The Brett Lawrie for Shaun Marcum Trade
ESPN's top baseball stories today only mentioned the Jason Werth deal and a Mark Reynolds trade to the Orioles. No one seems to be noticing that the Brewers and Blue Jays traded #1 prospect for #1 starter, which is a significant and rare type of trade. The impact on the Brewers is going to be tremendous.
Marcum is a very good pitcher. I find it a little funny that he doesn't meet the 6 foot 2, hard-throwing prototype that the organization set for themselves back at the "pitching summit" but I never really bought the idea of a prototype anyways. If you're following the news it's likely you've seen plenty about his stuff already, but he's not a hard thrower, that's for sure. Don't mistake him for a "contact pitcher" though, because he's not. Power stuff is not always good stuff.
Marcum started 14 games in 2006, 25 in 2007, and 25 in 2008. He improved each season, dropping his FIP from about 5.4 to 4.9 to 4.45. This improvement was directly mirrored in his tERA numbers. He was aided by a very low BABIP in 2008 to finish with a 3.39 ERA, allowing him to become "established" as a solid starting pitcher, I'm sure many analysts said it was his breakout year. Unfortunately, he underwent Tommy John surgery and missed the entire 2009 season.
Marcum was a different pitcher upon his return in 2010. He set a career high in innings pitched with 195, and his 3.64 ERA was matched by an equally low FIP, also a career low. On an impressive, young Blue Jays staff, Marcum was the opening day starter and the staff leader in most pitching categories. His biggest change before and after the injury was more variation on his fastball. He seemed to tweak his cutter, throwing it harder and getting its classification changed from "slider" to "cutter" by the Pitch f/x algorithm.
Marcum throws a 2 or 4-seam fastball about 50% of the time, which is a very low rate and indicative of his reliance on his offspeed stuff. He really is only throwing the straight fastball to keep the other pitchers effective. Beyond the two fastballs, his next most useful pitch is his changeup. It's one of the most effective in the game by any measure. It averages about 7 mph slower than the fastball, and he has thrown it more and more with each season in the majors. In addition to the aforementioned cutter, Marcum also throws a 75 mph curveball about 11% of the time. It's another effective weapon in the arsenal.
Marcum is able to get plenty of strikeouts with this selection of pitches. His swinging strike percentage has been around 10%, which is solidly above average, and he's done that in his entire time in the majors. Marcum can get guys out, there is no real question that he is not a soft-tossing finesse "contact" guy. He has a track record.
It's also worth mentioning that Marcum has compiled these numbers in the toughest division in the Major Leagues. There's an automatic gain expected from transferring to the NL, and especially coming from the AL East.
Some people have stated concern about Marcum's injury history, but Tommy John surgery is the only real setback he's dealt with in his career, and it's relatively routine these days. Every pitcher is an injury risk. Every pitcher. Past Tommy John surgery does not really correspond with a higher risk of any other injury down the road. So while there's certainly an injury risk, there's nothing to indicate that Marcum's any more of an injury risk than any other pitcher the Brewers could have acquired.
I have yet to even touch on what the Brewers gave up, but there's no question it's a significant amount. I've been on Brett Lawrie's bandwagon since he was drafted, and he's a talented hitter who put up a great year as a 20-year old in AA. But if anyone was expendable, it may have been him. I always felt that Lawrie would hold his own as a hitter even if moved down the defensive spectrum-- as a third basemen or corner outfielder, he would likely be an above-average offensive producer down the road. The problem is that right now, the Brewers have 5 players who fit that description (and yes I'm counting Mat Gamel). Lawrie's value to the Brewers was tied in his ability to stick at second base-- and the Brewers' willingness to trade him, I think, speaks about their confidence that he could do so. I think it also speaks about their confidence to get a deal done with Rickie Weeks, and possibly says something about how highly they think of Scooter Gennet.
Of course, having a valuable player somewhat blocked at a few different positions is a bad reason to trade him. Considering the alternatives, however, a pitcher as good as Marcum came available and the Brewers had to give up fair value to acquire him. I'd much rather send away a player like Lawrie, who may be blocked and may have more value to the Jays than to the Brewers, than just about anything else of equivalent value in the system (like pitchers, and hitters who are also strong on defense). Lawrie was expendable and Melvin used him to solve a major weakness.
The starting rotation has yet to take shape, but there's no question that Gallardo and Marcum are a formidable 1-2, and the rotation was strengthened tremendously without even touching the current team, and using a player who might have been traded after the season anyways. The offense is still one of the best in the league and now the pitching staff is resembling something close to or even better than average.
The main argument I've seen against this trade goes something along the lines of disliking it because the Brewers are sacrificing their future to make a short-term run for the playoffs, and that if it doesn't work out they will be doomed to the NL Central cellar for years to come. My rebuttal comes in this form:
- The Brewers didn't sacrifice farm system depth. They took one guy off the top. In many ways, I like dealing Lawrie-- another power hitting high draft pick with defensive issues-- more than I would like dealing a bigger package of slightly lower prospects, like Lorenzo Cain and 2 pitchers. If we assume Lawrie's not going to stick at second, we already have a very similar guy already in Gamel.
- I don't see why the next two years are not looked at as potential years of contention. The offensive core and Gallardo is under contract for this season, and the only significant players with their contracts up in 2012 will be Rickie Weeks and Prince Fielder. Both are major players but I feel that Weeks can be retained, and Fielder can be replaced. Mat Gamel will almost certainly be working hard at first base this season.
- Worst-case scenario is just a bit of player turnover. If this team manages to tank and the management changes course, Marcum could easily be flipped for a good prospect or 3 at the trade deadline or the end of the year.
The more I think about this deal, the more I like it. The Brewers acquired a good pitcher who is easily #2 caliber, if not a borderline #1, and didn't hurt the team too badly to do it. And they didn't just rent him for a season. This move moved me from skeptical about the chances to compete in the central next year to optimistic. I say that Doug Melvin did good work here, and though people are free to disagree, I think this one's going to work out well for the Crew.
157 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good article, JM
I’m sure there are some of us (or just one of us) who will go on and on about Lawrie’s value and how he’s got the bat to carry him, but really, it’s not like he was expected to start next year.
If he goes on to have a great career, then we just have to hope Marcum gave us the kind of impact we hoped for, which he should. Great add here by the FO. No team was going to give us a solid starter like for Gamel or someone like that, had to be a guy with value, and that was Lawrie. Was exactly the kind of move we’ve been looking for, a legit #2.
"I signed with the Milwaukee Braves for three-thousand dollars. That bothered my dad at the time because he said he didn't have that kind of dough." - Ueck
I'd call him a legit #3 with #2 upside
Here’s a simple question: Do you think Marcum makes the Brewers contenders?
I dont think Lawrie was blocked, the Hart extension was foolish, but the second Lawrie was ready, he would have been the every day starting RF, and Hart would have been moved. Do you think Hart is going to repeat his numbers?
As another poster said on the other thread, this is the type of move that current contenders make to improve their chances. You dont move your top prospect for an arm if you arent a contender. Marcum alone doesnt instantly make this team playoff caliber, and this is why it was a foolish move. Now if it were July 10th, and the Brewers were in the race, I would have been all for it.
No, you wouldn't have
you would have found another reason to hate it.
Twitterize me: @mykenk
by Mykenk on Dec 6, 2010 3:45 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
Thats horseshit
If anything (lately) I have shown an unwavering objectivity when it comes to numbers and valuation. Lawrie is going to be in the top 11-25 for Baseball America’s Top 100 2011 prospects. Thats a value of $25 million. If Marcum repeats his 3.5 WAR season, which I dont think he will, and is paid less than $11 million over the next two years, then its an even trade.
I have no problem with them giving up a prospect if it pushes them over the top. But not a top prospect and not with this team. I dont dislike Marcum, Melvin got fleeced in my book, as he did with Hardy last year, and he and his boss seem to have a very unrealistic view of the current team.
I'm not as convinced that Lawrie is a sure thing
I’ve see the “can’t miss” label applied to plenty of people who’ve done nothing at the big league level. Why are we assuming that he’s going to be a hall of famer when he doesn’t even have a position to play? Why are we assuming that we’re going to need his bat when you want to be competitve in 5 years? Why are we assuming such a dramatic decline in the teams offensive output over the next few years?
You say that this is a bad deal and that Melvin got fleeced, but that’s using your set of assumptions. There’s an equally valid set of assumptions that shows this is probably a fair trade for both teams.
If you want to win, you have to gamble on the tail of the distributions, you can’t just try to get a bunch of high production guys and hope they’re all average for the year. No team has ever won anything without significant over-performance, so why try to set the team up for a baseline of over-performance. You set the team up to be an 80-82 win team, and hope the tail events hit. That’s how small teams win. (alternatively, they can be terrible for 10 years and accumulate a ton of draft picks, but there’s a reason the Rays have a good team and zero fans, and it’s 2% location, 5% stadium, 93% irritation).
Twitterize me: @mykenk
by Mykenk on Dec 6, 2010 3:59 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
Agreed
You and I just have different philosophies. I love the prospects, you prefer the vets. I agree that gambles have to be made, and I just prefer the cheaper route.
I dont think Lawrie is a “sure thing” either, but I think he will at least be an above average player. Was I concerned about his attitude issues? Yes, but I dislike Ryan Braun immensely for the same reasons on a personal basis, and know that he has great value.
If Marcum can provide the same production in 2011 and in 2012 and at the same time make them contenders, then the trade off looks good to equal. But as you know, my opinion is that they should have started a mini rebuild last July, and this trade doesnt really change that opinion for me. If they can somehow pick up a 5 WAR player this offseason without giving up mlb talent, then they are contenders for sure, but I will still be unhappy with the release of prospects to do it.
You're mischaracterizing the philosophy
It’s not a preference of vets or prospects. It’s a matter of calculated risk about how to make a team better now and better in the future, and leveraging talent to maximize the team at different points in order to achieve a World Series. Like it or not, they extended Hart, and Lawrie would be blocked when he got up— if you assume he can’t play second, like the Brewers obviously did— and he would probably be used as a trading chip at that point, for a pitcher, who wouldn’t have helped this season.
You’re trying to construct the perfect team in about 4-5 years I think, but you’re already working with a pretty dang good one that, as stands right now with no further improvements, is borderline contender. Lets just say Gallardo’s a 4 WAR guy, Marcum 3, Wolf 2.5, Narveson, 1.5, and Capuano 1. That’s about an average starting rotation, and I think you would agree that the bullpen and offense are above average. You’re telling me you see this team, as constructed, as having no chance at making the playoffs?
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
by Jordan M on Dec 6, 2010 4:41 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
The 'pen is above average?
Do we even know who’s going to be in the ’pen this year? Ax and Braddock and Loe and …
I’m not smart enough to look at the other stuff and do anything but drool and mumble.
Possibly
Although it sounds like both are more likely to start the season in Nashville.
DiFelice will also get a chance to make the team.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
I forgot about him too
Realizing all of this makes me feel better about dropping Coffey and Villanueva, they weren’t necessary.
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
Any of the starting pitching depth will go there, yup
I don’t expect Capuano, Narveson, and Parra to all be in the rotation but I expect them to be on the team. Braddock is a beast, obviously, and I think if they do go to Parra as a middle innings guy he’ll be effective as well. Something like Axford, Braddock, Loe, Parra is a really solid top 4. Then you work in Jeffress, Rogers, and whoever is left over from the starters. There won’t be a Jorge Julio or Greg Acquino or Elmer Dessens involved here.
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
I'm just wondering if it's premature to call that group above-average.
That’s two rookies, two guys in their second year, a couple failed starters — one of whom was used 723 times last year — and a 40-year-old setup man coming off a serious injury.
I’m not smart enough to look at the other stuff and do anything but drool and mumble.
True, but bullpens are bad.
There’s plenty of concern, but to be above-average they just have to be better than the 16th best bullpen in the majors, and I think they’re there.
Axford
Braddock
Loe
Parra
Jeffress
Rogers
DiFelice
Hawkins
Kintzler
McClendon
Starting pitching depth
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
Fair enough.
I thought we were identifying the ‘pen as a strength of the team. If we’re just saying they’ll probably be relatively less shitty, as compared to the rest of the league, I’m in.
I’m not smart enough to look at the other stuff and do anything but drool and mumble.
Do I have this straight?
Two rookies – Jeffress and Rogers
Two guys in their second year – Axford and Braddock
Failed starter used 723 times – Loe
Failed starter – Parra
40-year-old setup man – Hawkins (although he’s not quite 40 yet)
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
I agree.
Something to think about: What if Parra figures stuff out?
And yes I know that Parra’s chances of figuring stuff out can be approximated by a delta function.
by BrewCrewBrian on Dec 7, 2010 7:37 AM CST up reply actions
That's a big what if as you implied
The Brewers then have 6 viable starters on the team and will have a solid rotation when a starter goes down with injury. Every team has a starter go down at some point. That said, I don’t know that Parra will get another real opportunity to start for the Brewers to actually figure this stuff out.
Minecraft is like digital Legos. I like digital things and I like Legos. I am now addicted to Minecraft.
"Marcum alone doesn't instantly make this team playoff calibre...
and this is why it was a foolish move"
I understand what you’re saying, but the crucial point is that we’re not about to start the season tomorrow. Was Doug meant to wait weeks until he’s made other signings and then hope that, miraculously, there’s still the possibility of a move for Marcum? By all means, if the season’s starting and Marcum is the only notable change its fair to look back and question the signing (and I’d join you in it) but we’ll need to wait and see if that’s what happens…
"I hope your name is Rick"
by MrLeam on Dec 6, 2010 4:17 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
I'm a day late, but I'll copy and paste this again.
“This one move isn’t going to fix this team. They still need (x) and (y), and they’re more than one (z) away.”
No one is suggesting that this one move, or any other move this offseason, will fix the team in one fell swoop. Thankfully, they’re allowed to make more than one move.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Dec 7, 2010 10:39 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
very true
We still need a dependable back of the rotaion guy, unless you are in favor of giving one of the two young arms a shot there, cant be any worse then Parra (in the rotaion). I feel that Cappy and/or Narvason will fill the #5 spot in the rotaion.
Do you think there is enough money to go after Webb, and keep Fielder?
At the moment I'm pretty sure there's enough money to sign almost anyone.
I’m not sure that makes it a good idea to bid on Brandon Webb.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
i assume you mean lee is out
because from the talk on twitter it will take a 7 year deal from a smaller market team to land Lee, I just think there is better financially pitchers out there. I’m not saying I dont want Lee, but not for 6 or 7 years, I dont feel that he can keep on pitching like he is untill he is 37 or 38 or older.
I would personally like to see a trade for Sheilds, or one of TB top 3 pitchers if they are in a re-building mode.
Well
By my calculations, there is about $66.696M tied up in payroll after arbitration raises and contractual pay increases
I suppose it all depends on whether you feel the Brewers will commit in excess of $90M to payroll again this year.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 7, 2010 11:43 AM CST up reply actions
I said at the end of the season that a Lawrie trade was going to be our best bet to get something done, and I’m pretty happy with the return. Now they just need to sign him to an extension and a Gallardo / Marcum front end for the foreseeable future looks quite nice.
It also frees them up to get some prospects that are further away from the majors but higher quality for Fielder, and to hang on to him until the deadline.
Why would we even talk extension? He hasn’t thrown a single pitch in the NL central yet. Perhaps he gets rocked.
You never know...
Perhaps there are more soft tossing player sin the NL Central and bats are more advanced against those style of pitchers.
I just really hope the team is able to get an extension signed with Marcum
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
Now that you've resigned yourself to the trade
What’s fair market value for a 3 year contract for Marcum in which we buy out his 2 last arbitration years? Melvin seems to adore team options, so it’s probably best to tack on a 4th year salary and buyout, as well.
Minecraft is like digital Legos. I like digital things and I like Legos. I am now addicted to Minecraft.
complete guess
I would like to see something in the neighborhood of 4 years 35m with a 10m team option for a 5th season.
by E Tyme on Dec 6, 2010 3:46 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
I'd think he's looking at probably $4-$5M this year in arb
and maybe $6M+ in arb 3. You probably need to consider that. You don’t want to backload the deal too much considering the contractual increases to players like Braun, Hart and Gallardo. So, possibly something like 3/$27 at 8/9/10 with an option/buyout of 10/2. That could make the deal worth 37 over 4, and guarantees $29. Its really sort of shooting in the dark here. I’d guess Melvin and Co. will not talk an extension until after 2011 with Marcum as I think they’ll probably want to see how he adjusts to Milwaukee, and give the fans a chance to shower love and affection on him for a year.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 6, 2010 4:27 PM CST up reply actions
4-5M in this arb?
wasn’t the neighborhood originally 2-3M? or is the thought 2-3M with incentives that could make it 4-5M?
i'm fighting all the french people i can find. happy cinco de mayo!
by sowingwildoats on Dec 7, 2010 8:42 AM CST up reply actions
After the year he had last year
I’m guessing he’s going to make 4-5M in arb 2.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 7, 2010 11:43 AM CST up reply actions
I'll go with 4/6.5/10/12
And offer four years, $32.5 million.
If four years is a longer commitment than you’re comfortable with, make it 3/$20.5 with a $12 million option for 2014 and a $1.5 million buyout.
In my opinion, though, any long term deal for Marcum would need to buy out more than one of his free agent years…otherwise you’re guaranteeing a lot of money and not gaining that much.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
That was my thought on the 3 year contract
Why take the risk of buying out his arbitration years if you’re only getting the savings on his first free agent season. Like most contract situations, I guess it comes down to whether the Brewers want to commit to the 4th season or if Marcum is willing to make that 4th year a club option.
Minecraft is like digital Legos. I like digital things and I like Legos. I am now addicted to Minecraft.
I think I mentioned above
That I would think Melvin & Co. will wait until after 2011 to give a contract. On three years, then, it buys out two FA years, plus an option.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 7, 2010 12:01 PM CST up reply actions
I was working under the "discussing an extension"
point of view from the Jays trying to work out the extension. I suppose the Brewers could play wait and see rather than the extension the Jays were thinking of working out.
Minecraft is like digital Legos. I like digital things and I like Legos. I am now addicted to Minecraft.
Then he runs the risk of Marcum just thinking, "I'll just wait a year and cash in during Free Agency."
I think Melvin tries for the extension before the All-Star Break.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
by tcyoung on Dec 7, 2010 9:45 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
True
but I still think that the front office will want to see what he can do for a full year in Milwaukee before offering the contract.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 7, 2010 10:40 PM CST up reply actions
The option is key. If you have a club option for that 4th year, you're buying out 2 years of free agency
and maintaining some insurance in case he gets hurt.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
completely side-busted but
that arsenate paper looks like it’s gonna get skewered pretty well too.
i'm fighting all the french people i can find. happy cinco de mayo!
by sowingwildoats on Dec 7, 2010 8:42 AM CST up reply actions
Disagree that Mat Gamel will be working hard at 1st
mainly because I’ve never seen or heard evidence that he’s ever worked hard anywhere.
Twitterize me: @mykenk
Yeah, he's not so much a five-tool player as he is an all-Tool plyaer
by infield fly on Dec 6, 2010 3:53 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
I've never seen any evidence that he hasn't worked hard anywhere...
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
Really?
Maybe that was lawrie.
Then again, my only recent memories of Mat Gamel are of him humping a traffic cone, so.. idk.
Twitterize me: @mykenk
I'll try to find the quote
but didn’t Don Money slam Gamel’s work on defense this past year?
I’m not smart enough to look at the other stuff and do anything but drool and mumble.
Gamel's 2009 offseason left a bit to be desired
Also depends on how much responsibility you want to put on him for his inability to become an average defensive 3B in his 5 years in the Brewers minor league system given what was at stake (become average, make the MLB team).
Get a ife broseph
Here's the quote...
Gamel, he’s swinging the bat very well. Questionable defensively, some plays out there, I just haven’t seen the improvement that I like to see from at least two years ago. He’s started to swing the bat better, but defensively, you gotta catch and throw it, too…You can tell, you can show, you can teach, but at some point the player himself has to take the bull by the horns and let’s go about our business. If you have a problem throwing, which he has a problem throwing, he gets out on the side and flat and throw a lot of balls, say, to first base it’ll be on the home plate side of first. Last night he threw a ball to second, he threw it on the first-base side of second, so everything he’s throwing is going to, if you’re looking at the base he’s throwing to, to the right. So: make an adjustment. That’s the difficult part. You’re seeing guys not making the adjustment after, not a week or two, but two or three years. I’ve had him since ‘08, and it’s just, you gotta make improvements at some point, ‘cause in the big leagues, it’s very difficult, unless you’re hitting .350, to put you out there and make your errors and other plays that you don’t make.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
by sjlee on Dec 6, 2010 4:39 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Stupid lack of editing...
I clicked the italics button instead of the quote button.
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
Yeah, this, too.
I’m not smart enough to look at the other stuff and do anything but drool and mumble.
Yup, I remember this
But I don’t think it’s evidence that Mat Gamel “doesn’t work hard anywhere”… (not to single out Mykenk, just using that to symbolize the viewpoint).
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
I agree
Its open for interpretation, and ‘character’ is pretty subjective if you’re not interacting with someone day-in and day-out. You could easily read that quote and think that the manager is just frustrated that a guy who’s so physically talented can’t seem to get it right (see also: Gomez, Carlos).
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 6, 2010 4:47 PM CST up reply actions
It isn't like he would be replacing a good or even average
defender if he played 3B or 1B for us.
Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.
Humping a traffic cone
That isn’t working hard?!
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Dec 6, 2010 5:23 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
That's not why I disagree, since 'attitude' and 'behavior' are pretty subjective
mostly that he’s expressed a dislike for the position, and a preference for the outfield. That and the fact that I don’t think the front office sees him on the big league club. I think they’re hoping Cody Hawn is ready by 2012.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 6, 2010 4:29 PM CST up reply actions
Good luck with that
For Hawn to be ready by September 2012 he’d have to pass through four levels of the minors in two seasons.
Now that's great tasting chicken!
You're not wishing me luck
You’re wishing the Brewers system luck. Otherwise…who?
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 7, 2010 11:44 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
like it
I like it was one for one. Would have preferred it was Gamel but that wouldn’t have done it. Would not like to see Cain go. I thought he looked good last year.
Tim Bring back the chalet,frank charles at the wurlitzer organ, bob betts at the mic, and the barrell man logo!!!!
I'm okay with it not being Gamel
While it’s true it may have taken a little more than just Gamel to get it done I think the more important thing to consider is Gamel is much more likely to make an impact on the team in the next two years than Lawrie was. Thus making the team that much better in the short term
It is what it is.
by coolig on Dec 6, 2010 4:28 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
More move rumours
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/12/dodgers-brewers-discussing-prince-loney-broxton.html
Can’t see it happening (hopefully)…
"I hope your name is Rick"
Already shot down in that same link...
Dodgers GM Ned Colletti shot down the Fielder-Loney-Broxton rumor, according to Dylan Hernandez of the LA Times (Twitter link). Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports hears that the Brewers and Dodgers have not spoken at the meetings (Twitter link).
I agree… we don’t need to have a washed up closer on the roster… we had plenty in recent history (Turnbow and Gagne).
Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.
Hoffman
Taking shallowness to new depths -- FtJ's blog
by Fatter than Joey on Dec 6, 2010 4:47 PM CST up reply actions
You'd have to think
Fielder would be thrilled to go to the Dodgers if only so he could finally get in that damn clubhouse
It is what it is.
by coolig on Dec 6, 2010 4:53 PM CST via mobile up reply actions 19 recs
Rec Machine
Too close for missiles, I’m switching to Ueck.
By someone not named nullacct at least.
Applying Simpsons and Star Wars quotes to Brewers discussions since 2009.
but then who's on first?
i'm fighting all the french people i can find. happy cinco de mayo!
by sowingwildoats on Dec 7, 2010 8:45 AM CST up reply actions
For people saying Marcum is a "#3 starter":
2010 ERA: 3.64
2008 ERA: 3.39
Career ERA: 3.85
Average #1 ERA: 3.60
Average #2 ERA: 4.14
Average #3 ERA: 4.58
(based on a quick Google search and Jeff’s analysis from 2006, but I don’t think league-wide ERAs fluctuate all that much as to be significantly different in the present)
This doesn’t even take into account the fact that he’s moving from the hardest division in baseball (AL East) to arguably the worst (NL Central), and that against teams other than the Yankees/Red Sox/Rays, Marcum had a 2.74 ERA last season.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Dec 6, 2010 5:22 PM CST reply actions 3 recs
Personally,
I get annoyed with calling someone a #2 or #3 or whatever. Its clear to anyone that he’s at least our second best pitcher right now. If we are able to acquire another pitcher better than Wolf without moving Fielder you’re looking at a team with 4 solidly above average starters and a great offense and it would be hard not to consider them favorites in the division
It is what it is.
by coolig on Dec 6, 2010 5:36 PM CST via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
I think he's a very solid #2
Wasn’t 2010 a much, much bigger ‘pitchers year’ than any in recent memory, though? I guess I could do a little digging on that.
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 6, 2010 6:01 PM CST up reply actions
Nah, not really.
A lot of high level pitching accomplishments (no hitters, perfect games), but overall, I’m pretty sure the “year of the pitcher” thing is a fluke.
Twitterize me: @mykenk
There was a drop in ERA.
It was a pitcher’s year. I did those quintiles last year and again this year. I will post them tomorrow but I think the #1’s dropped something like 0.50-0.25 ERA from the previous year. #1-3 were all better.
Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.
What about league total ERA?
I don’t care about individual pitchers. If all the good pitchers did better than average, and all the bad ones did worse than average, it’s not really the “year of the pitcher”…
Twitterize me: @mykenk
Runs dropped from 4.61 to 4.38 per game
Earned runs dropped a similar amount. Offense dropped to levels not seen since 1993, but was still better than the 1980s.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/pitch.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/bat.shtml
I never use a big word when a diminutive word would suffice.
Total ERA
2009 – 2010
3.23 – 3.08
3.87 – 3.57
4.34 – 4.11
4.89 – 4.57
6.03 – 5.52
NL ERA
2009 – 2010
3.19 – 2.95
3.77 – 3.48
4.24 – 3.99
4.73 – 4.44
5.65 – 5.50
AL ERA
3.27 – 3.23
3.98 – 3.66
4.47 – 4.24
5.08 – 4.71
6.47 – 5.54
2010
Pitchers – teams
7 2
8 6
9 5
10 11
11 3
12 2
14 1
2009
Pitchers – teams
7 1
8 1
9 7
10 4
11 5
12 9
14 2
15 1
Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.
So I was wrong
The dreck improved. The top of the rotation guys saw some improvement but there was a big improvement at the bottom. Look specifically at the AL #5’s.
More accurately there were 36 fewer pitchers used to start games in 2010 than in 2009. My guess is fewer pitchers got injured thus fewer really bad pitchers got opportunities to start games.
Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.
2 pitching spots covered...
What about the other three…
Goooooo-mez!
by Drew C on Dec 6, 2010 5:47 PM CST via mobile reply actions
Wolf doesn't count?
Also, Narveson?
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 6, 2010 6:01 PM CST up reply actions
Right now it should look like this...
49 Gallardo, Yovani SP R R 6-2 222 24 3
43 Wolf, Randy SP L L 6-0 198 34 11 (at two only because I like R/L/R rotation)
28 Marcum, Shaun SP R R 6-0 197 28
38 Narveson,Chris SP/RP L L 6-3 205 28 4
39 Capuano, Chris RP/SP L L 6-2 224 32 7
Spot Starting/long relief:
26 Parra, Manny SP/RP L L 6-3 216 27 3
I really like the trade! A very nice off-season surprise to open my sports page to. I don’t think any of us had this guy on our short (or long) lists. Any no Fielder in the mix! Of course health (and mental breakdowns) will be a concern with a portion of these guys, but isn’t it always?! If Weeks signs a reasonable 4-year extension, this will make the deal even better. Plus, we didn’t break the bank and it looks like we could make another move or two.
I did read somewhere other players would be involved in this deal...
…that could be an issue if it is a really good young arm from our system.
All this talk about mortgaging the future by try to win now talk
is driving me nuts. The fact is most of the Key Brewers: Braun, Hart, Cain ,McGehee, Escobar, Lecroy, Gallardo, Gamel, Wolf etc as signed for atleast 3 more years. There is a fair chance that they are able to sign Weeks to an extension aswell. So if the nucleus is going to be around for that length of time I would argue that we are trying to win for the next 3-5 years.
Somebody like Marcum is helping for the next 2 years maybe longer. (Who would say no to a 4 year $32million contract Marcum or Melvin?).
I think that the overall plan is to try a be competitive each of the next 5 years and Marcum certainly is helping for atleast the next 2. He looks like a very good pitcher who is probably also going to benefit from playing against the Pirates,Astros and Cubs on a regular basis rather than the Red Sox, Yankees and Rays.
We definitely need to try and compete this season if we are keeping Fielder around.
I think that Lawrie was an asset that the Brewers could look at and think how much of the next 3-5 years is he going to be able to help us. Probably not for a couple of years and even at that it is not certain where he would play. Not just because he may well of been blocked at 2B but where he can he field without embarressing himself. Lawrie therefore may well be more valuable to another team than the Brewers due to the make-up of the of the sqaud and how long most of the players are going to be here for.
Yes, Lawrie may turnout to be a perennial all-star 5+ years from now but I think that it is a bit foolish to make plans based purely on what may happen that far in advance rather than looking at the more easily to predict next 2-3 years
The question I have is if we could of got a better pitcher than Marcum in return for trading Lawrie? This is something that we can only speculate about since we don’t know who Melvin has spoken to about Lawrie but unless a team was sure that Lawrie could play at 2B I think that getting Marcum is about the right sort of level to expect.
by Saltire on Dec 6, 2010 7:08 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
I think most mortgage-the-future-folk woudl have been OK with it if Marcum had more than 2 years of control.
The point is that If you had 4-6 years of control with Marcum, your 2013-2014 roster looks like this:
Gallardo
Marcum
Odorizzi
Heckathorn
Cain
Weeks
Braun
Hart (only 2013)
Gamel
McGehee
Escobar
Lucroy
That’s a WS contending team, assuming Odorizzi and Heckathorn pan out.. If you don’t have that #2 around when Odorizzi and Heckathorn make it to the bigs full time, you have a mighty big hole to fill.
http://www.mlbsoup.com
by tcyoung on Dec 6, 2010 7:20 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Tbh, it would still be better than what we have right now
And both Odo and Heck fulfilling their potential is long odds.
It's a contending team
if Cain, Escobar, Lucroy, Gamel, Odorizzi, and Heckathorn can play in the major leagues. None of those is a sure thing right now.
Twitterize me: @mykenk
I predict
Lawrie will hit the walk-off single to clinch the All-Star victory for the AL, giving Milwaukee the homefield disadvantage for the world series in 5 years
Wasnt sure about the trade at first
But prospect trades are a tricky thing. Lots of people want to talk about WAR and potential with prospects. Mnay were angry over the Sabathia / Laporta trade citing Laporta’s perceived furture production and value as many will be regarding this trade and Lawrie. But what is the perceived value of a playoff berth or a division title?
I know Lawrie is young and was our top prospect, but he wasnt exactly a world beater. If he was sooo good, they would have dealt Weeks / Hart and he would be starting. If you look at the deal purely from a “need” perspectiv, it works out great. We have plenty of power hitting defensively questionable players, pitching is a great need.
He’s actually underrated, but that’s another can of worms…
Question for those who are up on the payroll situation
How much money do the Brewers have to play with at this point, with all the nontenders, trades, etc. into account?
I have the current payroll at $69,160,000
w/ fairly liberal arbitration estimates ($15 million for Fielder, $7 million for Weeks, $5.25 million for Marcum) and a SP and backup IF spot open on the 25-man.
So, I would guess $10-20 million depending on the opening day payroll.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Dec 6, 2010 9:16 PM CST up reply actions
closer to 10 than 20
I can’t imagine Mark A. going 90 mil on the payroll after he lost money with a smaller payroll last year (iirc). I would expect the payroll opening day to be no higher than 83 mil (thats just pure speculation, nothing to back that up but gut feeling).
That is what I would guess
We really only had an opening day payroll of about $86m after you figure Wolf deferred $4m. I would guess about $80m for 2011. Back out a few million to get us back to breaking even and a couple million to pay back part of Wolf’s money and we are at about $80m.
Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.
Reasonably close to mine
I’ve got it at $66.696M, with 2 open spots on the 25 man for a SP and IF
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 7, 2010 11:48 AM CST up reply actions
I like this...
Marcum had a good season pitching in baseball’s best division, he goes deep into games, and has a good K/9. 1 for 1 trade is a good deal, we could definitely use him.
Having just visited Bluebird Banter two things stand out to me:
1. Many people over there seem really high on Marcum, and they should know a good pitcher when they see one, having watched Doc Halladay pitch for quite a few years.
2. Their fan confidence seems really high compared to ours, even more so when you consider the division they play in. So, are we being realistic or cynical?
It is what it is.
by coolig on Dec 6, 2010 9:45 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
He's good, but let's not get content here...
I think Marcum is definitely a #2, especially on this staff. However, on a really good staff he would be a #3. Like the Cardinals for example, behind Carpenter and Wainwright.
I think that’s why people look at him as a #3. I for one still think this team is another ‘Marcum’ type player away from having a legitimate shot at the division.
I realize the staff is better with Marcum, and hopefully his stats only get better in the NL, but it’s still two #2’s and a #3 if Wolf produces more like his last two months then the previous 3 months of the season. Then as it stand right now two #5 guys to fill it out. That’s just not good enough, even for you optimists. Gallardo hopefully takes a big step and establishes himself this year, but we can’t sit here and bank on it. Marcum should only get better in the NL, but again you can’t bank on it. Same with Wolf taking another step to find consistency. I think you need another #2 or #3, whether it’s a guy from ATL or perhaps James Shields or Matt Garza from TB, who knows. I just know we need it if you want to get serious about the Brewer’s next year.
That's why I hate the "ace/2/3/4/5" classification system, because it's different for every team
Is an “ace” one of the 30 best pitchers in baseball, or one the best pitcher on every team, or are there only about 10 ace pitchers overall? Marcum fits right into the average #2 spot in a rotation. Of course, when you have 2 great pitchers like Wainwright and Carpenter, he’d be the third best starter. In ‘08 Gallardo’s the #3 starter. That’s just how it works. That said, of course I’d like to see Shields on the team.
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
I agree, I’m just saying if you’re looking at making a very good or great rotation, Marcum isn’t your #2 starter. I said he’s definitely the #2 on this team, he would’ve been the #1 last year statistically for us. I think a deal for Garza or Shields is definitely possible, we’ll have to see how much they’re asking though..
Im not sure too many people around here are content at this point
Obviously this doesnt instantly make the team a division frontrunner but it certainly gets the offseason off to a nice start.
It is what it is.
Yes it does!!! And it was nice surprise move. Why are some of you so pessimistic!!!!
I dug a little deeper in our roster and found that if Gamel is willing to move around a bit to find himself, Counsell comes back and our youngsters continue to improve, we are a good backup catcher away from a nice team. Let’s drop the negative crap and look forward to a great season!
If...
Gallardo, Marcum, and Wolf make us a playoff lock then don’t tell the Cardinals who could beat that rotation 5 times over and were what, 6 games out of 1st this year?
While it’s true that Cardinals struggled offensively a lot more than the Brewer’s did, if we’re arguing this team on paper vs. the Cardinals on paper the Cardinals are a better team than the Brewer’s. Not even figuring in the Reds.
And if I’m not mistaken, they’ve still won a lot more games than us the past 2 seasons even with a lesser offense. I don’t think Marcum alone vaults your pitching past the Cardinals.
Also, SRB, it’s not just the Cardinals. The Reds Volquez, Leake, Cueto is better than the Brewer’s, the Giants and Padres is better, the Braves and Phillies are better. It’s not just the Cardinal’s who have a better rotation, I just used them as an example as they did not make the playoffs this season.
Haven't seen you around for a while
Were you off stocking up on exclamation points?
Now that's great tasting chicken!
by Kyle Lobner on Dec 7, 2010 10:51 AM CST up reply actions 4 recs
WOW~
REC!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 7, 2010 11:49 AM CST up reply actions
I disagree
The only teams with two starters both better than Marcum in the AL last year (xFIP) were Detroit (Verlander/Scherzer) and Seattle for the first half of the year (Lee/King Felix). Three of those four pitchers are Cy Young winners!
True, Wainwright/Carpenter might be better than Gallardo/Marcum, but again, those are two Cy Young winners and one of the best 1-2 starter combos in the majors. Prince Fielder is a backup 1B on the Cardinals, that doesn’t mean he isn’t an elite 1B.
Ryan Braun: He loves it.
by SRB on Dec 7, 2010 12:11 AM CST up reply actions 5 recs
This.
Too close for missiles, I’m switching to Ueck.
Warning for people with slower computers: This is the 1600+ thread.
Tread carefully in these waters.
We were arguing against Doug Melvin, who I am now agreeing with
Not really a valid point, because I think I evaluate each decision on an individual basis. I love some DM moves and hate some others. I argued against the Suppan and Riske signings at the time, was pretty skeptical of Hardy trade at the time. But I loved the Sabathia trade and a lot of other moves he’s made. Either way, glad he linked it, it was an entertaining one no doubt.
Either way, when I do defend a move or attack a move, it’s not grounded in previous year’s ERA, and that was the main point of that discussion.
E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).
Actually, if you've never read it
there’s plenty to see there. The BCB debut of LOLLERSKATES and ROFLCOPTER, not to mention a boatload of rec’s. Still some of my best work, if I do say so myself.
Twitterize me: @mykenk
I got a third of my career recs there
and it was so late at night that nobody gave a shit that I was making Star Trek jokes.
I’m not smart enough to look at the other stuff and do anything but drool and mumble.
I remember the thread well
I stayed up until pretty late joining in the discussion and went to bed just after the discussion about Mastodon and BTBAM (who, up until recently, I presumed were Transformers rather than bands) thinking things couldn’t get any more bizarre. As a result, I missed out on being there for the greatest moments in Brewers history…
"I hope your name is Rick"
Ohh is that where he was
RIDE BIKES~!
"If we want to sign a Type A free agent, we would lose a second-round pick, but we don't have a way to get picks back. Our whole Draft process needs to be redone."
~Doug Melvin
by Charlie Marlow on Dec 7, 2010 11:50 AM CST up reply actions
Marcum is a flyball pitcher apparently
I’m a little concerned. But then again, Jim Palmer was a flyball pitcher and gave up a lot of homers, but he ended up in the HOF. Not saying Marcum will be the next Palmer, but he might do pretty well
From Keith Law:
In the Winter Meetings Live Chat:
10:28 [Comment From Bret : ]
Thanks for stopping by, Keith. Mike Wilner in Toronto mentioned that he thinks the Jays will move Brett Lawrie to third base. How do you see him doing there?
10:28 keithlaw: I don’t see that as a potential long-term home for him. His reactions aren’t fast enough for third. At that point, just move him to an outfield corner and tell him, “Your job is to hit.”
Same place
Comment From Mark
How do you see Marcum fairing in the NL after putting up solid numbers in the AL East? Will he be challenging Gallardo for opening day starter?
10:39 keithlaw: I imagine they’ll give it to Yovani but I would be surprised if Marcum ended the year with the higher ERA. I think the league shift will help him significantly.
by klwillis45 on Dec 7, 2010 9:40 AM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Yeah.
It was awkward phrasing.
I’m not smart enough to look at the other stuff and do anything but drool and mumble.
im still happy with our 1,2,3
it look pretty decent for our front end of the rotation, now if we can find a #4 and re-sign Cappy, it will be pretty good. I dont know if Narvason will make the rotation he had a good w/l record but the ERA was high. I feel that he pitched in a few games where the Brewers were up by a bunch, and he was told to trade outs for runs to get Wins on the board. Dont know if that was the case, is there anyway of finding out the info?
Whoops
I misread “would” as “wouldn’t.”
by Cheeseandcorn on Dec 7, 2010 3:38 PM CST up reply actions

by 





































