Linebrink acquired for Inman/Garrison/Thatcher

[dogs with bees in their mo]

I'm all for trading prospects to win now, providing that as a result of the deal, we actually do win now. I seriously doubt Linebrink will make enough difference this season to offset the fact that we traded at least 6 years of arguably our best pitching prospect for 2 months of him.

 

The potential downside of this trade is enormous; It has the possibility of being an absolutely horrendous deal that lingers for years and doesn't help that much in the short term anyway. The upside is meager in comparison; We get a good reliever for a while for guys that never amount to much.

[strawbossisevil]

I just want to wish Inman the best in the Padres organization.

 

It was always fun watching his box scores over the past few years, and reading his quotes.

 

That said, if he really turns into what he's expected to be (4-5 type pitcher), we really don't need him.

 

In 2009 (the year he'd likely come up) our rotation could include:

 

Sheets (if we can get him to sign an extension - hopefully done this offseason)

Gallardo (top of rotation talent, and cheap)

Capuano (entering his last year of Arby- solid middle of rotation starter)

Villenueva (entering Arby for the first time, solid middle of rotation starter)

Parra (cheap pre-Arby, with top to middle of the rotation talent)

Bush (another solid middle of rotation starter, Arby through '10)

Suppan (by this point will probably be the #5 starter, and he'll be an above average one)

Vargas (solid #5, in his last year of Arby)

Jackson (#5 possibly, needs to show improvement to get here, but he's a possibility as well.

 

While you can never have enough starting pitching, if Inman truely becomes a bottom of the rotation starter, he'd have to leap frog a number of other pitchers who may be more established and equally deserving.

 

I think what this trade does, is it provides Melvin with the draft picks he needs in order to stock up for another wave of prospects that will arrive in Milwaukee when our current players begin to price themselves out of our budget. And if all Inman becomes is a 4 or 5 starter, we stand a good chance in finding one of those in the draft with the picks.

[splitterpfj]

We have the 5 pitchers who opened the season in the rotation, plus Gallardo, Villanueva and Parra, all ahead of Inman at the time of this trade.

 

Yes, he could turn out to be a good one, but the organization was absolutely in a position to deal him.

 

It's up to Linebrink, and then it's up to Jack Z.

[TheCrew07]

After 6 hours I still dislike this deal for the reasons I've gone over at length in the trade forums previously. In short, I absolutely despise trading pitching prospects for rental players. If we do in fact pull 2 first round draft picks, that's great, but they are still 3 years behind where Inman is right now. I hope Melvin has the starting pitching worked out on paper and long term we nail his plan on the head.

 

I wonder if Parra's solidness out of the pen made Inman expendable? That's 3 young pitchers all of whom could be starters with the big league club already working out of the pen (Yo, Villy, Parra).

 

Assuming 2 of the 3 are in the rotation next year, I wonder who goes? I think Vargas is a no brainer, Suppan has a no trade, that leave Cappy and Bush, and I think I'd rather have Bush, but I'm still on the fence.

 

At any rate, I'm very sorry to see Thatcher and Inman go, Garrison never did much for me. Linebrink just doesn't do it for me, there are other relievers I would have rather gotten if I was giving up 3 pitchers. I hope this trade works out well, but I despise the deal on the paper. I would have thought we could have gotten more for what we gave up.

 

Prove me wrong Doug.

[mls4]

Well I've given myself a few hours to digest this trade before commenting, plus I read through most of the comments here, but I'm not sure I like it any more now then when I first heard about it. I'm really trying to take off the Power-50-tinted glasses and look at this objectively, but I'm just not convinced Linebrink makes enough of a difference. If it had been 2 players being traded away, I think I could handle that, but 3 players just seems like too much.

 

At any rate, I am glad we are in a position to make this type of trade, even if it means overpaying.

[Nearsighted Views]

OK. I've read 7 pages but can't finish. My thoughts, as if you care:

 

1. Prospects: They are just that. We love them as Brewers fans because it's all that we know. In 3 years, this trade may suck but so be it.

 

2. Bullpen: Linebrink may be struggling but I'll take him any day of the week. We now have 3 power throwing 8/9 guys that can interchange.

 

3. Melvin: In him I trust. For the next 3 trades, he has the benefit of the doubt. Brewers fans wanted something and here it is.

 

GO CREW.

[edod]

Can he hit? I'll delay my opinion on this deal until I see Linebrink in the box thumping some fire into a decarbonated brew crew.

[Oldcity]

Quote:

---

It's not about giving up Inman or not, it's who we're getting back. If this trade is for a Gagne-level stud, I think no one cares. And maybe Linebrink will revert back and everyone will be happy. To quote SeriesFinale: "I'm not averse to them trading Inman for the right guy in the right situation. I just don't think that Linebrink is that guy."

---

I don't think it's fair for us to say who they could have gotten for Inman. If this trade only gets back Linebrink, it obviously isn't good enough to get back Gagne.

 

I don't see how this can be "horrible" considering I think we'll end up with a prospect or two on par with or better than Inman.

[JoeHova]

Quote:

---

I'm all for trading prospects to win now, providing that as a result of the deal, we actually do win now. I seriously doubt Linebrink will make enough difference this season to offset the fact that we traded at least 6 years of arguably our best pitching prospect for 2 months of him.

 

The potential downside of this trade is enormous; It has the possibility of being an absolutely horrendous deal that lingers for years and doesn't help that much in the short term anyway. The upside is meager in comparison; We get a good reliever for a while for guys that never amount to much.

---

 

 

Amen, QFT, etc.

 

You said it perfectly, in my opinion. If you give up an Inman along with 2 other guys who have good shots at the majors, you hope to get an impact player, not an OK 7th inning man. The Brewers pen has been pretty good, I dunno why the brain-trust was so keen on making a move of this nature.

[Crazyk1294]

I just got home. What? God I hope there is something else in the works...How could they not get more for our BEST prospect? Now I'm going to read the other 13 pages of this thread.

[UWRyan428]

I was definitely one of Will's bigger supporters, going as far as calling him our top prospect going into this year, over Braun and Yo (though I did it more just to think outside the box. He's a K-rator!). But with Carlos Villanueva's emergence and I would imagine Parra being left-handed, the odd man out would seem to be our top pitching prospect. Melvin broke the stalemate with an overpayment for Ned's newest toy. Honestly, as referenced earlier, it is now a very short game, and you have to imagine Yo loves the idea of having a strengthened bullpen, and if he does depart, the picks should help ease the pain, especially with an owner ready to invest more in the farm system. I hated the trade when it was first announced but after sleeping on it, I am actually happy with it. Linebrink will bring a lot of stabuility to an already stable bullpen. And remember, everyone, the precedent on price that was set last year by the Reds. We may have underpaid...

[BrewCrewRising]

Well Inman may have struggled at AA, but his K to inning ratio still looks awesome. I'm no stats scholar, but regardless of how high Inman goes, he's probably the real deal. I think even if you are for this trade you don't argue that.

 

I think the hardest thing to digest really is that unless the extremes happen, we will just never know to what extent it was a good trade. If Linebrink has a Chris Demaria type of career in Milwaukee, then we know it was bad. If has a decent ERA, then we just go 'meh'. If we win the World Series and he has a decent ERA (best possible outcome) we may still wonder, "Did we really need to give up Inman for him though?". (assuming that Inman doesn't Nuegebauer it for the Padres)

 

The bottom line is that we don't know, and the trade is not sexy. Because of CV's and Gallardo's successes we were excited about Inman, and so in a sense we traded a lot of hope (which Brewers fans have had to use as currency for too many years) for someone who's success and contributions may be hard to gauge.

[biedergb]

A lot has been said in the 13 pages, so I won't rehash a lot of my thoughts (generally in the I wish we hadn't traded Inman variety).

 

But one thing that hasn't been brought up -- some people seem to concede that if Linebrink doesn't stay at least we have a couple of 1st/2nd round picks in next years draft. I would rather have Inman, who is already in AA and demostrated success in pro ball, rather than unknowns coming out of the draft.

 

Anyway, let's hope that Linebrink turns out to be a great late inning reliever during the stretch run.

[Fatter than Joey]

I waited awhile before posting, as my initial reaction was very negative.

 

So let's look at the short term.

 

We currently have 13 pitchers on our staff.

 

Our starters -- Yo, Soup, Bush, Vargas, Cappy

Our BP -- CoCo, Tbow, Villy, Wise, Shouse, Spurling, Balfour, Parra.

 

Assuming Sheets comes off the DL, let's say Balfour gets DFA'd, and Yo gets bumped to the BP.

 

Who does Linebrink replace? -- Let's assume Spurling gets DFA'd.

 

At some point we probably go back down to 12 pitchers so Parra probably gets returned to AAA.

 

OK so now we have a closer -- CoCo; a LOOGY -- Shouse, 2 long guys in Villy and YO; and then 3 setup guys in Wise, Tbow and Linebrink.

 

Essentially we swapped our garbage inning guy (Spurling) for Linebrink.

 

Here are the scenarios in which I like this trade.

 

1.) Sheets is hurt worse than we know and Yo has to stay in the rotation for most of August/September.

 

2.) Yo and/or Parra are going to get shut down soon regardless of the Brewers playoff situation.

 

3.) Doug Melvin wants to trade one of our 3 setup guys (Wise, Tbow, Linebrink) in some sort of deal for a LFer.

 

4.) Doug Melvin thinks that our last 60 or so games are all going to be 1 run games.

 

5.) Doug Melvin does not trust Yost's ability to manage a BP, and rather than have a guy like Spurling around to pitch in 8-0 games, Yost will now not have to think about things, and always have decent pitchers ready for "tomorrow's game"

 

Otherwise I do not like this trade at all. It smacks of desperation.

 

Now, I don't have a problem with Spurling, or even Balfour on the roster. In these last 60 games or so -- there are going to be some blowouts. There are also going to be some games where Sheets goes the distance (or into closer territory), so it seems to me that as it stands right now -- the 25-30 IPs that Linebrink is going to get are going to come in a large part from Spurling, and he will be pitching in 8-0 games -- and that just does not make a lot of sense to me. I don't think that Linebrink is going to be an upgrade over Tbow or Wise -- I suspect (hope) one of the three is going to be moved.

 

I am not huge on Inman -- and am not opposed to trading him -- I was hoping for a LFer (in some sort of package) or a closer (as Sam astutely points out) for 2008.

 

I know that some are excited about compensatory picks -- I really am not -- If we let CoCo and Linebrink walk -- we will have a BP anchored by Tbow and Wise, which I find unacceptable. If we did not have CoCo this year -- I really think we are behind the Cubs probably before the AS break.

[bjkrautk]

I think I like this trade, actually.

 

I'd rather have to give up Inman than one of our top 3 pitching prospects (who are, IMO, the 3 rookies on the 25-man roster: Yo, Villanueva, and...to a lesser extent, a healthy Parra).

 

I also read Doug Melvin's comments as a guarantee that they'll be offering arbitration to Linebrink after the season. That's huge. If the Brewers lose out on both Linebrink and Cordero this off-season, they've at least set themselves up for a Moneyball-sized draft that will help keep the farm system well stocked for the future.

 

I'm not willing to base this trade solely on Inman v. Linebrink....you have to look at what Linebrink brings to this team after '07 (either via contract extension or draft picks).

[hauser42]

I said it 6 weeks ago that Inman was one the Brewers bigger trade chips and it has happened.

 

Young left handed pitchers can get the trade done. This not over paying, Brewers are gettting one of the most coveted relievers in the game for this season. All this posting about giving up too much is crazy, Brewers are in a division title race and need help now. Inman is a couple of years away at best.

 

If the Brewers don't resign Linebrink they get two solid picks in next years draft that Jack Z can use to reload on what he gave up this year.

 

My book this is a no loose situation for the Brewers when it comes to players.

[igor67]

I think the best way to frame this is a series of key questions.

 

1) Is Linebrink drop in performance a sign of overuse and wearing out or the typical kinds of bad streaks even the best relievers have and Doug got him just like he got Coco last year?

I've decided that I can't answer this reliably and will defer to the organizations long standing good track record with bullpen guys. In other words since statistically you can make arguments either way based on the data you need that scouting insight and the Brewers have been churning out excellent bullpen performances for years relative to the rest of the team's talent, so I think it's safe to say they think he's going to bounce back

 

2) How do you scout Inman? I submit that you can't really say anything from his AA performance it's too small and depending on your opinion before hand you can find evidence for any opinion. So it really comes down to what they saw before.

I would feel differently if this scouting issue was just being brought up for the first time, but it has been brought up before and I think largely ignored by us fans and certainly down played by Doug. Which is fine and it's still OK to think Inman might be different and have more success.

 

 

3) What else was out there at a similar price?

I went on record earlier wondering how much more it would have taken to get Texeria, and I still stand by that question. Texas was already apparently high on TGJ, there is a lot of other pieces the team could include as interesting prospects. Now maybe Texas wants nothing less than two Braun and Gallardo type prospects, but I doubt they can expect to get that much in reality. This is the only area I have doubts. Then again trying to read trade rumors is about as reliable as forecasting the weather with a graphing calculator.

[hawing]

4.) Doug Melvin thinks that our last 60 or so games are all going to be 1 run games.

 

This reminds me of one of my thoughts from last night: what help will Linebrink be if the starters don't cut the mustard to begin with, or if the bats are practically silent? Obviously that was a knee-jerk reaction to Wednesday's game. Otherwise, I don't mind having a new bullpen alternative. Linebrink does not immediately give me that unsettling 2006 "wheel of relievers" feeling (like Balfour did).

 

This transaction feels like a dice-roll, the likes of which I don't recall having seen from this franchise while I've been a fan . If it works, and the Brewers achieve whatever their postseason goal is (WS or "mere" playoff appearance), maybe the resulting interest/revenue will ultimately offset the prospect depletion. I guess I'm accustomed enough to the franchise selling instead of buying, that the opposite is a bit unsettling.

[molitor fan]

All this posting about giving up too much is crazy

 

I tell you, along with Gregmag and others I have about HAD IT with individuals that have different perspectives on this trade denigrating a different opinion that theirs on the trade in this manner. This thread is rife with disrespect, especially towards the contingent that follow prospects closely.

 

Sick of it, and I think it needs to stop.

 

And on a related note, it looks as if Linebrink will not report by Friday, and may be balking at reporting at all, based upon Melvin's statements that he is devastated by the trade, ala Junior Spivey. The fact that his wife's child may not be getting delivered till the latter part of the weekend means we will be Balfoured for a while longer, at the very least.

[BrewCrewRising]

Quote:

---

know that some are excited about compensatory picks -- I really am not -- If we let CoCo and Linebrink walk -- we will have a BP anchored by Tbow and Wise, which I find unacceptable

---

 

According to mlb4u.com Wise will be walking after the season too, unless we resign him.

[Jaylyn]

After sleeping on it, I still don't like this trade. I have no issues with trading Inman,Thatcher or Garrison or the fact that it's a "rental" player. The part that bothers me is that the trade is for a MR whose having an off year. I would have much preferred a trade of those three for another bat. This looks like a desperation move.

[Ennder]

Quote:

---

know that some are excited about compensatory picks -- I really am not -- If we let CoCo and Linebrink walk -- we will have a BP anchored by Tbow and Wise, which I find unacceptable

---

 

It does excite me personally. Inman was not going to have a spot in our rotation in the next few years in my opinion. That means he probably ends up in our bullpen and he's wasted. The pick we get when Linebrink walks is likely to be as good a player as Inman only whoever it is should be hitting the majors around the time we are having problems signing some of our current young players. This is just pushing a prospect back to a more useful timeframe for the team.

 

I still don't like the Linebrink part of the trade very much, losing Inman is not going to make me lose any sleep though. I also don't think we win the division this season even with the trade and if we do take the wild card I dont' know that linebrink is the key to going deeper into the playoffs.

[BrewCrewRising]

There are two votes on this page for desperation move. I don't see it that way at all. For the last couple of months there have been rumors (and suggestions on this site) for getting some BP help. We all wanted Gagne/Otsuka/Weathers. Last year a good number of people were disappointed we didn't get more for El Caballo.

 

I'm not a fan of this trade either, and like every other trade DM does, I'll Fox Mulder it and "want to believe" it to be a good trade.

 

I wish we could have gotten more for the highly touted Inman, but the only way it's desperation to me is if they tried to get Gagne/Otsuka (pre DL)/Weathers, and could't and "settled" for Linebrink. However DM had said that they had their sites on Linbrink for the last year.

 

What bothers me the most is that sometimes I'm a bit off on DM's infatuations. He "liked" Mench and Nix last year, and obviously like Suppan.

[chuckiehacks]

Quote:

---

And on a related note, it looks as if Linebrink will not report by Friday, and may be balking at reporting at all

---

Where is this coming from? I saw this quote from Linebrink himself:

 

"To go to a team that's playing for something to win is an exciting opportunity," Linebrink said. "The fact that you're wanted there makes it all the better. I'm looking forward to it."

[FVBrewerFan]

Quote:

---

The part that bothers me is that the trade is for a MR whose having an off year. I would have much preferred a trade of those three for another bat.

---

 

Sums it up for me. I would only add if we got a "solid" lefty in the pen I would feel a little better.