Brewers - Diamondbacks Trade

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:54 am

This is the announcement from the AZ side:

The D-backs acquired pitchers Doug Davis and Dana Eveland

along with outfielder Dave Krynzel from the Brewers on

Saturday in exchange for catcher Johnny Estrada and pitchers

Claudio Vargas and Greg Aquino.

Davis, a 31-year-old left-hander, was 11-11 with a 4.91 ERA

in 2006, the third straight season in which he worked over

200 innings. He figures to fill in the rotation behind

NL Cy Young Award winner Brandon Webb and veteran

Livan Hernandez. Davis just finished a two-year contract

that he signed midway through the 2004 season and said at

the end of this past season that he was looking for a

three-year deal with Milwaukee. A Valley resident, Davis is

eligible for salary arbitration this year and free agency

after the 2007.

Eveland, 23, was the Brewers 16th round selection in the

2002 First-Year Player Draft. The left-hander appeared in

nine games, five as a starter for the Brewers last season

and was 0-3 with an 8.13 ERA. In Triple-A he was 6-5 with

a 2.74 ERA.

Krynzel, 25, was Milwaukee's first pick (11th overall) in

the 2000 First-Year Player Draft. The centerfielder hit

.231 with 17 doubles last season in Triple-A. He is

well-regarded defensively and has tremendous speed.

Maybe Greg or Tom can give the Brewers version

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Nov 25, 2006 2:10 pm

I'm a bit surprised by this trade from the Brewers' side because Davis is a tough arm to replace in the rotation. You don't find too many guys like him who can strike out 180+ hitters per year, but he was frustrating to watch last year as he struggled with his control and he is 31, after all. I think they believe Estrada can anchor their roster up the middle as they now have good youngsters at C, 2B (Weeks), SS (Hardy) and CF (Hall, Hart or free agency). Krynzel fell out of favor last year when he didn't report an off-field injury and he really has had two sub-par years, while Eveland is a good young arm who just hasn't done it yet in the majors.

Estrada is a good bat and the Brewers are obviously spending a lot to obtain him. I like it from the standpoint that they have a lot of good young hitters and Estrada could be around for several more years before he's eligible for free agency, but pitching has always killed this franchise and I'm not sure getting rid of your No. 2 is a step in the right direction or not. But it certainly opens the door for some of the youngsters who performed well at the end of 2006.

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Sat Nov 25, 2006 2:54 pm

Vargas had is moments last year and is four years younger than Davis. Aquino has talent too (struck out better than a batter an inning last year). Maybe moving out of ARI will help him keep some of those FB in the park or help keep the hits down. Interesting trade.

poopy tooth · Post by **poopy tooth** » Sat Nov 25, 2006 4:31 pm

I think the K's that Davis posts will help him get offers after the season that Milwaukee won't be able to match. If Matthews can get $10/million a year for 5 years, what does that mean for anyone?

I do like Estrada. I think he is a good hitter, as well as a good signal caller. I think in the long run, this will help Milwaukee. Aquino should help an already better than average bullpen. Nice 7-8-9 set up for the Brewers.

I have to agree with EK above...Vargas had flashes last year...up and down.

All things considered (contracts, Free Agency, etc.) the best player was Estrada.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:43 am

Originally posted by poopy tooth:

I think the K's that Davis posts will help him get offers after the season that Milwaukee won't be able to match. If Matthews can get $10/million a year for 5 years, what does that mean for anyone?

I do like Estrada. I think he is a good hitter, as well as a good signal caller. I think in the long run, this will help Milwaukee. Aquino should help an already better than average bullpen. Nice 7-8-9 set up for the Brewers.

I have to agree with EK above...Vargas had flashes last year...up and down.

All things considered (contracts, Free Agency, etc.) the best player was Estrada. There's no question that money played a factor in this deal, but Melvin does a good job in getting value in return when he trades guys who are headed to free agency in the next year. There's no way they would be able to keep Davis past this year and now they have a younger pitcher in Vargas and Estrada for the next four years. I'm sure they believe pitching coach Mike Maddux can get Vargas to be more consistent as he has done wonders with guys like Tomo Ohka, Dave Bush and even Davis. And of course having Estrada locked up for four more years doesn't hurt at all.

Losing Eveland and Krynzel isn't much as the Brewers have plenty of options in the outfield and a few good arms coming up, so overall this does look like a good trade for the Brewers. Davis will be a solid addition for the Diamondbacks, so it looks like both teams benefit here.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:47 am

The contract Gary Matthews signed with the Angels was mentioned here, but what about the $100 million deal that Carlos Lee just signed with the Astros? The guy is a productive hitter, but can you really count on this guy to be productive for SIX YEARS? The Rangers felt that he had lost it so much in the outfield that he would have to be a DH if they signed him. The Brewers liked him, but refused to give him anything more than four years.

With baseball flush with money, I have a feeling we'll see all kinds of crazy contracts this off-season. MLB owners should play Rotisserie baseball for a while to understand how to really budget a winning team.

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Sun Nov 26, 2006 3:36 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

The contract Gary Matthews signed with the Angels was mentioned here, but what about the $100 million deal that Carlos Lee just signed with the Astros? The guy is a productive hitter, but can you really count on this guy to be productive for SIX YEARS? The Rangers felt that he had lost it so much in the outfield that he would have to be a DH if they signed him. The Brewers liked him, but refused to give him anything more than four years.

With baseball flush with money, I have a feeling we'll see all kinds of crazy contracts this off-season. MLB owners should play Rotisserie baseball for a while to understand how to really budget a winning team.

Why not? Shandler was a consultant for the Cardinals...why couldn't you work a deal with the Brewers?

I am one of the biggest fans of Lee, but six years for $100m is nuts. If the Astros get close to their money out of Lee for three years, I would be surprised. Maybe only one year or part of a two, then back to the AL....

Vander · Post by **Vander** » Sun Nov 26, 2006 4:32 am

It is a easy left field to play. Not a lot of room to have to cover, short throws. Yes the money's crazy. That's what people have said about all the signings. It's the going rate though. Owners currently are stupid enough to pay it and fans demand it. If they don't the fans are in an uproar about how their cheap owners don't want to spend any money to improve their team. Don't get me wrong, I think many of this years signings will be regretted and they'll have to eat these contracts with non performing or underperforming players.

Cooperstown · Post by **Cooperstown** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:14 am

Originally posted by Vander:

It is a easy left field to play. Not a lot of room to have to cover, short throws. Yes the money's crazy. That's what people have said about all the signings. It's the going rate though. Owners currently are stupid enough to pay it and fans demand it. If they don't the fans are in an uproar about how their cheap owners don't want to spend any money to improve their team. Don't get me wrong, I think many of this years signings will be regretted and they'll have to eat these contracts with non performing or underperforming players. It's a little more difficult in left than most people think. There's some tough angles where the visitors bullpen is. But if Willy T stays put that should help. And it's not like we've had the 2nd coming of Shoeless Joe out there anyway.

As a fan I'm pretty stoked that we got the best hitting free agent out there, and he killed the ball in our park last year. But when I saw the money my first thought was, "now the ticket prices wil really go up!".

I've been a season ticket holder for years. Since the move to the new stadium in 2000 my Club Seat has gone up each year.

In 2000 $28 per seat

In 2007 $50 per seat

That's a 44% increase in just 8 years.

But Vander's right, you can't have it both ways. You can't demand that your teams owners sign the big free agents, without expecting seat prices to go up.

Where this contract will hurt is in years 5 & 6 when Lee will still get the big money but won't be as productive, and there won't be enough money to spend on anyone else.

Hopefully we'll have made it to the Series again before that happens.

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 8:20 am

they will have plenty of $- and your seat price will be $150

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:22 am

I believe research suggests that seat prices are driven by the market more than by payroll. In other words, if they raise prices and the seats are half full that doesn't do the team any good. On the other hand if a team doesn't budge the payroll but there is a huge demand for seats, they will go up independent of the team's 'commitment.'

Nevertheless, if new players increase the demand for tickets, there is an indirect relationship there. I could see that happening with the Cubs this year. If they raise prices, it will be because more people want to get in to see Soriano, rather than because they have to pay Soriano.

Vander · Post by **Vander** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:42 am

Wow!!! Are you saying baseball teams are run like real businesses? It really amazes me. You have a collection of billionaires who must have some business sense, yet when it comes to sports teams they seem to lose it. Some even admit they would never pay that price for a business if it weren't a sports team. Their only justification is they hope to sell to "a greater fool" later. I've actually heard that said. Cases in point, look at the foolishness of Tom Hicks, Peter Angelos and the guy that owns the Redskins among many others. They've obviously lost all business sense.

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:50 am

unfortunately vander- they haven't. in most cases they are handed a monoploy. you have the only"whatever" in the washington area. plus- in most cases- the public (many of whom do not go to the games) pays for the stadium. the price appreciation is fantastic- george paid - i think -10 million for the yanks. unfortunately for me- the sox- are run like a business- all the reasons i won't go into here. what the cubs are up to i can't figure out- they were run very much like a business. BJOAK- you are 100% correct. well said. and for all those reasons- he will pay $150. or someone will.

Vander · Post by **Vander** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:54 am

Cubs or the Tribune Co. itself up for sale? I'm not sure raising the payroll makes either more attractive, but have noticed better teams seem to have higher market values.

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:41 am

vander- that is all i can come up with. makes no sense- but i think that is it.