Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

Brewers claim Matt Harvey, according to Jon Heyman (Latest: Trade not happening, see post #57)

Lathund

By Lathund,
in Milwaukee Brewers Talk

bill hAll Star First Round Pick

bill hAll Star

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
I think with Harvey you could do something like a 4-man rotation with all of the off days:

 

Chacin

Anderson

Harvey

Miley/Peralta/Davies depending on matchup

 

In the 3rd inning if you're down 3-1 and you have the leadoff hitter on 2B, you can pinch hit for Wade Miley (this is September) with 1 of your 10 bench players and have one of Davies, Lyles, Peralta potentially go 3 innings (or even more if the game gets out of hand in either direction).

 

Miley should pretty much always be starting. If we went the 4 route, it would be those first 4 with Peralta/Guerra/Davies in long relief. And yes I would agree most starters would be on extremely short leashes.

 

Miley is good, but if we faced the Cardinals I'd probably go with Peralta or Guerra and just deal with the mismatch of Carpenter. I guess adding Matt Adams does muddy that decision up.

 

To be fair, Miley is getting righties out much better this year - but I could see a scenario where I'd rather start a different righty maybe.

 

Facing the Cardinals, I'd even consider opening the game with Dan Jennings and then going to Peralta or Guerra *ducks for napalm fire*

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply
KeithStone53151 Carolina Mudcats

KeithStone53151

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
Jim Riggelman said he fully expects Harvey to start for the Reds today.

 

I would find it weird and probably vindictive if the Reds hung onto Harvey. There is no reason for it, at the very least I'm sure ownership would like to save $1 million and the Reds would prefer to let a younger guy pitch a few games down the stretch. I suspect Riggleman is part of the posturing...I bet Harvey's bags are already packed

Link to comment
Share on other sites
adambr2 All-Star

adambr2

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
Jim Riggelman said he fully expects Harvey to start for the Reds today.

 

I would find it weird and probably vindictive if the Reds hung onto Harvey. There is no reason for it, at the very least I'm sure ownership would like to save $1 million and the Reds would prefer to let a younger guy pitch a few games down the stretch. I suspect Riggleman is part of the posturing...I bet Harvey's bags are already packed

 

Don't know. They just posted their lineup for today and he's in it. Seems pretty far to take the posturing for someone who is going to bring back a nothing burger anyway if dealt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bill hAll Star First Round Pick

bill hAll Star

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
Jim Riggelman said he fully expects Harvey to start for the Reds today.

 

I would find it weird and probably vindictive if the Reds hung onto Harvey. There is no reason for it, at the very least I'm sure ownership would like to save $1 million and the Reds would prefer to let a younger guy pitch a few games down the stretch. I suspect Riggleman is part of the posturing...I bet Harvey's bags are already packed

 

Don't know. They just posted their lineup for today and he's in it. Seems pretty far to take the posturing for someone who is going to bring back a nothing burger anyway if dealt.

 

The Reds have:

 

A. Almost zero motivation not to give him away for almost nothing to the Brewers. Save your owner a million bucks.

 

B. Almost zero reason not to at least try to posture/hold out for more.

 

Both sides probably know that this deal should get done at 12:30 CT or so and that it probably will involve the Brewers paying $500k-$1M and giving back either absolutely nothing or some single A player that has a .05% chance of making it to the majors. But the Reds might as well try to extract more. They also have no reason not to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
adambr2 All-Star

adambr2

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
Trade deadline is one thing, but why go through all the effort a second time to not do anything. Obliviously its likely that one side was being stubborn, but still. You are negotiating over pennies at his point.

 

I'm guessing our stance was basically "Give him to us for free and we'll pay his remaining salary" and their stance was basically, "No, we want something for him."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bill hAll Star First Round Pick

bill hAll Star

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

The Reds can put him back on waivers but they'd be forced to give him away if anyone claimed.

 

So, tin foil hat, we force him to pitch against the Cubs and have a *wink wink nod nod* agreement with the Reds that we'll claim him again tomorrow since they were just going to give him away anyways.

 

Probably not but just an idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jodo23 College Ball

jodo23

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

Matt Harvey will stay with the Reds, GM Nick Krall says

C. Trent Rosecrans (@ctrent)

August 24, 2018

 

Krall said they want positive momentum through the end of the season and the team likes having Harvey on the team. I’m still surprised and not sure I get it either

C. Trent Rosecrans (@ctrent)

August 24, 2018

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KeithStone53151 Carolina Mudcats

KeithStone53151

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
Matt Harvey will stay with the Reds, GM Nick Krall says

C. Trent Rosecrans (@ctrent)

August 24, 2018

 

Krall said they want positive momentum through the end of the season and the team likes having Harvey on the team. I’m still surprised and not sure I get it either

C. Trent Rosecrans (@ctrent)

August 24, 2018

 

Krall should hold up a sign that says "I have no idea what I'm doing"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jjfanec ACL Brewers

jjfanec

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
This sounds like the person at a garage sale walking up with something marked $.50 and asking if you will take a dime for it.

 

More like a quarter priced at .25 cents and say, "No, thanks...I want more for it."

 

Kind of but also like saying that about a quarter that won't be worth anything in one month and doesn't do you any good now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
reillymcshane Nashville Sounds

reillymcshane

Brewer Fanatic Contributor
Posted
Posted

This is the kind of thing that can have a bunch of answers to why it didn't go down.

 

The Reds might have wanted more than we offered. Or maybe the Reds want to keep Harvey beyond 2018, and thought having him around the last few weeks was advantageous. Harvey may have even said he prefers to finish out the season with Cincy. Who knows.

 

Time to move on, which is fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
markedman5 Biloxi Shuckers

markedman5

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

" positive momentum" lol

 

God the Reds are stupid.........save the money.........get a little something maybe.....lose another game or 2 which might move you up a spot in the draft......

 

Nah let's over play our hand.....get nothing....and then try to spin it by saying we want to build " positive momentum"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrTPlush Wisconsin Timber Rattlers

MrTPlush

Verified Member
Posted
Posted

This isn't entirely shocking...isn't the first time a team held onto a rental. Everyone says "Reds burned $1mil!", but then again no one has a problem throwing $10mil at Jonathan Schoop even if he isn't worth it. That money is almost nothing, drop in the bucket, meaningless.

 

The Reds blow $1mil and miss out on getting a trash prospect...big deal. We blow way more than that signing Neftali Feliz etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KeithStone53151 Carolina Mudcats

KeithStone53151

Verified Member
Posted
Posted
This isn't entirely shocking...isn't the first time a team held onto a rental. Everyone says "Reds burned $1mil!", but then again no one has a problem throwing $10mil at Jonathan Schoop even if he isn't worth it. That money is almost nothing, drop in the bucket, meaningless.

 

The Reds blow $1mil and miss out on getting a trash prospect...big deal. We blow way more than that signing Neftali Feliz etc.

 

If you're a GM, would you rather keep $1 million or throw it in the garbage if those are your only 2 options? The Reds GM opted to throw it in the garbage.

 

The Schoop thing is different in that we are contending and deemed him to be an upgrade. Harvey pitching is literally negative value, I assume the Reds have their own versions of Wilkerson that they could give a look to for the next month and hope to get lucky...or at the very least learn something. So basically, the Reds threw $1 million in the garbage and lost value...rather than save $ 1 million and gain a fringey prospect. Hats off to Krall, that guy knows things.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Brewer Fanatic Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Brewers community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of Brewer Fanatic.

Become a Caretaker
×
×
  • Create New...