Doug Davis is back in Milwaukee

"Davis will receive $4.25 million in 2010 with a $1 million buyout of a $6.5 million option in 2011... The deal with Davis includes easily reachable incentives of $2 million in 2010 that would boost his salary to $6.25 million."

over 2 years ago Jim McLennan 18 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

In other words

Around about what we’ll end up paying Edwin Jackson. So we could have had a similar pitcher, for a similar amount of money, without giving up Scherzer. Lovely.

by paqs on Jan 21, 2010 2:43 AM EST reply actions

It’s a good point, paqs.

"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8

by njjohn on Jan 21, 2010 8:25 AM EST up reply actions

I'm not sure Doug Davis = Edwin Jackson

Davis’ FIP last year = 4.84
Jackson FIP last year = 4.28, and in the AL [I assume FIPs are higher there?]

Davis pitching is like Russian Roulette. One of these years, all those base-runners are not going to be stranded, and it won’t be pretty when it happens. I think pulling the trigger three times is enough for our fan-base to handle…

"Win, or die" -- Marquise de Merteuil

by Jim McLennan on Jan 21, 2010 11:03 AM EST up reply actions

That’s fair. It’s probably better to say that Scherzer roughly equals Jackson and that DD is a significant upgrade over Kennedy.

"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8

by njjohn on Jan 21, 2010 12:04 PM EST up reply actions

Precisely

I actually linked Doug Davis’ projections on fangraphs to him earlier. ;-) They’re not very attractive. Davis is significantly inferior, and Scherzer has reliever written all over him (if you ask me, regardless of your opinion, his delivery sucks and his medical bill is already huge). I think if you want to look at a move look at what the Angels gave Pineiro. $8M per for two years – you make that move instead of the Jackson trade, and you’re stuck with no Adam LaRoche.

"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."

by Dan Strittmatter on Jan 22, 2010 12:30 AM EST up reply actions

(Although, the Heilman move looks awful now...)

"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."

by Dan Strittmatter on Jan 22, 2010 12:32 AM EST up reply actions

If we have a

Webb-Haren-Pineiro-Scherzer-Whoever rotation, we could plug in Allen or Bailey (or Parra or Roberts in left and Conor at first) instead of LaRoche and we’d be much better off. Unless we don’t get Heilman, and in that case, we can afford both Pineiro and LaRoche.

It all comes down to whether Max gets injured. And if his delivery is a time bomb, why did we draft him in the 1st round and give him a big bonus, and why did the Tigers trade for him? I guess you know more about deliveries than the Tigers FO and pitching coaches.

by paqs on Jan 22, 2010 3:11 AM EST up reply actions

This debate will go on forever, won't it?

At least we agree with Heilman now.

We picked him because he had an electric fastball and had a closer floor with a top starter ceiling if he didn’t get hurt much in the minors because people can recover from TJ. But he did get hurt in the minors. And he still gave us a good season last year. And Edwin Jackson. The Tigers traded for him because of his upside and high floor, but you have to respect how the solid package we got is better than the possible downside for next year when we want to be contending. And because they’re selling and unloaded two guys who are going to be getting more expensive for cost-controlled guys with moderately high floors (Scherzer’s is closer, Schlereth’s is LOOGY/possibly MR depending on who you ask, Jackson’s is 4th OF, Coke’s is MR). There’s value to be had there.

I guess you know more about deliveries than scouts. :-P

"I've had Bailey's out of a shoe, though."

by Dan Strittmatter on Jan 23, 2010 12:14 AM EST up reply actions

Not forever

Eventually the sun will burn out and all knowledge of baseball will be lost as humanity flees to further solar systems.

Until then? Yeah, it’s probably going to continue.

"I can just see it: Post 'Intervention? Why would I need an intervention?' And then he'd +1 himself."

by kishi on Jan 23, 2010 12:26 AM EST up reply actions

NO!

I’ll take the high road.

by paqs on Jan 25, 2010 3:27 AM EST up reply actions

You're right

They’re not equal.

But if you think the difference between the two is 5 years of Max Scherzer, I have to disagree.

by paqs on Jan 22, 2010 3:03 AM EST up reply actions

Look at this thread/poll where 60+% said they’d be willing to pay $8M or more for DD.

"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8

by njjohn on Jan 21, 2010 8:27 AM EST reply actions

Another interesting thread to read in light of this is this thread. Especially the last half. How do you think the Cardinals are feeling about their Penny contract now? The Yankees and their Pettitte contract? The Brewers and their Wolf contract?

It was a clear numbers game and those who have waited this long are now going to be handsomely rewarded.

"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8

by njjohn on Jan 21, 2010 8:34 AM EST reply actions

It's risk and reward

There are some things you want to do early, but if we waited a few months, we could have saved the $2.15 million we’re giving Heilman, and we could have kept Max and signed a free agent pitcher.

Or, if they were hell bent on trading Max, get a better return for him.

Pettitte is being paid for being a True Yankee™. Penny is overpaid, but it’s just one year. Wolf, on the other hand, talk about a desperate move by the Brewers.

by paqs on Jan 21, 2010 9:24 AM EST up reply actions

I bet the brewers are just fine with it. They basically picked 2nd in the FA pool and paid a commensurate price. The people who knock the price usually factor in a likelihood of injury and I’m not sure how sound that reasoning is.

You don’t like Wolf, but what is the treasure for waiting that’s available now?

by ol Pete on Jan 22, 2010 8:04 AM EST up reply actions

The Brewers may be fine with Wolf right now, but I’m telling you that, for the price, Pineiro, Davis, Garland, Sheets, Bedard, and Washburn are all going to be better choices. Now, I might end up being wrong on the last four (all still available). Some team may get desperate and overpay for one of them… but I don’t see that many cash flush teams still out there, so I doubt it. Regardless, the difference in talent between Wolf and any of these guys is pretty negligible and yet he’s going to take home a contract 33-50% richer than all of them.

"Love is the most important thing in the world, but baseball is pretty good too. " ~Greg, age 8

by njjohn on Jan 22, 2010 10:54 AM EST up reply actions