Debating Prince's Deal
Honest question here that I'd like to see discussed in the comments: What was the team's benefit from this Fielder contract, (at two years, $18 million, with an 7/11 split, according to Tom H.)?
The Brewers (I'm guessing) hope they're getting two things out of it:
1) A happier, more relaxed Fielder, which means a mashing (45-HR) Fielder
2) A discount off his second year of arb if he truly does perform better in '09
I don't buy the benefit of "not having to negotiate next year." It didn't seem that hard this year, and it was far less of a battle with Boras than we expected.
Prince, meanwhile, is getting:
1) A pretty nice pile of cash this year and next, regardless of how he performs in '09
It seems like Prince is getting the bigger benefit here, while we're taking the bigger risk.
Here's one (albeit unlikely) scenario in which this could have been better for the team: Do the $18M deal but have Prince accept OUR arb number ($6M) or even less ($5.5) as his salary for this year, and then $12M or $12.5 for the next. Use that extra flexibility to sign Looper to put our payroll at the self-imposed max of $85M. Then trade Prince next offseason for a starter, let someone else pay the hefty portion of the deal, put Gamel at first, spend the money freed up by Prince, Cam, Kendall and Hoffman's departures on more pitching ... and we might still be a Wild Card contender for two seasons. Instead of where we are now, which is screwed.
(UPDATE: According to Heyman/SI - the Brew sort of did this, giving Prince 6.5M this year. I don't know what the extra 500k is going to do for us, but I guess it's still better than a 7/11 or 8/10 split.)
0 recs |
8 comments
Comments
I'd almost rather
give Fielder 9 this season and 9 next if its for 18MM and if the deal is being done to increase the attractiveness in a trade scenario.
That won’t happen, of course.
Also, I’d think that if this trade scenario is in The Mustache’s head, and the FO is thinking of putting Gamel at 1B, then they’d move him now and keep him at AAA 1B all season. Otherwise, he’s missing valuable time to get the position down by bringing his bat up to the MLB club.
Something I’d thought about while posting on another message board is the potential of Eduardo Morlan. If he sticks with the club for the entire year, I’d think it means he’s pitching relatively well and is proving he can handle MLB pitching. His K/9 and K/BB numbers are nice in the minors, though it appears he’s had some control issues. I had read that he throws 92-94. Perhaps he could be a closer under club control for 5 seasons starting in 2010. A pipe dream, I know, but intriguing nonetheless.
by Charlie Marlow on Jan 23, 2009 2:00 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I agree with Keith Law ...
… that Gamel ain’t gonna be a 3B. I know it’s just anecdotal, but I bailed on a tailgate at one of the games I went to late last season, went into the park early with a friend who got us in, and we saw Gamel taking grounders at 3B late in BP. It was atrocious — way way worse than Braun looked as a rookie. And this was just with a guy hitting Gamel fungoe hoppers. It just didn’t look like his natural position. I know Gamel got sent packing with an injury soon after that, but it corroborated everything we’d been hearing about his defensive struggles. I’ve gotta think his future is as a 1B or RF.
by MooseHaas on Jan 23, 2009 2:36 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Question
What seemed to be his biggest difficulty? Was he not getting to balls, not fielding them cleanly, botching throws, etc.?
by MadJimiBrewha on Jan 23, 2009 8:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't remember much about the throwing ...
… I just remember him looking unnatural charging the ball — getting eaten up by in-between hops — and not ranging all that well side-to-side.
by MooseHaas on Jan 23, 2009 8:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting
My impression for sucky third basemen has always been the errant throw. I hadn’t thought about footwork.
"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"
by roguejim on Jan 23, 2009 8:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Prince move
Is all PR… like the Hoffman deal… Hoffman helps the club, but not as much as the press suggests (may be another setup man from San Diego for us like Linebrink and have Carlos closing);
Not having to negotiate with Boras next year is nice, but he is under the Brewers control anyway… maybe we need a mad Prince to “make sure he gets his”, especially if the Brewers were to have won the arbritration hearing.
The PR is really trying to get people to the stadium, because chances are this year the last few series won’t be sold out, like they were last year, because the Brewers may be 6-10 games out of the playoff race. Trying to lock people in now to buy these 10 packs- I still think the Brewers have a chance this year… but with a payroll of approximately $80 million, they still need almost 3 million people to come to the games I am thinking, otherwise could be a “loss”.
Mark A said he lost money last year, and I think the payroll ended up at 91 million or so, if the attendance is down this year (due to both recession and lower quality of play), and the payroll is not as significantly down- could be some pain from ownership. The club’s payroll is still almost doube what it was just a few years ago… attendance may be up, but the tv contract and revenues is already set … may come to the point where they have to dump Prince next year , and not even able to get the “stud” pitcher we want… but instead a few AAA guys and a #4 low ceiling starter.
The designated hitter rule is like letting someone else take Wilt Chamberlain's free throws.
by Kyguy922 on Jan 23, 2009 9:25 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm
I thought Mark said we made a profit last season, thanks to the playoffs games. I could be remembering it wrong, though.
"I will agree that the attitude [at BCB] is ridiculous and they have done so much to instigate animosity and then block us from responding. Real mature!"
by roguejim on Jan 23, 2009 9:44 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
my bad
you are correct- I thought he was losing his shirt for some reason… maybe around the time of the CC signing, he said there was no way to turn a profit, but it was something they needed to do for the long term financial interest in the team
here is the link, last line said small profit but no specifics
The designated hitter rule is like letting someone else take Wilt Chamberlain's free throws.
by Kyguy922 on Jan 23, 2009 10:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

by 

























