Tuesday, February 27, 2024
Home > Analysis > And The Dance Begins: Jansen, Turner Just Say No To Dodgers

And The Dance Begins: Jansen, Turner Just Say No To Dodgers

The Dodgers just missed the 2016 World Series, but you would be hard pressed to find someone who would argue that was because of Justin Turner or Kenley Jansen. In fact, the boys in blue advanced as far as they did because of the work that Jansen and Turner put in this past season.

The Dodgers extended mediocre qualifying offers to the two (one year, with less than 10% raises), which practically guaranteed their star third baseman and elite closer would test the waters of free agency. Why the Dodgers took this route baffles me, as the team could ill-afford to lose Turner’s defense and right-handed power at the plate, or Jansen’s willingness to lay it all out for multiple inning saves if that’s what the team needs.

Jansen and Turner will almost certainly be courted by the Yankees, World Series champion Cubs, and the hated Giants. Those teams will surely put up multi-year, superstar salaried contracts that the Dodgers’ will be forced to top if they want to keep one or both.

If the Dodgers decide they will only commit to one, I’m hoping it’s JT.

Turner came of age with the Dodgers, improving steadily in each of his three seasons in LA. He’s not a flashy third baseman, but his defense is rock solid. He put up Defensive Runs Saved (+7) and Ultimate Zone Rating (+14) numbers in 2016. He’s also become a certified power hitter, launching a career-best 27 homers.


Despite his propensity to surrender ninth inning home runs too often for my comfort, I would welcome Jansen’s return to Chavez Ravine in 2017. I’m just not so sure the Dodgers feel the same way.

They should have locked up Jansen with a serious, multi-year contract after 2015. They didn’t, and then they actively sought closer Aroldis Chapman in 2016. The deal fell through, but rumors abound that the Dodgers are trying for Chapman again. Sorry, those of you who don’t want Chapman in LA because of his personal issues, but it seems the Dodgers are more interested in him than Jansen.

All of which leads me to believe the Dodgers are actively considering life without Jansen, despite his brilliant 1.83 ERA and 0.67 WHIP in 2016. He showed the baseball world what he’s made of in the postseason, when he recorded three saves and a 0.86 WHIP, including three perfect innings in Game 6 of the NLCS.

The Dodgers figured he didn’t even merit a 10% raise.

PITTSBURGH, PA - SEPTEMBER 01: Kenley Jansen #74 of the Los Angeles Dodgers pitches against the Pittsburgh Pirates during the game on September 1, 2011 at PNC Park in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The Dodgers defeated the Pirates 6-4. (Photo by Justin K. Aller/Getty Images)
(Photo by Justin K. Aller/Getty Images)

Strike up the band! We’re just getting started.



Oscar Martinez

I was born in the shadow of Dodger Stadium and immediately drenched in Dodger Blue. Chavez Ravine is my baseball cathedral, Vin Scully was the golden voice of summer all my life, and Tommy Lasorda remains the greatest Dodgers manager ever. My favorite things are coffee, beer, and the Dodgers beating the Giants. I also blog about my baseball card hobby at All Trade Bait, All the Time.

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:

Oscar Martinez
I was born in the shadow of Dodger Stadium and immediately drenched in Dodger Blue. Chavez Ravine is my baseball cathedral, Vin Scully was the golden voice of summer all my life, and Tommy Lasorda remains the greatest Dodgers manager ever. My favorite things are coffee, beer, and the Dodgers beating the Giants. I also blog about my baseball card hobby at All Trade Bait, All the Time.

109 thoughts on “And The Dance Begins: Jansen, Turner Just Say No To Dodgers

    1. You’ve negotiated before. I don’t know, and either do you – context is everything?

      When would they have tried to extend him? 2015? 2014? How many years? What were similarly-situated relievers making? What was the market then?

      They will get nothing but a pick if he leaves and the pick’s value won’t be as great as Jansen is now for 2017, and won’t likely be as valuable in 5 years either.

      They don’t have Jansen’s equal or (or close) within the organization to close now. If they sign someone else, he either won’t be as good (Melancon) or will cost just as much if not more (Chapman).

      1. All I can say in regards to eternal options is basically what you already said, and for Baez is NOT a replacement for Kenley at all. we have seen enough of Baez’s act in last 3 PS. Some have suggested him but Baez does not have the make up at this time to assume that late inning role, especially at crunch time.


    3. Last season I wrote about my wish the Dodgers had signed Jansen to a multi-year contract, and I still wish they had.
      That said, it’s not my specialty to speculate on contract offers and terms, so I won’t this time, and I couldn’t possibly answer about what another person would accept.

  1. Good day Mark! Good question, as many posters felt Jansen should have been extended earlier than this. As to what they should have offered him? IDK There are other closers out there but Jansen IS my first choice. my big concern is if Dodgers let him walk to the rival Giants. Freidman would obviously take some rath for that but perhaps if that took place Dodgers signed an alternative, (Chapman or Melancon) . Turner as many say should be the FA signed first and foremost, as there is no other real replacement in the farm for him nor anyone on FA market. Longoria, who Freidman knows well would cost Dodgers a plethora of prospects and I DO NOT want to see Bellinger involved in any such deal. Only issue to consider for Turner is that he was not good at all against LHP, but neither was anyone else on this team not named Seager. I understand that JT is working to fix that this off season.

  2. Good luck signing either one. This FO has a plan and it does not include high priced FA’s even if they are your own, even if their leaving creates holes in the lineup. If it happens I’ll be shocked, based on their practices so far. They especially don’t like any FA past 30, unless of course they are recovered from a dumpster or discovered packing groceries.

    They want to grow the team from their own farm system, so therefore any and all draft choices are coveted. Not all the farm kids are ready (still two years away), so they will give lip service to ‘competing now’ (trading for “elite” talent) and continue to dumpster dive to fill in the roster. If your definition of success is making the playoffs, that has happened, but there is no way CK plus the smucks from the baseball dumpster make this an elite team.

    Guggenheim will probably be gone in 5 years, will Friedman and Zadi?

  3. My point is that if the Dodgers wanted to re-sign Kenley after 2015, it would have probably taken $75 million/5 years. He would have signed that, but is he worth that? I don’t think so. If they had offered less, no way he would have signed it.

  4. Lets do this:

    Trout to Nationals.
    McCarthy to Nationals
    Gonzales and Roark to Angels.
    Trea Turner to Dodgers
    De Leon, Verdugo, Kazmir, Puig to Angels

    Dodgers use salary savings on Kazmir and McCarthy to help sign J Turner and Jansen and Melencon.

    If somebody like Solarte were needed to make the trade then I would trade Gonzales to San Diego to get Solarte. Then use the Gonzales money to sign Cespedes?

      1. While Angels are drawing people to the stadium that might not last if they keep finishing in last place and trading Trout is their ticket out of last place. They don’t have pitching and their Farm is worst in the MLB.

          1. You could play along or just act like a fuddy duddy —A fuddy-duddy (or fuddy duddy or fuddy-dud) is a person who is fussy while old-fashioned, traditionalist, conformist, or conservative, sometimes almost to the point of eccentricity or geekiness.

        1. RF Toles
          2B Trea Turner
          SS Seager
          3B J Turner
          CF Pederson
          LF Ethier / Thompson
          1B Bellinger / Ruh / SVS
          C Grandal / Barnes

    1. I know how much you want Turner and it would take hauling in a Trout type player, but in your scenario the Nats get Mike Trout and McCarthy for Turner and Roark. As much as I like Turner too they haven’t given up enough in that deal to get Trout.

      The Dodgers get T.Turner and salary relief(for free-agents) for McCarthy, Deleon, Verdugo, Kazmir, Puig, and Gonzalez.

      Angels get Gonzalez, Roark, Deleon, Verdugo, Kazmir, and Puig for Trout. I agree that they won’t want Gonzalez when they have two slow first baseman. I believe if they deal Trout they will do everything possible to move Pujols in the deal especially if you’re going to ask them to take on nearly $80 million worth of salary in Kazmir and Gonzo.

      1. By pairing Roark and Gonzales I assumed everyone would assume that both players came from the Nationals. Yes I did misspell Gonzalez but still it was Gio and not Adrian that was going from the Nats to the Angels.

        I thought someone would suggest that it would take Turner and Strasburg to get Trout instead of Turner and Gonzalez and Roark.

        The Angels have three first basemen so why would I include Adrian in a trade to the Angels without taking one of those three back? You might ask yourself why would he do that other than being stupid and then say maybe he wasn’t and then figure it out that I was talking about Gio and not Adrian.

  5. My guess? The Dodgers would like to resign both of them. However, they’re going to let the free agent market set the floor, rather than extend a generous offer outright and have JT and/or KJ use that on the market as leverage. Then they’ll make the decision re value.

  6. Let’s trade…I know. Steven Strasburg and Max Scherfzer to the Dodgers for – Ethier, Kazmir, McCarthy and a bag of balls.

    Please – let’s get real.

  7. “Strike up the band” 🙂

    Seriously Beltre walked, the Dodgers survived and actually made the playoffs two years later. Relief pitchers are ubiquitous.

  8. Brilliant, persuasive and knowledgeable. I wish I could debate like that.

    And of course, to make such an argument in a court of law would get you a long way too – like in jail.

    1. Jail? For words?

      Yes, jail for words. Why? Because bloodsuckers in the “justice” system would take those words as a threat, charge multiple felonies, put Bum in prison for a few decades then pin medals on their own chests telling all what heroes they are.

      The American experiment is coming to an end. Everything we’ve touched has turned to dust. RIP.

        1. Been going downhill since 2000. Witnessing the fall of an empire. And watching the Dodgers grind gears for decades hasn’t helped.

          No team out there is going to trade us their Seager’s for our McCarthy’s and to continue reading it is f’n ridonkulous. Then the lawyer speaks about sending someone to jail for exercising free speech. That ain’t funny to me. Yeah bad day. Stand by. The bad days are going to get worse – for US citizens and for Dodger fans.

          1. Badger

            I’m sorry to hear that.

            I wondered where you have been.

            All of those lobbyists, is telling me, that it is not going to be that different, from a former regime.

          2. It will be a bit different now MJ. Nobody knows for sure but the lobbyists involved now are even scarier than what we’ve seen leading up to this. By a former regime I assume you mean from 2002-2009? Yeah, it worsened then, but it actually began before that.

            I’ve been watching here, and doing a lot of reading. Not much Dodgers news and until our Free Agents sign there won’t be much to talk about. The trade for Sale and Frazier is the most interesting I’ve read so far. It would take our top prospects, and for that reason I wouldn’t do it, but Sale and Kershaw for a couple of years would set off alarms in SF, and Frazier is actually younger than Turner and a 3.6 oWAR player. That’s a trade that could actually happen.

        1. Yeah, I didn’t understand the histrionics. An outburst in court disrupts the legal process. It’s a bit silly and over the top to conflate what is a reasonable and long established courtroom protocol in maintaining order in a courtroom to the traducing of the First Amendment and the collapse of the Republic.

    2. Rick, my reply was not meant to be brilliant, persuasive and knowledgeable. It was intended to be an appropriate response to your comment. I bet you hear that a lot.

      I would like to have Trea Turner on the Dodgers but when I have said that everybody here says there is no way that the Nats would trade him so I created a scenario where they would. Now everybody wants to say the Angels won’t trade Trout. That is not set in stone.

      Lighten up. Some think big and some think small. You are a small thinker and are risk adverse like all lawyers.

      1. Guys, you got to remember: Anyone can post anything on the Internet. Anyone can object to anything that was posted. The only legitimate and meaningful objector is the site owner, for only he has the right to halt your posting activities on that site. Anytime you post something, there is a likelihood that someone will disagree with your thesis. Politely or otherwise. Fortunately, because this is the Internet, the only thing thrown will be words. If you disagree with a poster, say what you will and let it go, you will never change his mind nor he yours. Not picking on Phred but he likes massive complicated way-out-there deals that don’t happen very often, like never, I reacted to them a few times like Dodgerrick did last night and the result was as unsatisfactory for me as I’m sure it was for Dodgerrick. But he didn’t throw the knockout punch at me at least… Anyway, I learned he just thinks a bit different than I do and it’s no big thing. He has just as much right to post whatever he wants as I do and I learned there was no profit in disagreeing with him in an offensive manner. I just think to myself that Phred has just made another ridiculous trade proposal (my right to think that) and go on to the next posting. Or amuse myself reading the resulting brouhaha and think how smart I am not to be involved in it. See? Even an old dog like me can learn something…

        1. That would appear to be a brown skin man punching out a white dude.

          Excellent choice of representative cartoon Wonder.

          1. Why? I think Phred is white, no idea on DodgerRick. Race did not enter into it, I just picked the funniest cartoon. Are you looking for racial problems?

          2. No. Not me. Just thought under the national circumstances, it was worth noting. People of color are a bit freaked out this week. Perhaps you’ve noticed?

      2. Badger

        Yes that one appointee, is way far to the right.

        And a couple more, will probably be has beens, that are trying to grasp there last touch of power.

        1. There are some very scary people about to take center stage MJ. I’ve been doing a lot of reading about them. They do not represent my values, nor do they represent what’s left of middle class America. It’s going to be a very bumpy ride.

      3. You are a presumptive snot. Yeah, people say F you to me frequently- not. You obviously are unable to accept criticism so strike out. Sounds like – wait for it – small- mindedness.

        Most people can disagree reasonably. Coarseness and profanity add nothing to any discussion.

        1. You’re right. Coarseness and profanity add nothing the any discussion. Calling someone a presumptive snot probably wasn’t particularly fruitful, either.

          1. Are you adding me to your list of people you want to do battle with Patch? One of the reasons I don’t frequent this site as much as I used to is due to all the bickering and you are one of the people that bickers.

    3. Dodger rick

      I don’t think Bum planned on taking that to court.

      He just wanted to make a line up, that was to his liking.

    1. Yeah, that’s how the rest of MLB views the Dodgers, “lets gang rape the Dodgers”!!!

      Look for NO big trades. Sign Turner, beef up the bullpen (including a closer), get some right-handed mashers to platoon with what we got, do “something” about 2nd base and “Let’s Play Ball”!!

      Stay the Course!! It could be worse.

      P.S. Monitor Hill’s asking price.

      1. As an attempt to engage in reasonable debate I would counter that your description of gang rape is both highly inappropriate and wildly off base.

        For all the reasons mentioned the foundation of that trade makes sense. You guys who keep barking about win now should be all over that. Chris Sale is a legit #1 in his prime and Todd Frazier is a 30 rear old 3.6 oWAR player that plays legit defense. If Turner leaves, we get a pick, which is something that gives FAZ an erection, we get an All Star third baseman and we strengthen an obvious weak link on our roster – starting pitching. I’m not saying I would do this as I’m looking at 2018 and beyond, but that is the kind of trade that could actually happen.

        1. Badger: “You guys who keep barking about win now should be all over that.”

          You talking to me? I say COMPETE now, COMPETE later, COMPETE always!! If the asking price for Sale is what is proposed in the article, PASS!! That trade would have the Sox grabbing the Dodgers by the p_____!!!

          So my description of gang rape is “highly inappropriate and wildly off base”? How come it gave you an erection?

          1. You see? It’s impossible to have an intelligent conversation with you.

            Win now didn’t work. And gang rape is something only the hopelessly ignorant would make light of.

            Where’s that ignore option?

          2. Badger: “And gang rape is something only the hopelessly ignorant would make light of.”

            What a pompous ass you are! First, you cry over the election in multiple posts! Then you want to scold me for the “micro aggression” of using the term “Gang Rape”.

            Spare us your crocodile tears!!

            YOUR candidate and hero, Crooked Hillary Clinton, IS someone who is hopelessly ignorant (your definition) for truly making light of gang rape. At least, quit crying/pouting about the ignorant old hag not being elected President before casting the first stone will you?


        2. Not to step in it……but I had mentioned ‘keeping’ Frazier in the trade this past off season. Questioned it then and said that the Dodgers finished 3rd in that trade and have been a proponent of trading for Sale (and Frazier) as insurance against both Turner and Gonzalez. Sale is 1 of the top 5 pitchers in the game today. Obviously the Sox will want as much as they can get but the Dodgers with Puig and Urias being the ring leaders will be better than anything else they will be offered.

          Way too many of you think all prospects are going to be bona fide all stars…..that is not being realistic. Urias, Puig, Calhoun, Stripling, Chris Anderson, Barnes and a class A prospect.

          As I had said before I would still attempt to sign Turner. If that would happen then Gonzalez needs to be traded. JT gets Gonzalez money. Frazier gets Turner’s money. Sale gets Kendrick/Ruiz’s money and payroll has not went up.

    2. Badger

      I read that article, and I think it is better to use money to sign Turner, then give up prospects.

      Because some of the prospects, and young players he mentioned, we know something about them.

      And why give up four or five prospects, to get Sale, to get two prospects, from not signing Kenley and Turner.

      We know more about Joc, and Urias, then we will know, about who we will get with those number one picks.

      I just think if your the Dodgers, why give up those prospects, when you have plenty of money, to sign one of your top players, that is vital to your team.

      Turner is going to get paid, but he won’t be getting an outrageous contract, like what Greinke got.

      That is because Turner is older, and has had injury problems.

      And some teams might wonder if Turner will continue to produce like this, because only a couple years ago, Turner was merely a utility player.

      And every other team except the Dodgers, will have to give up a first round pick, to sign Turner.

      Teams having to give up a number one pick, is also working against Kenley.

      Chapman and Melancon, don’t have that number one pick attached to them.

      This is why I say if the Dodgers don’t sign Turner, it is on this front office, because the Dodgers have some things working in there favor, when it comes to Turner, that other teams don’t have.

      And the things that work against Turner, will probably keep his offers from getting so outrageous, by baseball standards of today.

      1. I don’t disagree MJ.

        I’m just saying what I think to be true. If we re-sign Turner, then we don’t need Todd Frazier. Frankly, looking at the two of them, I prefer Frazier. He plays every day and isn’t a FA until 2018. Maybe we extend him. And I don’t know how long it will take to Bellinger to become less a strike out hitter but I think a comparison to Joc Pederson can be made. If AA pitchers can strike him out I’m sure Major League pitchers will find a way to do it. He’s a .267 minor league hitter. I think he may need another year. Urias and DeLeon are very good prospects. Would I trade them for Sale? Maybe. Would you?

        1. Badger

          I know you were just trying to show an example of the way, that this front office might think.

          As you know, I don’t want another all or nothing type of hitter, in this line up.

          Fraizer has mostly been just that, and that is why I wouldn’t want him.

          I also wonder about Bellinger, like you do, because Joc actually hit at a better average in the minors, then Bellinger has.

          And we all know, that Joc is still just learning how to hit.

          I think Turner is not only the most important bat in our line up.

          I also think he is one of the fibers, that holds this team together.

          And he not only hits for a decent average, he is a pretty good clutch hitter too.

          I know his age, and a possible decline, is the problem about giving Turner a multi year contract, but I would bet on Turner.

          It would be great to sign Turner to a over paid three year contract, instead of four years, but I think it will be the latter.

          And this front office
          has made worse bets then this one would be.

          I also think that Turner will be working on hitting lefties better, in the off season, so I believe he will improve on that too.

      2. I also wonder whether Turner can keep producing that way. The bottom line isn’t what it would take to sign him but what you can live with if he signs and falters. If someone else signs him, we do the best we can without him. I’ve said it before, I’m glad that’s FAZ’s decision, not mine. And us critics will eat him up; If he signs Turner, he paid too much; If Turner goes bad, he should have seen that coming; If someone else signs him, then FAZ is cheap. No matter what he does, he can’t win…

        1. I think they can.

          Make a legit offer. Just like they did with Greinke. If he chooses to move on, as a free agent that’s his choice. We have no replacement in the system, but we do have the depth of prospects to replace him. So, replace him.

        2. Wondering

          I agree with you about that, but they signed up, to make these type of decisions.

          And they are making there own good money.

  9. Gonna be a long winter without people like Bum sticking their head above the parapet.

    His post was intended to create debate. Job done as far as I can see.

    1. Very true Watford but I was hoping for a different kind of debate. I think I will comment again and then keep replying to myself to demonstrate the kind of dialogue I would prefer.

      It gets old when all I read in here is about signing Turner and Jansen or trading for Braun or signing Cespedes, or rehashing THE TRADE, or criticizing/supporting FAZ. That has already been said in here ad nauseam –(ad ˈnôzēəm/adverb–referring to something that has been done or repeated so often that it has become annoying or tiresome).

        1. I prefer to think I am good company, I have a sense of humor, and a pretty reasonable outlook……sometimes I veer off the path…….

      1. Check and recheck there Bum. I always like the fact that you think in all directions instead of the tunnel vision I sometimes feel the FAZTER has. Creative thinking keeps us young! I propose a trade for Longoria, then they know how much they are spending instead of trying to reel Turner in. My idea is posted below. Might take some really creative thinking to get it done, but I think it solves 3 problems in one fell swoop!

  10. Morning all. Some spirited jabber I see. The thing is this, we can all sit here and postulate and dream and make insane trades with our minds, but not one of us, even Mark, have a clue what is going on in the FAZMASTERS mind. We know we have 9 free agents out there and that they want maybe 3 of them back. Whether or not the FO steps up and spends money on those guys is a mystery. What we DO know, is that spending large amounts of money is not in their MO so far. They have been, and this is not a criticism, preferring to do business by getting short term low risk high reward players, or making trades they feel will give the team depth. Now they might feel that taking on some salary for a couple of players will not hurt them too much. Then again I do not think they pursue the really high dollar player. I have read a couple of reports that say they really want Chapman. But I have also read where he wants 100 million dollars for 5 years. I do not see them signing that kind of deal with him or Kenley. It is highly possible they go an entirely different direction. We will see. The next couple of weeks will tell us a lot. I do not know which way they will turn and look for upgrades so right along with all of you I will be just as surprised as you are. They signed a former Buc’s draft pick to a minor league deal. Stetson Allie, former pitcher, now OF-1B…..lots of power, not much contact.

  11. I’d take a top closer over a good third baseman any day, if that is the choice. The team needs at least to keep Jansen and get a solid, healthy #2 starter. I’m not sure Hill is that guy, but I’d keep him and still go after a #2. All the other injured guys can duke it out for #4-5 with the young guys. Or the bullpen.

  12. If forced to make a choice, I go with an everyday player. Especially an All Star. I get that late inning pitchers are important. We’ve seen that often the 7th inning is the place to save the game, something Roger and I have been saying for years. Stack the bell pen with great arms and share the duty. I spend $75-$100 million on starters and hitters. But, that’s me.

    1. I agree that they need to spend $ on players that are out there everyday. Which leads me to think that they might re-check into trading for Longoria. He solves 3rd, might tie him in with a trade for Archer. That would give us 3 pretty solid starters. If they can talk the Rays into throwing in Logan Forsythe, they kill 3 birds with one stone. It might take a lot, but it makes a whole lot of sense too. You get 2 pretty good power hitters and an up and coming RH starter. What would it take? Maybe a 3rd team involved and some creative thinking. Just an out of the box idea. I like getting those 2 better than trading for Braun. They could probably put Puig in that deal because Tampa would probably love a Cuban star down there.

      1. Michael

        I think they would have to give the Rays way to much to make that deal.

        Because I think the Rays are still mad that Friedman left.

        The Rays made that deal with the Giants, under Friedman’s nose, at the trade deadline.

        I think there was more to that move with the Giants, then just making a good deal.

        1. MJ, hello there, and Giants main idea, or so it seems that they went and got Matt Moore at the deadline was with the Dodgers in mind mainly because of their well chronicled struggles against LHP. As far as dealing with the Rays for those mentioned, I DO NOT do any deal with them if they are asking for Bellinger.

          1. PDF

            It was said that Friedman was negotioaiating with the Rays heavily at the trade deadline.

            I know Friedman wasn’t going for Moore, but it is really funny, that the Giants were able to make this deal with the Rays, for Moore.

            And Friedman came away with nothing, from the Rays.

  13. Plugins news for those of you requesting more interactive comments:
    I haven’t been able to find a plugin for emoticons that will work with our version of the site.
    Only found one plugin to allow an “ignore” option (the same one recommended by Wondering)..
    That plugin hasn’t been updated in over two years and I don’t feel comfortable installing such an outdated plugin here.
    My suggestion (for now) is ignore the old fashioned way: when you see a user’s name you want to ignore, just scroll down without reading. 😉
    I haven’t given up on the requests, and I’m open if someone finds a plugin we can use.
    PS: The comment box will turn type into simple emoticons 😀

    1. Be glad to search for plug-ins that will work. What version of WordPress software are dealing with? Oh, forgot. Many thanks for your efforts.

      1. Extensive search didn’t turn up anything. You might consider using the old plugin. As long as it works, it works. When it screws up, dump it.

  14. Does Oscar, the author of this post, not understand the purpose and role of a qualifying offer?

    The value of the qualifying offer, which is determined annually by averaging the top 125 player salaries from the previous year, will be worth $15.8MM this offseason. All qualifying offers are for the same duration (one year) and the same amount (i.e., $15.8MM for 2015-16).

    The sole purpose of the qualifying offer, in the case of high-profile, highly desired FA like Jansen and Turner, is to ensure the draft pick compensation.

    If we’re going to have posts here, they should be based in reality.

    1. Pretty sure Oscar understands that. This year the offer is 17.2. The FO does love it’s draft picks. which in this case if both sign elsewhere would be 35 and 36.

      1. If he understood that why did he write this paragraph:

        The Dodgers extended mediocre qualifying offers to the two (one year, with less than 10% raises), which practically guaranteed their star third baseman and elite closer would test the waters of free agency. Why the Dodgers took this route baffles me, as the team could ill-afford to lose Turner’s defense and right-handed power at the plate, or Jansen’s willingness to lay it all out for multiple inning saves if that’s what the team needs.

        1. Bluto, as some have reported, offering the QO’s was and is a procedural thing to do, as many teams do so in case that player signs elsewhere, thus a draft pick attached. In many cases, that hurts a player who is out on market, see Howie last year. Dodgers still in the mix to re-sign both so wss.

          1. THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING.

            It’s not what the author of the post wrote.

            Am I on Mars here??!??!?!?

        2. Bluto, sounds like you don’t understand the Qualifying Offer.
          1. The amount is set every year by MLB using the salaries of the top paid 125 ball players.
          (So the Dodgers had no control at all in the amount of the offer)
          2. The club losing such a player receives an extra draft choice. Sometimes the club signing the player loses a choice, sometimes not.
          3. The Dodgers would be stupid not to give them QOs; If they lose the player, at least they will get the extra draft choices. And they will attempt to sign the players themselves.
          So you see, everything is moving along in a logical and reasonable manner. At most Oscar is guilty of phrasing his article in such a manner that it did not become crystal clear to you.

          1. Wondering:
            That’s the way I understand it. I do have one question though. Is the extra draft choice always between the 1st and 2nd round?

          2. Teams that sign free agents who turned down qualifying offers will surrender their first unprotected draft pick in the following year’s draft. The first ten selections in the draft are protected. Those clubs would surrender their second-highest selections if they reach terms with a QO-declining free agent. Forfeited picks don’t go to other MLB teams (as they used to under the old Type A/B system). Instead, they disappear and the first round is condensed. In turn, teams that lose a player who declined a qualifying offer are awarded a compensatory pick at the end of the first round, before the competitive balance choices. I think that all means the awarded extra picks are between the first and second rounds which are both shortened by the “lost” picks which are placed between the two rounds.

        3. I have found it best to never assume what someone else is thinking. Main reason is because you usually get it totally wrong.

      2. Hello Michael, as ya say many teams love them drfat picks, even though on many occasion those said players may never ‘see the show’ so to speak. But in this case, I believe we ALL would rather have Turner and Jansen back and with a new deal with the Dodgers.

        1. I think that is the case, but I seriously doubt that they would go 5 years for any closer. And absolutely no way they hit the 20 million a year mark.

  15. Michael – just read up on Longoria. Interesting idea. But there is yet no rush for Tampa to move him. His contract is still easy for them, he doesn’t make $18 million until he’s 35 (he’s 31 and making $13 and $13.5mm the next two years) and even though his d has slipped measurably (-0.6) his offense is still well over 4 so he’s cost effective. If they’re smart, and you know they are, the “trade a year early” probably isn’t until 2019, when he’s 33 making $14.5mm. That said, he and Archer are going to take the same kind of deal we mentioned in the Sale/Frazier deal. Not quite as much, but similar, especially considering how valuable those two are to the Rays.

    1. I agree which is why I suggested a 3rd team. They have done those before. They would need to get pretty creative. But they have also shown interest in Forsythe, that was why I included him in the deal.

    1. Total retread and former Angel I think. I doubt they go after him unless it is for AAA..They want Barnes as Grandal’s caddy.

Leave a Reply

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

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)