Why Guillermo Mota?

[Fatter than Joey]

But if you non tender Estrada how do you get Mota if that is who you are targeting as a potential relief arm?

 

Well -- If DM was targeting Mota -- then you trade Estrada -- and that is the question -- was DM targeting Mota, or was he dumping Estrada?

 

If his goal was to dump Estrada, taking on Mota makes no sense to me. If he was targeting Mota, I really hope that works out better than I anticipate.

[Thurston Fluff]

Well -- If DM was targeting Mota -- then you trade Estrada -- and that is the question -- was DM targeting Mota, or was he dumping Estrada?

I think it's a combination of the two. He may not have targeted Mota in particular but he was going to get rid of Estrada one way or the other and had enough interest in Mota to take a relatively small financial risk on him.

[Ennder]

As an example, take Craig Counsell. Does it make one iota of baseball sense to bring back a 36 year old infielder coming off a season where he hit .220/.323/.309? Answer is of course not. But he's owed $3.2 million. End of discussion. Callix Crabbe, hope you enjoy your next organization, there's no room for you on this roster becuase we're paying Craig Counsell.

Actually if you add in his defense he was roughly a league average player. Counsell had a strong defensive season last year, it is just too bad some of that defense was at 3B.

[hauser42]

Mota will be a decent setup man for this team. If he is over his injuries then he will be fina and Doug will be in the good graces for this move since he gave up nothing to improve the pen.

[mothershipconnection]

I view Mota as a kinda bad reclamation project. If you look at it as signing Mota to a 1 year $3.2MM deal to take a chance on a guy regaining form, it's not horrible in this market. Of course, the assumption needs to be that Estrada would be nontendered and there was no other acceptable offer out there. With the sad state of the 08 pen right now, I don't think it's an awful move to take a flier on Mota, and I'm confident there will be far worse free agent RP signings this winter.

[SoCalBrewfan]

Mota will be in our pen in all likelihood from start to finish, Yost will HAVE to use him.

 

That's the big question, but I don't know that the answer is foreordained, as it would have been in a previous Brewer era. In fact, that's less true of Mota than it would be for a free agent reliever.

 

With the increased expectations and payroll, I don't think that Mota's $3.2m guarantee is such a great expense that we would let Mota sink the team if he really and truly stinks. That's the advantage of a one-year deal as opposed to the multiple years that many (if not most) free agents will be demanding...it makes Mota easier to dump and even easier to trade if things aren't working out. (Not that Mota would have a lot of value at that point, but by the deadline, there's only a million plus left on his contract, and there's always Ed Wade down in Houston eager to pick up another reliever or two.) If you sign a Linebrink type for three or four years, then you're pretty much forced to use the guy come hits or high water. As others have said, I think Mota is a gamble with some upside...relievers turn things around all the time. Or, if you prefer, you can look at it differently: since a full season by a reliever is invariably a small sample, one sees one-year flukes (good and bad) all the time.

 

Melvin has repeatedly shown a willingness to trust a scout's recommendation on a player, particularly when it's a guy with a live arm...that hasn't always paid off but it's paid some dividends, and it's a pretty consistent pattern. If the reports are to be believed, the Mets gave Melvin a list of names and he chose Mota...presumably based on an evaluation by one or more of the scouts. (That's consistent with the original post, naming McNamara.) The stakes are a bit higher here with Mota's guaranteed contract, but he's also a guy who's had some success in the past, so you'd expect to pay more for him than you would for a Balfour type...and have correspondingly greater expectations of success.

 

Melvin was quoted in the past as saying to his scouts, 'find me the next Turnbow or Kolb.' I would assume that Mota is merely one of several pieces that will be thrown at the wall this spring.

[TooLiveBrew]

I'm confident there will be far worse free agent RP signings this winter.

Yea, like that guy the CWS signed... Linebrink, wasn't it?

[logan82]

We dumped Dessens and his $3.8M contract part way through last year.

[Fatter than Joey]

We dumped Dessens and his $3.8M contract part way through last year.

 

KC paid his contract

 

Melvin was quoted in the past as saying to his scouts, 'find me the next Turnbow or Kolb.'

 

As if one isn't enough.

[SoCalBrewfan]

Melvin was quoted in the past as saying to his scouts, 'find me the next Turnbow or Kolb.'

 

As if one isn't enough.

 

Well, snark all you want if it makes you feel better, but that quote reflects a philosophy of bullpen construction that I think is pretty smart, particularly for a team in the middle of the salary pack. (For that matter, it can work for a team near the top, like the Angels.)

[logan82]

We dumped Dessens and his $3.8M contract part way through last year.

 

KC paid his contract

 

Melvin was quoted in the past as saying to his scouts, 'find me the next Turnbow or Kolb.'

 

As if one isn't enough.

 

I said this already but you seem to have missed it. KC paid Dessens contract, but as part of the trade we paid LA $2.1M of Clark's contract so that the net result is that we paid $3.8M for Dessens.

[Fatter than Joey]

Well, snark all you want if it makes you feel better, but that quote reflects a philosophy of bullpen construction that I think is pretty smart

 

Seriously -- I think one scrap-heap reclamation project is enough for one team

 

(For that matter, it can work for a team near the top, like the Angels.)

 

Most of the Angels BP are homegrown -- Rodriguez, Bootcheck Shields, unless I am missing something.

[Fatter than Joey]

I said this already but you seem to have missed it. KC paid Dessens contract, but as part of the trade we paid LA $2.1M of Clark's contract so that the net result is that we paid $3.8M for Dessens.

 

How do you get a net of 3.8? -- I don't understand your math

 

Dessens got 1.7 from KC

Clark got 2.1 from Milw and 1.7 LA -- It seems to me 2.1 was paid by the Brewers -- what am I missing?

 

EDIT: -- Let me back up.

 

The comparison was made between Clark and Estrada.

 

If we would have non-tendered Estrada we would be out $0

If we would have DFA'd Clark we'd have been on the hook for Clark's Salary. ($3.8M)

 

I do not think the situations are the same -- Getting some relief for Clark's salary made a lot of sense. Essentially DM traded Clark so instead of paying Clark $3.8, we paid him $2.1, and got Dessens for free.

[logan82]

You are right. $2.1M. I thought you were trying to say we paid nothing for him which was not true.

[Fatter than Joey]

I thought you were trying to say we paid nothing for him which was not true.

 

I was not super clear

[logan82]

I was not super clear

I got my information off of ESPN.com and in their article they said the Brewers paid LA $2.1M which was the difference between what Clark was owed and the $1.7M that LA was set to pay Dessens. That is where I got confused. Serves me right for using ESPN for information.

 

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/spring2007/news/story?id=2813444

[xisxisxis]

I view Mota as a kinda bad reclamation project. If you look at it as signing Mota to a 1 year $3.2MM deal to take a chance on a guy regaining form, it's not horrible in this market.

 

Mota was downright nasty for 3 years with the Dodgers. He combined with Gagne to make a formidable 1-2 punch. While both have had injuries in their past since those memorable years, I wouldn't mind seeing if we couldn't rekindle some of the lightning in a bottle. Maybe the Gagne signing is the next piece in Doug's master plan .....will Rollie Fingers come out of retirement too? If Todd Jones is still pitching, maybe Rollie still has something in the tank.

[TooLiveBrew]

I wouldn't mind seeing if we couldn't rekindle some of the lightning in a bottle.

 

Well, it was something in a bottle. And no, not a genie. Check out Mota's production relative to his suspension.

[SoCalBrewfan]

Seriously -- I think one scrap-heap reclamation project is enough for one team

 

Why? Do you think it matters where the relievers come from? I can't tell if you're serious here (though the word 'seriously' would suggest you are), but if you are I really disagree...reclamation projects are a heckuva way to fill out a pen. Maybe you mean something different by scrap-heap or reclamation project than I do?

 

Most of the Angels BP are homegrown -- Rodriguez, Bootcheck Shields, unless I am missing something.

 

Look back a couple of years, particularly to the 2002 version that won it all. They had Percival of course, and added Rodriguez for the playoffs, but the rest of the pen was built from castoffs. Brendan Donnelly had an incredible run in the Angels pen, and was a key guy on that '02 team...he made the all-star team in '03 as a middle reliever. He was released by half a dozen teams before that, including once by Tampa Bay. Ben Weber, who led the '02 team in appearances with an ERA+ of 174, was claimed off waivers. Lou Pote contributed 200 innings over four years, ERA+ 130...he was signed for nothing off the scrap heap. Alan Levine, a useful swing man...claimed off waivers. Kevin Gregg had a nice season or two with the Angels a bit later, and is now a closer elsewhere. He was a scrap-heap guy, originally drafted by the As and picked up for nothing.

 

They have mostly moved on from those guys, and arguably changed approaches some with free-agent signings like Speier and Carrasco (ugh). Their system has also produced good pitching, so a good portion of the current pen is indeed homegrown. The Angels paid real money to Speier, but his career began humbly and illustrates that quality relievers can be found on the scrap heap...before he established himself and eventually got a multiyear deal, he was a two-time waiver claim and traded in very minor deals.

 

If you prefer, look at the current Padres pen...it's anchored by a guy with a pretty good pedigree. However, they filled it in with guys they picked up in low-profile trades before they were established (Heath Bell, Cla Meredith), a cheap vet or two (Embree last year, Brocail this year), even a Rule 5 guy (Cameron). Hampson was claimed off waivers...as was our own Scott Linebrink a few years back, before he established himself as a premium setup guy in San Diego. It might be easier to construct a good pen in that park, but it's hard to argue that they have a nice collection of cheap talent, and spent very little to assemble it.

 

Back a few more years, the Braves dynasty won 100 games a year with what seemed like cobbled-together bullpens, with older vets like Remlinger and Hammond turning in good years, Kerry Ligtenberg coming from indy ball, and a cast that changed from year to year but almost always did the job.

 

The Brewers have done very well at this in recent years, and turned a lot of scrap heap guys into solid relievers and, in some cases, solid closers: Weathers, King, Kolb, most recently Wise and Turnbow. (You could arguably include shell-shocked Coors setup men DeJean and Leskanic also.) Some of those guys turned back to pumpkins in time, but I think it's very reasonable for Melvin to send out his scouts with instructions to find guys with good arms in order to repair a broken bullpen. They've already started the process, with McClung, Choate, Mota...whether any of those guys is any good, or even on the team come April, remains to be seen of course.

[Fatter than Joey]

Why? Do you think it matters where the relievers come from?

 

I do. Ideally you build a pen with a mix of established veterans -- young farmhands -- and the scrap-heap. The Brewers bullpen corps has been especially scrap-heap heavy for awhile and especially in its current state.

 

I sort of view it like an investment portfolio, a person has different investment options with different risk/rewards -- you try to find a balance that optimizes in the long-term.

 

Look back a couple of years, particularly to the 2002 version that won it all (Angels).

 

Certainly I wouldn't claim that the scrap-heap has never paid dividends ever.

 

They had Percival of course, and added Rodriguez for the playoffs, but the rest of the pen was built from castoffs.

 

We have neither a Percival or K-Rod though. -- I think we have plenty of projects on staff -- I want to see DM get a Percival or develop a K-Rod. By 2002 Percival had 200 saves and was a 4-time AS, the scrap-heap was a supporting cast then. The Angels also had a very solid rotation -- better than ours.

 

The Angels paid real money to Speier, but his career began humbly and illustrates that quality relievers can be found on the scrap heap...before he established himself and eventually got a multiyear deal, he was a two-time waiver claim and traded in very minor deals.

 

Absolutely. I am not opposed to the scrap-heap -- It just can't be your main source for pitching.

 

If you prefer, look at the current Padres pen...it's anchored by a guy with a pretty good pedigree.

 

Indeed. First, the Padres have a pretty good rotation. Brocail is a solid yet non-sexy vet. neither Bell or Meredith were scrap-heapers, Cameron was probably blocked with all the pitching the Twins have -- Linebrink was a scrap-heaper.

 

Back a few more years, the Braves dynasty won 100 games a year with what seemed like cobbled-together bullpens, with older vets like Remlinger and Hammond turning in good years, Kerry Ligtenberg coming from indy ball, and a cast that changed from year to year but almost always did the job.

 

Again -- The Braves had a wonderful rotation, and the 2002 Braves BP was anchored by Smoltz.

 

The Brewers have done very well at this in recent years

 

I disagree -- I think the Padres had a much better idea of what we had in Thatcher and what they had in Linebrink. I am not sold on the idea that Melvin or his scouts are really solid evaluating pitching. Certainly guys like Wise & Turnbow have helped us go from a 60 win team to an 80 win team -- but you mention a lot of 100 win teams, and repeat playoff teams, I dont think the scrap heap has enough fuel to get teams from .500 to 90+ wins.

 

I think it's very reasonable for Melvin to send out his scouts with instructions to find guys with good arms in order to repair a broken bullpen.

 

The one concession I will make, is that the Brewers have not done a super job developing arms from within, so of course the scrap heap HAS to be a bigger option -- but that is because of a failure of sorts on the Brewers part. I would hope that there are some FA/trades for some arms in our future.

 

They've already started the process, with McClung, Choate, Mota...whether any of those guys is any good, or even on the team come April, remains to be seen of course.

 

If any of these guys are near the front of our pen, we are in trouble.

[Ennder]

All I can say is that if Turnbow is our closer next year we are in trouble.

 

5.7 BB/9 in 2005, 6.1 BB/9 in 2006. Showing a tendency to struggle with LOB%. These are just terrible numbers for a closer, I'd rather have just about any other closer in the league.

 

Sad thing is that McClung and to a lesser extent Mota have both shown the same tendency, consistent below average LOB% is generally a bad sign for a RP. An off year here or there is fine but when it is the same year after year you have a problem.

[SoCalBrewfan]

Certainly I wouldn't claim that the scrap-heap has never paid dividends ever.

 

What you wrote that prompted my response is that 'one scrap-heap reclamation project is enough for one team.' I think there's evidence that such a comment isn't supported by history; a number of teams have been successful with more than one scrap heap guy in their pen, and with such guys in key roles, like that played by Donnelly. The Braves did so year after year...in '98, after Wohlers blew up, they plugged in former indy leaguer Ligtenberg, backed up by scrap heapers Seanez, Cather, Dennis Martinez, and a prospect named John Rocker, and won 106 games.

 

Now I think we're arguing rather than disagreeing, though...you're quibbling over details, throwing out things about how those teams don't count because they had good starting pitching or a well-paid closer. I agree that it's hard and risky to get several hundred quality innings from the scrap heap, particularly if you're planning on contending. (And that the number of bullpen innings needed depends to some extent on who's starting.) I completely agree that it's safer to use the unproven guys to fill in the back end of the pen, at least until you know what you have...though history shows that those guys can emerge as key relievers. I definitely would love to see the farm system producing relievers, and to see relievers come in low-profile details like the ones that landed the Padres Cla Meredith and Heath Bell. (neither of whom was a top prospect) Heaven knows I've been fussing for years about the Brewers' inability to produce relievers from the farm.

 

I don't agree that acquiring Mota is a capital offense, or that he's expected to be the main guy in the pen, or that his salary guarantees him innings if he stinks, or that there should be a one-scrap-heap-guy-per-team quota.

 

The Brewers bullpen corps has been especially scrap-heap heavy for awhile and especially in its current state.

 

The current state of the pen is not pretty, but the season hasn't started yet of course. But I disagree that they were too dependent on the scrap heap last year. The Brewers spent more resources on the bullpen last year than they have for a long time. Cordero didn't come cheaply, in salary or acquisition cost. Linebrink did not come cheaply. (Indeed, some feel we got outsmarted by the Padres into overvaluing 'proven relievers' over no-name guys.) Of the 17 million-dollar salaries they had listed on bb-ref, five were relievers...Shouse was just shy of that mark...the whole pen cost something like $12M. They had top prospects past and present in the pen at various times (Capellan, Villaneuva, Gallardo, Parra). It was a pretty balanced approach I think...and I'd expect that when the season opens, they'll again have guys with a a mix of backgrounds, likely including a free agent or two and perhaps a trade acquisition.

[Fatter than Joey]

What you wrote that prompted my response is that 'one scrap-heap reclamation project is enough for one team.'

 

Yeah -- I would stand by this -- and really I still believe my initial statement with regarding the Brewers looking for the next Turnbow/Wise will produce bad results. I thought I was clear I had made my statement "One Turnbow/Wise is enough" with regard to the Brewers current state of affairs.

 

Now I think we're arguing rather than disagreeing, though...you're quibbling over details, throwing out things about how those teams don't count because they had good starting pitching or a well-paid closer.

 

I just thought it was obvious that a team that won 106 games probably did it on the back of their 3 HOF pitchers in their rotation, and dudes that hit 215 HRs. As far as we can tell they won 106 games in spite of their BP. If the Brewers had 3 HOF starters I'd feel better about multiple scrap-heap pitchers in the pen. I found your evidence a bit weak, and not really parallel to the Brewers situation.

 

I don't agree that acquiring Mota is a capital offense, or that he's expected to be the main guy in the pen, or that his salary guarantees him innings if he stinks, or that there should be a one-scrap-heap-guy-per-team quota.

 

I think right now Mota is slated to be a front-end guy -- I hope I am wrong -- and I don't think there is a question that he will be given more chances than a guy like Aquino or Balfour, and of course my one-scrap-heap guy applies to teams that want to win 90+ games -- again you point to teams that perhaps are better than Melvin at reclaiming scrap-heapers.

 

But I disagree that they were too dependent on the scrap heap last year.

 

I never made this claim -- If DM would have said -- "Find me the next Cordero", I'd be all over it, or "find me the next Villenueva" or even a guy like Doug Brocail.

 

If we look at our BP from last year...

 

Cordero -- non-scrap-heaper legit All-star Closer

Villanueva -- nice young arm acquired in shrewd trade

Shouse -- solid performer in TX -- while I realize he bounced around before TX -- when we picked him up he had a solid 4.5 years of performance prior to Milw.

Linebrink -- solid pitcher (declining) in SD -- once a scrap-heap, but at this point somewhat reliable.

Turnbow -- scrap-heap

Wise -- scrap-heap.

Parra -- farm.

Spurling/Dessens -- garbage time - who cares.

 

Now -- speaking to more of your front end options -- Turnbow and Wise were the most inconsistent.

 

We lose Cordero and Linebrink to FA -- Villy probably heads to the rotation -- Do we really want the "next Turnbow" or "next Wise" in our pen when we already have one of each -- I sure don't. I'd rather get a legit closer (like Cordero) or even a Doug Brocail type.

 

Think of it this way -- Yost has his "7th-8th-9th" routine -- If Wise is 7th, and Turnbow is 9th, do we really want "New Turnbow" to be 8th?