Majority of people on this board only evaluate solely based on the previous season rather than body of work in combination with breaking down performances and using their eyes

 

Anyone who actually reads this board knows that statement is obviously false. Even if its falsity weren't obvious, you haven't even tried to back it up. Making an obviously false, unsupported claim about how true and well-supported your own views are makes you look not very credible. When your false, unsupported, self-aggrandizing claim also insults the "majority of people on this board," it makes you look . . . just not good.

 

There's strong, serious evidence that Garza has declined sharply over the past several years. People have made those arguments, and the arguments the other way, very well on this board. You should read it sometime.

[brewmann04]

I agree lets see what the off season market is like and maybe a team will be willing to trade for Garza especially if he ends up on a high note

[brewerfan82]

I don't think there's any rush to move him. We have 5 rotation spots on the major league club. Between those spots, the minors, injuries, offseason trades, bad performance, etc., anyone we want to have a trial on the major league level next year we'll find an opportunity for.

 

Right now, I think we have 6 guys that you figure are "default" MLB rotation possibilities due to experience: Nelson, Davies, Anderson, Guerra, Peralta, and Garza. Davies is really the only one I for sure don't move (23 yo, not a free agent til '22). Nelson is close, but he's getting a little older (27), hasn't been overly dominant this year (4.36 ERA, 1.522 WHIP) and I wouldn't turn down a deal if someone wanted to overpay for a pitcher. Anderson is an okay filler piece, but not someone we need to hold onto for the future and may be a throw in for another deal (much like he was last offseason). Peralta probably has no value to anyone and only has 2 years of control left. He has the talent to turn it around, but he may be best in the bullpen at this point (especially if it frees up a space for someone else we want in the rotation).

 

Guerra may be attractive to another team with his performance this year. He has a bit of team control, but he's also older (31) and has a pretty good chance of dropping off before we're competitive again. If we're going to trade someone this offseason, I would think it'd be him.

 

As for the minor league options, Colorado Springs makes it hard to evaluate the pitchers in the minors, but no one has forced their hand yet to move them into the major league rotation to start the year. So I don't think it hurts starting any of those guys in the farm and moving them up later as needs necessitate.

 

So I think at least one of those guys will either be moved to the bullpen or to another team, which leaves a spot for Garza to regain more value in. If a couple are moved you can try a Suter or Hader in the rotation, but otherwise Garza can help block them (and their clock) for a half season.

 

In the end, if someone offers something you like for Garza this offseason, you take it, otherwise I'd wait til next trade deadline. I just don't see a need to move him right away if you don't get something useful.

[LouisEly]

There are people on this board who automatically think that when a player goes into an extended slump he is terrible and will forever be terrible and useless. Just look at the comments about Broxton the first half of the year.

 

There are comments about Peralta being useless, having no value to other teams, etc. In the second half of this year, covering six starts, he has gone 37 innings (> 6 IP/start), given up 30 hits, walked 11, struck out 33, for a 1.088 WHIP and .713 OPS-A. And he is regularly throwing 97, touching 98, and is 27 years old. If we're GMs and you think he's useless, I'll gladly take him off your hands.

 

In his 11 starts in the second half of 2016 Garza has a .686 OPS-A. That's pretty darned good. No one has ever said he is a #1 starter. But among the 72 NL pitchers with at least 80 IP this year (roughly five per team), Garza ranks 40th in ERA - that's #3 starter quality this year. (Guerra is 8th, #1 starter quality; Nelson is basically tied with Garza at #39, a fraction lower). Garza has a better ERA than Gio Gonzalez, Jaime Garcia, Michael Wacha, Zach Grienke, Scott Kazmir, Mike Leake, Adam Wainwright, Aaron Nola, Archie Bradley, and Matt Harvey. Yes, there are other metrics, but at the end of the day it's about keeping runs off the board. In his last three starts he's held the Cubs, Cardinals, and Pirates to a total of two earned runs and struck out 22; only four of his 16 starts this season have been against teams that are not in playoff contention. He's hasn't been bottom-feeding.

 

I've been called a "Garza apologist", etc., for the last two seasons, but there have been darned good reasons for it.

[Greenleaf1]

Like Garza or not, he doesn't factor into the rebuild beyond 2018 at the very latest. If he's good enough to regain some value in our rotation like he has lately, he'll command too much money in free agency and I don't think the Brewers would want him at that point anyways even if they wanted to spend the money.

 

His value to us is if he can regain some value for a trade, just like the rest of our aging veterans. There's no doubt that he has regained a lot of value over the last 6 weeks or so. His ERA this year is actually not looking that bad anymore, and there's definitely going to be an offseason market for a starting pitcher with a league average ERA at a relatively low cost (if we eat some money). The question will be if any team offers enough.

[MadThinker88]

I disagree with people thinking there is no rush to deal Garza and are willing to hold onto him into next year.

 

The issues of 2015 can reappear and then the value he has disappears.

It's better to deal Garza during the off season (perhaps during the winter meetings) to get value while you can.

 

I realize it's not the SOP of DS to package his assets together in a trade, but I would be interested to see the package (or single upgraded prospect) that the Crew could get be sending Garza and one of the many OF guys (like Phillps) out together.

Wonder if the Yankees would bite and trade off Justus Sheffield & JP Feyerisan for that pairing. Probably just wishful thinking on my part...