Linebrink acquired for Inman/Garrison/Thatcher

[xisxisxis]

On the point that a lot of people have made, that we wouldn't have had room for Inman anyway

 

Well I'm not going to defend that sentiment because it truely is silly to be worrying about room on a pitching staff in 3 years when 100 of things can happen to change the makeup of the 2010 rotation, but....

 

 

Remember, we're on the hook to Suppan for a ton of money; we have to resign Sheets; Cappy is about to get expensive; Bush will get expensive soon; and Parra hasn't shown yet that he can start (although I'm optimistic). Maybe Inman doesn't make it, but if he does, there's no way he's blocked here.

 

And we were treated to numerous reports and articles about how much Attanasio was involved with the Suppan signing. If Suppan is a deadweight in a short time (next start by my money), then Mark can write the checks to Suppan from his private account because I can't imagine even the most pro-organization brewers apologist wouldn't hold Attanasio responsible for the Soupcan mess.

 

 

He's a command/makeup monster with decent stuff who had moved quickly through the system and, with the exception of his first couple of AA starts, pitched like a Yo clone. He's a season away from being ready. A guy like that is a lot more valuable than getting to roll the dice on a comp pick.

 

But greg it's about making the playoffs now, not worrying about the rotation in 2009/2010. We've seen that the pieces are in place for an excellent offense made up of young guys and the nucleus of a pitching staff to make a 4-5 year run is in place. As the Brewers teams of the early 80's showed, a rotation with a bunch of less than optimal starters can work very well with a great offense. At this point we can afford to gamble a bit on Inman not walking through the minors, the majors and to the Hall of fame while the Brewers are contenders for a few years. Yes the price was steep, but the goal (playoffs) is worth the risk. I just wish we could have thrown in Nedly and got Bud Black in return.

[jloos19]

I find it funny that same people who said Sheets "wasn't a winner" and that Estrada is excellent because "he never strikes out and hits line drives" love this trade, claiming that Linebrink is the cream of the crop in terms of middle relievers. Look at how much his K/BB rate has dropped this year (just to reiterate) and his WHIP... that's not "cream of the crop." Just sayin'.

[Fatter than Joey]

What does losing Sheets have to do with acquiring one of the best set-up men in all of baseball?

 

Well -- First, Sheets coming back pushes Yo to the pen -- Who is pitching as well as anyone. I would assume Yo would pitch in games where set-up pitchers would be used, i.e. non-mop-up situations.

 

Secondly -- I do not see Linebrink as one of the best setup guys in baseball.

 

Spurling is a mop-up, innings-eater pitcher with less than stellar 'stuff.'

 

Absolutely -- which is why it makes sense for him to pitch in mop-up situations, not Linebrink, Wise, Yo or Tbow.

 

We're talking about shoring up the backend of the bullpen

 

Why? -- so we can hold a team in a 8-0 game from scoring more runs?

 

and giving us insurance in case Turnbow melts down

 

I do not subscribe to the Turnbow "melt-down" theory.

 

Everyone knew that we needed to gain more reliable arms to get us to Coco in the 9th.

 

I guess I don't see Linebrink as an upgrade to either Wise or Tbow -- perhaps he is incrementally better, I doubt it will translate into wins. If you want to say we upgraded Tbow and Wise -- fine. However, I think we did so in a small fashion (if at all) and it cost us 3 arms to do so.

 

We have too many pitchers who don't take us beyond the 5th inning of games and I don't know about you, but I sure feel more at ease with Linebrink helping out Wise and Turnbow to get some holds as the 6th, 7th, 8th inning guys if need-be from now until the end.

 

I can buy into the idea that Yost is bad at managing his BP -- heck, I have purchased that concept a long time ago. If DM thinks that Yost will continue to misuse pitchers, then I suspect this trade makes sense. If mop-up pitchers are going to be used in high-leverage situations, -- then I suppose they better be good pitchers. In this light I can see wisdom in this trade.

[endaround]

Yes its about winning now. But Melvin still acted like a drunk who took out a $100 bill along with two 10s to pay his $25 dollar bar tab and told the bar tender to keep the change.

[don1481]

Quote:

---

As pointed out, even if we lose Linebrink we still get 2 comp picks that are higher than the draft position of the 3 prospects combined.

---

 

David, this is something that has been bothering me from the moment DM mentioned "Type A FA." Two words can sum up my counter-argument to this:

 

Tony Graffanino.

 

Now, some of you reading this may be asking "Don, what relevance does our RH half of the Counsellino platoon have to do with Linebrink?" Well... last year, part of the reasoning for acquiring Graffy, in addition to covering for an injured Rickie Weeks, was to get DM's hands on some comp picks. Other teams were well aware of Graffy costing them picks and so Tony wound up accepting arby with the Brewers and... *sigh*.

 

Graffy obviously will not be landing the Brewers any comp picks this offseason.

 

Now... with Linebrink, let's say he doesn't sign elsewhere and accepts our arby for the same reasons that Graffy was forced to. What could we wind up with next season? If we look at Linebrink's numbers over the years, we see a Tale of Two Scotts. You have Awesome Scott, who was awesome in San Diego between 2003 and 2005... and you have Meh Scott, who's been well, meh, for San Diego this year and last. Since he's not getting younger, it's reasonable to think that he could keep up with his current pattern of regressing towards league average. Yes, he could go back to Awesome Scott, but again, given his age and his past couple of years... I'm not thinking it's terribly likely.

 

While (as of now) the bullpen for next year consists of Turnbow, Turnbow, and well, Turnbow, having another arm in there, especially one that isn't the relief equivalent of a Designated Rotation Stooge, isn't a terrible thing. But since Melvin did make it quite clear that one of the reasons why he made this trade was to get comp picks, the fact that the Brewers wouldn't get comp picks means that we gave up Inman plus two others for a middling middle reliever would mean that this trade's upside has taken a severe hit.

[RU Rah Rah]

I think that this might have been suggested previously in this ever-lengthening thread, but you might take a took at the response on one of the Padres' fan sites:

 

forum.signonsandiego.com/...ge=7&pp=15

 

There's a lot of garbage there, but generally their fans seem pretty stoked about getting Inman for Linebrink.

[Bruce Ciskie]

If DM thinks Ned is so bad at managing the bullpen (he wouldn't be alone), then why is the solution to make the bullpen better? Wouldn't it cost us fewer prospects to just make the manager better at managing the bullpen?

[Brian the Automator]

[ Well -- First, Sheets coming back pushes Yo to the pen -- Who is pitching as well as anyone. I would assume Yo would pitch in games where set-up pitchers would be used, i.e. non-mop-up situations. ]

 

Sheets won't be back until September.... August & the remainder of July are crucial as well.

[xisxisxis]

I guess I don't see Linebrink as an upgrade to either Wise or Tbow -- perhaps he is incrementally better,

 

FTJ you are way too smart to make such a poor statement as that. By any metric you want Linbebrink's been one of the top setup men in baseball the last several years. Wise and Turnbow or anyone else on the Brewers staff don't even come close.

[Team Canada]

Yes the price was steep, but the goal (playoffs) is worth the risk.

 

 

I still think Linebrink has very little to do with whether or not the Brewers make the playoffs.

[giffted1]

After reading some of the comments I'm starting to like this trade. We've been very lucky in the bullpen injury wise, and it's inevitable someone is going to go down. With the addition of Linebrink we can lose a big arm and still have a solid pen.

 

Inman, Garrison, and Thatcher is a big price to pay for a rental reliever, but the Padres obviously liked him, and we're going to get some nice draft picks when he walks.

 

Inman is a good prospect, but he's just a prospect. He's not the same prospect that Gallardo was who was dominating AA at this time last year. The scouts didn't think he could be more than a bottom of the rotation starter, and the Brewers figured he was expendable. Its a tough loss to swallow, but not a huge loss.

 

Thatcher has been excellent in AAA, but I think we all know that it doesn't guarantee major league success (see Balfour, Grant).

 

Garrison looks good, not great in A ball. He still has a long ways to go before he makes it to pitchers heaven.

[Bruce Ciskie]

Quote:

---

I still think Linebrink has very little to do with whether or not the Brewers make the playoffs.

---

 

Unless Linebrink can hit (or at least draw some walks) or take Suppan's spot in the rotation, you may have a point.

[don1481]

Quote:

---

FTJ you are way too smart to make such a poor statement as that. By any metric you want Linbebrink's been one of the top setup men in baseball the last several years.

---

 

Oh, David... I wouldn't call FTJ's statement "poor" at all.

 

Even during his last "awesome" year (2005) Linebrink's peripherals were starting to regress towards "league norms." And by the end of last season, the following trends were pretty apparent:

 

H/9 were trending up.

K/9 was trending down.

WHIP was going up.

 

If Linebrink has as good of "Stuff" as we're told, how come he's had a relatively pedestrian last couple of seasons?

[xisxisxis]

David, this is something that has been bothering me from the moment DM mentioned "Type A FA." Two words can sum up my counter-argument to this:

 

Tony Graffanino.

 

When we offer Linebrink arbitration and if he accepts then we have another season to like this trade. Given some of the outlandish contracts given to middle relievers in the past I don't see any way Linebrink turns down a multiyear deal to take arbitration from the Brewers. Comp picks are a safer lock than Inman in the majors in 2008.

 

As a general question, how can so many people be upset about trading Inman while pretty much guaranteeing we will get 2 comp picks to replace Linebrink if he leaves? I think if Jack Z has shown anything it's that he knows what he's doing. Yeah there's no guarantee we will get a prospect as good as Inman with the 2 comp picks, but it seems odd to have so little faith in Jack Z while everyone seems to accept anything DM does because he's DM. Whose more valuable to the teams current success and prospects?

[TGJforPrez]

Keith Law of ESPN and a former Special Assistant to the GM of the Blue Jays gave his assessment of the trade. While he doesn't really care for Linebrink, here is his evaluation of Inman. I think people on here need to relax. Melvin and these scouts know a heck of a lot more than we do about prospects.

 

Will Inman is a performance prospect, but his stuff doesn't match the superb numbers he put up at A-ball. His fastball is just average, with a little bit of run; his command is below-average and he gets hit hard when he leaves his fastball up. His best pitch is his curveball, a slow, big-breaking pitch with decent depth, and he has a fringe-average changeup. He's small with sloped shoulders, so there's not much reason to expect him to add velocity as he gets older. He projects as a fifth starter at the big league level, maybe a fourth starter if his command gets better. In his favor, he's going to a park that is very friendly to this type of pitcher.

 

Read Entire Blog Below: Will require an insider account.

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2949410&name=law_keith

[Invader3K]

The Keith Law article was mentioned in the chat last night, and people immediately labeled Law as "an idiot."

 

I think some people get a kick out of following prospects and hoping they succeed, so they can say they followed them since the beginning. That is fine, but let's keep some perspective here...no one is claiming Inman was going to be as good as Gallardo, or even Parra, from what I'm understanding. The Brewers don't have a need for a fifth starter for next year...they do have a need for a proven reliever in the bullpen right now.

[xisxisxis]

Even during his last "awesome" year (2005) Linebrink's peripherals were starting to regress towards "league norms."

 

VORP 2005-2007:

 

Turnbow: 22.8

Wise: 31.4

Linebrink: 54.8

 

That includes his "horrible" 2007 and 2006. He also was better than the combined Wisebow last year when Linebrink was just average.

[xisxisxis]

I still think Linebrink has very little to do with whether or not the Brewers make the playoffs.

 

I think the players have nothing to do with whether the Brewers make the playoffs. Obviously it's just Karma and luck. How could players ever have a role when the cosmos determines every outcome....

[Bruce Ciskie]

Maybe this has already been conveyed in the 15-page thread, but here's an idea...

 

Since there seem to be a lot of numbers that support both sides, how about we put away the hatchets and let the guy join the team and prove himself as either a good or bad pickup?

 

Then we can move on to talking about whether or not we need to get another bat, and if so, who we should be going after.

[gregmag]

But greg it's about making the playoffs now, not worrying about the rotation in 2009/2010.

 

No -- it's about both; it's always about both. It becomes a question of percentages. I would happily overpay right now in expected future success for expected present success. At some point, though, the degree of overpayment becomes absurd. Ryan Howard is a better hitter right now, IMHO, than Prince Fielder. I'm sure the Phils would give us Howard for Fielder. Do you make that trade because it helps us now, even though it almost certainly hurts us in two years?

 

Greg.

[xisxisxis]

Since there seem to be a lot of numbers that support both sides, how about we put away the hatchets and let the guy join the team and prove himself as either a good or bad pickup?

 

 

Well if we simply look at record, the Brewers are 0-1 since they acquired Linebrink.....What A MISTAKE!!!!! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

[don1481]

Quote:

---

When we offer Linebrink arbitration and if he accepts then we have another season to like this trade.

---

 

What? David? Where's this optimism coming from? Between you and Geno, I thought for sure there was going to be enough angst and cynicism about how we're "mortgaging the future" to fill up several Cure albums.

 

But that said, again - look at Linebrink's recent history. We acquired "Meh Scott," not "Awesome Scott." Top setup man he is not as of now. He hasn't been a "top" setup man in the past two seasons, either. It's not like when we acquired Cordero, who had lost his closer spot *that* season and was pitching effectively as a setup man.

 

Now, I know I'm going to draw the wrath of Russ for this one, but I'm going to "small sample size" and look at Linebrink's past month. I mean... if we're acquiring a reliever to help us down the stretch, it'd be nice if he was on a roll, right? Well... with that delicious 9+ ERA this month, Linebrink's almost as hittable as Grant Ball-Four. Mmm. Tasty meatball.

 

Quote:

---

Given some of the outlandish contracts given to middle relievers in the past I don't see any way Linebrink turns down a multiyear deal to take arbitration from the Brewers.

---

 

And given how a large portion of those contracts have backfired, GMs are probably getting a little wiser about shelling out such cash.

 

Quote:

---

Yeah there's no guarantee we will get a prospect as good as Inman with the 2 comp picks, but it seems odd to have so little faith in Jack Z while everyone seems to accept anything DM does because he's DM. Whose more valuable to the teams current success and prospects?

---

 

This discussion is not at all about what Jack Z would do with the comp picks so much as whether or not said comp picks will come to fruition in the first place. But since you bring it up... I do trust Jack Z to replenish the farm system with comp picks (if that happens).

[brewers255]

In 2006 Linebrink had a 6.08 ERA, this year's he cmpares the exact same ERA wise. In than finished August and Septemember with around 3.00 ERA.

 

July numbers

 

2005- 4.32 ERA Season: Home: 3.31 ERA Road: 0.66 ERA

2006- 6.08 ERA Season: Home: 3.19 ERA Road: 3.92 ERA

 

So yes he has struggled but when he was considered one of the best set-up man in baseball he struggled in July and had a outstanding 0.66 ERA on the Road. I also dont consider 30 years old for a relief pitcher.

[xisxisxis]

Do you make that trade because it helps us now, even though it almost certainly hurts us in two years?

 

Before I respond, you need to show me how Inman (a AA pitcher) and Linebrink are similar in any way to Howard and Fielder, otherwise I'm argueing over a straw-man.

[Fatter than Joey]

Sheets won't be back until September.... August & the remainder of July are crucial as well.

 

Yes -- and Sheets may be out even longer, in that regard the trade makes sense, I have pointed that out earlier.

 

FTJ you are way too smart to make such a poor statement as that.

 

Studies show I am not that smart and make poor statements almost hourly.

 

By any metric you want Linbebrink's been one of the top setup men in baseball the last several years.

 

I will chose WHiP 2007 or K/BB 2007. I guess I see Linebrink regressing, I am not sure the last several years apply here. There are a bunch of setup guys better than Linebrink Wise and Tbow -- of course many are probably not available.

 

I still think Linebrink has very little to do with whether or not the Brewers make the playoffs.

 

Agreed 100%

 

and we're going to get some nice draft picks when he walks.

 

Unless he sucks and choses arby.

 

Thatcher has been excellent in AAA, but I think we all know that it doesn't guarantee major league success (see Balfour, Grant).

 

Balfour hadn't pitched in MLB since 2004, and has only pitched in 3 innings -- I really don't think that we should use this as evidence.