Fear The Chorizo

Tell that to Sabathia and Burnett. If Sheets were healthy he would have been in Burnett's place in New York. Even Lowe eventually got his money. Do you not take the time to read my posts? I specifically said that sort of market was available to healthy starting pitching when the Yankees were still throwing offers around. What you just said is exactly what I think. Sheets wasn't healthy enough to warrant an offer from the Yankees when they were spending their money. If the Yankees aren't involved in the bidding, there's no starting pitching market even close to comparable to recent free agent offseasons.

It's a good thing he waited the market out!

If healthy Ben is worth 15-20 million on the open market. I think that open market doesn't exist currently - it was definitely there the last few offseasons, and even earlier this offseason when the Yankees were involved in bidding on healthy starting pitching, but I think that ship has sailed, at least until next offseason.

3 years 27 million for a pitcher like Sheets who's healthy would be a no-brainer. Sheets may not currently be healthy, and has shown that he can't get through a full season healthy - I'm sure that can be argued, but 2004 is a long time ago. That alone wouldn't cause teams to duck and run - if he was guaranteed to give a team 150 quality IP each year he's signed, 3 years 27 million is still a steal. The problem is that there's plenty of uncertainty about his injury report, most notably the latest one that ended his season. What concerns me about this particular injury is that he pitched through it after taking a shot for some time prior to it becoming too painful to continue - everyone indicated no additional structural damage was done during that time, but it obviously couldn't have helped. Sheets could still get a decent deal, I think, if he really is healthy - he'll have to wait until spring training starts for clubs, and he'll have to showcase himself by pitching for scouts/gms to prove he's currently ok. Russ, I don't think Sheets is on the verge of seeing his arm fall off, but I think many teams can't take the risk of even getting Sheets at a discount only to see him make 1/2 of his starts. If those extra innings would have to be pitched by garbage pitching, and if the contract given to Sheets eliminates the organization's flexibility to take on salary via trade, it's a risk not worth taking for probably 25 teams in baseball (especially when draft pick compensation gets factored in). The other issue is there's just not much more money for free agents to get from teams - budgets are already stretched paper thin for alot of organizations, and I think it's completely altered free agent contract values. Some players and agents have been slow to swallow their pride and lower their asking price, and that's probably made their situations worse. They can be completely right in citing contracts from previous years given to comparable players to determine their value, but if nobody's listening that doesn't do them any good. It's similar to quitting your job because you're moving elsewhere, then expecting to land a similar job with higher pay even though nobody's hiring, and the few jobs that open up get filled internally by younger, cheaper workers who have ability but lack experience.

I also don't buy into the multiyear deal = injury argument. I mean, if you knew you were completely healthy, wouldn't you want a nice, fat multiyear deal, too? I sure would, but if NOBODY'S offering close to that because they don't think you're completely healthy, why not take a 1-2 year deal to prove them wrong, and still be young enough to get a nice, fat multiyear deal the next offseason?

What am I missing about Sheets' current situation that makes him unique to everyone else waiting the market out? Everyone else waiting the market out ended last season without having an injured pitching arm. The other starting pitchers who were free agents that are close to Sheets' ability when he's healthy have been signed quite awhile ago. And I don't think waiting this market out is all of a sudden going to lead to gm's forking out money they didn't have in December and won't have anytime soon. The market is basically set (see Pettite and Garland signing 1 year deals for much less than they made last season), it's the market that's waiting on the free agents left to wake up and realize what their value actually is if teams like the Yankees aren't offering the contracts.

he'd do well as a DH somewhere, but he can't play outfield defense anymore

After the series of moves the Cubs have made over the past two months, and now that there's basically zero chance a Peavy trade happens after acquiring Heilman, the Cubs have definitely gotten worse - they still have the talent to own the division, but they have no depth anymore, which was a huge plus for their team last season. I think if healthy they're still 5+ games better than anyone else in the NL Central, but if a few things go wrong it wouldn't be a stretch to see them struggle. If the Cubs get Harden's typical injury-riddled season, regression from Dempster after a career year, issues with Big Z starting to break down, and nagging ailments to their aging stars (soriano, ramirez, lee, bradley) that force a much weaker bench to play too often, things could get difficult.

The only way a three year deal at a significantly reduced dollar amount makes sense for Sheets and his agent is if he is truly concerned about his arm/injury issues. If he was confident that he could start the 2009 season 100% with no lingering effects of that elbow injury, he should take a 1 (or at most) 2 year deal to prove any doubters wrong and cash in as the top free agent pitcher next offseason. taking a 3 year deal basically puts his next free agent period on the wrong side of his pitching career, which means that he's lost his opportunity for his biggest payday. If the arm/injury concerns are that significant, as much as I'd love to have him pitch for the Brewers I probably wouldn't want him signed. Earlier in this thread Russ posted that if the over/under on Sheets IP in 2009, bet on the over. For a team like the Brewers, what if the over/under on Sheets IP in 2009 is 125? Is that enough innings from Sheets to risk burning up payroll, when roughly 1/2 of the starts Sheets would have made if healthy have to be replaced with AAAA washouts and bullpen destroyers?

The Brewers rode Sheets like a rented mule during their lean years, only to watch him slowly start breaking down as the team around him improved enough to become a playoff contender. That kind of speaks to Sheets being abused.

Football has it easy - their farm system is college football, something the organizations don't have to spend a penny on. College football gives all pro teams plenty of opportunities to scout amateur players playing against other quality competition and make an informed decision as to a player's ability. That's the fundamental difference between football and baseball - drafts in baseball tend to have a higher risk of players flopping due to a lack of overall knowledge of a prospect's ability, but the initial cost of drafting players and giving them time to develop in the minor leagues is relatively low. Football gets a free farm system, but wasting high draft picks on players who flop cripple an organization's salary cap structure and roster flexibility, because a player drafted has to be on their roster, not toiling away at some single-A club learning how to play football. Then again, non-guaranteed contracts in football give GM's a get out of jail free card that baseball doesn't have. The other big difference is the shared revenue, including tv contracts, that the NFL has set up compared to baseball, where teams in big market cities can dominate small market teams if they're properly managed. Baseball may not be the most watched sport on television, but it's still the most attended, accessible, and affordable by the average joe and by middle class families throughout america. Factor in the paid attendances of countless minor and independent league teams, and the numbers aren't even close. Granted, the number of games in a baseball season dwarfs football, but I'd argue that makes the sport better to actively follow.

Every organization thinks they have the next Reyes, Boggs, Gooden, etc. in their farm system - perception is oftentimes not reality, especially when viewed through the extremely rose-colored glasses that many fans use when evaluating their favorite team.

Every organization thinks they have the next Reyes, Boggs, Gooden, etc. in their farm system - perception is oftentimes not reality, especially when viewed through the extremely rose-colored glasses that many fans use when evaluating their favorite team.

Every organization thinks they have the next Reyes, Boggs, Gooden, etc. in their farm system - perception is oftentimes not reality, especially when viewed through the extremely rose-colored glasses that many fans use when evaluating their favorite team.

Actually, after reading through Law's rankings again, as long as a player is eligible for consideration as a rookie, they're included in his ranking system. So guys like Escobar, Gamel, etc in the Brewer system would be part of their minor leagues. I think Law interprets an impact player as a guy like Braun, Longoria, Fielder, Pujols, Howard, etc - a guy that will hit the ground running and be all-star caliber as soon as he sets foot on a major league field. In any given year, there are maybe 2-3 players in all of baseball's minor leagues who fit that bill. Low level prospects start to show signs of becoming that and replacing the blue chippers as they develop, so I think based on his ranking system, almost any team listed in the top 20 this year could be top 5 next year if their low level prospects excel. He also seems to have put a lot of emphasis on who he viewed as having the best drafts in 08, which I think is being a bit risky - until prospects get challenged at higher levels of the minors, it's tough to draw accurate conclusions on major league ability.

Actually, after reading through Law's rankings again, as long as a player is eligible for consideration as a rookie, they're included in his ranking system. So guys like Escobar, Gamel, etc in the Brewer system would be part of their minor leagues. I think Law interprets an impact player as a guy like Braun, Longoria, Fielder, Pujols, Howard, etc - a guy that will hit the ground running and be all-star caliber as soon as he sets foot on a major league field. In any given year, there are maybe 2-3 players in all of baseball's minor leagues who fit that bill. Low level prospects start to show signs of becoming that and replacing the blue chippers as they develop, so I think based on his ranking system, almost any team listed in the top 20 this year could be top 5 next year if their low level prospects excel. He also seems to have put a lot of emphasis on who he viewed as having the best drafts in 08, which I think is being a bit risky - until prospects get challenged at higher levels of the minors, it's tough to draw accurate conclusions on major league ability.

Actually, after reading through Law's rankings again, as long as a player is eligible for consideration as a rookie, they're included in his ranking system. So guys like Escobar, Gamel, etc in the Brewer system would be part of their minor leagues. I think Law interprets an impact player as a guy like Braun, Longoria, Fielder, Pujols, Howard, etc - a guy that will hit the ground running and be all-star caliber as soon as he sets foot on a major league field. In any given year, there are maybe 2-3 players in all of baseball's minor leagues who fit that bill. Low level prospects start to show signs of becoming that and replacing the blue chippers as they develop, so I think based on his ranking system, almost any team listed in the top 20 this year could be top 5 next year if their low level prospects excel. He also seems to have put a lot of emphasis on who he viewed as having the best drafts in 08, which I think is being a bit risky - until prospects get challenged at higher levels of the minors, it's tough to draw accurate conclusions on major league ability.

If Fielder gets 7 or 8 million this year in arbys this season, the natural progression would be for him to get 10-12 million next season almost regardless of how his 2009 season goes. If he happens to have an awesome season, there's the potential for his arby number in 2010 to be higher. I think a 2 year deals makes sense for both sides - it gives the Brewers cost certainty, and for Fielder it gives him more money up front without buying out any FA years. Plus, they avoid having to deal with tearing each other down at arbitration hearings, and it gives both the player and the team some stability. With this deal it would make sense for the Brewers not to trade Fielder until his FA year (2011?), or keep him under Brewers control until he becomes a free agent and hopefully collect some good compensation picks. Granted it doesn't in any way extend the time Fielder would remain a Brewer, but honestly he may be a DH only by the time he'd be a free agent anyway.

I believe he had the Brewers at #13 For the NL Central, the Cards were #6, Brewers at #13, and the Pirates (#22), Reds (#26), Cubs (#27), and Astros (#30) all toward the bottom of the heap. Breakdown on the Brewers farm system was that while it had good depth, they had little in the way of impact, star-quality prospects aside from Jeffress (if he gets his act together). I think it was a more than fair assessment of the Brewers' minor leagues. Keep in mind that his list doesn't include players that have seen any part of major league action. He also mentions Jack Z.'s large shoes that need filling in order to keep the farm system productive. His analysis of the Astros at #30 was pretty entertaining, and he slammed the Cubs for basically drafting garbage during most of the mid 2000's. Reds got docked because Votto, Bruce, Cueto, Volquez all were major leaguers last season.

I believe he had the Brewers at #13 For the NL Central, the Cards were #6, Brewers at #13, and the Pirates (#22), Reds (#26), Cubs (#27), and Astros (#30) all toward the bottom of the heap. Breakdown on the Brewers farm system was that while it had good depth, they had little in the way of impact, star-quality prospects aside from Jeffress (if he gets his act together). I think it was a more than fair assessment of the Brewers' minor leagues. Keep in mind that his list doesn't include players that have seen any part of major league action. He also mentions Jack Z.'s large shoes that need filling in order to keep the farm system productive. His analysis of the Astros at #30 was pretty entertaining, and he slammed the Cubs for basically drafting garbage during most of the mid 2000's. Reds got docked because Votto, Bruce, Cueto, Volquez all were major leaguers last season.

I believe he had the Brewers at #13 For the NL Central, the Cards were #6, Brewers at #13, and the Pirates (#22), Reds (#26), Cubs (#27), and Astros (#30) all toward the bottom of the heap. Breakdown on the Brewers farm system was that while it had good depth, they had little in the way of impact, star-quality prospects aside from Jeffress (if he gets his act together). I think it was a more than fair assessment of the Brewers' minor leagues. Keep in mind that his list doesn't include players that have seen any part of major league action. He also mentions Jack Z.'s large shoes that need filling in order to keep the farm system productive. His analysis of the Astros at #30 was pretty entertaining, and he slammed the Cubs for basically drafting garbage during most of the mid 2000's. Reds got docked because Votto, Bruce, Cueto, Volquez all were major leaguers last season.

Does anyone know why the Jays are looking to trade Halladay anyways? Are they trying to rebuild and salary dump? For starters, one of your division rivals just spend about 1/2 a billion dollars to upgrade their team, and that team finished in 3rd in the division last season behind two teams that haven't gotten any worse and are probably better. Halladay absolutely will be this year's C.C. Sabathia - the question will be how many teams will be in the running for him. If the Brewers would throw caution to the wind and offer some of their better prospects, there aren't many teams that can put together better minor league packages.

Does anyone know why the Jays are looking to trade Halladay anyways? Are they trying to rebuild and salary dump? For starters, one of your division rivals just spend about 1/2 a billion dollars to upgrade their team, and that team finished in 3rd in the division last season behind two teams that haven't gotten any worse and are probably better. Halladay absolutely will be this year's C.C. Sabathia - the question will be how many teams will be in the running for him. If the Brewers would throw caution to the wind and offer some of their better prospects, there aren't many teams that can put together better minor league packages.

Yeah, it's not even close at this point. It basically seems like the Brewers have ceded the division to the Cubs in hopes of competing for the Wild Card again. Maybe not the worst strategy at this point, but it can be disheartening when you see that as a fan. I wouldn't go that far - the depth the Cubs had on the ML roster last season is completely gone, and now it looks like Harden is probably going to need surgery, or 10 days rest between starts to keep his arm from falling off. Aside from the Yankees and Mets, it would be difficult to say that any other teams have significantly improved their roster from what they had last year. I think the Brewers are like a lot of teams not named the Yankees this offseason - they're going to see where they stand when June rolls around, and if they have a shot they'll make some trades to take on salary that losing teams are going to be rushing to shed. I think a signing/trade for one more solid starter would significantly increase my optimism for the Brewers' chances, and it doesn't necessarily have to happen before the season starts.

If I were a GM and all signs pointed to Sheets' injury healing on its own in time for the start of the season, I would STILL prefer to wait until he could give me a workout a prove it. I agree with that 100% - in order for Sheets to get a multiyear deal close to what he's worth when healthy, he's going to have to prove at some point that he's healthy going into the 2009 season. That means he's going to have to wait until March to sign a deal. You say that like Sheets has an extensive serious injury list instead of one major and a bunch of minor injuries. I'm kind of sick of this argument - there really aren't many pitchers who find a way to have lengthy careers that have an extensive serious injury list....more than one serious injury probably means retirement for most pitchers. People can look at it from whatever perspective they want, the facts are that over the first four seasons of his career, Sheets averaged 206 IP, the last four he averaged 150 IP. At 7 innings per start on average, that's close to 2 months of missed time per season. IMO, any injury that keeps a player from doing his job and performing to his abilities is a major issue