Sheets for Crawford rumor

[splitterpfj]

It appears as though we're stuck with the same infield defense we had last year, unless the team somehow acquired a new 3B. Melvin's latest comments are that he won't ask Hall to change positions again, and he would only move Braun if he had a "bonafide third baseman" to replace him.

 

OK then, if Crawford is added, at the expense of Sheets, to improve the team's weak points from last year, you would now need to move Hall, maybe one more pitcher, and probably some prospects (or spend on a free agent) to add a new 3B and at the very least, two bullpen arms, if not a new starting pitcher.

 

I like Crawford enough to pursue him, but this could be some very strange math by the time it's done.

[sbrylski]

This is all good discussion and all...but we know the odds of this actually happening (Sheets out and Crawford in) are pretty low, right? I'd be shocked if the Rays, who apparently set Crawfords trade value very high, and the Yankees, who also value their pitching prospects very highly, will be able to come together with us and find something that works for all parties.

[TooLiveBrew]

he would only move Braun if he had a "bonafide third baseman" to replace him.

What does irony mean... would it be like if we already had a bona fide 3B on the squad, but just in CF?

[PilprinBuddha]

Bill Hall to me is not a bonefide Third Baseman. I think Bill Hall is a bonefide second baseman. Mike Lowell is a bonefide 3rd baseman. I'd try to sign Lowell and Lofton move Hall to second (wont happen) Braun to OF, and trade Weeks.

[fondybrewfan]

I would like a deal for Crawford if for Sheets either to the Rays or some other 3rd team on the condition that Doug has something up his sleeve to obtain a solid #2 starter through another trade. I think he could spare one or two offensive parts if Crawford were acquired. I think a combination of Hall, Gamel, Capuano, and maybe someone like Alcides Escobar and/or Darren Ford could net a pretty good starting pitcher, possibly an upper tier #2 pitcher or Low #1 starter

 

Thus it would essentially be

 

Brewers Get:

Crawford

Low #1 or High #2 Pitcher (Joe Blanton, Erik Bedard (maybe that is a reach), Ian Snell, Matt Cain, Mark Buerhle)

 

Those pitchers are just guesses and arent even necessarily available, not sure of the pitcher but atleast I think that combination of players would be more than enough and probably would be to much if you include Escobar or Ford.

 

Brewers Send:

Sheets

Hall

Gamel

Capuano

Escobar/Ford

 

It seems to be that given Sheets contract situation that package would be more than fair and would make the Brewers a better team at the risk of losing even more minor league depth which is already starting to get rail thin

[brewers255]

Rumors are swirling in Tampa that the Cubs and D-Rays are close to a deal that would send Crawford to Chicago for Ronny Cedeno, Rich Hill, and Carlos Marmol.

[craigharmann]

Please make that trade!! That would REALLY hurt the Cubs! Although it would be much better if the Rays would swing Marmol to the Crew for Vargas or someone of that ilk.

[dadofandrew]

I think those who question how much Crawford would shore up the team's weakness are missing the forest for the trees. I heard the same thing about drafting a 1B when Sexson was our best player.

 

How will Crawford help the IF defense? Who cares, if he improves the team, he improves the team. The IF defense will only improve next year as the young players improve. Crawford is signed to a below market contract, and is probably still improving. He's an 850 OPS guy now, out of the dome in St. Pete.

 

I also find it odd that no one wants the best defensive LF in MLB? Anytime you can add a solid two way player, you need to look into it. The 4 IF's are set, LF is not.

[Robideaux]

That would be a pretty nice haul for the Rays if that actually happened. I wouldn't be upset if that happened--I think the Cubs would regress.

[Tbadder]

The key to this is Sheets' health. He is a proven loser--health-wise. Crawford is a valuable player with a poo-ton of talent. He is cheap-cheap-cheap and allows us to trade other players for pitching possibly. He allows us more years of wiggle room to position the team for the awful decision of who to keep (Braun) and who to let go (Fielder). We're all talking like the Crew is gonna be a contender next year. I just don't see that happening. The defense and situational offense isn't good enough. The bullpen isn't where it needs to be and we've got nothing resembling a #1 starter if Ben can't stay healthy, which he's proven over and over again, he can't. The sample is large--Sheets' value will never match his talent. Plus it's pretty obvious that Sheets' is starting to click downward, whereas as Crawford looks to be coming into his own. I'd trade anyone in the minors except Gamel for the afforementioned pitchers (Snell, Wang, etc.). Another consideration is dumping the Brewer that makes me cringe the most--JJ Hardy. Never was it so obvious that this guy had a career year, and his health history could mean he's a walking time bomb. Trading JJ could bring a big time young stud pitcher ala Gallardo, and we could move a defensive gem like Escobar onto the roster and save the staff some headaches.

[CportBadger]

The Cubs after Crawford would make sense with them moving Jones and Monroe and adding Infante. That said, I think a young lefty starter and their best reliever is a lot to give up, especially since they won't be able to get someone as good as Hill in FA.

[Robideaux]

DOA-

 

I don't think most people are saying that Crawford isn't any good (at least I'm not). He is. The question becomes, "What do you have to give up to get him?"

 

I see two camps (broadly):

1. Trade Sheets because Sheets is gone in a year anyway, so let's get value while we can. Crawford is good and getting better.

 

2. The Brewers glaring weakness down the stretch last season was pitching--starting and bullpen. Then you look at run differential between either Sheets or Crawford and their Brewer replacement player.

 

Replace Sheets in the rotation with Bush: What is the net gain/loss?

Replace Crawford with Gross/Mench or Winn/Church/etc.: What is the net gain/loss?

 

My contention, just my opinion , is that the drop off from Sheets to Bush is greater than from Crawford to Left Fielder X in 2008.

 

I look at this team and see playoffs--I would hate to start ripping away key pieces of a 2008 playoff team in order to help build for 2009 and beyond. Unless somebody just blows you away with an offer for Sheets (or you can swing another trade for a GOOD pitcher) I say trade Sheets at the deadline if we are out of contention.

[endaround]

I think those who question how much Crawford would shore up the team's weakness are missing the forest for the trees. I heard the same thing about drafting a 1B when Sexson was our best player.

 

How will Crawford help the IF defense? Who cares, if he improves the team, he improves the team. The IF defense will only improve next year as the young players improve. Crawford is signed to a below market contract, and is probably still improving. He's an 850 OPS guy now, out of the dome in St. Pete.

 

I also find it odd that no one wants the best defensive LF in MLB? Anytime you can add a solid two way player, you need to look into it. The 4 IF's are set, LF is not.

Eric Bynes isn't available. We are talking about Crawford who isn't anywhere close to being the best.

If you have $2000 to spend on your house and your choices are fixing the hole in your roof or hiring a lawn care service, under your logic both are just as good as the another! Sure you might get wet but look at that lawn!

[fondybrewfan]

I dont know if this is necessarily a rumor. The guy over at mlbtraderumors said that Cubs are looking at Crawford and he specifically said that no names were mentioned. On his own be brought up the names Cedeno, Hill, and Marmol. He basically made it up

[Katuluu]

Just to add potential fuel to the fire, the Twins are rumored to be offering up Garza to try and land some of the D'Rays young position players. Supposedly Upton is their primary target, but I wouldn't be suprised if they might be the third team being hinted at in these rumors.

[RobertR]

The goal, at this stage, is to get into the playoffs. In a vacuum, trading Sheets for Crawford isn't a bad deal, but it doesn't necessarily make the team better in 2008, just different. I don't think it's hard to make the argument that Sheets + Luke Scott > Vargas + Crawford, for example. It's not exactly hard to come up with leftfielders that can provide offense and it's perhaps besides the point when there are glaring needs elsewhere.

 

Edit: FWIW, Baseball Prospectus has Crawford as a worse defender than Geoff Jenkins and a little better than average.

 

I also don't think Melvin is so tied to Braun at 3B that he wouldn't move him to outfield if the right third baseman became available. Andy LaRoche, for example. There are plenty of examples that what Melvin says for public consumption isn't necessarily how he truly thinks.

 

That said, I don't think the Brewers are going to pull off a Sheets for Crawford deal. Not when you have to start pulling in third parties that seem equally reluctant to deal their best young players.

 

Robert

[Weirdos19]

I say make this deal for these reasons.

1) Sheets may start 30 games, or he may start 10. We have no idea what we are getting with him. Crawford is a .300/60 steal guy. Signed as long as the current core players the Brewers have now. Sheets may be gone by next December.

2) By acquiring Crawford, we have flexiblity to make moves to improve our defense and relief pitching. This deal would make Mench, Gross, or Gwynn available. The Gwynn/Otsuka deal would be an ideal move after the Sheets/Crawford deal is made.

3) Also, trading Sheets may give us the flexibility to maybe move Bill Hall. Giving him that contract looked like a great move when it happened. But now it looks like it could be the type of deal that the Brewers need to get away from. Crawford's contract is a steal in comparison.

[PeaveyFury]

In a vacuum, I don't trade Sheets for Crawford, but 4 years of Crawford is much, much better than 1 year of Sheets and two draft picks.

 

So I'd do it. But as Robert said, this seems very unlikely. A third team would have to be involved, and that just makes things really complicated.

[dadofandrew]

As to Crawford's defense, I use zone rating, as it's one of the only defensive metrics that I understand and it makes sense (Jeter, Braun, others all at the bottom). All the fancy defensive stats seem to overvalue (70 runs above average, please) and could just be making it up, there's no rhyme or reason to them. ZR measures the balls in the "zone" and how many outs they made.

[MNBrew]

I can't remember where I've read it over the last week, but it basically said that it's worth what you could read into it that the Dodgers would be so willing to part with a young talent like Andy LaRoche.

 

Seemingly everybody here poo-poos the idea of giving Braun another year to improve at 3B, but they've done that with Weeks and it worked. Not only that, they took a far worse defensive infielder and gave him a whole lot of time, and now so many on this site treat him like he'd be the best defensive solution if the Brewers would only move him back to the IF -- yes, that's Bill Hall. I'll posit the likely unpopular point of view that Braun's defense when he came up was at worst the same as Hall's when he first came up, and likely Braun's was better.

 

Kat, are you wondering if the Twins could be the 3rd team involved in the Brewers' potential attempt to land Crawford? How do you see the players possibly lining up (if you've thought it out that far)? I think if the Brewers could land Crawford without giving up a SP, a young major league position player named Braun, Hardy, Hart, Weeks, or Fielder, or any more of their top young pitching prospects, it'd be a serious coup.

 

I don't believe the Brewers ever projected this type of offense out of Hardy -- or at least not anywhere so close to the start of his career. But they probably actually expected his defense to be more on par with what he did earlier in his career, which without looking it up I recall to be a good bit better than it was this year. They said he was major-league ready on defense when they drafted him, and they knew he'd at least be above average in the field if not eventually exceptional. Teams don't tout a guy's "make up" very often anymore, but they did with Hardy as I recall. When there's great clamoring for the Brewers to improve their defense, I think trading Hardy would NOT be the right way to go. For as much as Hall improved in the IF by two years ago, he's still not at Hardy's level.

[trwi7]

but they've done that with Weeks and it worked.

Actually no it hasn't. Weeks is still one of the worst defensive 2nd basemen in the league.

 

Not only that, they took a far worse defensive infielder and gave him a whole lot of time, and now so many on this site treat him like he'd be the best defensive solution if the Brewers would only move him back to the IF -- yes, that's Bill Hall.

Difference between these situations is that when Hall and Weeks went through this we weren't planning on competing. Now is a different story.

[Katuluu]

Well, the Twins have been pretty open about contacting the D'Rays. I don't know if all three teams have actually had talks about a trade, but it seems likely that those are the three teams that people are hinting at. If I had to make a very rough guess at what kind of trade would happen I'd say it would be something like this:

 

Milwaukee gives: Capuano, Parra, Gamel

D'Rays give: Crawford, Upton

Twins give: Garza, Guerrier, Kubel

 

 

Milwauke gets: Crawford, Guerrier

D'Rays get: Garza, Parra, Gamel, Kubel

Twins get: Upton, Capuano

 

D'Rays would be giving up an awful lot, but they'd be getting two starting pitchers that can contribute right away and both have huge upside, a replacement LF in Kubel, and a potential 1B/LF stud in Gamel. Is it enough in return? Probably not, but I think that would be some sort of a starting point.

[TooLiveBrew]

I don't believe the Brewers ever projected this type of offense out of Hardy -- or at least not anywhere so close to the start of his career.

 

When I first heard Melvin & Yost talk about JJ, they said he'd be a 15-25 HR guy and hit .280-.300.

 

Nice 'starting point' proposal, katuluu - the thought of getting Guerrier too makes me happy. In addition to him being a sweet player, just think how many misspelling variations there are for Haudricourt!

[danzig6767]

3) Also, trading Sheets may give us the flexibility to maybe move Bill Hall. Giving him that contract looked like a great move when it happened. But now it looks like it could be the type of deal that the Brewers need to get away from. Crawford's contract is a steal in comparison.

 

When you see some of the cash that will get thrown around in free agency, Hall's contract will end up being far from something that the Brewers will have to try to get out from under.

 

[MNBrew]

Kat, you're up here in MN, too, if I recall. I'm skeptical that the Twins be willing to include Guerrier in any deal. He & Neshek would be the best closer options if/once Nathan's no longer here. Or do you think that bringing in Capuano & Upton would be enough to make them consider including Guerrier in a deal, too?

 

Then again, when healthy and not over-used, the Twins' bullpen was their greatest strength last year, and you have to give in order to get.

 

I do like your proposal. Hard to wait to find out what if anything will happen.