What would you do with Mike Cameron?
by Kyle Lobner on May 6, 2009 12:00 PM CDT
Email
PrintI don't hear too many people complaining about spending $10 million on Mike Cameron anymore. Coming into Tuesday's game, he was hitting .307/.398/.625 with ten doubles and six home runs, and he's the most valuable defensive outfielder in baseball.
Furthermore, he's having a career year at the best possible time. Cameron is eligible for free agency after the season, and will almost certainly be one of the best free agent center fielders available in a weak market. Taking a look at Cot's Contracts, here's a list of the other potential free agent outfielders who can play center field:
Rick Ankiel
Marlon Byrd*
Endy Chavez*
Coco Crisp
Carl Crawford*
Johnny Damon*
Ryan Freel*
Reed Johnson
Andruw Jones*
Jason Michaels*
Dave Roberts*
Randy Winn*
* denotes a player who has played center field recently, but has also played other positions.
Simply put, there's not much out there. Ankiel and Carl Crawford are probably the best of a weak class, and while Ankiel is a consistent center fielder, Crawford has only played three games in center since 2005.
So what does this mean for the Brewers? Well, to start, it means Mike Cameron's value, both now and at the end of the season, is high. Very high. For teams that have a gap in center field, Cameron is one of very few chances to fill that gap anytime between now and free agency in 2011. If he's allowed to become a free agent this fall it's reasonable to believe he'll find at least one team willing to overpay, and could command as much as 2-3 seasons at $15 million per. That's almost certainly out of the Brewers' price range.
With that said, Mike Cameron might not be someone the Brewers could live without. Immediate internal options to replace him (Chris Duffy, Tony Gwynn Jr.) are not very attractive, and the heir apparent in the minors, Lorenzo Cain, is already rehabbing a somewhat serious leg injury for the second consecutive season. Ryan Braun and/or Corey Hart could likely be moved to center if the need arose, but neither really have the skillset to be much more than an average-at-best defensive center fielder, and the gap left behind by their departure might not be better. The immediate candidates to fill a corner outfield vacancy would be Brad Nelson or perhaps Bill Hall. Mat Gamel could be a long term solution, but has never played a professional game in the outfield.
So, to sum up: Cameron's value is high and rising, he could make a lot of money as a free agent this offseason and the Brewers aren't necessarily well prepared to replace him when he's gone. What should they do?
65 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Cameron's value is high, but it's not rising
This is a hot start, not a new leaf. The guy is 37. At the end of the year, he’ll be within shouting distance of last year’s line (.243/.331/.477).
Now, I’d love to have him back for another year, even at that rate of production, but someone’s going to offer him a multi-year dear, and the Brewers shouldn’t compete with that. Take the draft pick(s) and walk.
"I didn't realize his velocity was that high," said Macha, noting that radar readings aren't flashed during exhibition games.
Ditto
I can’t really add much to that.
by Saberilliterate on May 6, 2009 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions
I also agree
and I don’t think he’ll command 15 million per year for more than 1 year. I could maybe see that for one year, but I don’t think teams will pay that much for a 37 year old, especially when, as BK noted, he won’t hit like this all year.
Projecting the rest of Cameron's season
Using Dan Szymborski’s handy ZiPS in-season projection tool, Cam is projected to hit .252/.340/.465 the rest of the way, to finish with a .260/.349/.489 line, with 24 HR.
"I didn't realize his velocity was that high," said Macha, noting that radar readings aren't flashed during exhibition games.
I voted to offer arby and a 1-year deal
But if the Crew is out of contention at the trading deadline (which I don’t think will happen, but if it does) I would vote for trading him; his value will probably be at a high, and we don’t stand much chance of resigning him in the offseason, anyway.
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
Agreed
Hopefully a big if that the Brewers are out of it… but could get quality players for him in this scenario, save $4-5 million depending when we trade him, plus get the players right now, instead of a crapshoot of draftpicks that may or may not come to fruition.
Teams that are fighting for a playoff spot could view him as a huge upgrade, because he might still be in the .270/.365/.490 range at the trade deadline, and teams will be willing to part with some proven minor league talent I am sure.
The designated hitter rule is like letting someone else take Wilt Chamberlain's free throws.
also keep in mind
we have yet to see a non-Jack Z-led draft selection. We may not make such good picks in the future. We might do well, but we might regress to league average or below drafting ability.
by PagsBrewCrew on May 6, 2009 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm on the record previously as supporting this option
Offer him arbitration at the end of the year if he stays with us all season. If we’re out of it come July, then trade him for some great prospects. I’m glad he’s off to a hot start, which makes his trade value even higher.
Two interesting trade fantasies that have come to my fevered brain over the past couple of days: 1) Sizemore gets injured, Cleveland gets into playoff contention despite this, flip Cameron to the Indians to get LaPorta back. Then all we need is seven more LaPortas to add to our one Gallardo. 2) Package Cameron with Suppan to a team that really wants Cameron. You want Cameron, you have to take Suppan, too. Instant salary relief and rotation improvement for 2010.
Option 2
I like option 2, but other than the Yankees – who would be willing to pay Suppan $15M for 60-70 games of Cameron? I think that option 2 is just too much of a wet dream.
by Saberilliterate on May 6, 2009 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions
That's why it's a "fevered brain" fantasy
I’m not saying it’s likely. But remember, “At the trade deadline, teams are always looking for pitching”, right, Joe Morgan? Even if the pitching in question is barely-above-replacement-level. And don’t forget Suppan’s veh-trun experience and playoff clutchitude! :)
Then all we need is seven more LaPortas to add to our one Gallardo"
a) I wasn’t aware that we had committed clonicide after we traded one of our LaPortas
b) I thought we agreed that we needed 5-6 Gallardos to satisfy our pitching needs, and that he’s okay with the bat as well. That means we only need 3 or 4. Plus a couple of Counsells to fill in off the bench.
by PagsBrewCrew on May 6, 2009 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Be careful what you wish for.
A team of nine Billy Ripkens might only win about 10 games.
"The reports are that he is getting better. The definition of better is nebulous."
That's my take, but...
There’s a lot of season left for Cam, the rest of the team, the divisional/WC contenders, and players like Cain.
So, too many variables dangling to get too far ahead here.
Still pro-Cameron
Braun...
Am I alone in thinking Braun could be a decent defensive center fielder after a few years back there?
I mean, he’ll never be Cam back there, but if he’s even above average defensively there and we can put someone like Gamel in left…
i'd rather not monkey with Braun
as long as he’s putting up reasonable defensive numbers where he’s slotted now, don’t mess with him. Although the skill set in center is closer to the set for left field than third, he’s shown to not have Hall/Counsell/Graffinino flexibility when it comes to adopting to different positions.
by PagsBrewCrew on May 6, 2009 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Hall would be a better short-term choice
In that he has a year of experience at CF. Put Gamel (and his weak glove) at 3B. If Cameron gets traded, we’re assuming that we’re out of it anyway, so get Gamel some playing time at 3B this season to see if he can handle it.
Hall didn't like center much though
he was willing to do it, but the rest of his game suffered. And he wasn’t a plus defender out there anyway.
by PagsBrewCrew on May 6, 2009 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions
picture
yeah, he DOES look like he’s auditioning for “hole in the wall” on Fox. Or ABC. or whatever damned network has that show.
IT'S TIME... TO FACE... THE HOLE!!!
god that was a horrible show.
Anyway, what about extending him now? a 2 year deal may get the job done. It’s not like he’d turn down the 22+ Million he’d command. The question remains if we can afford it. Since there is no true, ready heir to his position, he is becoming pretty indispensable. And yes, he is 37, but he’s in great shape and still provides enough to justify the salary at this point.
"That's not a weird stat. Rickie is a run-scorer," Yost said. "It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter," Yost told reporters. "See, you guys have no concept. He's a run-scorer. So there's nothing weird about it. That's what he does."
I am not sure that we can afford another year of $10M + to keep him. There are too many arbitration players who will get paid in 2010.
by Saberilliterate on May 6, 2009 12:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Voted trade
but only if other clubs value him for his present production and forget about how old he is. If we can’t get much in trade, no matter our record, I’d say do the arb/multiyear thing as long as multi ≤ 3.
You want to sign Cameron for his age 38-40 seasons?
You’re nuts.
"I didn't realize his velocity was that high," said Macha, noting that radar readings aren't flashed during exhibition games.
depends on if we get a discount with more years
but sure.
at 10M the first year and 20M the last year, hell no.
by PagsBrewCrew on May 6, 2009 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions
sounds like another Suppan deal we would regret
An aging player that is historically about league average, and pay handsomely for the next 2-3 years, beceause he had a good month (Cameron April of 2009, Suppan-Playoffs of 2006)
The designated hitter rule is like letting someone else take Wilt Chamberlain's free throws.
I'm saying like
3 years, 24 mil maximum. If he plays 2 for us, he’ll be costing above what I think market will be. if he manages all 3, that’s 8M a pop, which is cheaper than others would pay for him.
Ideally 3 years 20M, but I don’t think he’ll bit.
I voted multiyear contract after offering arbitration.
Though not for 3 years. In my multi-year contract, I would give him a year guarenteed and than an option year. Pretty much the same contract as we gave him when we signed him, though I think we’d need to pay a small bit more for the first year.
:) + Suppan = :'(
Trade
Somebody needs to be traded before the end of the season; Gamel shouldn’t be kept in the minors very much longer and if he is incapable of playing defense we might as well bite the bullet and trade him to the AL. If he is given a chance in the field in Milwaukee, then we have one too many major league starters on the team (assuming last season was the fluke with Hall and not the beginning of this season…)
Considering the situation, Cameron seems like the most desirable trade candidate. Hall isn’t the best defender out there, but some combination of Braun-Hall-Hart in the outfield, with Gamel at 3B, wouldn’t be bad news to me.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
I took the offer arb./let him walk if he declines
Even if he accepts the arbitration offer, which as I’ve stated previously I don’t think he would, I think he would still be a very tradeable commodity if we decide we don’t want to pay him the arb. value.
BCB, the preferred above replacement level sarcasm supplier.
i think hart to CF would work out decent
mostly because he fits the mold more than Braun who has too much power to play CF and we wouldn’t want to wear him out with all the running. Moving Hart to center would leave RF open for Gamel.
"Cubs fans boo again – 99% of these people can’t see the plate." -Ueck
Are we talking about a baseball player doing too much running?
I suppose, they are baseball players…..
A CF compared to a RF does a lot more work
but yeah I think they tend to get worn out more
"Cubs fans boo again – 99% of these people can’t see the plate." -Ueck
I'm confused:
mostly because he fits the mold more than Braun who has too much power to play CF
Is Braun’s power going to limit his ability to roam the outfield, somehow? You know he doesn’t have to drag his bat behind him, right?
"The reports are that he is getting better. The definition of better is nebulous."
I'd be curious to see
what people’s definition of “out of it” is, “it” being the playoff race, at the deadline.
I’d guess that by the end of July, we’ll have played about 110 games, so .500 would be 55-55. What would be out of the playoff race by then? 45-65?
I can’t see trading him, short of losing every game between now and the deadline, nor can I see anyone giving us that much for him. I wonder, though, if Melky + Igawa would do it. (Melky is hitting .344 for the Yankees, Igawa is struggling with the gopher ball in AAA but has a 1.16 WHIP)
"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!"
I would hang up the phone if Cashman offered Igawa and Cabrera again.
Mike Cameron for half of a year is like adding a well above-average pitcher at the deadline. Look at what the Phillies gave up for Joe Blanton last year, or even the Rich Harden deal. You have to treat Cameron as having as big of an impact or more than those guys.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
Blanton and Harden were not half-year rentals
"I didn't realize his velocity was that high," said Macha, noting that radar readings aren't flashed during exhibition games.
Okay bad examples
But 4-win pitcher, halfway through the year. You’re getting 2-ish highly leveraged wins added to your lineup. That’s just as much as a rental for that type of pitcher.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
You don't have to look too far for an example of that
We could have reasonably expected Sabathia to be a ~2-3 win pitcher when we rented him.
"I didn't realize his velocity was that high," said Macha, noting that radar readings aren't flashed during exhibition games.
yes and no
A team adding a SP is almost always replacing someone really close to replacement level, if not below. (See: 2008 Brewers.)
While it’s possible a team trading for Cam would have that kind of situation in center (see: 2009 White Sox), it’s more likely they’d be upgrading from somebody who is above replacement, but not as much of a stud. Still 1+ highly leveraged win, but I don’t buy using Sabathia as a comp.
Also, cheese.
by Jeff Sackmann on May 6, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, we're talking about the 2009 Yankees
They’ve got Melky, who may be for real but has been replacement-level the last couple years and didn’t even win the job in Spring Training, Brett Gardner, who has been awful, and Austin Jackson, who is hitting .383/.452/.469 in AAA thanks to an absurd .512 BABIP; Jackson’s park/luck-adjusted line of .272/.355/.321 translates to .233/.305/.272, which is essentially Brett Gardner’s line.
"I didn't realize his velocity was that high," said Macha, noting that radar readings aren't flashed during exhibition games.
The Yankees might be the best trading option.
They have a couple of prospects that can develop behind Cameron (Gardner and Austin Jackson). They also have a serviceable CF to send back to us. Also if the Yankees pick him up in the offseason, we may not get a first round pick because they might also sign aomeone more valuable.
I think Cameron stay the rest of this year, but leaves town after the year via free agency.
If you can tell me what will happen next year with Hardy, Escobar, Gamel, and Hall, I will tell you who our 2010 CF will be.
That is the better question
What do you do with Escobar in 2010?
2010 is Hardy’s last year of arbitration. Assuming that Hardy doesn’t contract beyond 2010, what do you do with Escobar in 2010?
IF JJ signs a deal that keeps him here for a few extra years then there is consistency built in where it doesn’t hurt to move AE to 2nd base or trade him or??
If JJ is traded this winter then you have a place for AE at SS.
But what if neither of the above happens. Do you keep AE in Nashville for another season? Does AE have to be on the 25 Man Roster to prevent him from being snatched up via the Rule 5?
by Saberilliterate on May 6, 2009 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Does AE have to be on the 25 Man Roster to prevent him from being snatched up via the Rule 5?
No. He’s already on the 40-man roster, so he’s safe from the Rule 5 Draft indefinitely.
He will also have an option remaining in 2010, so he could feasibly be returned to AAA if his bat isn’t ready or he remains blocked.
"The reports are that he is getting better. The definition of better is nebulous."
JJ could be a deadline trade candidate, although I’m having a hard time thinking of a suitor. Ideally we would get pitchers from BOS (maybe a Bowden/Buchholz + Kalish/Reddick package), as they’ve said they have payroll flexibility for mid-season additions. JJ just needs to stay hot and get his numbers back to his career numbers.
The tough part about JJ is that if we extend him we’ll pay him as a SS, while Escobar’s value is maximized at SS and it doesn’t make sense to play him anywhere else. If we moved JJ to 2nd/3rd after an extension, we’d be overpaying, which is why I won’t be at all surprised if he’s traded.
It would depend on the records of the other teams as well.
A better way to look at it would be how many games behind in the wild card race would the Brewers have to be for them to be “out of it”?
:) + Suppan = :'(
I'm surprised so many people are voting for option 4...
With the stated premises, isn’t that simply an insulting version of option 3? In a vacuum, a one-year conract might make sense, but in the given context it strikes me as an utterly pointless idea.
by Zeyes on May 6, 2009 3:54 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Depending on the price
I wouldn’t be against offering 2 years. You might even be able to get him for cheaper/yr under a 2 year deal than a 1 year deal.
check that
I thought you meant #5 instead of #4.
As far as #4 goes, I think it owuld make sense if we don’t have anyone to replace him.
I'm not saying #4 doesn't make sense...
I’m trying to say that it would come across as insulting to even offer a one-year contract if he hits in the .830 OPS range and ends up as far and away the best CF free agent, so you might as well not even bother. And that leaves me wondering why exactly people are voting for it. (Unless people are thinking of offering something outrageous like one year, $18 million that might actually stand a chance of being accepted, in which case I withdraw my criticism.)
But if you want to make a purely-for-show offer, it’s probably more reasonable to do it as with the Cordero offer, i.e. reasonably good-faith length (which would probably be 2 years for Cameron) but lowball on the money.
I think the logic behind the one year offer
Is that he might reject arbitration, go to the market, find there’s not as much out there as he thought, and return for $10-12 million. It’s an option for people who want to make an effort to retain Cameron as long as they don’t have to pay him until he’s 40.
"The reports are that he is getting better. The definition of better is nebulous."
I think that sums it up well
I voted for that option, and I wasn’t thinking from the point of view of whether it’s “insulting” or not, I was just thinking that I’d be happy having the guy around for another year, but I don’t really think the Crew is in a position to offer multiyear contracts to guys in their late 30s, and if someone else is willing to offer that, good for him, he should take, but it really isn’t worth the risk for a small market team
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
I voted trade as well
The trade off is that if they are in the thick of things at the end of july, playoff chances disappear with a trade of Cameron.
I would always opt for future value vs present. I was on board earlier in the year with the Yankees for the straight up deal for Cabrera. Hes younger, switch hititng, plays decent defense and is cheaper. If the same trade presented itself again in July, Melvin would be short sighted to turn it down.
Its too early to tell now, but when all is said and done on the CC trade from last year, the Indians are probably going to be the winners, and for what? One playoff win? If you had held onto LaPorta and Brantley and just missed the playoffs, the reward would have come 2 or 3 years down the road with multiple playoff appearances, and on the cheap.
So
You would have preferred us not trading for CC last year, even if you knew ahead of time it would guarantee us a spot in the playoffs? That is craziness. Yes, for me, one playoff with was worth it.
The other problem is
With your theory, we would never make the playoffs. So if we keep LaPorta, do we trade him for future talent after awhile? At some point you need to quit stocking up the farm and make a run at it. It seems you just want to be constantly wrapped up in this wishful dreaming for the future
Tell that to the 2 time World Series Champion Marlins
This philosophy would not necessarily bring on a revolving door that would always keep the team out of hte playoffs.
If it is done right, you could run a team in a way that keeps key talent on hand to their prime years, improving year on year, and staying cheap. If the Brewers were run like the Marlins were, they would have traded Fielder last offseason. If he went to the Sox for instance, they could have probably gotten a return like Ellsbury, Bard, Bowden, Lowrie and a couple of 2nd tier prospects. All of those players would be Brewer property from 3 to 6 more years. And if they did the same with Hardy they could have gotten a very good #2 pitcher in return, say Matt Cain.
If you had a team of Kendall, LaPorta, Weeks, Hall, Lowrie, Braun, Ellsbury and Hart, and a rotation of Gallardo, Cain, Bowden, Parra and Bush. Id like the chances of that team.
Occasionally you could sign a big star type player to a multi year deal and hold onto talent. But I would always dump expensive, older players, like Cameron, for younger, cheaper, projectible ones because it saves money and makes the team better (hopefully) going into the future. I think this approach would bring longer term success, as opposed to one time success.
Mike Cameron
I am very happy with Cameron’s play, and at least we know the defense will hold up throughout the year. However, no one is going to pay Mike Cameron $15 million a year. He is 38 years old, and that would be more money than what Chipper Jones got from the Braves. He will not even be able to get the $10 million he is making this year, even if his fine play continues.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Brew Crew Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chicago
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Cincinnati
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Houston
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Milwaukee
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
|
St. Louis
|
0 | 0 | .000 | 0 | Lost 0 |
(updated 2.13.2012 at 7:02 AM CST)
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
