Sheets for Crawford rumor

[sbrylski]

Melka Cabrera is so overvalued by the Yanks. I wouldn't want to try and negotiate him out of there.

[danzig6767]

The whole "Weeks is a solid defender now" campaign was started solely because he made a few less errors. He's still pretty brutal.

 

It still makes me shake my head that Hall will likely be in the outfield next year when we should contend and each game is so vital, but two athletic poor infielders will be at 2nd/3rd over Hall who can play both infield spots better.

 

[RockCoCougars]

Why trade Sheets and/or Weeks when each of their values are at an all time low? Why break up potentially the best young infield ever that's locked in for cheap for at least 3 more years?

 

I also happen to think that Cano and Cabrera are both highly overrated, and while I love Crawford, I wouldn't trade either one of them (Weeks/Sheets) for him straight up. As I've said in other posts, if Tampa wants to trade Crawford, I'll give them Billy Hall, Tony Gwynn, and Manny Parra. If that isn't enough, they want way too much.

[TooLiveBrew]

One thing that confuses me & keeps coming up -- can someone elaborate on how Sheets's value is at 'an all-time low'? Check out the crop of FA SP's. If anything, Sheeter's value is as high now as it ever will be.

[RobertR]

A couple of thoughts/comments:

Teams make big improvements by fixing the things that are worst on them first. What's worst on the Brewers is their infield defense. Fix that and you'll see a large improvement. Crawford does nothing to fix that problem. Not unless you use him as a centerfielder and move Hall back to the infield.

There is no source, just speculation. That said, if Cano is available as part of a package for Santana, he just might be available in a smaller package for Sheets. It's worth enquiring about anyways since the Yankees are reportedly interested in Sheets.

I agree Melky Cabrera is overrated. Decent defense and an offense in the low .700s doesn't impress me that much, even if he is young.

A 9.2 WARP1 indicates that people aren't appreciating just how good Cano is. That's a star. He's better than Crawford and fits the Brewers needs better.

Who said anything about dealing Weeks?

I'm not going to complain if the Brewers do acquire Crawford. He'll be valuable over the life of the contract, no question. That said, there are other moves that perhaps offer more bang for the buck.

Robert

[logan82]

I still don't see how trading Sheets even at 24 starts a year and replacing him with 24 starts of Capuano/Parra/Vargas makes us a better team next year. Especially for a corner outfielder. Sheets was about the only pitcher we had that could go deep into games and prevent us from seeing the likes of Dessens/Spurling to much. Not to mention overworking our guys that were actually good. I don't see our bulpen getting much deeper next year having to replace Cordero and/or Linebrink plus bringing in a couple more guys. Our weakness last year was OBP on offense and pitching/defense. Trading our best pitcher, even at 24 starts, for a high OBP guy who we can likley get somebody much cheaper without drastically weakening our pitching just does not make sense to me.

[danzig6767]

I still don't see how trading Sheets even at 24 starts a year and replacing him with 24 starts of Capuano/Parra/Vargas makes us a better team next year. Especially for a corner outfielder. Sheets was about the only pitcher we had that could go deep into games and prevent us from seeing the likes of Dessens/Spurling to much. Not to mention overworking our guys that were actually good. I don't see our bulpen getting much deeper next year having to replace Cordero and/or Linebrink plus bringing in a couple more guys. Our weakness last year was OBP on offense and pitching/defense. Trading our best pitcher, even at 24 starts, for a high OBP guy who we can likley get somebody much cheaper without drastically weakening our pitching just does not make sense to me.

 

Obviously the only reason the Brewers would consider this or even trading Sheets at all is if they don't believe he'll be here longer than next year. Then the thought process is multiple years of Crawford or another player vs one year of Sheets.

 

[logan82]

I highly doubt that Sheets will be here more than next year, but I still don't see the point in trading him. That is the mentality you take when you are building a team and winning isn't as important as ammasing quality players for the future. We dont' need to gain more quality players who will be good for us down the road at the expense of the present. We need to add to the players we already have. Trading a guy when there is a drastic drop off between him and his replacement at this point doesn't make sense to me. We are trying to win now, as opposed to years past when the idea was to get players for the future.

[Oldcity]

I also happen to think that Cano and Cabrera are both highly overrated, and while I love Crawford, I wouldn't trade either one of them (Weeks/Sheets) for him straight up. As I've said in other posts, if Tampa wants to trade Crawford, I'll give them Billy Hall, Tony Gwynn, and Manny Parra. If that isn't enough, they want way too much.

Hear hear!

 

[endaround]

Hall is more valuable than Crawford. He's signed for half the cost and can put up similar number while playing the infield.

[Oldcity]

I'm not sure I agree that Hall is quite as valuable, but there certainly isn't a wide gap. Point is most people are overrating Crawford, and some are by quite a bit.

[fondybrewfan]

I'm not sure I agree that Hall is quite as valuable, but there certainly isn't a wide gap. Point is most people are overrating Crawford, and some are by quite a bit.

Not only on this board. Check the comments at mlbtraderumors. Some guy thinks that a trade for Crawford would have to begin with Gallardo and Hardy.

[JJHardy7]

I'm not a Ben Sheets fan by any means. His injuries are frustrating, but I don't know if trading him is the right move to make. I doubt we'll get back a MLB pitcher with Sheets ability. If the team wasn't pushing for a playoff spot, the move would make sense. I'd rather roll the dice and see where we're at July 31.

[1e Corbeau]

Not adding too much to the discussion here, but I currently tend to agree with Logan's sentiment on this one.

 

I think the big challenge for a team in the Brewers' size market (the Twins/A's model DM and MA have referenced) is to take advantage of windows of current opportunity, while maintaining an eye towards sustained and future success. Ultimately, you have to make the hard decisions of getting something in return for a player who very well may walk via FA (ie Sheets) through trade or holding to get as much utility out of that player and grabbing the comp picks (more of a crapshoot).

 

I think I'd rather have Sheets for one more year (considering the avg starts/year over the last 3- and 5-yr periods) than Crawford. I know some feel Crawford is a "special" player and I admittedly haven't watched him much and am relying on the stat lines here, but I'm of the opinion that the speed portion of his unique skill set is over-rated, perhaps driven by the fantasy-obsessed media. I'm willing to grant that those who seem to provide rationale for his "specialness" know more about scouting than I ever will.

 

My thought-process is something like this. Overall, we didn't struggle to score runs (though we did rely heavily on the long ball, which led to some streakiness in production). We got hurt by starters not going deep into games, overtaxing an eventually suspect pen, and defense. Sheets is more beneficial, I think, in 2008 than Crawford to the Brewers (even if Sheets starts 24 games).

 

Yes, Crawford fills the OBP LF hole (which I agree is a problem that needs action this offseason), but his is heavily reliant on BA, which makes me worry a bit. He plays solid to great defense, no? But, the high cost it would take to obtain him turns me off, especially with LaPorta likely to be able to produce within the next 2 years. I think I'd rather give up cash only to sign a guy like Lofton for a year, rather than trading our best starting pitcher, regardless of if we extend Sheets or not.

 

If you believe Hall is not a viable 3yr option in CF and also that Crawford could play CF (well) and that would create the Hall-to-3B-Braun-to-LF chain reaction, it becomes more appealing.

 

Capuano as a centerpiece for Crawford would be great, but not realistic IMHO.

[TooLiveBrew]

Nice post, Corbeau.

 

Check the comments at mlbtraderumors. Some guy thinks that a trade for Crawford would have to begin with Gallardo and Hardy.

 

http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif

[JohnBriggs12]

An OF of Crawford, Hall, and Hart in whatever spot you want them, covers a heck of a lot more ground than one of Mench, Hall, and Hart. It also frees up a bench player like Counsell to be strictly a defensive replacement and not a prime PH option. Outfield defense is as important as IF defense on this team with the number of flyball pitchers on this staff.

 

As good as Braun and Fielder were offensively last year, they were just 5th in the NL in runs scored, 91 behind leader Philadelphia. The key to scoring more runs is in two places, the number one and two spots in the order, and the number 5 spots. At various times last year, those spots suffered. They are assuming Weeks will be the guy he was the last 6 weeks and that Hart has ably found his niche in the 5th spot. That leaves the 2nd spot in the order. All the guys who's names have come up (Crawford, Winn, etc) and the attributes Melvin has listed as his primary targets, fit filling the number 2 spot in the order ahead of the big boys.

 

Remember too, that one way to take pressure off the starting pitching, and a way to avoid relying on middle relief so much is to score and score often. Too many times last years team jumped out with 4-5 runs early only to stop there. Adding speed means be able to manufacture that run or two that adds on to leads and keeps constant pressure on the opponents. Crawford is a premier speed guy.

[Oldcity]

Thing is, Crawford doesn't even fit the type of hitter that Melvin said he'd be targeting. Most agreed that a "professional hitter" is one who can work walks and get on base. Crawford generally gets on base but he doesn't work many walks. Certainly Crawford is a more dynamic player than Luke Scott, Randy Winn, Austin Kearns, Gabe Gross, etc, but I'm not sure he's a better option when you consider what the Brewers would have to give up to get Crawford as opposed to those other players (nothing, in Gross' case).

[Katuluu]

Hall contract info:

2008 - $4.8 million 28yo

2009 - $6.8 million 29yo

2010 - $8.4 million 30yo

2011 - $9.25 million co or $500K buyout 31yo

 

 

 

Crawford contract info:

2008 - $5.25 million 26yo

2009 - $8.25 million co or $2.5 million buyout 27yo

2010 - $10 million co or $1.25 million buyout 28yo

 

Not sure where people got the idea that Crawford costs 2x as much as Hall. Both are signed to very club friendly contracts.

[PilprinBuddha]

Nice post, Corbeau.

 

Check the comments at mlbtraderumors. Some guy thinks that a trade for Crawford would have to begin with Gallardo and Hardy.

 

http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif

And with that they could kiss my good side http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/laugh.gif

[Team Canada]

If DM is assuming that he won't be re-signing Sheets, I could be ok with the deal. But here's the problem I have, as stated in a couple other places:

 

1. Our IF defense is bad.

2. Our pitching was/is suspect.

 

 

How does Crawford in LF solve either of those problems?

[RobertR]

My main concern with Crawford is that he doesn't provide enough immediate return to offset the cost of acquiring him in 2008. Like Sheets or not, it was clear this year that Sheets was the Brewers most valuable starting pitcher and a lot of problems occurred when he went down.

 

This strikes me as something of "gilding the lily". There's no question that Crawford would improve the Brewers offense. However, the Brewers offense is the least of the team's concerns. Infield defense and the bullpen have to rank as bigger concerns, Crawford likely does nothing to address that, and trading the team's best starter makes the rotation worse.

 

As I said earlier, teams make the biggest improvements by addressing their biggest weaknesses. Crawford doesn't do that, no matter how appealing he may look.

 

Robert

[TooLiveBrew]

There's no question that Crawford would improve the Brewers offense. However, the Brewers offense is the least of the team's concerns. Infield defense and the bullpen have to rank as bigger concerns, Crawford likely does nothing to address that, and trading the team's best starter makes the rotation worse.

^ (what he said). That's the best way I've seen this summed up.

[Robideaux]

Robert,

That just about sums up my thoughts on the subject as well--just in a clearer way with fewer clauses.

[PilprinBuddha]

If Sheets could stay healthy - Ever - I would not even consider trading him. In fact I'd be trying to sign him long term. His propensity for injuries is the only reason I'd consider dealing him.

 

IMHO, It makes little or no sense for Sheets to be mentioned in any trade rumors with small market teams. Large Market ones yes, but not small market.

 

If the Mets are actually interested in Cappy - Which OF might they be willing to trade. I like Millege's talent, but I hear his attitude is Bradleyish.

[Fatter than Joey]

This strikes me as something of "gilding the lily".

 

Agreed -- If there is one thing a team like the Brewers should try not to do is gild the Lilly.

 

Unless we trade for Ted Lilly.