Greinke Available

[ewitkows]

The Diamondbacks are “aggressively shopping” righty Zack Greinke, according to Bob Nightengale of USA Today (via Twitter). With $95.5MM of salary still due over the next three years, he’s an expensive option. But the deal is at least cabined in length, and the Snakes have a good shot at getting out from under most of it. (Alternatively, the club might be able to pay down a larger portion and recoup some talent in a swap — or go in the other direction and include additional talent to make the whole contract go away.) It’s still largely unclear how things will shake out, but the fact that the Arizona organization is looking for a taker certainly makes a trade seem quite plausible.

 

Say we pay half of this and throw in a lotto ticket, this might not be a bad avenue to go down. 3/48 for Greinke isn't that bad of a contract.

[KeithStone53151]

I think it would have to get down at least to 3/48 with a couple mediocre prospects thrown in to be worthwhile to us. Add another high end pitcher to the list of those being shopped. Have to assume Stearns is calling on all of them. Greinke strikes me as the type of pitcher that will age reasonably well. Plus command and a true 4 pitch guy. I personally would be more inclined to target more of an impact guy than Greinke. Guys like Paxton/Degrom/Kluber will probably all provide higher quality innings than Greinke over the next 2 years(2 because Degrom/Paxton would be 2 year guys).

[MrTPlush]

Well one would first need to figure out what Zack Greinke would get on the open market to figure out what exactly he would be worth. If you plan to give little in prospect value 3/$48mil isn't even close. I would say taking on $70mil or so is more realistic. He has still been really good the last few years. $23mil is not a crazy yearly salary for him despite his age.

 

At $48mil there has to be a solid $15mil-$20mil surplus value.

 

Greinke makes a lot of sense to be honest...a lot. Throws 200+ innings and is more impactful than some give credit for. I also think he will age well. Not sure we have the payroll room to have him on the books for $20mil+ a year though and I don't know giving u good prospects would be wise.

[KeithStone53151]

Would he get $70 million on 3 years though? He's 35 and he's approaching 3000 innings on his arm. Velocity down to a career low sub-90 mph and that's pitching half his games in Arizona. That's a lot of reasons right there to simply not target him at all. I think pitchability and having 4 quality offerings will help him maintain success a bit longer, but velocity dip is certainly a risk. I don't recall any specific precedent over the last couple years of a guy at his age/quality signing any sort of deal. I don't think he's quite to the CC Sabathia 1 year at a time for $8-12 million stage yet, but he's much closer to that than the Arrieta/Darvish stage of $20 million per.

[JosephC]

I think it's questionable if Greinke has any surplus value at this point. His average fWAR/bWAR over the last three years is 3.9 and the projection services has put him at 3.4 WAR in 2019. That seems fair considering his age. I would also say it's appropriate to just go ahead and apply the -0.5 WAR per season rule of thumb over the next few years. 3.4 + 2.9 + 2.4 = 8.7 WAR. With WAR inflation, let's say that 1 WAR = 9.5 million for the 2019-2021 timeframe. 8.7 * 9.5 = 82.65 million. Greinke's salary over that same timeframe is 95.5 million. I'm assuming the Diamondbacks are on the hook for 9 million of his signing bonus that still has not been paid. Greinke also gets a 2 million bonus if traded. I'd have his surplus value as a -12.85 million just based on his salary alone. The trading team would get some "investment income" kicked back in this deal because large portions of his salary are deferred.

 

Most likely outcome here is that Greinke goes to a big market team. The big market team picks up ~25 million per season and the Diamondbacks cover the rest. In return the Diamondbacks get a couple role-player prospects (guys that rank in the #11-#20 region on an organization's prospect list).

[ewitkows]

I don't know if there are a lot of large market teams looking for older pitching. I can't see the Dodgers/Yank/Red Sox or Cubs going for him. Maybe the Nats or the Phils if they miss out on Machado/Harper.

 

Houston might be a possibility , I'm not sure where their payroll is.

[wallus]

I would rather our payroll/resources go towards offense than an old starting pitcher.

[MrTPlush]

Would he get $70 million on 3 years though?

 

He would get $60mil easily in my opinion...possibly more. Even at that you are still looking at $12mil surplus value. That's no lottery tickets.

[MrTPlush]

I think it's questionable if Greinke has any surplus value at this point.

 

No one is claiming he has surplus value with his current contract.

[KeithStone53151]

Would he get $70 million on 3 years though?

 

He would get $60mil easily in my opinion...possibly more. Even at that you are still looking at $12mil surplus value. That's no lottery tickets.

 

I disagree but can understand your argument. We'll get a gauge on how other teams value him if he actually gets traded.

[long ball]

I love Greinke. He's one of my favorite Brewers ever.

 

I think Mrtplush is right and he's probably worth ~3/60+ as a free agent. I don't think the Brewers are in a position to pay market value on a starting pitcher though.

 

The only way the Brewers can compete is to develop their own talent, make smart trades, and get surplus value out of most/all contracts.

[MrTPlush]

It would greatly depend on what Greinke's no-trade looks like. If he put teams that might trade for him it would kill a ton of leverage the D Backs would have. However knowing Greinke and his mental health issues he deals with I am betting it is mostly big markets...which in itself causes a road block with his salary.

[pacopete4]

Grienke looked like a shell of his former self last year. Hard pass on this idea for me.

[brewerfan82]

Grienke looked like a shell of his former self last year. Hard pass on this idea for me.

I'd take him with his 2018 numbers:

 

3 year numbers look pretty good compared to our staff as well:

[MrTPlush]

Every year I see, "I don't want him he has declined" or "He is a shell of his former self"

 

Then I look at our current pitchers and see none of them hold a candle stick to the player in question. Sad life we live on the pitching front.

[reillymcshane]

Zack Greinke has thrown 200+ innings the last two years. His ERAs have been 3.20 and 3.21. His FIP has been 3.31 and 3.71. His bWAR has been 6.1 and 4.2 and his fWAR has been 5.1 and 3.5. Even at 35 he's still a really, really good pitcher. Also, he's one of the better hitting pitchers in baseball, and fields his position exceptionally well.

 

No doubt he'll reach a point where he's not effective anymore, but we still haven't gotten to that day.

 

Do I want to pay him $90M+ over the next three seasons? No. But he's easily worth $65-70M.

[Roderick]

I can see trading for a true #1 (which is not Greinke). I can even understand looking for a lefty starter (not that big of priority to me). I can see signing a low-cost Miley type or two.

 

Just seems to me that assets could be better used elsewhere if it is not one of the above.

[pacopete4]

Every year I see, "I don't want him he has declined" or "He is a shell of his former self"

 

Then I look at our current pitchers and see none of them hold a candle stick to the player in question. Sad life we live on the pitching front.

 

I don't want pitchers past their primes and paying them $30M to do it. Paying pitchers 35+ years or older is foolish for a team like the Brewers. I don't care how they compare against our staff's numbers in that instance. Find younger pitching that you can control. That is the key to our sustainable success.

[ewitkows]

Every year I see, "I don't want him he has declined" or "He is a shell of his former self"

 

Then I look at our current pitchers and see none of them hold a candle stick to the player in question. Sad life we live on the pitching front.

 

I don't want pitchers past their primes and paying them $30M to do it. Paying pitchers 35+ years or older is foolish for a team like the Brewers. I don't care how they compare against our staff's numbers in that instance. Find younger pitching that you can control. That is the key to our sustainable success.

 

This move would allow our pitchers an extra year or 2 to develop into those TOR pitchers, instead of just throwing them out there for 180 innings and hoping for the best.

[KeithStone53151]

Every year I see, "I don't want him he has declined" or "He is a shell of his former self"

 

Then I look at our current pitchers and see none of them hold a candle stick to the player in question. Sad life we live on the pitching front.

 

I don't want pitchers past their primes and paying them $30M to do it. Paying pitchers 35+ years or older is foolish for a team like the Brewers. I don't care how they compare against our staff's numbers in that instance. Find younger pitching that you can control. That is the key to our sustainable success.

 

This move would allow our pitchers an extra year or 2 to develop into those TOR pitchers, instead of just throwing them out there for 180 innings and hoping for the best.

 

Except that's kinda what you have to do. All players will do some developing at the MLB level. Hitters generally tend to adjust quicker and hit the ground running moreso than pitchers. I don't think more time in the minors would be overly helpful for Burnes/Woodruff. Peralta maybe, but he's also so effective at the MLB level that I don't know that he NEEDS time in milb to be an effective MLB arm.

[pacopete4]

I don't want to see us burn up Peralta, Woody and Burnes in AAA. Time has come to get after it with those three.

[brewerfan82]

And you wouldn't be interested in a Greinke, Chacin, Nelson, two of Peralta/Woody/Burnes rotation at the right price?

[trwi7]

And you wouldn't be interested in a Greinke, Chacin, Nelson, two of Peralta/Woody/Burnes rotation at the right price?

 

Is there a right price? Either the Diamondbacks pay quite a bit of his salary and we have to give up really good prospects for him or we pay most or all of his salary, give up less but then have $35 million tied up in one player for 3 years. Neither is a good option.

[pacopete4]

And you wouldn't be interested in a Greinke, Chacin, Nelson, two of Peralta/Woody/Burnes rotation at the right price?

 

Is there a right price? Either the Diamondbacks pay quite a bit of his salary and we have to give up really good prospects for him or we pay most or all of his salary, give up less but then have $35 million tied up in one player for 3 years. Neither is a good option.

 

This is my response as well. It just doesn’t add up.

[clancyphile]

Greinke may be worth a package of Anderson (for some salary offset), Schoop (more salary offset), as well as Bickford and Herrera. Crew takes on all of Greinke's 2019 salary, and $20 million of his salary for 2020 and 2021.

 

Greinke seemed to enjoy being in Milwaukee, and to get him back while he could still be very valuable - and in exchange for spare parts - is doable, IMO.