Thursday, June 20, 2024
Home > Hot Stove > Breaking News: Giancarlo Stanton Will Not Be Playing For The Giants Next Year

Breaking News: Giancarlo Stanton Will Not Be Playing For The Giants Next Year

Giancarlo Stanton

File this under awe shucks. Marlin’s slugger and NL MVP Giancarlo Stanton has whittled down his list of teams that he would waive his no-trade clause for to just 4 clubs. Stanton will only waive his no-trade clause for the Dodgers, Yankees, Astros, or Cubs. Notice the San Francisco Giants are not among the teams in that short list. There were 25 other teams not on this list as well. However it’s important to remember that the Giants were considered one of the finalists to land Stanton just a mere hour or so ago.

The Giants were so hopeful. They (along with the Cardinals) had an agreement for a trade in place with the Miami front office. One little problem there, Stanton has a full no-trade clause in his contract and if he doesn’t want to play somewhere, welp then he doesn’t have to. And you know what? He doesn’t want to play for the Giants no matter how hard they wined and dined him.

The Giants tried pretty hard though. They wooed him. They moonlighted him. They extolled the virtues of playing on a club that finished with the worst record in MLB and has a depleted farm system. After all the Giants play in a ball park where seagulls will swoop in and eat your food after the game. The framework was laid.

However Mr. Stanton just put the brakes on the Giant’s dream of actually having a super star power slugger in their lineup. Stanton recently told reporters and the Marlins that he will not waive his no-trade clause to play for the Giants. It is official the Giants are heartbroken as their dreams have been crushed.

Embed from Getty Images

This doesn’t stop the Giants from possibly going after someone like J.D. Martinez or another free agent star. But Stanton was the guy the Giants really wanted. He’s the guy that would have not only given them an immediate power upgrade in their weak lineup but also the guy that would have put fans in seats in record numbers for the 2018 season. He represented a buzz that the Giants wanted because he was supposed to erase their fans memories of a miserable 2017 season.

Now that won’t happen. The Marlins will look for another trade partner that’s willing to take on Stanton’s enormous salary. Meanwhile the Giants will head back to the drawing board looking for a way to jumpstart their morbid organization. Giancarlo Stanton will not be traded to the Giants, and that’s great news.

Scott Andes

Scott Andes: Longtime writer and Dodger fanatic

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:

Scott Andes
Scott Andes: Longtime writer and Dodger fanatic

155 thoughts on “Breaking News: Giancarlo Stanton Will Not Be Playing For The Giants Next Year

  1. How did you know so much about the Giants pursuit of Stanton? Must have been highly publicized.

    As a mingler with Giants fans, yes, I can tell you that are fans disgusted with Stanton for playing games, there are those that are fed up with the front office’s ability to come up short every time, and those who are relieved and would rather see the Giants conduct a rebuild.

    Personally, I think Stanton and yourself and many experts are correct. This is not a roster to just add a couple pieces and make a contender with. A rebuild is probably the best thing for the org in the long haul. But, they have Posey, they have Bumgarner for two more seasons; they’re gonna give it the ol’ college try for the sake of their World Series plow-horses and franchise icons.

    So, what are the Dodgers going to do about Stanton wanting to play for the Dodgers? Are they going to make a realistic offer or is he just not in the cards (he’s not with the Cards either)?

    1. Hi Rye, nice to hear from you. Sorry for your season. Scott is really good – if not great – at being snarky. It livens things up!

      Tell you what, Giants not getting Stanton was a relief to me no matter how remote it was. Big Contract Players know what happens when teams lose. They get blamed. We went to the WS and some of us still blame Kershaw and Jansen because they have the biggest contracts. It’s how it is and Stanton knows that full well especially since he grew up in LA. Plenty of highly paid scapegoats in LAs sports history!

  2. Looks like trading short term salary and prospects is the best strategy.
    Like I said before “the Dodgers have both expiring contracts and prospects”.
    Kind of sounds like the NBA.
    I am sure that the Marlins realize that business is business and they are not in the drivers seat

    1. Marlins new ownership had full knowledge of the Stanton situation and must have developed a strategy to deal with it. This is their strategy. Guess we’ll eventually see how it works for them.

      It fell apart quickly for the giants. They were flying high until the wheels came off in mid ‘16. Bummer for them. I still believe they have the resources to get back relatively quickly.

  3. It will take the Marlins more than a year to resolve their salary strategy, whatever that looks like. (under 90 Million?) I am sure they are coming to grips with this reality

    1. What the Marlins need is a new tv deal and corporate sponsorships, including stadium naming rights. It’s all in Jeter’s playbook. It will take more than a year. The current tv deal, $20 million a year (way below market value) runs out in 2020. This will take time. First things first – unload Stanton and begin stacking the system.

  4. We have now heard that Stanton has turned down the Cardinals and Giants. Suddenly the Yankees and Astros are in play with very little mentioned about the Dodgers. Sounds like the baseball world does not want the team to obtain Stanton. It would also seem the Dodgers could easily end this situation and trade for him cheaper than any other team but they do not. It tells me that the Dodger FO doesn’t want him either. Such is the vanilla FO the Dodgers have. What a shame, giving up a potential Dynasty for FBZ. If they do not sign Stanton maybe it is time to dump them.

    1. I’m holding out hope, package. I think the FBZ has a strategy if they had landed Ohtani but now it’s on to Plan B for them.

    2. That’s not how the baseball world thinks Bluto. It’s still a East Coast game centered around New York when it comes to baseball (and basketball).

    3. I think the world would love for Stanton to go to the Dodgers. It would be a great story on a number of levels:

      1. The team with the highest payroll just keeps spending
      2. Stanton goes home.
      3. The Angels getting Ohtani and the Dodgers Stanton, Los Angeles rising.

      The front office is looking to shed payroll, I’ve heard continually, hard to do that by picking up Stanton’s contract.

      Ken Rosenthal has a similar take on the Stanton-Dodgers situation.

      “The way to make a trade work, as I wrote last week, is for the Marlins to take back some combination of the Dodgers’ highest luxury-tax numbers—first baseman Adrian Gonzalez ($22 million), who would need to waive his full no-trade clause; left-hander Scott Kazmir ($16 million); and righty Brandon McCarthy ($12 million). But as of last week, the Marlins were unwilling to absorb short-term dollars in a Stanton trade, even though it would enable them to demand better prospects in return. The Marlins’ hard-line position on finances will remain viable as long as remain in play with acceptable trade agreements—the Marlins would not have allowed Stanton and his representatives to meet with those clubs if basic frameworks were not in place. If Stanton rejects both, the Marlins will need to engage other suitors—still possible—or start getting realistic about the Dodgers.”

      Rosenthal’s a good reporter.

      The Yanks are a good team, also well run, as Passan writes:

      “The Yankees recognize they’re in a position of significant strength right now Same with Giancarlo Stanton, who can decide exactly where he wants to go and force a deal. And the Marlins … well, the Marlins are trying to figure out how to best salvage an absolute mess.”

      Words in >< are MINE.

    1. Now we can focus on the other Marlin players.

      Go get ‘em FAZ.

      Stanton might hit 70 on that team. And mebets the Spankees will be favored to win it all next year. I’ll check 538 later.

      1. Badger

        The Yankees are much in the same situation as we are, because they also want to get under the luxury tax too.

        And both the Dodgers and the Yankees, will be in great shape after the 2018 season.

        So let’s see what happens, because like I said, if our front office can get a relatively decent deal for Stanton by todays baseball standards, and they let the Yankees get Stanton, I will be upset!

        We have needed a big right hand bat in our line up, since both Hanley and Kemp were dealed, and Stanton would be the ultimate big right hand bat!

    2. Package

      I am upset this front office let the Yankees, make this deal!

      Because the Yankees are in the same exact financial situation, as the Dodgers are!

      But the Yankees can see they won’t have a chance to get a player like Stanton often, so they were not going to let this deal for Stanton, get away, like our front office just did!

      There is no excuse for our front office, letting Stanton get away!

      The Dodgers had the inside track to Stanton, and they blew it!

  5. I think this is a purdy good splanation of the Dodgers money situation:

    I also just read a Frorbes article that said the Dodgers are winning BIG with equity gain. All you need do is look at how a miscreant no gooder like McCrotch can drive the organization into the ditch, declare bankruptcy and walk away with a billion. It’s a billionaires game played by millionaires. The suckers who pay for all the bullshit is us. That’s right, I said it, the suckers is us. Bend over homies.

  6. Suckers?

    What the hell is going on here?

    On one hand you could argue that the Dodgers didn’t take advantage of a desperate team.

    On the other, EVERY SINGLE report was the Dodgers were cutting payroll. Business is business. This isn’t Friedman nor FAZ nor FBZ. Whether the Dodgers got him or not was always more of an ownership call in terms of financial outlay. So I guess we know the limit.

    Just because some know-nothing fans (myself included) can come up with cash-flow and budgetary scenarios, doesn’t equate with the reality that has been reported for eighteen months. Sheesh. This is like YF still claiming Verlander was possible.

    1. Bluto

      We are going to be in great shape financially, after the 2018 season.

      Do you think we should miss out on an incredible player, because we might have to pay the luxury tax, for one more year?

      Because I think the front office is creative enough, to get around that one year, so I don’t see why they would be so worried about one more year, when the finances are going to be in great shape, the very next year..

      1. I’m sure they modeled out ways to try to make Stanton fit.

        100% sure.

        Dodgers Digest sums this up nicely:
        In all seriousness, this just sucks. There’s no way around that feeling after losing out on the reigning NL MVP who wanted to come home to play for the team he grew up cheering for. And why? Probably money, as the Dodgers appeared fearful of the magnitude of Stanton’s contract and how it would have impacted their ability to stay reasonably in range of the luxury tax. It’s disappointing.

        Yes, the Dodgers will be fine. They still return a great team and basically nothing they do this off-season will change the fact that 2018 looks promising. However, a trade for Stanton made enough sense for a team on the cusp that Dustin backed a hypothetical deal not once, but twice. Now after losing out on both Stanton and Shohei Ohtani (who went to the Angels), the Dodgers are left licking their wounds and figuring out how to approach the rest of the off-season.

        Who knows? Maybe the Dodgers have something else up their sleeve instead or maybe in a few years the fears about Stanton’s contract becoming an albatross will come to fruition and we’ll crack jokes about how emo we all were about this, but right now it sure just feels like a huge missed opportunity to significantly upgrade the Dodgers.

        1. Bluto thanks!

          I am upset because the Yankees are in almost the exact same financial situation, as the Dodgers!

          And they know a deal that doesn’t come around often, when they see one!

          And this deal right here, is why people get upset with this front office!

          They are still acting like they are still with the A’s, and the Rays!

          The Dodgers are the second biggest market in baseball, and we can as easily make this deal if the Yankees can!

          It looks like the problem is, this front office can’t see they won’t get a chance to get a player like Stanton often!

          That is why the Yankees are making this deal!

          And the fact it didn’t take the Yankees that long to make this deal, shows this is a deal the Dodgers should have made!

          1. Sigh

            This is the key part from Rosenthal:
            Hearing the Yankees taking vast majority of $295M owed Stanton. One source says $260M. Another says $273M.

          2. The Yankees will receive luxury tax credit of $3 million per year in Stanton trade; $30 million cash payment from the Marlins is averaged over the 10 years — regardless of when payouts come, and even though opt-out exists.

        2. Bluto
          The Dodgers are not licking their wounds. They never wanted Stanton. It is just another disappointing move on behalf of the FO. They do it all the time. It has happened many, many times. They do not care what the fans want. It is all about vanilla. They know they will fill the seats anyway. They will cut payroll and make money, money, money. You have to remember, they are not Dodger fans, they are business men. As long as they are in the hunt each year they will continue. It wasn’t about getting Stanton cheap, it was spending 295m, and they did not want to give up any prospects or spend any money unless of course, it is some hurt or poor player that they can possibly reclaim, they don’t want him.
          It will always be this way unless FO personnel is changed and that will not happen as long as they make MONEY,MONEY,MONEY!!!

          1. Yeah.

            False binary. You can do better than that.

            It’s not money at the expense of winning. There’s nary a glimmer of proof to that.

            It’s aiming to run a business for sustained success within a budget.

            I call that real life. You call it disappointing.

            I’m worried for you and that perspective it’s going to be disappointing forever.

  7. The Marlins are giving the Yankees 35 million dollars, and the Yankees are giving the Marlins, Castro, and a few other prospects!

  8. I still think we could have done this if we wanted to. We didn’t want to. FB&Z want to do it their way and taking on the MVP in his prime is not their way. Let’s continue to work the edges and bring up our own and maybe this time it will actually work.

    Who knows what’s next. Maybe they make a play for Ozuna, maybe they sign a free agent pitcher, maybe they scour the DL and find more of what they really like.

    Bluto summed it up for me. This just feels awful. The premier power hitter in baseball wanted to come home and we turned our back on him. It sucks.

    1. I could t agree less.

      Every piece of evidence and reporting shows this was a means issue, budgetary constraint, not a lack of want.

      1. Bluto
        You can believe that s$#% if you want but that is exactly what they want you to believe. I know, I know, there is nothing that can be done about it. You don’t think they are going to say “well, we just couldn’t use him in our plan” do you?

        1. What?

          Was that a question? If so, could you restate it in English? I have no idea what you are asking, nor saying.

          That said, if you rephrase I will try to answer.

          Also, who is “they”? The Dodgers? The Media? The Fake Media? Know-nothing fans like you and I?

      2. Huh?

        So it isn’t possible they didn’t want him because he costs too much 6 years down the road?

        They were willing to pay Greinke to age 36 and they are willing to pay Kershaw to age…. guess we’ll know that when the time comes won’t we…. but for a guy who is younger than either of them and projects to put up more WAR than either of them over the next 6 years is one step over the line.

        They could have made it work if they wanted to. They didn’t want to. Yeah, sure, say it’s about the money. Whatever. The question now is – who wins first, the Dodgers or the Yankees?

        1. Badger,

          1 year down the road, 2 years down the road, 3 years down the road and so on.

          Let me get this straight, why do you think the Dodgers who traded 3 middle tier prospects for Rich Hill, wouldn’t want to trade 3 middling prospects for Stanton if it’s not 100% financial?

          I’m really looking forward to hearing your rationale.

          1. You haven’t heard a word I’ve said Bluto. I don’t know how many different ways I can say it before it makes sense to you.

            You and the other FAZophants have said for 4 straight years now the Dodgers are going to get under the cap and every year I have said “no they aren’t”. We heard all the trumpeting, led by you know who, that the Dodgers were “losing money”. Each year they continued to spend and the value of the franchise has increased every single year. Sure, they may eventually CHOOSE to get under the luxury cap just to reset it. What I have said, and what you haven’t heard is – THEY DONT NEED TO!!! If you don’t believe me, and you don’t because your mind is made up, then listen to Kasten’s own words. “There is NO problem with our debt. Business for the Dodgers is very strong and very healthy.”

            This is a choice made by the second richest franchise in all of baseball. The richest? They just created a murderer’s row that rivals any in the history of the game. Stand by. The Yankees are clearly the team to watch.

          2. You still didn’t answer why, if not for money, the Dodgers would trade prospects for Hill and Darvish, but not for Stanton. I’m waiting on that.

            But yes, because Badger says the team doesn’t need to shed payroll is a reason to not shed payroll.

            Ignore the owners who have consistently been reported as wanting to get to a lower perennial payroll #, instead listen to Badger who has figured out the financials.

    1. Hey Bluto
      This isn’t about shedding payroll. It’s about winning as much as possible! When you shed payroll does that make you feel better about being a fan? For me, I want all the weapons possible to destroy the other teams. Stanton is one of those and he could have been had easily by the Dodgers. What a stupid move!! Also, it has nothing to do with what Badger wants or doesn’t want. Not getting Stanton hurt the Dodgers, just like they have done so many times before. FAZ is the reason for this. So if you want to look at the Dodgers from a strickly money angle, go for it?

      1. Hey Package,

        That’s an interesting perspective. I can definitely see if you use that perspective how it’s annoying the Dodgers haven’t acquired a lot of talent.

        I’m sorry to say this, but I envision a lot of disappointment in your future.

        Let’s hope the Dodgers continue to do well even if they can’t live up to your expectations.

        1. Bluto
          This team has disappointed me more in the last 3 years due to the FO than the franchise has in the last 60 years. Shame on them for not getting Stanton.

    1. That is about as astute analogy as I have heard in a long time package. One thing has remained consistent ever since Friedman took over the reigns as Baseball head of operations. They still build and buy and trade like a small market team. Some will argue that the signings they have made show otherwise, but like I said before, the only big contracts they gave were to their own guys, Jansen and Turner. Other than that, no deal has been for more than the 48 million they gave to the pitchers. Low risk high reward players are their bread and butter. Building a strong farm is the other. They have traded prospects. They read the waiver wire like the Wall Street Journal. I would also say that the fans approval rate is about split down the middle. There are some fans who are totally in on what they do, and others who just cannot fathom WHAT they are doing. I for the most part have given up trying to figure out their logic. I just sit back and look at the finished product and try to ascertain how this is all going to work. I am no sabermatician. I am old school when it comes to stats, and do not think that all the GARBAGE they have added does anything to improve what I see on the field. All stats do is give you an idea of how the player is going to perform on the field. Come the end of April, when the 25 man is set and opening day is here, I will be more able to say whether they have improved the team or not. The next few days we will see if Friedman does something bold, or just hangs his normal piecemeal pieces.

      1. Moronic how? They have not signed a single A-list player since they took over. The July trades that supposedly made them better were for rentals. No long term contracts to big ticket players. Tons of waiver wire and fringe player signings. They do things like they are small market. That is their MO. Has been since they got here. They have caught lightning in a bottle a few times, and been not so lucky others.

        1. Best record in baseball.
          Top ten farm system in baseball despite continued playoff appearances.
          Record signing from International Market.
          One win from the MLB Championship.

          How are those in any way analogous to Tampa Bay?

          I love when people try to twist accomplishments into luck.

          1. Okay, those are all pluses. I concede that. But they still have a small market mentality. How many of those international signings have made an impact on the team as it is now constructed? Tampa Bays only world series team was constructed in pretty much the same way, strong farm, fringe player signings. No big ticket FA’s. Difference> Money. Tampa did not have the money to retain any of their top farm players so they ended up trading them off for more prospects. The have not had huge success with their Cuban signings, as a matter of fact most of them have bombed so far, the others are still on the farm. I am not trying to twist anything, I am just observing, and although the team has been a winner in their years at the helm, they still have fallen short of the big prize. Yep, only 1 game this time. They have their good points and they have done some nice things, others are head scratchers. We all look at the game through different eyes Bluto, you see what you see and I see something entirely different. The game has changed immensely. The way organizations are built is way different than the way they used to be. Anything we say here is simply based on our own opinions as to what we are seeing. You buy in totally. There are a lot of fans who do not. But until it says Los Angeles Dodgers, World Champions, they have not accomplished what they were hired to do. That is the bottom line for any front office.

          2. Definitely different perspectives, but I’d further postulate that Tampa would never, ever resign Jansen, Turner or Hill.

            Nor would Tampa trade prospects for Darvish and Hill.

            Not sure how the farings of 20 year old signings on the International market makes or invalidates my point. I raised them because the process of signing them was decidedly not Tampa Bay. Who cares if they panned out? That’s more a result than a process issue.

            Are you trying to reason that any team who hasn’t won the final game of the season, or haven’t signed Stanton are using Tampa’s mentality, or is it only because the head of the Front Office comes from Tampa?

        2. I am simply stating that the way they do things is not all that much different than what they did in their previous employment. Be it Tampa or Oakland, or in Burns case, San Diego. No, Tampa would not have traded for Darvish or Hill. They would not re-sign Turner or Jansen, the reasoning being they do not and have not had the financial wherewithal to do so. It is not because they would not want to. Friedman has more financial flexibility with the Dodgers so he can do those kind of moves. Internationally they have spent a lot of money and time and effort that is true and it is a part of the process. But you would think that they would have gotten some production out of someone in the chain. And I was thinking more about the signings that THIS particular FO has made. And what I said about the FO pertains to the fact that they have not won the big enchilada, no matter where they hail from, be it TB or anywhere else. When they traded for Hill and Darvish, they did not take on a huge financial burden. Only when Hill was re-signed did they take on any significant payroll.

          1. Just So I am clear. How are the Dodgers similar to Tampa Bay? Just because they have them on the World Series?

            BecAuse it seems they are different for the following reasons :
            1. International spending
            2. Front office spending
            3. Key free agent resigning
            4. Trading for rentals
            5. Sustained winning
            6. 40 man roster depth

            Here is how they are similar:
            1. Friedman worked in both places
            2. Working within a budget (albeit different budgets)
            3. Not having won the World Series

          2. I am talking about the way Friedman operates. He has used the same format here in LA as he did in Tampa. And the spending is because he is with a team that can afford to spend more. He has not changed, his situation and attitude and the way he builds a team are the same. The only thing different is what he has to operate with. If you cannot see that, you are the one with the problem. The Dodgers are not the Rays that is obvious, the way in which Friedman runs the Dodgers is very similar.

          3. I see it a little differently. I think obviously they have more money to spend but it’s their operating framework that is Tampa consciousness. Look at the free agents they have signed. The one that jumps out at me is McKazanderhill. This is what I mean by operating on the periphery. They are spending money, but only on what they consider possible bargains. They had a real opportunity to step out there and be impressive with Stanton. They turned their back. And it’s not like they had to chase him down. He was standing on the front porch knocking on the door. When it came time to pull the trigger they were looking at their shoes. Not impressive.

            But, season doesn’t start for a while. There’s time. Impress us with a monster deal FAZenstein.

  9. The good news is that both went to the American League. In truth, I never expected the Dodgers to get either of them. The bad news is that the American League east is going to be facing the equivalent of Mantle and Maris every night. Another question is who is the RF since that is the position Judge plays. I would guess that one of them moves to left field. So Dodger fans, another good question is what does this FO do to strengthen the team? I read a story that Ohtani went to the Angels because they are going to allow him to play everyday. In other words, he is not going to be some platoon player when he is not pitching. It will be interesting this spring to watch the Angels and see how Scioscia works Ohtani into the lineup and where he plays. You know Pujols is going to be the primary DH. Dodger needs…..bullpen, regular every day LF, bench help. One quality starting pitcher. I myself am not surprised nor disappointed that the Dodgers did not land either player. If they had really wanted Stanton they could have easily made a deal. Ohtani would have been a little harder because of the two way thing. Easier in the AL than the NL. But it goes to prove once again that the powers that be in the front office are not inclined to chase long term big ticket players. That is not an opinion, it is at this point in time a fact. Right now your Dodgers starting lineup with A-Gone being healthy would be, SS, Seager, 3B, Turner, 2B, Forsythe, 1B, Gonzo, RF, Puig, CF, Taylor, LF, Some combination of Kike, Bellinger, Toles. C Barnes, Bench, Pederson, Kike, Toles, Grandal and a player to be named later. They have 8 candidates at starting pitcher on the roster right now. Only locks in the pen are Cingrani and Jansen. They will build the rest from the roster and any FA signings or trades they might make. Does losing out on Stanton mean they might make a play for JD Martinez? Doubtful. But there are still some intriguing FA’s out there. We just need to see if the FO takes a SERIOUS interest in anyone. It obviously looks at this point in time as if they are dead set on getting out from under the luxury tax.

    1. Good thoughts here.

      I believe I’ve read, given luxury tax implications and the increasingly punitive repeater penalties, Stanton’s $295 Million could have ended up costing the Dodgers a half Billion dollars.

      1. Yeah, something like that and no matter what anyone says, the luxury tax was one of the reasons the Dodgers did not pull the trigger on a deal for him.

        1. Michael

          The point is the Yankees didn’t let the luxary tax, stop them.

          I didn’t know the difference in money, between the Yankees and the Dodgers, in the 2018 season, but my point is, what will the Dodgers and Yankees numbers be, after the 2018 season?

          1. I am not sure what the numbers will be MJ. I do not look at projected salary’s and such. I have never worried about payroll. I know when the Yankees were owned by Steinbrenner, he never let money keep him from getting players. This group seems very concerned about salary implications in the future and they look ahead. They have salary coming off the books I do know that. They freed up 40 million this year with Crawford and Ethier’s salary’s coming off the books. The Yankees with Stanton are overloaded with outfielders. They still have Ellsbery and Gardner and are probably looking to move both of those guys.

      2. “Good thoughts here”

        You mean like “If they had really wanted Stanton they could have easily made a deal”

        Yeah, I agree. I believe I said as much. They didn’t want him. But that’s ok because they will find 50 home runs, 125 RBIs and 7 WAR on the waiver wire and DL lists. You do know projections have him with AT LEAST 6 WAR through ’21, at least 4 WAR until ’23, and he doesn’t not earn his money until 2026. But, it’s good to plan ahead, right? F’n Yankees. Ef Jeter too.

        1. More thoughts, this time from Olney:

          The Dodgers really like Stanton and have been well aware of his desire to play for them. But in internal discussions, there has been discomfort with the very back end of his contract — Years 8, 9 and 10, for which Stanton will be in his late 30s, he will be owed owed about $96 million, presumably in his waning years of production and defense. The Yankees can project ahead and know that Stanton could shift into a DH role, if necessary; the Dodgers do not have that luxury. The access to the DH, in the end, might be why the Yankees jumped at Stanton and the Dodgers did not.

          1. Wait a minute – years 8,9 and 10? Age 36, 37 and 38.

            So rather than focus on years 1 through 7, to age 35, where he is projected to put up 39 WAR in Los Angeles, (24 the first 4 years) FAZ focused instead on years 2025 through 2027, where he is projected to put up only 6.2 WAR. Hmm. I wonder what WAR will be worth then? Doesn’t matter now does it. The Yankees jumped all over this one.

            I find the FAZ thinking on this to be shortsighted. For a group who claims to be about winning now, leaving 39 WAR on the table feels remiss.

    2. Mr. Norris
      Unfortunately this group of FO personnel will not change. They have been in charge for 3 years and they have let top tier talent go to others almost everytime. That is because their thought process is to use the scrap heap, get injured players and get prospects all in hopes somebody will surface. Also, never, never sign proven good major leaguers. Even if you need them. In my estimation, same thing as cheap like a small market team. The only difference is a small market team truly cannot afford to buy top tier talent, the Dodgers can and don’t and that is what makes this FO really annoying and frustrating

  10. Leaving for California on Monday gang. So I will not be on here much while I am out there. My laptop is mainly used for following my financial obligations. Everyone have a very Merry Christmas and I hope the new year is better for everyone.

    1. Michael

      I hope you and your Dog, have a safe trip to California!

      I know you will be in good company, all the way to California!

  11. Bluto. You are a true and passionate fan. I think you are pretty well informed and keep up on a lot of things I do not. But everything stated here is opinion. They are not all going to be alike. There will be different ideas from everyone. But just because someone looks at things differently than you do does not make them a moron. It just means they do not think about it the way you do. I am old school, that has not and will not change. I like big trades and big signings if for no other reason it gets the fan base excited. Case in point, how excited were all the fans when they traded for Darvish last year? They were pretty fired up. This was the piece that was going to put them over the top. Conversely, how excited were the fans when they traded for Hill? Not so much, as a matter of fact they were down right stumped. Reddick? The outfield was crowded as it was, and Hill was in no means a #1 guy. He was having a good season, but that was about it. Stanton would have created instant buzz and excitement. FBZ seems not to be into that sort of thing. And by the way Bluto, best record in baseball means nothing the next year and nothing if you do not win it all..because in the end, it is that last game that defines your season.

      1. Precisely and that is the point and the big difference. You buy into what they do, and the majority wants it a little different, and that is the point of any argument about this FO, they do not take the big leap.

        1. Well, they went all out to sign Turner and Jansen. They got Darvish. They got lucky with Bellinger and Taylor. Maybe they will sign a couple more and get lucky again.

          Interesting trade ideas at Rumors, involving Davis from Oakland (for Grandal and whoever). Another for Ozuna involving more prospects. Heard another one suggesting we take Castro off the Marlins hands, along with Ozuna of course. They can have and flip Forsythe, and we send some youts too. I have a feeling the dominoes are about to fall. Mets already called on Castro.

          Yankees 6-1 favorites. That didn’t take long. What a lineup they have. Exciting for Yankee fans.

  12. If Stanton’s last 3 years look bad to some, wait until they see what the last 3 years of Machado and Harper look like.

    The FBZ is not going to outbid anyone. They won’t and they can’t.

    1. Maybe they are looking at the last three years of Crawford, Gonzalez, Ethier, Kemp, Kazmir, Manny, Hanley, Josh Beckett and Nick Punto. If we had won a championship somewhere in there maybe it wouldn’t be like this. We didn’t. 5 in a row. 9 of the last 14.

      They will do it their way.

      I still don’t like it. He WANTED to come here! He’s a freakin Yankee now.

    2. That was exactly my point. They still operate like a small market FO. Bluto disagrees, I think he is wrong.

      1. Those who have supported FAZ seem to always be able to justify their actions. I’m trying to keep an open mind about this but frankly I’m just not that impressed. The first two years they spent more and won fewer. This last year we looked good until four flats in a Game 7. Now the MVP wants to come play for us and we say “no thank you”. Feels weird. Feels almost curse worthy.

        1. Those who justify the FBZ refuse to compare them with what other FOs have done.

          Giants won 3 WSs, Yankees are back to being a contender after only a couple years, and guess what by backing out of the Chapman deal we have the Yankees FO a huge assist in their rebuild. And by not seriously bidding for Stanton we probably gave the Yankees another assist.

          Other FOs are just as good if not better than the FBZ. Just my opinion.

    3. YF

      That was my thoughts about Stanton’s last three years.

      And the thing is, they will be getting under the luxury tax by a lot, after the 2018 season.

      Once I saw the Yankees go after Stanton, that upset me, because I knew the Yankees had luxury tax problems too.

      And the Yankees showed me, this is a deal that won’t happen that often, so you better make the deal.

      And the Yankees made this deal over nite!

      The Yankees were thinking about winning a championship, and our front office was worrying about the Dodgers money.

      And if our front office doesn’t change after we get under the luxury tax, I will be very upset!

      Because even the Cubs and the Cardinals go after free agents, that will make there team better!

      Like I said before, I don’t care if they want to try to find that one good player, out of these obsure players, but they have to know when a deal by baseball standards today, is a good deal too

  13. I do not and will not ever profess to understand why Friedman operates the way he does. He has the full support of ownership. So he is going to be around a while sports fans. My thing is this. I always have believed the goal is winning the World Series. Now, the last 5 years the Dodgers have won the west and made it to the series once and they lose by one game. Okay, my gut tells me that if you are that close to winning, a couple of pieces are going to put you over the top. All the numbers he uses should point him in the direction that needs improvement. Why keep putting patches on when you can get a NEW tire for the bus? Makes no sense to me, but then I am no believer in saber metrics. FAZ lovers will point to the 3 years of winning the division since they got here. If that is all their goal is, well, they are doing well, but I do not think they are the genius’s they have been painted to be. Bluto makes his points and they have credibility, but and this is a huge but, the end result is in the end very unsatisfying. If all the want to do is make it to the playoffs, they are doing a great job. Unfortunately for them, it is not good enough for the average fan. Bluto may be satisfied with getting to game 7 and then losing, but you average every day fan is not. As a matter of fact I saw more posts on all the sites, including twitter berating the FO for not getting Verlander instead of Darvish. We all know that they did not want his contract and that is why they did not earnestly pursue him, when he obviously would have improved their chances of winning the big dance. They still could have acquired him after the trade deadline as he was not traded to Houston until August 31st. And who did they get to improve the bench, an over the hill strike out machine in Curtis Granderson, who along with Reddick will go down in the annals of Dodger trades as one of the worst pick ups ever. Oh he was great for a week. After that he was WORSE than Reddick. I do not and will not expect big name acquisition’s from FAZ. So far, 3 years into their reign, that is not their MO. I expect the same old tire repair service we are getting. Patch the tire on the bus, do not spring for a new one. And those who think they are going to go after Harper when he becomes a free agent, you are DREAMING< That guy is going to make more money than Stanton, who will look like a bargain compared to Harper.

    1. Who knows where the cost of WAR will go, but I think it’s safe to say it will be $10 million+ before Stanton starts a decline. He’s only 28.

      Dodgers remain the favorites at 9/2. That surprised me, though I guess it shouldn’t. Yanks tied for second with 2 teams. The “it’s difficult to repeat” clause has Astros also at 6/1, along with Indians. Nationals, Cubs and Red Sox follow up. Marlins are 500/1.

      This guy don’t think much of the trade:

      Doesn’t think much of billionaires in general. I have to agree with him.

      I would think all the veterans on that team will want out. I know I would. I’m sure the phones are ringing in Miami. Yelich, Ozuna and Castro could net a ton of prospects.

      We still look good. Hopefully Kershaw holds it together while Bellinger and Taylor improve. Wonder what the odds of that are. Anyway, we have a number of them under team control so the 5 year window remains open. Might start getting drafty soon. Might not. Who knows. The goal is to remain competitive for years, just like Kasten did in Atlanta.

  14. Moderation again.

    Your filters need to be moderated Scott.

    And why are so few people posting here? Is it because we don’t kiss the ring?

    1. My experience with growing online communities, and it’s what I do for a living, is that people like varied, vibrant discussion with perspectives they can latch onto.

      Once a good mass has been lost it takes time to re-aggregate and foster discussion. The interesting thing about this board is that the posts are usually not driving discussion. That puts even more of a burden on the community members.

  15. Hello. Anybody home?

    Jon Heyman
    Dodgers are said to have asked Marlins to take back some combo of overpriced deals (kaz, mccarthy, a-gon) plus pay significant $. Would have been a 75M plus offset. LA issues: tax plus debt service rule in 2019. So never close to GIancarlo deal.

    I told you they wouldn’t be interested in taking out our trash.

    1. Well, another day and I am still not over the Yankees getting Stanton and not the Dodgers. I just do not understand that those who are supposed to be so smart are so stupid. When Harper and Machedo come out next year they will cost a lot more than Stanton would have cost, he would have been a bargin for sure. Of course we all know they will never sign either of those two free agents. It is not their style. They want no excitement, let alone bettering the team. They are of course a small market FO in a large market and they do not care what the fans want. Even when the Dodgers were losing at least they were exciting and you knew the FO had done what they could with the available money they had. Not anymore.

    2. Badger

      What is that rule 2019, and if that is the luxury tax, why would the Dodgers worry about that, if they are getting so much money off the books, after the 2018 season anyways?

    3. Exactly and to the point, Badger.

      Was money and budget. Not prospects.

      Maybe term too, but I think the tax and the repeater effects were paramount.

      I could be wrongo.

  16. I don’t hate the front office like some, and I thought we needed a top starting pitcher more then Stanton.

    But the more I thought about Stanton, and the kind of player he is, I just thought the Dodgers will never get a chance to get a player like Stanton again.

    And we have missed the big right hand power bat in out line up, for some time now.

    Everyone can talk about the Yankee’s line up with Stanton and Judge in it, but I think Stanton and Cody hitting back to back in our line up, would have been better, because we would have a leftie, rightie, hitting back to back.

    And I think like Badger and Michael said, those three years at the end of Stanton’s contract, will not look that bad, especially after we see what Harper and Machado get.

    And I knew we were not going to get Machado and Harper, and I didn’t want the Dodgers to get those players, but I felt Stanton was different from those other two players.

    I do agree that teams usually never get the best of a deal, when it is such a long contract, like Stanton’s contract is.

    But you would think the Yankees would know first hand, about ten year contracts, more then most teams, and that didn’t stop them, from going after Stanton.

    And that is why I was so upset!

    After all, the Dodgers are right behind the Yankees,, when it comes to money.

    And it isn’t like the Yankees don’t have a good Gm, because there GM has been in that position for a very long time, and he just got his contact extended, so he knows what he is doing!

    And he made that deal so quickly!

    And there is always the discussion about how much money a home town kid like Stanton, would bring in for the Dodgers too.

    It was just an upsetting day to wake up and find out the Yankees made a deal over night to get Stanton, after finding out the day before, the Angels got Ohtani.

    I agree it is probably nicer to live in Orange County, but I think the Dodgers have a much better organization then the Angels have, and the Dodgers have a much better baseball tradition, then the Angels too.

    And the Angels have to allow Albert to DH so it isn’t going to be as easy for the Angels, as some think, to play Ohtani that often.

    And I don’t think the Angels have such a flexible line up like we do, because I think Scioscia is still a old time, kind of manager.

    I think the only thing that will probably be interesting at the winter meetings when it comes to the Dodgers, will the front office move Grandal, and for who.

    Because other then that, I don’t see the front office doing much, except building the bullpen and finding a set up guy.

    1. Good points MJ. I think what bothers me the most about the whole thing is that the Yankees did not give up all that much to get him. Starlin Castro and 2 prospects. Miami is on the hook for only 30 million of Stanton’s contract and will pay only 3 million a year to do that instead of all of it at once. So the Yankees take on 265 million. That is going to look like peanuts compared to what Harper is going to command. One thing I do believe about this whole thing. I do not think the Dodgers were ever seriously in on Stanton. A couple of reasons, first, you never not once heard of any Dodger players names out there as trade bait, unlike SF and the Cardinals who put the names out there early, second, and most important, almost the first story’s I read were that the Dodgers were concerned with the luxury tax ramifications of making the deal. Almost immediately as soon as I read that it flashed to me, no deal will be made. I do not hate the front office. I just think that they operate in a way that does not make any sense sometimes, and that while they are committed to keeping the Dodgers competitive, they are not prone to take the big leap, and acquire big ticket players. They have not done so in the 3 years they have been in charge. There is a story in yardbarker this morning that the Dodgers are in discussions with Miami about Ozuna. If they were to make a deal for him, I am afraid you will probably not see Toles out there next year.

      1. Who would you rather have in a platoon with Ozuna, Pederson or Toles? Who do you think Fiedman prefers? We still have a crowded outfield.

        I think you are right about FAZ interest in Stanton. They may have inquired just for drill but if Bluto is right they decided early not to take on that contract. I still think if it’s because of the last three years it’s freakin lame. Just my opinion.

          1. I understand MJ.

            And you’re right. I wonder if Jeter and his subordinates were ok with doing NY a solid.

        1. I think Ozuna is an everyday player. Guy played 159 games last year, batted .312 with 37 homers and 124 RBI’s which far outdoes anything any of out outfielders did. Why on earth would you platoon that bat? Makes Toles and Pederson and even Thompson trade bait. He hit .305 against lefty’s and .313 against RHP. More homers against RH so you need neither LH hitter. FAZ might like platoons but as long as he is hitting there is no reason to platoon this guy and he is a more than decent defender. Plus 2 years reasonable team control.

      2. Michael

        Good point about not hearing any player’s names, I didn’t even think about that.

        As you know, I thought we needed a top starter more, but I realized, the Dodgers wouldn’t get another chance to get a player like Stanton, that often.

        And Cody and Stanton, hitting back to back, would be a real game changer for the team.

        But since we didn’t get Stanton, I rather see Toles get a chance now.

        I don’t know where I saw this, but I think I read, that Ozuna only has two years left on his contract, and it would take more prospects, to get Ozuna, so I rather see Toles in left.

        But I still think Toles or anyone, needs to win the job in left.

        1. If they get Ozuna, I would not bank on Toles getting that shot. Ozuna gives them pretty good power from the right side and he hits lefty’s and righty’s really well

          1. I believe they are in serious talks with Miami about him. Depends on what the Marlins want back. The guy is obviously pretty good offensively, will be cheaper than someone like Martinez, and is 27 years old. Marlins are in a rebuild mode.

    2. Great point MJ.

      It stings to have a great player available at a discount and wanting to come to your team.

      But this Front Office is centered on building around value and a sustained business model.

      They’ve done great so far (BA’s organization of the year, best record, great trades, great farm system), why not trust them going forward?

      1. Reasoned response.

        One point – great trades? They’ve made a bunch of trades, some good, some not so good. Great? Plural great? I think if Taylor can do it again a few more times I would call that a great trade. Don’t see any others.

        I’ll say again, I think they’ve worked the periphery pretty not too bad. I also believe the system was stacked when they got here and the inherited a 94 win ball club. So, you know, it’s not like they built this jugger not. (see what I did there)

        I do understand what it is they are attempting to do. And I say again – it might work.

        1. Badger
          I see what you did there. I agree wholeheartedly. They did inherent a 94 win team but I will be extremely impressed if they win 104 again, won’t you? That is like sinking a 50 ft putt and somebody say do it again. Grading their trading skills on a scale of 1-5, I give them 1 and that is very liberal, I think.

          1. In their entire history the team has won more than 100 games 7 times. 4 in Brooklyn and 3 in LA. They won over 100 twice in a 3 year span in the 40’s.

        2. Taylor is a great trade even if he does nothing. Look at what they gave up.

          Grandad a great trade.

          KIke and Barnes for Gordon.

          Hill for middling players.

          The Alex Wood swindle.

          1. Great?

            The Manny trade was great. The Pedro trade was great. Shaw for Konerko was a great trade. Nolan Ryan for Jim Fregosi, Frank Robinson for Milt Papas, Gary Carter for 4 nobody’s, Piazza to the Mets, Babe Ruth for $25,000, Christy Mathewson for Amos Rusie, Cy Young for a suit and $300 (admit it, you didn’t see that coming ) ….. those are great trades. The ones you mention? Meh, good, not great.

          2. I guess perspective. Not sure how any of those referenced trades are “meh”, but it’s perspective.

          3. great: colossal gigantic fantastic humongous exalted glorious heroic outstanding renowned remarkable exceptional momentous miraculous phenomenal astonishing prodigious unparalleled wondrous extraordinary egantastic betazeply docious and gnarly dude

            meh: I’m bored

            Ok, somewhere in between great and meh

          4. Of that bunch there is not one single great trade. The only thing great about the Wood trade was unloading a huge BLUNDER in Olivera. Yeah, they have gotten results from Wood and Avilan, but that does not make it a great trade. A great trade makes immediate impact on your team. Kike and Barnes, you forgot Hatcher was part of that deal and so was Haney. It also included Cairo going to the Marlins. Haney was traded for Kendricks, and Hatcher was a bust from start to finish. Kike was ok the first year and has stunk since. Barnes did not really contribute until this year and will probably end up being the best part of the trade. But a great trade? Not even close, Hill was a rental, and only won 3 games, not even close to a great trade and they could not use him for almost 5 weeks after they traded for him. Please, he is more of a free agent acquisition than a great trade. Grandal was and is far from a great trade. In your eyes maybe, but Kemp has still put up better numbers since the trade than granny ground out. Like Badger said, Manny was a great trade, Getting Carl Furillo was a great trade as was trading for Pee Wee Reese. Great trades make impacts, none of those you mentioned did anything worth noting when they were made. By the way Badger, Ruth cost the Yankees 100,000. That was the amount Harry Frazee needed to finance his Broadway play, No No Nanette.

          5. I think it was $125,000. That’s what I meant to type.

            Good analysis on those trades. Taylor was a 4.8 WAR
            player this year. If that’s who he is year after year, I could elevate to great.

          6. Just checked Badger. Babe Ruth trade is rated at the 2nd worst in baseball history, did not see what the worst was. The Yankees paid Frazee exactly 100,000 cash. That was all.

          7. They caught lightning in a bottle in Taylor, but he was not all that impressive last year. Taylor will be a great trade if he continues through his Dodger career doing what he did last year. Otherwise he might be nothing more than a one year wonder and we all know how often that has happened in the MLB’s long history.

          8. Really interesting.

            Michael says a great trade is about impacts. I never, ever thought of it that way. I saw it as getting much better in return for what you give up.

            When you trade something of nominal or no value and get something of value, it’s a good trade in my book. When you trade something of nominal or no value and get an all-star, it’s a great trade in my book.

            Grandal went for Matt Kemp. Matt Kemp has NO VALUE. He was literally traded for the ability to waive Olivera. Grandal was an all-star. Great trade.

            Alex Wood was traded for the aforementioned Olivera. Wood was an all-star (a starter no less.) Great trade.

            Hill is the #2 starter on the team with the best record in MLB. He was trade for three prospects who have done bupkus. Great trade.

            We agree on Chris Taylor.

            Heck, even though Brandon Morrow was a MiLB free agent, it’s the same player evaluation team who evaluated him as the above.

      2. Michael

        That is funny I haven’t heard the Dodgers are in serious talks, with any players.

        And I did hear the Cardinals are in serious talks with the Marlins, about Ozuna.

        1. Taylor had a very good year, and he worked hard in the off season, to make himself be a better player, and I wouldn’t bet against his hard work!

        2. It was reported on a site called I like it because it is usually pretty on target and it is also a place where you can read all the rumors, and not only for MLB, but all of the other sports too. It was also posted on twitter and reported by Bob Nightingale.

          1. Nothing is immanent, that is true, but since they are all now in one place and the meetings start in the morning, there is a good chance that face to face things will happen.

      1. Oh. Church.

        Now I feel bad for bitching.

        I’m sorry.

        But damm, it’s been 8 hours. Church for 8 hours? What, did they go to a weekend sweat lodge or something? My post is going to become irrelevant. I hate it when that happens. Irrelevance. I may need therapy. Again.

        1. Badger

          When you you brought up that weekend sweat lodge, you cracked me up!

          And that is something I shouldn’t be laughing about, if you are talking about that place, in Arizona!

          But thanks for the laugh!

  17. Don’t know this will work but this is the post in moderation:

    Who knows where the cost of WAR will go, but I think it’s safe to say it will be $10 million+ before Stanton starts a decline. He’s only 28.

    Dodgers remain the favorites at 9/2. That surprised me, though I guess it shouldn’t. Yanks tied for second with 2 teams. The “it’s difficult to repeat” clause has Astros also at 6/1, along with Indians. Nationals, Cubs and Red Sox follow up. Marlins are 500/1.

    This guy don’t think much of the trade:

    Doesn’t think much of billionaires in general. I have to agree with him.

    I would think all the veterans on that team will want out. I know I would. I’m sure the phones are ringing in Miami. Yelich, Ozuna and Castro could net a ton of prospects.

    We still look good. Hopefully Kershaw holds it together while Bellinger and Taylor improve. Wonder what the odds of that are. Anyway, we have a number of them under team control so the 5 year window remains open. Might start getting drafty soon. Might not. Who knows. The goal is to remain competitive for years, just like Kasten did in Atlanta.

    1. Only 2 years at $10-11 millionper year. Morrow was projected at $28-30 million for 3 years, so this was lower than projected – the Cubs did well by paying a little bit more to limit it to two years. And the FBZ could not match that?

  18. Greggerson signing with the Cardinals………dominos are falling and FAZ is FAILING!……………………….AGAIN!

  19. I think the writing was on the wall when they did not pick up Verlander even though we had Ethier coming off the books. We just did not see it for what it was.

    Now will they at least trade Grandal and get some value (and cut payroll!) before his trade value declines?

    1. YF

      Will it looks right now like they are trying to make a deal like they did, with Darvish.

      And I don’t think waiting things out, is always the best game plan.

      The Dodgers are the second wealthiest team in baseball, and I am still upset the Yankees schooled this front office, and did it as quickly as they did!

      1. Waiting is usually a good plan if you know how to pounce, like the Yankees and the Astros. The FBZ do know know how to not pounce.

  20. Here is how much trading has changed in the majors. When the Dodgers acquired Carl Furillo in 1941, they were so impressed with him that they bought the entire Reading franchise just to secure his services……..doubt any team would do that today…..

  21. Jack Morris and Alan Trammel voted into the hall by the veterans committee. Garvey and Tommy John fall short.

      1. I don’t tweet. I have emailed him before, but I really don’t want to again.

        Shall we talk among ourselves about the beer video thread nobody is posting on?

        Think I’ll read a book. Got a new one on dream interpretation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)