Trade for pitching....or trade it away? (Sheets discussion)

[trwi7]

Trading Sheets and Capuano for Crawford actually sounds about the right price if you ask me.

 

Sorry but I think that's WAY too much. I think Sheets is too much to be honest.

 

To clarify, I think the rumor states we would use one of Sheets or Capuano.

That's the way I read it too sbrylski.

[twobrewers]

The Brewers are trying to acquire TB's Carl Crawford, who sources say the club thinks is the final "piece to their puzzle", but the Rays don't want pricey ace Ben Sheets of Chris Capuano in return. Instead they want to see if they can get the Yankees (who like both of those guys) involved.

 

The Yankees are interested in the Brewers' duo because they believe the Brewers' asking price is rair. However, the Brewers, who want a speedy, leadoff-type LF for 2008 and beyond, don't want Johny Damon in the deal. So, there are efforts being made to get the three teams together before the Winter Meetings.

It probably is supposed to say Ben Sheets OR Chris Capuano in return. But it also says the Yankees are interested in the Brewers' duo.

 

While I think you may be right that the article is implying only one of them - I am positive that Capuano alone isn't enough. Sheets alone would only be enough if the Yankees are able to work out a long term contract with him. But of course, that is all just based on my speculation as to the price of Crawford.

[sbrylski]

But it also says the Yankees are interested in the Brewers' duo.

 

Interested in one or the other, I interpret it as.

 

But yes, it'll take more than Cappy but hopefully a little less than Sheets.

[colbyjack]

While I think you may be right that the article is implying only one of them - I am positive that Capuano alone isn't enough.

 

I don't want to completely squash the possiblity of this, but the link provided above is to a message board post, not an article, a short post that has a few spelling and grammar errors to boot (I usually don't get too bent out of shape about such errors, but it doesn't aid the credibility).

 

I've never heard of Gotham Baseball before this post, so it is hard to take this so-called rumor seriously. Until I see a think to a story that validates this report, I'm not going to spend too much time trying to determine whether or not it is anything more than one person's imagination at work.

[SmartBall]

Sheets can be a great pitcher, I don't doubt that, and I don't love Crawford so I am not thrilled with some of the trades that have been speculated, but one thing I don't see people talking about is that Sheet's stats even when he was so called healthy this year were trending down. His strikeouts were down, his walks were up, his hits per inning were up. Not only that but from a pure scouting point of view his velocity seemed down, his location was hit and miss and his curve looked flat at times. He was still a good pitcher but I did not see 2004 Ben Sheets last year. I truly think it has something to do with his lack of commitment to off the field conditioning and off-season work outs. I have no way to know for sure, but he isn't exactly a cut athlete, and things like tweaked groins and hamstrings tend to avoid those guys that are in peak condition. I love Sheets and hoped he would be Brewer for life, but if you can trade him at 2004 value or anything close to it, I think you have to investigate.

[TooLiveBrew]

I think that's a really incisive post, SmartBall.

[Fatter than Joey]

I love Sheets and hoped he would be Brewer for life, but if you can trade him at 2004 value or anything close to it, I think you have to investigate.

 

Absolutely --- Even if Ben were trending downward -- the only pitcher that could remotely take his spot is Yo -- and Bush/Suppan/Vlly/Cappy are going to be

a huge dropoff -- you couple this with the loss of Cordero and trading Sheets for an OF+BP arm, makes a lot less sense to me.

[logan82]

Absolutely --- Even if Ben were trending downward -- the only pitcher that could remotely take his spot is Yo -- and Bush/Suppan/Vlly/Cappy are going to be

a huge dropoff -- you couple this with the loss of Cordero and trading Sheets for an OF+BP arm, makes a lot less sense to me.

If I understand what you are trying to say, I don't think this line of thought has really been posted. People talk about Yo bing able to take Sheets' place in the rotation. I will not argue with that, but Yo will already be in the rotation. The person taking Sheets' spot if he is traded will be Bush/Parra/Vargas/Capuano. Even with Sheets' decline in effectiveness none of those guys can hold a candle to Sheets. I agree that is there is a good trade that can be made, then make it, but I really doubt we will get enough in return. If we want to win next year I still think our best bet is with 24 starts of Sheets and 11 from one of those other 4 guys.

[TheBrewer]

My first thought was that it doesn't matter if most of his OBP comes from batting average, as long as he's consistently hitting for average, and I stand by that thought, but the OBP just isn't high enough. I still think Crawford is good. But he's not good enough.

 

Sorry but I think that's WAY too much. I think Sheets is too much to be honest

Guys, in my opinion to be completely honest, your being very biased towards Sheets and not being realistic.

 

Fact- Sheets is in the final year of his contract -(would Melvin even re-sign him, the price sheets may want, he may get on the open market etc when hes not worth it)

Fact- Crawford has 3 years remaining on his contract and is 27 years old next season.

 

To me right off the bat, JUST looking at the contracts that makes sense for us immediately. With Cappy in the trade also... I might question it a LITTLE but that was more speculation.

 

Opinion - Folks, in my opinion, Sheets is not the 2004 sheets. Yes he says hes pitching to contact now etc, hence his K's will go down, but at the same time as pointed out his H9 has gone up and his ERA has gone up, and you can only escape this so long but (22, 17, 24 starts the past three seasons), he's really become an injury bug .While thats not horrible, it's not career threating etc, it's still something to be concerned about.

 

When you guys pretty much dissect Crawford as much as you have thats a bit much seriously. I could go to Pujols this season in his "down" year, and tell you he hit .265 with runners in scoring position with 2 outs. (which is true this season) If I wana find something I can, irregardless of the player. I could go to Alex Rodriguez and say that again true that he hit .258 with none on and 1/2 out. It's crazy seriously.

 

While Crawford MAY be a bit over rated, fact remains he's a guy who's going to .300+/10-20HR/45-60SB. Period. If your comparing the 30 year old Ben Sheets to the 27 year old Crawford statistically I think the hand would go to Crawford but you COULD call it a push. If it's a push on stats, look at the contracts. Enough said guys.

 

If Sheets were traded I would be worried about our rotation yes. Gallardo could pull a Jered Weaver this next year, who knows, it's too unproven. I would imagine that Melvin would bring in someone else then via trade or via Free Agency.

[lukevan]

If we want to win next year I still think our best bet is with 24 starts of Sheets and 11 from one of those other 4 guys.

 

Agreed. Even if he does miss a few starts, he still helps the ball club. If Sheets misses a start here or there, we have other capable spot starters if we go in to the season with Bush or Parra in the pen.

 

I understand the need for a LF in '08, but trading our best pitcher doesn't seem like a good plan right now. We could get Winn/Kearns/Church for much less than Sheets and those players would not be much of a downgrade from Crawford IMO.

 

Of course the Brewers would have won the division if Sheets had 10 more starts. And if you don't think so, then you shouldn't be opposed to trading Sheets because he really doesn't make that much of a difference then. Right?

 

Going back to this briefly: I was only comparing what the production Sheets would've had considering good health and the ACTUAL results of the 10 starts in which he was replaced by Villy/Gallardo. I agree that having Villy/Gallardo in the bullpen would've helped and that might've been enough in all to overtake the Cubs. I just don't think it's a foregone conclusion that we would've been 3 games better than the Cubs with Sheets.

 

Here's a look at the numbers:

 

In Villy's 6 starts to end the season, he allowed 7 ER in 30 IP for a 2.10 ERA. It would've been difficult for Sheets to match that, let alone improve on it. The Brewers were 4-2 in those starts.

 

Yo allowed 14 ER in the preceding 4 starts in replacement of Sheets in 21.2 IP for a 5.94 ERA. The Brewers were 2-2 in those starts for a total of 6-4 in the replacement starts. Could Sheets have made it 8-2 or 9-1? Maybe. Again, having Gallardo/Villy in the pen in high leverage situations instead of McClung or Aquino would've helped the team as well. I'm not saying definitively that we wouldn't have made up 2-3 games with Sheets, but I don't think it's cut and dry.

 

I'd still be opposed to trading Sheets b/c for the upcoming season we are talking about either having Sheets in the rotation or likely one of Bush/Parra/Cappy/Vargas. I think that it quite a difference unless Capuano can pitch like the 1st half of '06 again.

[Fatter than Joey]

Even with Sheets' decline in effectiveness none of those guys can hold a candle to Sheets

 

Well let's develop this a bit further. If our 2008 season started today -- I would expect our rotation to be.

 

Sheets

Yo

Villy

Suppan

Bush

 

If we traded Sheets for Crawford + Reyes

 

Our rotation would be ...

 

Vargas/Parra/Cappy

Yo

Villy

Suppan

Bush

 

I have no doubt that Crawford would make us better in LF, but I think that upgrade would be offset by the downgrade in our rotation.

 

I would imagine that Melvin would bring in someone else then via trade or via Free Agency.

 

I would certainly be happy if a subsequent trade could be made to bring in a SP --- but my concern there is that we would have to trade Hart

or someone like him to get a suitable replacement for our rotation, which overall doesn't make much sense.

 

If it's a push on stats, look at the contracts. Enough said guys.

 

Your post does not address competing in 2008. I would rather get 30 starts from Sheets, make the playoffs, and then let Sheets walk, rather

than extracting value from Sheets this offseason.

[RyDogg66]

So now we have to talk about a Carl Crawford trade rumor in a pitching thread? I have a slight issue with the locking of a thread about a specific trade rumor and moving it to a general thread.

 

If the rumor expands to include position players, can that thread be unlocked? The precedent BF.net is setting is now any trade that may involve us either trading for pitching or trading away a pitcher must be discussed in this thread.

 

God help us if there are two or three rumors bumping around at the same time.

 

I've copied the same to the BF.net issues forum. Just something for the mods to consider.

[dadofandrew]

I agree RD. This thread is unreadable, and the Sheets/Crawford one, littered with good info, will soon fall away.

[saget]

I think I would burst into tears if Sheets were traded. Oh the humanity...

[joshjs]

What could they get for Sheets that might be worth giving him up? I think the answer is good, young (read: price-controlled) talent - either pitching or catching. It would probably hurt the team to lose Ben in 2008, but the 2009+ Brewers will most likely not include Sheets, and if they can improve those teams substantially, I want them to do it.

 

That said, I don't think it's going to happen, because price-controlled stud pitchers are the most valuable thing around right now. For example, I wouldn't want them to trade Gallardo in almost any situation I can think of.

 

(Forgive me if I'm not providing any new insights, as I've only read the last page or two.)

[TooLiveBrew]

I think the answer is good, young (read: price-controlled) talent - either pitching or catching.

 

Right on. We'd have to find a trading partner who believes that - at worst - one season of Ben Sheets is the final piece to their puzzle in 2008, and they don't want to wait for a young arm to prove itself. I'd look first at the AL 'contenders,' since I don't want to see Ben at all (if possible) as an opponent. Obviously you have to consider NL teams, too, since your #1 priority is to get as much as possible in return.

 

The Packers-Vikes game prevents me from doing any homework on this front, but I'll likely take a look later.

[Katuluu]

Crawford is actually 26 next season. His birthday isn't until August.

[logan82]

If Sheets were traded I would be worried about our rotation yes. Gallardo could pull a Jered Weaver this next year, who knows, it's too unproven. I would imagine that Melvin would bring in someone else then via trade or via Free Agency.

If Sheets is gone he will be replaced in the rotation by Bush/Parra/Capuano/Vargas, not Yo. If you are going to talk about replacing Sheets in the rotation you have to compare him to those guys and not Yo.

 

I don't think Mark A. would accept trading a guy who will help us now and giving up a year when we can be competitive. To me, that is what trading Sheets would signify. I have no doubt we will be trading one or two pitchers, I just doubt it will be Sheets.

[TooLiveBrew]

I have no doubt we will be trading one or two pitchers, I just doubt it will be Sheets.

 

Agreed, logan. Unless we can swing a deal like Sheets + Gwynn for Haren + Swisher (just an example, not meant to be analyzed), in which we get a strong quality SP, Sheets is going nowhere.

[TheBrewer]

I was saying in General about our rotation, not neccessarly about replacing Sheets with Yo. Just in general.

[SmartBall]

According to recent discussion on the MLBtraderumors forum, it would take YO and Hall or Parra and Hardy to get Crawford from the Rays straight up. Is it just me or did all the talk about Crawford being available for the last few years and his high fantasy baseball value somehow turn this guy into a franchise player. He is young with a unique skill set, but how good is he really? I look at either of those options and I say no freakin' way, he seems to me to be a guy who keeps tantalizing but has never broken through to be that huge star. So I guess my question is, taking all aspects of the Brewers out of the equation, how do people view Carl Crawford?

[ILuvDaBush]

A less powerful/faster version of Elijah Dukes....without the character questions. Like I said before, the only left fielder available that would be able to procure Sheets from my stable would be Jason Bay. Anything else, and no soup for you.

[endaround]

Crawford is a poor man's Corey Hart

[TheBrewer]

"Crawford is a poor man's Corey Hart"

 

Crawford will give you .300+/10-20HR/50SB

Hart will give you .280-.300/20-30HR/25-30SB

 

Crawford has more speed, but less power, and Hart has more power and less speed, and Hart may not have as high of a BA as Crawford does. Not sure how Crawford is a poor man's Hart.

 

I'm not sure how Hart will fill out as he gets more time under his belt and becomes more established. Hart may vary well eclipse what Crawford does in the future but thats too early to determine. Right now I think it would a wash of the two, but noting that Crawford has more experience under his belt and Hart may just be starting what he can do. Who would I rather have on my team, I might say Crawford because he's proven more, but on the other hand, Hart could do more in the future.

[logan82]

If that is what both players will give you I would take a guy with Hart's stats every time. Slugging is more beneficial than stealing bases.