On Washburn: we have a number of guys who can step in and perform around as well for much less money — remember, “our outfield defense combined with Safeco” helps everybody, not just him, so all LH low-strikeout flyball pitchers are more valuable here than elsewhere, not just him — and there are pitchers out there who have more ability who could be picked up cheaply and probably outperform him. Ian Snell, Dave’s favorite target, is a good example. Spending money on Jarrod Washburn is a bad idea because there are other places where that money could be far more profitably spent.

On Bedard: no, his health doesn’t make his trade value higher, it makes it lower. I wouldn’t be opposed to re-signing Bedard for the right terms, and I don’t think anybody is; certainly it’s worth offering him arbitration so that we get a pick if he leaves. I think the sense is, though, that any sane contract for this guy would have to be low on base salary and high on incentives, and that the odds are that he gets a more lucrative deal elsewhere.

If you pay a free agent his free market value, there is not inherent value to that. Paying a player market value for expected production is a 0 value proposition. So unless you think that Washburn or Bedard are going to give the M’s discounts (not likely) then any possible extension is a zero value proposition.

And the more I think about it, extending Bedard at a market price is probably a net negative value proposition because if he leaves as a free agent, at least you’ll get back a Type B compensation pick, which you may or may not get back at the end of his extension.

The only other way extending them would be worthwhile is if an equivalent replacement would cost more in draft pick compensation than the player would net if he signed elsewhere. Seeing as the team won’t offer Washburn arbitration (because he’d likely get $10-12M and that’s crazy for his level of production) that’s not a factor for him. For Bedard, if you think the M’s are going to sign a Type A free agent starter instead of him, then maybe that argument could hold water, but we all know that starting pitching is not at the top of the team’s shopping list this offseason.

But I’m curious why we need to do both Washburn and Bedard? It seems like if we just do Bedard for Hardy then we don’t lose those ~10 runs from Wash to RRS and we don’t have to throw in cash to cover the rest of Washburns salary. And I don’t see why Milwaukee wouldn’t do it because as Dave says, the upgrade of Bedard over Suppan or Burns is significant, the downgrade from Hardy to Escobar is not significant, and they know that Hardy is probably going to have to get traded before 2010 anyway, so why not get a frontline starter now when the 2009 playoffs are right around the corner and the Central is weak? If the Brewers need a little incentive then we throw in a minor leaguer with some potential (like a Saito for instance) or a PTBNL or a little cash.

But to throw in both starters it seems unnecessary like trading both Derek Lowe and Jason Varitek when only one of them would’ve been enough to get the deal done.

If we keep Washburn around then we can either A.) Keep him and let Morrow and RRS fight for the #5 spot and have options if one of them fails, and then possibly get type B compensation if/when Washburn leaves or B.) Trade him to a different team besides the Brewers and get a 3B or a RP or a prospect.

If Bedard for Hardy is not enough for the Brewers, then lets forget about it.

I know, I know, “he’s completely changed the way he pitches”, but he’s still not very good, he’ll be 35 next month, he doesn’t throw quality stuff, and the fact that he benefits from the park and the defense in no way makes him unique.

As for Bedard, I would be very willing to negotiate with him, but it’s unlikely that he’ll want to come back, no matter what he’s said on the radio.

The last time Jarrod Washburn was a league average pitcher was 2004-6

I would like to trade Jarrod Washburn and get Jack Wilson in return, I don’t care how it happens but that would be ideal. Both are free agents after the season, the money is close enough, we need Jack Wilsons glove and we don’t need Washburn.

Then I’d hold onto Bedard. If his value isn’t very high right now, like it wasn’t last trading deadline, then why move him now when his potential trade value is much higher. If he pitches through the end of the year on a high note he could reach type A (I believe) and then we offer him arbitration. If he takes it, great then we have a pretty good pitcher on a one-year deal. If not, then we get our compensation. Even if it’s type B, okay. I’ll take that too. He’s either going to help us by staying healthy or we just end the Bedard era.

If we make the playoffs with a healthy Erik Bedard this year and Jack Wilson at short, I’m liking it a lot more than a team without Bedard and Washburn and with JJ Hardy. Even if Hardy is around in 2010.

They had been said to be interested in Washburn before.