Garza (it is official)

I like it....if he can stay healthy.

color me shocked.

 

Not bad numbers, no pick involved. 

 

Seems to make sense.  I'm guessing he backs up first as well.

Me too.  If that staff is healthy, it's good to possibly great. 

 

Lohse

Gallardo

Garza

Perlta

Estrada

 

I like this move better than the Lohse signing and that worked out pretty well.  Garza pitched very well for the Cubs and Rays.  He struggled a little bit with Texas but has pitched well in the NL

Lucroy makes him an all star

Yep, they got what they needed/ and could afford. He will solidify that rotation barring injury from anyone.

There are some young guys for the pen or spot start, nice staff is shaping up.

 

If they get rid of Weeks, I'm contemplating pushing all in ...

Season tickets?

20 gamer ... season tickets are for the 1%ers or the pigeons.

I'm neither.

I'm shocked that a #2/3 starting pitcher accepted a contract for only $13M/year in this environment.  Love the signing, some health concerns, but young enough and has been a real consistent guy.  

 

 

Hmmm.

 

I think there will be very different reactions to this signing depending upon which camp you fall in.

 

If you think the Brewers just had a star-crossed year last year with injuries and the Braun drama and aren't far off from competiting, I can see why this deal is attractive. They get a solid pitcher at a reasonable price to shore up a rotation that was not very good last year.

 

But if you think the Brewers as an organization have significant ground to make up on the Pirates, Reds, and Cards, then what's the point in investing four years and $50 MM into an injury prone starter? Seems like rearranging the deck chairs a bit.

 

I personally fall in the latter category. I'm suspicious why teams who are closer to competiting and could really use an additional arm (Giants, Yankees, Pirates etc.) opted to pass on a guy like Garza at that price point. Could it be the injuries? Moreover, it continues a distrubing trend by Brewer management to build a patchwork team. I'd much rather see them trading veterans and rebuilding that farm system than throwing more money at injury prone veterans.

Not much downside to this deal. No prospects surrendered, no lost draft picks and paying a 30 year old pitcher isn't the worst thing to do with you cash.

JSOnline saying no deal yet...it figures.

There's $50+ million of downside to this deal. As much as they act like it sometimes, the Brewers are not the Dodgers, Yankees, or Red Sox. If Garza is injured or ineffective, that's $50 million of a limited budget that could be used elsewhere.

 

Beyond that, there's the opportunity cost. If you believe the Brewers really need to revamp their farm system, an investment like this may make it less likely the Brewers become sellers if they have a mediocre first half. 

 

But this does raise an interesting question…if Garza could be had for a reasonable amount, why did the big pocket clubs who really could write this off not bite? 

I don't think it's reasonable to be skeptical just because the big markets didn't bite. Seems kinda self-defeating to judge any move by that measuring stick.

But what is reasonable is to question the player himself as to whether he will live up to the deal. He's oft injured, and by all accounts has been a clubhouse flake. Not surly or unliked, just his antics wear on people over time. Maybe he's grown out oif that. 

If he stays healthy and has good chemistry with the staff and coaches, it's a slam dunk move. He can be a top line starter with his stuff. This could be a great move.

Maybe he wants to stay in the Chicago area (broadly)

5-16

What the hell does 5-16 mean?   Or was it supposed to be 5-61? Or John 3:16?

You really need to recognize that the economics of baseball have changed.  Dramatically.  $13M a year for a front line starter is frankly a steal.  The Brewers are getting ~$30M/year additional from the TV contract alone.  Obviously our owner doesn't think the outlay is too much.  Mark A is trying to produce a competitive team on the field, and this is a fantastic move (should it happen I guess).  The costs of it are not prohibitive enough to hamstring them for years to come.  This is chump change in today's MLB, even for Milwaukee.  

 

And, as for your comment on becoming sellers, again, I think you're missing it here.  If Milwaukee becomes sellers, they would have with Garza an affordable top line pitcher with 3 + years of control.  They could theoretically make out like bandits with that kind of an asset.  It doesn't make them less likely to become sellers at all.  It 1) makes them a better team, which I'd think we all want and 2) if they do become sellers, they likely have the most attractive asset on the market.  Which would give them the best opportunity to build the farm system.   If they are mediocre (which I am thinking, what like .500?) I can't imagine them being sellers regardless.  If they are .500 or above, no team likely is selling.  If they are under, they have a great chip to make moves with.  

 

However, I tend to focus on a good major league team vs those that pine forever on having a perceived great minor league system that may/may not ever produce great Major League talent.   How's Matt LaPorta doing, BTW?

 

 

First starting 5 with all vowel-ending surnames ever?