Sunday, May 26, 2024
Home > Dodgers > Should The Dodgers Go After Cespedes?

Should The Dodgers Go After Cespedes?

Yoenis Cespedes

Reports are surfacing that Mets’ slugger Yoenis Cespedes is going to opt out of his contract and be able to declare free agency. The 31-year old Cuban outfielder signed a 3-year 75 million dollar contract with the Mets last winter. During the regular season he played in 132 games and posted a .280/.354./.530 slash line with 31 home runs and 86 runs batted in. Cespedes posted an .884 OPS in 543 plate appearances. Cespedes played most of his games in left field for New York and posted a WAR of around 3 wins. Cespedes would get around 27.5 million dollars for opting out.

Should the Dodgers go after Cespedes if he becomes a free agent? The answer to that is I think they should take a look at him. I get it. The Dodgers front office does not want to offer any type of long term commitment to free agents and is unilaterally against big contracts via free agency.

Embed from Getty Images

However the Dodger’s offense last season was mostly pathetic. The Dodgers ranked at the bottom of the league in the majority of the offensive categories and was the worst team in the majors in hitting against left handed pitching.

If we take a look at Cesepdes’ splits last year we see that he batted .341 against left handers and had an OPS of over 1.000. Cespedes has a career .827 OPS against left handed pitchers and has hit 39 home runs. Hitting left handed pitching is pretty important and the Dodgers are in need of a right handed hitting outfielder who can mash.

The Dodger lineup in 2016 was too left handed. There were not enough good right handed hitters with the exception of Justin Turner. The Dodgers need some balance from that side and Cespedes would be great. I know the cost would be high, but the club would be rewarded with one of the better offensive outfielders in the league.

Now if they could just figure out what to do with Yasiel Puig?

Scott Andes

Scott Andes: Longtime writer and Dodger fanatic

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:

Scott Andes
Scott Andes: Longtime writer and Dodger fanatic

94 thoughts on “Should The Dodgers Go After Cespedes?

  1. Personally I would go after Cespedas. We do need that right handed bat. Puig, I would find a way, any way, to get rid of him.

      1. And that guy is particularly weak minded since he feels the need to delete comments that don’t cheerlead his point of view. He’s a fraud.

        1. Wow! He banned me after I made ONE POST that disagreed with him. I should’ve saved it. I thought it wasn’t bad….I even quoted Emerson.

          It’s usually axiomatic with people such as the author at Dodger Therapy, that the biggest critics are themselves the ones who tolerate criticism the least. The ones that tout themselves as “speaking truth to power” are the quickest to censor.

          He’s a coward.

          1. Too funny.

            The turd is practicing medicine without a license. A true snake-oil salesman, sadly there is always a buyer for the oil.

          2. Yeah Badger, but there’s a difference between one post that elicits the ban hammer, and the dysfunctional relationship you’ve had with Mark for, what?, 16 years? I think even the most patient would grow weary of the non-stop insults and sniping.

            BTW, you do realize that your post was another passive aggressive insult directed at You-Know-Who, don’t you? I’m just helping with your mindfulness and self-awareness. 🙂

          3. October 28, 2016 at 2:04 pm Reply @ DT

            “Chalk another one up for yet another retrograde thinking baseball Luddite cowering in the bunker hoping baseball goes back to the way it was forty years ago. This article is hardly worth taking the time to pick apart and dissect the endless string of fallacious arguments, the resentments of this front office based on fear and lack of understanding, the dubious use of misconstrued evidence taken out of context, but it can summarized as a collection of cynicism masquerading as insight.
            A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. So it is with the foolish traditionalism in the baseball executive branch of chasing star players at the height of their market hoping to buy wins based on such antiquated stats as batting average. “Moneyball”, if that’s what you want to call it, is not a passing fad that’s going away. It is the de facto standard operating procedure in baseball now. You might as well accept it and have executives who understand it and do it well.”

            That isn’t you? Sounds like you. More articulate maybe but just as negative.

            And it wasn’t just me that was banned. Two others that disagreed with Mark’s rants were erased too. Suppression of thought. It’s a tactic.

          4. Oh interesting. Well, when I posted it, it was there, then it wasn’t there. Apparently it’s there again. I guess the Dodger blogging community is rather small (I’m almost certain Dustin Nosler HAD to have been referring Michael Norris and the Grandal/framing debate when he referred to the “comical” criticism of Grandal.).

            “Sounds like you. More articulate maybe but just as negative.”

            And I thought we had this conversation already. When you resort to these snide, backhanded insults, it’s just as insulting as the direct variety….and it’s just not very nice. I think I mentioned previously, that if you want to play this game with Mark, that’s one thing, but I just don’t really like that. In fact I’m pretty sure I asked you “please” to not do that. IN FACT, I’m pretty sure I even used ALL CAPS to say PLEASE twice.

            Are we not getting the message? I know it’s hard to change habits. But, I think you’ll learn to be a better person without having to resort to such things. Be the change you want to see. Peace

  2. Won’t matter. Goes against their cost cutting ways. No cespedes and Turner walks. Prepare for more abysmal offense. Maybe they flip Puig for Braun. Lose Turner and close to a wash. Screw these guys.

    1. However, the Giants have two quality lefties in their rotation. Even Ty Bloch beat the Dodgers. The book is out on the Dodgers. If your righty struggles, pull him early and throw in a lefty. Improvement to the offense must happen. I think Braun is a much better everyday hitter than Cespedes, but will require the Dodgers to trade some pieces to get him.

    2. Since 1958

      That figure might be right, but teams are going to even bring a leftie up from AAA, to start against us, just because of the disparity we have against lefties, and righties.

  3. Turner struggled badly with LHP as well. I think a Braun deal makes more sense if they unload, say, Puig and Kazmir to balance the salary, but it would cost prospects which Cespedes would not. But it’s a moot question because this FO is not going to put up the money.

  4. Read Therapy Tim. Thanks for the heads up on that.

    Cespedes? Yeah sure. But I doubt it. 31 and will likely demand more money than the Dodgers are willing to offer. Puig and some low level prospects for Braun make sense, but we’re sure to be outbid. Who on Oakland or Tampa fits the bill? Maybe they have another Donaldson they want to give up.

  5. Chili: “Are you saying that because the FO goal is to get payroll down (which I’m sure it is) but has it been mandated to have it under the luxury tax line by a certain time. Not sure any of us know that.
    Would that mean that they do not resign Turner & Jansen AND will not sign any costly FA’s?

    I don’t know if there is a mandate to have luxury tax gone by a certain time. Just makes sense, if they are ever going to do it, 2018 is the year. They have talked about getting payroll down many times.

    Dodgers co-owner, Todd Boehly: “We’re looking toward building something long-term, and sustainable,” he said. Leading the league in payroll every year, he said, is not sustainable. “I think sustainable is more like the league average,” Boehly said, “plus some, or plus a lot.”

    According to Forbes, Dodgers have lost about $160M since Guggs acquired the team. The competition is profitable according to Forbes. Not sustainable.

    I am not saying Dodgers are broke and can’t sign costly FA’s, but:

    1. We already have a bunch of costly players, Kershaw, Gonzalez, Crawford, Ethier and others.
    2. Luxury tax has only ever been paid by six teams. All except the Yankees exited luxury tax territory ASAP, most after only dipping their toes in luxury tax territory.

    Yes, Turner and Jansen can be signed, but, is their asking price the best value when trying to improve the team considering luxury tax constraints?

    Wondering asked: “Let’s say the Dodgers sign Jansen 4/$60MM and Turner 4/$80MM, trade Puig and McCarthy and some prospects for Braun, what would their payroll be 2017 through 2020? Rough guess, no other major changes…

    I think this is an exercise worth tackling, at least, the Jansen/Turner part and through 2018.

  6. Does anyone want to watch this team next year, with Turner not with the team, and no other bat brought to this team?

    Cespedes probably will linger on with no team really wanting to pay him a multi year contract.

    But I wouldn’t sign Cespedes unless he agreed to a huge one year contract.

    We need someone, so Braun sounds good if it is a fair trade, or we get the better of the deal, and they off set Braun’s money by taking one of either McCarthy or Kazmir.

  7. They lost $160mm on frikin paper!!!!!
    This franchise is worth mega billions. I won’t go into the details but money is not a problem. Neither is cash flow… Follow it!!!!!
    Yes I can see them wanting to get it under control, but it ain’t a problem.
    Just maximize ROI is all Guggs is about.
    4 straight west titles a fat network paycheck and 3mm tix sold, not 3mm through the turnstiles though, there’s not a lot of money issues.
    Fix the problem Guggs. See what I did there?

  8. From Forbes:

    “It’s the craziest deal ever; it makes no sense. That’s why you saw so many groups drop out,” said Mark Rosentraub, a University of Michigan sports management professor. “I don’t get it. The numbers just don’t work. It doesn’t make business sense. Nobody came up with this number. Under the most favorable circumstance you broke $1.1 billion with $1.4 billion getting crazy. Now you’re up in the $2 billion range, which is over $800 million more than what pencils out for a profitable investment for a baseball team. If making money doesn’t count, this is a great move. But now we’re into buying art and I can’t value art. I can just run the model numbers and this doesn’t make sense.”

    Dodgers value in July of ’16? $2.5 billion. For a business allegedly losing money, they have increased their value by a considerable margin. Yes, it looks like they intend to decrease payroll to below luxury tax levels. But they don’t have to. They choose to.

    Which brings me to MJ’s question regarding watching this team. The FCI for a Dodger game this year was $234.10. It went up 6.9%. It wil likely go up again. Say to $250. That’s for 4 “average” seats, parking and concessions. Half that for me and my guest. Would I pay that to see this team, minus a few more stars? If Kershaw was pitching, yeah, I’d go see a game. Nobody else really. I am looking forward to when most of the starters on the field are ours. And the older guys? Guys like Utley and Braun are welcomed by me because they are from Southern California and want to be here.

    1. Badger

      That is exactly what I was thinking about Braun.

      Even though some said his numbers won’t transfer to Dodger stadium, they may not be as high, but don’t under estimate, playing for your home team.

      Even when Utley was tired at the end, I still appreciated what he brought to this team most of the season, along with all of the intangibles he brought to the team.

      Braun would have to be at his best behavior in LA too.

  9. In case you aren’t aware, you do lose money “on paper.” The money doesn’t generally fly out the window, but there are GAAP’s (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) that businesses observe because… well the IRS and their SHAREHOLDERS demand it!

    So, Guggenheim invested something north of $1.8 billion into the Dodgers. Guess what, if Walter treats the Dodgers like his own little pet project and, according to GAAP, if they can’t make a profit for his shareholders he will have to (1) cut costs; or (2) sell the team. Hello, they have to make a profit ON PAPER. That’s the deal. The Steinbrenners don’t have to – it’s their money. In Walters case, it’s his shareholders money.

    Yes, the Dodgers have lots of money and yes, they have to make money on paper. BTW, I do not like our owners! At all! Contrary to what the uninitiated, uninformed and cynical say, the Dodgers DO have get out of the luxury tax arena! That’s the long and short of it! Any other spin is complete BS! There is no choice!

        1. Still wouldn’t you agree, Guggs is 1000% better than this guy?

          PARIS (AP) — American businessman Frank McCourt has bought Marseille soccer club from Russian-born billionaire Margarita Louis-Dreyfus.

          McCourt and Louis-Dreyfus announced the sale Monday in a statement. Financial details were not disclosed.

          McCourt, the 63-year-old former owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers, promised fans he would push the club to the “highest ranks of European football,” adding that “we have the resources and courage necessary to invest.”

          Marseille employees approved McCourt’s offer last month unanimously after he pledged to build a team able to challenge Paris Saint-Germain.

          Marseille, the only French team to win the Champions League back in 1993, has won the French title nine times but has fallen behind since PSG was taken over by Qatari investors five years ago.

          Louis-Dreyfus took over Marseille in 2009.

          1. Thanks for the note. Wonder if the Marseille supporters know Frank’s history.

            Good luck Marseille hope you can avoid relegation.

          2. Baseball should have never allowed that jerk to keep the parking lots!

            He shouldn’t have been rewarded for bad behavoir.

  10. Slotim: “They lost $160mm on frikin paper!!!!!”

    What monopoly game paper? Hate to tell you, losses are losses!!! Agree, Dodgers MIGHT not have cash flow problems, unlimited borrowing capacity, could solve cash flow problems.

    Badger: “For a business allegedly losing money, they have increased their value by a considerable margin.”

    Interesting you define historical accounting numbers as “allegedly”, while, accepting estimate of possible future sales price as fact.

    Following is what the Forbes author wrote in another article:

    “The team’s owners (Mark Walter, Todd Boehly, Magic Johnson, Robert Patton, Peter Guber) are not super rich, but I suppose it is possible they are funding the losses by dint of capital calls. The Dodgers were close to selling a significant piece of the team to a South Korean sovereign fund but the potential buyers reportedly dropped their offer this summer after conducting “due diligence.”

    My best guess: Guggenheim Baseball, which used hundreds of millions of dollars of insurance company money controlled by Guggenheim Partners to buy the Dodgers, is still using that money to run the team. Insurance regulators are apparently fine with that, but should baseball?”

  11. I’m not trying to be mean, but you really don’t understand what you are saying? This is big business and they have to turn a profit. It has nothing to do with insurance regulations.

    1. Not my words. They are the words of the Forbes writer.

      However, insurance companies are heavily regulated. They take the money from people buying insurance policies and invest it. Regulators do look at how the insurance companies invest to try and make sure there will be money to pay insurance claims in the future. So i think the author is saying, so far, the insurance regulators don’t see the investment in the loans to the Dodgers as overly risky.

  12. Thank you Mark. I look at financials a day long, and yes I know what paper losses are. Mark is 100% correct about GAAP.
    The Guggs baseball empire is so much more than we fathom.
    I have now shifted to the other dark side. Ownership!!!
    Although I brought it up a few years ago.
    Guggs gets out within 3 years.
    It’s all about the real estate!!!!

    1. My enemy is Guggs, not Friedman.

      They are beholden to the almighty dollar, because their shareholders demand a damn return. I can run my company and make 5% on the bottom line and no one cares. It’s my damn company – I have no shareholders to placate. But with Guggs, they cater to big money investors who like “double digit” gains each year. The Dodgers aren’t delivering that. They can make money (on paper) if they don’t pay the luxury tax, but just like (He’s not) SloTim said: They will move on sooner than later. The next chump will pay $3.4 Billion. The question is… who?

  13. I do confess that I had high hopes for Frank McCourt when he bought the Dodgers. I identified with him. He was a little guy who had a chance to do something great, but his greed got in the way and that was the end, although the slimeball made hundreds of millions.

    Guggenheim = Fox!

  14. Wait, I forgot – this is about Cespedes.

    Sustainability means that you need to constantly be “developing” new prospects every year. When you sign a “Cespedes or Desmond” you lose a draft pick. the short answer is No. I’d rather trade for Braun.

  15. Tim is right. This is about return on investment. That’s all it is. That’s all it ever is.

    I would not be the least bit surprised to see this group turn it over within 3-5 years. And if you don’t believe they would get competing bids you need to pay closer attention. Sports teams in major markets have been cash cows for many people for a long time. They feed the junkies called fanatics. Fanatics pay whatever it takes. Have you seen what Cubs tickets are selling for?

    And EVERYONE knows the game of “losses”. We all did a form of it whenever we could. There are some wealthy egomaniacs brazen enough to brag about using the loopholes created by those who do the looping so they avoid paying taxes. It’s a game billionaires play.

    The Dodgers already sold for about twice as much as some people valued them. It could very well be that something like that could happen again. You can be sure they will be sold for considerably more than what was paid in 2012.

    1. Badger

      You should watch the Chicago broadcast sometime.

      They are selling so much stuff on there broadcast, it is unbelievable, as compared to the Dodgers.

      1. MJ,

        Not much difference selling a 2013 NL West Champion shirt and a 2016 NL West Championship shirt. At some point, having 1 or 2 of those is probably enough.

        I’m sure the Cubbies are capitalizing on their NL Central Division Champs, NL Pennant Winners, 2016 World Series contenders…….and IF they win the WS their memorabilia sales will quadruple over what they have already sold.

    1. Badger

      If we can get rid of McCarthy, or Kazmir, I think the Braun deal doesn’t sound as bad.

      Because one of these two pitchers, will help off set Braun’s contract.

      And I don’t see either of these two pitchers, contributing to this team.

      Kazmir has a chronic condition, and chronic conditions, don’t go away.

      And McCarthy, will be more of the same, which isn’t much.

      But he will text some witty stuff on Twitter all year, while sitting on the bench.

    2. I’m still baffled how or why the Brewers would trade Braun and then take back salary equal to his. Can someone please explain that logic?

  16. It will be a split. Guggs will take real estate and another entity will take the team. No way they sell this cash cow than can carved up a dozen ways.

    1. Do you know how the $2 billion was structured Tim? Did they amortize it like a real estate loan? They certainly wouldn’t need to, but they gain in equity while writing off interest. The losses don’t look like they could add up to $85 million, or whatever they claim, but interest could be part of it. Also it should be noted that RE property development rights value is separated. These guys are essentially a private equity firm who don’t have to report their internal affairs to anyone. We don’t actually know anything about what’s going on but we do know, as someone writing about this very thing said – this investment group surely knows how to rub two nickels together and make a quarter out of it. And another thing I already mentioned, a lot of smart rich people keep buying franchises. The Dodgers ownership can do this anyway they want. Superstars are sexy, and very Hollywood, but algorithms are winning championships.

      1. Wrong, I am sure Dodgers must have audited GAAP financial statements prepared. They need to provide their financial information to MLB. Ever heard of revenue sharing. Additionally, like the Forbes author stated, the insurance regulators look at Dodger financial information to determine the soundness of Guggs Insurance’s investment. Forbes article showed that Dodgers have 16% loan to value ratio. Lenders surely have loan covenants and want to see financial statements to ensure compliance.

        You must not have noticed the $73M loss was EBITDA (Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization), it was footnoted.

        Every indication tells me Dodger operations haven’t been “cash flowing” for Guggs. However, like Slotim and you said perhaps the real payoff is “real estate appreciation” or hoping for the bigger fool on the sale of the business. Any appreciation from these two items would not be reflected in arriving at the $73M loss.

      2. So does Kershaw’s presence increase the value of the club or does his salary have an adverse effect on the goal of decreasing payroll?

  17. If Guggs were to sell the Dodgers I would guess a buyer would like it if the team payroll was near league average, the Farm system was strong, the team had a long string of playoff appearances, attendance stayed at number 1 in the MLB, the team had a couple of all stars on it, and the team had recently won a World Series.

  18. I do not want Cespedes on the Dodgers. Don’t really want Braun on the team either mostly because of the number of years left on his contract and preferring other ways of improving against lefties.

    The Dodgers can slug with anybody against righties. Based on who they have already on the team, maybe they should play small ball against lefties. Speed and defense needs to be improved against lefties to improve their small ball capabilities.

    I think the first thing I would try to do would be to add a righty bat at second that is extremely fast and gets on base enough to lead off. I would also like a righty hitting catcher that can hit at least .250 or higher from the right side that would at least let Grandal rest against lefties.

    LF Toles; 2B New Guy; SS Seager; 3B Turner; CF Pederson; RF Puig; 1B Gonazales; C Grandal/Barnes

    1. Much more realistic. Welcome to Realville.

      How about, Villar, Gourriel, Toles (could he do it?), Neil Walker (not fast) or one of the minor leaguers at 2nd?

      1. Boxout

        Is Neil Walker a free agent this year?

        He looks like a solid answer for second.

        He has hit for more then a decent batting average, in the last two years, and I mean decent, at 270, 280.

        And he also has really good power, for a second baseman, and he is very good defensively too.

        And he will only be 26 this year, so there is a lot to like about him.

        1. Yes, he is a free agent, but, Mets want him back. I also think he had some kind of back surgery. He is 31 yrs old.

          1. Boxout

            I didn’t think he was that old.

            That is to bad he is that old, because he has such solid numbers.

      2. I don’t start out what you call realistic and gradually work my back to it.

        I would love to see Toles at second. I have reminded everybody before that Russel and Lopes were center fielders and were converted to middle infielders. As much as I like Toles from his small sample size I could see the Dodgers trying to find his mirror image in a trade to get a righty bat.

        1. Bum

          Not many players come up to the bigs for the very first time, and produce from there first at bat, like Toles did.

          And Toles made the move up, from A ball.

    2. Bum

      But will they do that?

      We all knew that playing this line up of part time players, was not better then the regular line up, but nothing changed.

    3. Bum

      If we can get a good right hand hitter, then we can take the chance, to see what the young guys will do against lefties.

      That should have been done after they found out, that the platoon line up, wasn’t the answer.

      1. The Dodgers don’t have the greatest up-the-middle defense when Pederson sits and with Kendrick/Utley’s lack of range. Shifts help but they do not have a quick infield with all four spots not known for their quickness/speed.

        I really want Trea Turner at second base but like Toles, he is not an established proven commodity. The team can gamble with Toles because they have Ethier and Thompson as fall backs.

        1. Bum

          Trea Turner wants to play shortstop.

          And after the Nats had to watch the shortstop they have strike out most of the year, Turner is going to be the Nats next shortstop, probably sooner then they thought.

        2. Bum

          I agree about Chase and Howie, but not the other infielders.

          And I am saying play Toles, Joc, and Puig everyday.

          And if Joc and Toles, show they can’t hit lefties, then platoon for them.

          And with Puig, if Puig doesn’t produce enough offensively, it might be time for him, to be traded.

          But once again, if that happens, and we wait to long, Puig once again, won’t have much decent trade value.

          Puig needs to improve, because his numbers are only getting worse every year!

          And I don’t want to hear excuses that Puig was hurt, because Puig doesn’t want to do, what he needs to do, to stay healthy

  19. Damn if it didn’t get good near the end… Sign Turner and I too think we have enough…Speedy 2B???
    Give me a hint who??? I really would like to see some speed in the lineup to add with Toles if he pans out…Would anybody want Gordon back???

    1. It would appear FAZ doesn’t value speed. They traded Gordon AND Peraza. I too would prefer more speed in the lineup, but, maybe that’s old school thinking.

      In looking at our prospects it would appear Bellinger and Verdugo have speed (50) Calhoun does not (45) but Diaz, our #6 prospect can fly (60). He’s allegedly not due until 2019. I sure hope he and Alvarez are the real deals. If it all comes together, we will have a lot of young talent available to the ML club, and payroll under control, in about 2020. Urias, Seager, De Leon, Bellinger, Verdugo, Lux, Calhoun, Alvarez, Diaz, Buehler. Wouldn’t surprise me if we added more names to that Top 10 list. Kershaw, Pederson, Puig, Toles if we keep him, Stripling, Grandal, Stewart – a lot of changes to the veteran leadership as the contracts of AGon, Crawford and Ethier are replaced. The team, with that tv contract in place, and 3.7 million tickets sold ever year will look good to potential buyers and Guggs can continue with their work on the 250 acres and more entertainment purchases. I wonder if Cohen and Soon-Shiong might still be interested in the team?

  20. One thing I will say about the Cubs playing Schwarber, is that they are playing there best players, that will help them win.

    That is what the Dodgers should have done!

    Playing Reddick constantly, didn’t give us the best chance to win.

    Howie playing left didn’t either, because Howie wasn’t hitting lefties well, and his arm and defense, made him a liability to the team.

    And Reddick was a joke, and because he was played way to much, and that really hurt the team.

    Puig should have been playing in rightfield.

    And that would have given us a better look at Puig, to see if he had improved his game in the post season.

    And that would also have allowed Toles to play more to.

    And Toles and Puig made us a much better team, when they were on the field.

    I could see if Howie and Reddick were blistering the ball, but they were not that great offensively either.

    The Dodgers need to let there young players, play everyday and see what they got.

    And if they are not producing, then think about playing others.

    That is how Trea Turner took off.

    The Nats let Turner know, that he would be in that line up everyday, and that makes a big difference to young players.

    1. I think if asked Roberts would tell you that through analysis every day he put the players in the lineup that the numbers told him would give the Dodgers their best chance at winning. It worked pretty well, surviving the weak West then bouncing one superior roster before being smoked by the best team in the game. Getting as far as they did surprised me but the bigger surprise would have been beating the Cubs. Most thought they would win the pennant. Not sure what “real baseball thinkers” might have believed, not being one and all, but most fans I talked with thought the Cubs were indeed the best team in the NL.

      1. Badger

        Even this year’s numbers didn’t back playing Howie and Reddick over Toles, and Puig!

        Reddicks offensive numbers were so bad, Puig with his defense alone, was a better choice.

        Reddick was merely a singles hitter.

        And Howie had not hit in more then a month.

      2. Badger

        Even you said it is posible.

        And to everyone who said the Cubs were the best team in baseball.

        The best team in baseball, rarely wins it all.

        That is why we even had a chance, if our bullpen would have held up.

        But I am not recommending that a team to only have starters that throw only five innings a game!

        I think a team’s starting rotation is one, or the most important thing, on a team, especially in the long season.

        1. I said it then and I’ll say it again – I think it was a mistake to trade 3 of our best prospects for Hill and Reddick. We could use all three of those players better moving forward.

          1. Badger, aren’t those three exactly the type of players you wanted to trade for a rental at the end of 2015? It hurt to give up those three for about a month of Hill and Reddick but after tiring of Puig and the failures of McCarthy, Anderson, and Kazmir to make the playoff roster, the Dodgers absolutely had to make that trade or look/be impotent.

          2. Bum, in ’15 I wanted to go for it at the deadline. When we didn’t, I then took the position of trading NOBODY for NOBODY. My mantra has been keep everybody for ” ’18 and Beyond!” for quite a while now. I sure as hell would not have made the Hill Reddick move. And that is not hindsight, I said as much right away.

            I don’t see what it is we can do to get payroll below luxury tax levels and beat the better NL clubs at the same time. This, in my estimation, is going to take a while.

          3. That’s true Badger. Once the Dodgers didn’t go for it in ’15 you did want to keep the prospects and shoot for ’18.

            The Cubs were not only the better team but they seemed to be destined for the WS this year, much like it felt like the Dodgers were destined for it in 88. But when the best pitcher in baseball pitches game 6 and the best pitcher in ’16 when healthy goes in game 7, the Dodgers were in the pole position to get into the WS.

        2. Having those rentals didn’t make a difference. We still got bounced. Those three prospects still here would give us enormous leverage moving forward. Hill and Reddick now? How do they fit here? I see Hill in a place like Baltimore and Reddick may join him there.

  21. Hi Pete, hope life is good.
    Visited Galway recently…. what a town! Never seen people drink so much & so late. Loved it.

    I know I’ll be shot down but I’m putting myself in the firing line.

    Sign Cespedes &; send Puig & Holmes to Houston for Altuve.
    Suggested a trade for him a couple of years back but was told he “wasn’t all that”.
    2 years later, and he is that good.
    Golden Glove defender, speed, good BA & lead off RH hitter,
    He ticks a lot of boxes.

    I’m no expert (as you know), but Holmes & Puig might not get it done. Maybe JDL or Joc could be thrown in some kind of deal.

    He is 26 & under team control till 2019 on very favourable terms.

    Toles LF
    Altuve 2B
    Seagar SS
    Turner 3B (resigned)
    Cespedes CF (or LF)
    AGon 1B
    Grandal C
    Puig or Joc RF



    I know, I know, the Astros won’t want to let him go, but everyone has a price & we have lots of “Prospects”.

    Fire away…

    1. Holmes isn’t with us any more. Altuve is signed to an easy contract through his prime years and won’t be a free agent until 2020. Houston holds team options in ’18 and ’19 and doesn’t need to trade him. Unless they were overwhelmed they’d be nuts to let him go.

    2. Watford

      You have consistently wanted that big right hand bat, and I don’t blame you.

      This team needs a good hitter with power, to help this team’s offense, especially after Kemp and Hanley were let go.

      And I agree with you, Puig is not this bat, at this time in his career.

    1. Altuve is awesome and would be just what the doctor ordered but are you telling me you think they would trade the best second baseman in baseball for 1 prospect and a RF who was just demoted to the minors this past season. So, basically two prospects. He’s not Trout but the haul wouldn’t be tremendously less.

  22. Puig is just entering his prime. Milwaukee might want to revisit that trade idea. I wouldn’t give them a lot more than that. Adding a couple of low level prospects should do it. We’re doing them a huge favor taking that contract off their hands.

    1. Badger

      That is why I wonder if the Brewers asked for that much, because I do feel, we are helping them get rid of there pariah, and some of his money.

  23. I became a Dodger fan in 1949, and I loved the Dodgers of the 50’s. I consider those teams as the epitome of the “Dodger Way.” Not only were they great hitting teams, they were equally adept in the field. Because of this, I cannot get excited about Braun or Cespedes. While they are great run producers, it’s hard to tell how many runs they surrender. Neither am I hot for Thompson. He has not been proven by enough ABs around the league, and I am skeptical about a long career being built upon a significant back injury. He is not a bad piece to keep around for a while to see how he continues to bat and how his back heals
    It appears to be difficult to talk trade without saying “Puig.” I don’t know when it is time to give up on him, but I think Roberts, maybe it was Friedman, recently said he has multiple ways to impact a game positively. I think that an outfield of Toles, Joc, and Puig would be fantastic in preventing runs and would be in a state of progressive improvement on offense with speed for both defense and offence. I say get a speedster for second. Get a couple of good starting pitchers. Start as soon as possible in developing a first baseman and use him for resting Gonzales in 2017. Platoon Grandal. And we are good to go.

    1. Better be careful around these parts, hpwolfe. Many here would tell you those 50’s teams were terribly flawed. Built only to get to the World Series, but, never to win it.

      You are probably about ten years older than me. My first Dodger memories were 1959. In those days ALL I wanted to do was play baseball. Would beg the older kids to let me play. School held no interest, except recess. Parents got me “The American Diamond” by Branch Rickey for Christmas one year. Probably learned to read with that book, practically memorized it. Still have it. The 50’s Dodgers were truly beautifully constructed teams!

  24. I can’t remember who said this, but the reason Toles wasn’t rated higher then Johnson, is because Toles is no longer considered a rookie anymore.

Leave a Reply

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

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)