Thoughts on the Hardy for Gomez Deal
by Jordan M on Nov 7, 2009 11:29 AM CST
in Transactions
28 comments
- I like the acquisition of Gomez, before we start putting any context on this trade. He's a ridiculously good defender, one of the best centerfielders in the game due to his tremendous speed and range. Being an elite defender gives him plenty of value before even looking at his offensive contributions. There's a tendency to group together "good centerfielders"-- but there's a big difference between the tier of guys like Tony Gwynn Jr., Juan Pierre, and Jody Gerut, and truly elite defenders like Gomez.
- Gomez, right now, is not a good offensive player. He's been basically a replacement-level hitter in his time in the big leagues so far. That does not mean he's been a replacement level player, though, because his stellar defense has made him worth between about 1 and 2 wins in his two full seasons. He has a career .286 wOBA, and the league average is around .333-- and wOBA includes stolen base contributions. His career slash line is .246/.292/.346.
- There's reason to believe that Gomez has a much bigger offensive upside. He was a very highly regarded prospect in his day, and a major piece in the Johan Santana deal. In A-ball as a 19 year-old, he .275/.335/.380; then he came in with a .281/.350/.423 line at AA at age 20. He was bumped to the majors by the Mets at age 21 after hitting .271/.353/.361 in AAA. He's been in the majors since then, with that completed year and two more with the Twins, and hasn't cracked a .300 OBP. Just based on his profile, it has to be possible that there's an upside of even a .320-.330 OBP and .350 SLG this year, which would go a long way towards making Gomez a much more valuable player. He'd practically be an all-star if he was a league average hitter, but that's probably too much to ask for at this point. He'll be here for four years, though, so there's still hope.
- Gomez is a lot of fun to watch. I usually don't get caught up in that type of stuff, but I always found it amusing to see him take a monster hack at a pitch and almost corkscrew himself into the ground, and then bunt on the next pitch. And his energy on the basepaths and ability in center will keep us entertained.
- In terms of total value, this deal is pretty close to an even match. The expected value of Hardy's production over his salary in the next two years is very close to the amount of expected value of Gomez's production over his salary in the next four years. That's a strategy for a team that doesn't expect to be in contention for the next two years, however, so it doesn't quite make sense to me why the Brewers chose to do this type of deal. I'm just going to go ahead and quote Graham from Lookout Landing, who was disappointed that the Mariners didn't beat the Twins asking price for Hardy: In terms of money/talent, the deal makes a good amount of sense for both sides. The Twins get a big upgrade at shortstop, the Brewers deal from depth to cover a weak position (albeit not that well) for free, and have some more money to play with in free agency. As the return for a guy like Hardy, Gomez the talent is rather underwhelming, but the financial flexibility he provides is useful. Could/should the Brewers have gotten more for him? Yes. But they didn't, which is where this deal becomes weird from the Milwaukee side. They had an asset which had less value to them than to the rest of the league, but they sold him for his value to them rather than anyone else's, which is not the best trading strategy in the world.
- The Brewers did everything wrong in their handling of Hardy. The last line from Graham pretty much sums up what I think-- they sold Hardy at the value to them rather than his actual value. The whole situation has been bizarre-- sending him to AAA and promoting Escobar to shake things up when there was no real reason for doing so expect gaining a year of service time that apparently increased his value to... Carlos Gomez. Yes, Hardy had a bad year. Projecting him with a weight of 3/2/1 for the last three seasons still gives a 2-3 win player with 5 win upside easily. Even at his worst, last season, he was better than Gomez was last year. And maybe the strangest part of this deal was the huge rush. It happened two days after the World Series, and Doug Melvin admitted he didn't even call a team with a shortstop shortage, the Tigers, much less the rest of the league. Not only did he sell Hardy at the absolute lowest point of his value, but he managed to pull the trigger so quickly there's no telling what might have happened had he held on longer. I doubt the Twins would have pulled their Gomez offer from the table.
- Melvin didn't even touch the pitching staff with his biggest trading chip, and downgraded the offense. Sure, the extra savings from Hardy to Escobar and Cameron to Gomez give the Brewers some money to throw at a free agent pitcher. But that's not the logical way to look at it. Say the Brewers had accepted the apparent Red Sox offer of Michael Bowden for Hardy. Bowden, at the mininum, makes even less than Gomez next year, and Hardy's salary is gone either way. In this situation, with even a little bit more money to play with, they could re-sign Cameron to play center for maybe 1 year, $8-10 million because they don't have to worry about another pitcher-- or they could sign a righty centerfielder like Reed Johnson to platoon with Jody Gerut, a platoon which would project about the same as the Gomez and Gerut situation going on right now, in 2010 at least. Gomez is a better bet for the following three years, but remember that Lorenzo Cain and Logan Schafer are coming and might have been able to fill in the gap by 2011. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Would we rather be looking at a rotation of Gallardo, Parra, Bowden, Bush, Suppan with Cam in center and an extra $5 mil, or that same rotation with Gerut/platoonmate in center and $15 million to throw at Erik Bedard, Ben Sheets, Rich Harden, or Justin Duchscherer? Again, it's such a strange idea to throw your most valuable trading chip at a really slight position player upgrade for 2010. It just looks like he's playing for down the road. If salary relief is one of the good parts of the trade... well, non-tendering J.J. would have gotten salary relief too. Getting Bowden would have accomplished the same thing. I don't know why we have to consider this a positive in the trade.
- I really like the idea of getting Gomez here. He's a nice piece to have. Not for the price of Hardy, though. And I don't understand the way Doug Melvin handled this situation overall. He could have done so much better. I'll wait to judge his offseason until we see if the available money is handled the right way. One thing I will say now-- I hope the moves will be with a consistent goal in mind. Spending the money on starters like Washburn, Piniero, and Marquis would probably not upgrade the team enough to justify the spending and commitment, which is why I suggest 1 year deals for injury-prone pitchers. And if they do decide to target a pitcher, I hope Casey McGehee is more likely to be traded than Mat Gamel. Acquiring Gomez and dealing Gamel would probably indicate a confused set of goals about when the team's window of contention is.
3 recs |
28 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
Honestly, I wouldn't mind Piniero on a short deal.
GB% stabilizes really quickly, so I’d put money on Piniero’s newfound GB success carrying over. That, and he’s essentially stopped walking people.
He’s probably too rich for us though.
by Jack Moore on Nov 7, 2009 12:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think he's going to be paid like Kyle Loshe, though
and I want no part of that. I’d take him as a pitcher but I’m afraid of what it would cost.
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
by Jordan M on Nov 7, 2009 12:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Jeff Suppan is a GB pitcher.
Cards Announcers On Gamel's First Career HR, "That’s all they need is another home run hitter".
by tcyoung on Nov 7, 2009 12:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
gopherball?
Taking shallowness to new depths -- FtJ's blog
by Fatter than Joey on Nov 7, 2009 12:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
They always say this but he is really not
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
by Jordan M on Nov 7, 2009 1:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice post
I agree with your analysis of Gomez, but I also think you’re being too harsh on Melvin for making this trade when he did.
He was in talks with 6-7 teams about Hardy before settling on Minnesota, and if Detroit wasn’t one of those it’s because he probably realistically saw no fit there (what major-league ready pitching could the Tigers have potentially offered?). Furthermore, if his strategy was to look for either pitching or a replacement for Cameron (to then buy pitching) it made sense to make the trade sooner rather than later. At the latest he would have had to make it before December 1 (when the Cameron decision was due), which is before the Winter Meetings, and which probably wouldn’t have presented a very different trade market for Hardy than the one we’re in right now. Also, since this mean’s he has money to be aggressive with free agent starters (as we all know, who are in small supply) it makes sense to get in the race as soon as possible.
Furthermore, I think he made a smart move by going after a trade that balanced short-term considerations (2010) with the future of the team. Bowden might be a very good prospect long-term, but is he going to be an asset to the rotation as early as 2010? I think Melvin considers Gomez, while simultaneously having arguably more long-term potential than Bowden, to be a player who can break-out and contribute as soon as next season. Clearly teams weren’t interested in giving up affordable, major-league ready pitching for a gamble on Hardy (he has the potential to be a 5-win player again, no doubt, but I think general managers weigh last season more heavily than baseball-statisticians do)
I do agree though that Gerut or a Gerut-platoon would have had a real chance to outproduce Gomez next year, but would it necessarily be by a lot? Gomez has a lot more room to grow (both in 2010 and after) and there is a certain amount of risk in assuming that Gerut can return to his 2008-numbers. A platoon of 2009 Gerut and 2009 Johnson would be considerably worse than Gomez, in my opinion, and with no upside. Also, like I said, given the option of Gerut in 2010 and the falling star of Cain in the future, Gomez seems like a probable upgrade both in the short-term and the long-term. As for your scenario of Gomez/(Bedard/Sheets/Harden/Duscherer) or Cameron/Bowden in 2010, I’m pretty firmly in the camp of the former.
More generally, the trade also shows a commitment from Melvin to emphasize defense and speed more. How that pans out is yet to be seen, but it’s certainly a relief from the years upon years of living and dying by the home run. Having Weeks/Escobar/Gomez on the basepaths (if Macha lets them run) with Braun/Fielder in the middle is a pretty exciting/balanced offense.
This is a win-win trade for both sides going into 2010, and long-term I think it has the potential to be a huge Brewers win.
Ryan Braun: He loves it. *Sign Sheets!*
by SRB on Nov 7, 2009 12:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Great article
I think the reason to be harsh on Melvin isn’t so much in acquiring Gomez, but more in piloting the nosedive in JJ’s value, when it was very obvious that trading JJ was a very real possibility at the end of 2008.
Taking shallowness to new depths -- FtJ's blog
by Fatter than Joey on Nov 7, 2009 12:33 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
2011
Thinking about 2011 get really interesting now because even with raises to a lot of guy through arb, we have a lot of dead money coming off the books in Suppan, Hall, and Riske. Considering that Escobar, Gamel, Gomez, and McGehee will all still be really cheap, we might have even more money to play with next off-season, especially if we sign a couple of SP on one-year deals.
What are the chances that Hart gets traded instead of Gamel or McGehee, with Gamel shifting to RF? I would be more accepting of a slap-hitting duo of Gomez and Escobar if we had another power bat like Gamel around.
Also, you don’t live and die by the HR; you live and die by whether guys get on base in front of those HRs. That’s why it’s scary to think of Escobar, Gomez, and Kendall (please god no) in the same lineup.
"I've had the time of my afterlife." --Patrick Swayze
by baumann on Nov 7, 2009 12:40 PM CST via mobile reply actions 0 recs
The problem with 2011
Still focuses around the question marks in our pitching staff, which it is why I think we need to bolster our AA-AAA pitching
Taking shallowness to new depths -- FtJ's blog
by Fatter than Joey on Nov 7, 2009 1:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I really like your seventh point a lot.
Great post! A lot of the same way I feel.
by NoahJ on Nov 7, 2009 1:05 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Nit picking a bit
But it looks like Gomez is going to be arb eligible as a Super 2, and if that happens, then he’d only be under team control for three more seasons, not four, right?
That's all I've got for you today, unless you're interested in some Chris Capuano/Tom Haudricourt Fan Fiction.
by KLSnow on Nov 7, 2009 3:30 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Incorrect
He will still be under team control until he hits six years of service.
Being a Super two guy just means he gets four arbitration hearings instead of three.
Sign Corky Miller
by TheJay on Nov 7, 2009 3:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
if that's the case
Then I almost certainly got it wrong in my post on arbitration that’s linked in the reference section. Can someone remind me to fix it once I’m back from vacation?
That's all I've got for you today, unless you're interested in some Chris Capuano/Tom Haudricourt Fan Fiction.
by KLSnow on Nov 7, 2009 4:30 PM CST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Clarification
I shouldn’t say it’s four instead of three. There is no magic number of hearings. As long as the player has less than 6 years of service time, he is subject to arbitration every year. A guy could in theory bounce between teams and the majors and minors for a decade and have arbitration after each season. In reality, those guys wind up being FA through release or being outrighted before that happens.
Sign Corky Miller
by TheJay on Nov 7, 2009 6:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Random thought
What number is Hardy going to wear in Minnesota? They already have a heartthrob wearing #7.
Sign Corky Miller
by TheJay on Nov 7, 2009 3:59 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Retrospective Rumor?
How about Tom H’s new post on jsonline about how the bo sox were in on Hardy but the Brewers wanted Bucholtz or Bard (for obvious reason) and the Sox wouldn’t budge. I would have much rather expanded the Hardy deal with Mcgehee (preferably) orGamel to get Bucholtz….That kind of talent is worth it and would only improve in the NL Central…Given what happened, I’m fine with the Gomez trade but would have prefered to get some kind of low prospect in addition…I think we traded Hardy with a present weighted low value and used the total salary savings as justification. Everything now depends on what he does with the free cash.
by Brewcityhoya13 on Nov 7, 2009 4:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
wouldn't happen
Getting Buchholz would have been the dream scenario, but would have required Prince
by Milwaukee's Gr8est on Nov 8, 2009 6:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Greinke and Rzepcyzski as alternative
I think that the Brewers trade / loss of JJ Hardy is stupid since he was one of the key trading chips for acquiring Zach Greinke from Kansas City and secondarily or alternatively Mark Rzepcyzski from Toronto. They should have waited awhile or sought out other teams than the Twins. The released Bourgeois seemingly has better minor league BA and SB credentials than Gomez who only has possible potential as for Bourne.
Accordingly KC needs help at 3B (Teahan gone), OF, 1B, C, P, RP-closer, and 2B). Weeks, Hardy at SS or moved to 3B, and say negotiable two to maybe four of Seth McClung, Taylor Green, Brendan Katin, Mike Jones or Josh Butler could have likely enticed KC.
Toronto needs help at SS, !B and 2B. Hardy and Rickie Weeks would seemingly suffice to pry Rzepcyzski.
I also like offering conditional contracts to Ben Sheets or Rich Harden plus non-conditionally trading for Matt Garza (a tough sell to TB, depending upon Greinke / Rzepcyzski trade negotiations) versus pursuing FAs Slowey, Carmona, Blackburn, Myers, or Marquiz.
Get RF experience for Gamel, and keep McGehee and Lopez! Induce Suppan to retire. Salome (with tutoring from Kendall at much less money), Braddock, Scarpetta and Heether could help the Brewers a lot soon. Looper?
by AZCAbrewerfan on Nov 7, 2009 5:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
agreed
I’ve been hoping for a Rzepcyzski deal…and think the Jays would have pulled the trigger on this. Not sure why the deal wouldn’t be done straight up.
by infield fly on Nov 7, 2009 6:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Obviously, I'm not a fan of the trade, and Jordan's listed the bulk of those reasons.
Finding out the Red Sox offered Bowden was infuriating to me.
Couldn’t The Mustache at least have pulled some low A pitching prospect as well? At least then I wouldn’t feel so chapped.
I don’t have a category for "washed-up guys who may or may not be dominant big-league closers sometime soon."
~Jeff Sackmann
by Charlie Marlow on Nov 7, 2009 6:12 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
This deal sucks
It’s only a good deal if you’re putting together a track team. The Brewers play baseball. Giving up an all-star caliber shortstop for a guy who can’t even crack the starting lineup up in Minnesota is sad. The reason Hardy is going to make good money is because he has earned it. The Brewers can’t continue to ship out players just because they have to pay them what they’re worth. If you’re going to trade Hardy, you need to get a hell of a lot more than a washed up prospect.
by tannerboyle on Nov 7, 2009 6:16 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Wow, that was a bit harsh
I agree that the Brewers got the short end of this deal. But the Brewers are going to continue to ship out players when they have to pay them what they’re worth becuase that’s the reality of small market teams. We can’t afford to keep our All-Star SS for their entire career like the Yankees. Cycling in new, young, cheaper players is how teams with our payroll limits work.
And let’s wait until Gomez is given a chance to play full-time before we label him a washed up prospect.
"A D+ Grade? That must have been a Wittardo grade"- @73_MC
by BrewHaHeather on Nov 7, 2009 10:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree somewhat.
I agree that we should give Gomez a chance to show he isn’t washed up — but on the other hand, I don’t see what he has done to be given the starting CF job either.
Taking shallowness to new depths -- FtJ's blog
by Fatter than Joey on Nov 8, 2009 8:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And I agree somewhat with that
But from what I’ve heard at Twinkie Town, Gardy treated Gomez sort of like how Macha treated Gamel. He didn’t produce right away, so he played him sparingly. The little playing time he recieved had a similar effect on Gomez as it did on Gamel. Gomez played full time in 2008 and had decent numbers (OBP was still terrible but, be was only 22). JJ Hardy didn’t do much when he was young to be given the starting job, but Yost still played him and he improved. Gomez hasn’t really been given the chance to prove he can be a starter.
"A D+ Grade? That must have been a Wittardo grade"- @73_MC
by BrewHaHeather on Nov 8, 2009 10:55 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But from what I’ve heard at Twinkie Town, Gardy treated Gomez sort of like how Macha treated Gamel. He didn’t produce right away, so he played him sparingly.
He had 577 ABs in 2008, and even in ‘sparing’ playing time in 2009 amassed 315. Apples =/= Oranges.
Gomez hasn’t really been given the chance to prove he can be a starter.
Does it take more than 1017 MLB ABs?
I don’t have a category for "washed-up guys who may or may not be dominant big-league closers sometime soon."
~Jeff Sackmann
by Charlie Marlow on Nov 8, 2009 5:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He's only 23 years old.
Cards Announcers On Gamel's First Career HR, "That’s all they need is another home run hitter".
by tcyoung on Nov 8, 2009 10:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well said
Excellent post. Exactly what I was thinking, but unable to put into words. Gomez is interesting and saves a ton of money vs Cameron, but it’s such a lost opportunity on maximizing Hardy’s value.
by Milwaukee's Gr8est on Nov 8, 2009 6:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
St. Louis
|
91 | 71 | .561 | 0 | Lost 6 |
|
Chicago
|
83 | 78 | .515 | 7.5 | Lost 1 |
|
Milwaukee
|
80 | 82 | .493 | 11 | Won 3 |
|
Cincinnati
|
78 | 84 | .481 | 13 | Won 2 |
|
Houston
|
74 | 88 | .456 | 17 | Lost 3 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
62 | 99 | .385 | 28.5 | Lost 2 |
(updated 11.20.2009 at 10:30 AM CST)
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
