The annual winter meetings came and went, ending on Thursday afternoon. All 30 MLB clubs were present to make deals and discuss trades as is the customary tradition every year around this time. Each team looks to the winter meetings as a way to upgrade their rosters. The winter meetings are not the end all or be all of the hot stove offseason, but it’s normally where the majority of the transactions during the hot stove take place. It’s just how things are done. The Dodgers spent the winter meetings doing what they normally do, which is nothing. The Dodgers were rumored to be in on almost every player in MLB, and of course all the Dodgers did was twiddle their thumbs. If you guys wondered why I did not write anything about the winter meetings, it’s because I knew that nothing would happen. I’m getting to know the front office’s habits quite well by now.
I agree with everything that James wrote in his latest article. He really summed things up quite well. So far the Dodgers have signed Rich Hill to a 48 million dollar contract, and tendered contracts to 2 utility players, and a horrendous middle reliever. Meanwhile we watch as usual as all of the good players come off the boards. One by one the teams around the Dodgers are making moves, wheeling and dealing, filling holes, acquiring all-star players, and the Dodgers again do nothing.
The Dodgers have two key free agents that they need to resign. Super closer Kenley Jansen, and third baseman Justin Turner are both looking for multi-year contracts in excess of 80 million dollars. Of course I know what you are going to say.
“I wouldn’t give 80 million dollars to a guy who only pitches 70 innings a year”
“ You have to be brain dead to give Kenley that much money”
“The “trade” has hamstrung the team financially for years!”
“I would let Kenley walk, that’s too much money”
“Market inefficiencies…Blah Blah”
“Free agent signings don’t win championships!”
Let’s get one thing straight here. Anytime I hear somebody complain about the Dodger’s payroll it makes me irritated. Some fans are really weird these days. (No not you guys). First of all, it’s not your money. It’s not my money. It’s not our money. The Dodger’s payroll belongs to Guggenheim, a multi-national conglomerate with billions of dollars in assets. That means the Dodgers have billions of dollars despite the recent accusations of massive debt. The richest and largest market club in MLB still has a ton of money and a great farm system to boot. Yet fans still complain about the high payroll as if it’s linked directly to their bank accounts. For the record why do you care if the Dodgers spend 120 million dollars on Kenley Jansen? Is it going to bankrupt you personally? When Kenley signs the contract will your car get repossessed? Will the world stop spinning?
Again, IT’S NOT YOUR MONEY. Sure ticket prices go up, but that’s going to happen anyways. Inflation has something to do with that too, not just the high player salaries. Ticket prices will always go up. That’s the way things work. When do you ever hear about ticket prices going down? Doesn’t work that way.
Of course the Dodgers want to get under the luxury tax to avoid the penalties, but should that stop them from resigning the greatest closer in franchise history? I know 17 million dollars for a closer like Jansen or Aroldis Chapman sounds completely insane, but that’s the way it is now. Star closers are getting huge paydays. Salaries are going up for all players. Ticket prices rise, inflation is happening. The cost of living is going up in our daily lives. Once again, IT’S NOT YOUR MONEY.
So when the Dodgers let’s say offer Jansen a 100 million dollar contract, don’t get upset. These are the same people that cried and screamed for years when Frank McCourt mismanaged the finances and the Dodgers were unable to sign any big free agents. When the Dodger’s payroll was roughly around 80 million dollars in 2011 and McCourt was being run out of town these people now cheer when the Dodger’s bottom line goes up. This makes no sense to me.
You can’t have it both ways. You can’t have a 25-man roster of all minor league prospects under 25 that all become all-stars, and a low payroll (under 100 million), and low ticket prices, all while Guggenheim is collecting a profit. That seems unlikely to happen. First that all or even half of the prospects pan out, or even become average major league players. And that you can have a low low payroll while contending for a World Series title. Not likely.
I’m not saying the Dodgers should give Jansen 150 million dollars or whatever, I am saying that sooner or later you have to start retaining your players. You can’t just let every player that reaches free agency walk just because…”they’re too expensive”, or free agency doesn’t win titles!”
For the record I would like to see the Dodgers keep Kenley and Turner, but JT is the one player I feel like they truly could not do without. They can find somebody else to close out games. They won’t be anywhere near as talented as Kenley who has a career 13.9 strikeout per nine rate.
Turner is the guy that can’t be replaced. How are the Dodgers going to replace his 27 home runs and 90 runs batted in? How are they going to replace their everyday third baseman and number 3 hitter when there is nobody in the minors that can come up, and the market is super thin for third baseman.
If the Dodgers are going to do anything this winter, the least they can do is resign their top players, I.E. Jansen and Turner. If they do that then perhaps I’ll have a lot more respect for them. Otherwise 2017 is going to be one hell of a painful year. Because if I see Kike Hernandez batting third, and Chris Hatcher closing out games next season I am going to lose it. So while we wait to see whether Kenley signs with the stupid Marlins, or stays in Los Angeles, remember this…..IT’S NOT YOUR MONEY.
So please, stop acting like it is.
No I wont mention the Trade, that’s Mark’s mantra ad nauseum…
No to Kenley, not for $80M +…
Got to, repeat, got to resign JT…
We will have a closer by committee at ST and continuing into the season and we will find that closer…
P.S. The West is ours again…
Good points Scott.
I think the underlying question is……….are the LA Dodgers a hobby/toy to Guggenheim or a business proposition? Early on it appeared that it might have been a new toy/hobby but now it appears that it is/was a business venture. Some might say that it is a combination but at the very core, it has to be one or the other. The rest is just frills to satisfy the fan base.
All teams need to sign a free agent from time to time including the Dodgers. But, if a QO is attached to a free agent and a team is over the payroll penalty, signing that free agent will cost a second and fifth round draft pick, or something like that.
It is not just payroll affordability. Teams that are over the penalty are going to have to trade for what they need due to the new CBA.
I hope Turner is signed and I hope whomever winds up at second base is a fast player that plays great defense and hits well from the right side and is controllable for 5 years. That leaves out Kinsler and Dozier.
If Dozier is going to cost De Leon and Stewart why not add Verdugo and try to get Brendan Rodgers or Ian Happ or Franklin Barreto or Dansby Swanson or Ozzie Albies or Gleyber Torres.
Those players can be reviewed here: http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2016 except for Gleyber Torres who can be found here: http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/yankees-prospect-gleyber-torres-continues-to-dominate-in-arizona-fall-league/
Bum
I am not a fan of Dozier for this team either, especially for Stewart, and JDL.
Solarte my be good to fill that gap at second, because he wouldn’t cost as much in a trade, like the other two.
And he won’t cost to much to put on the field, because he is still under team
control.
He isn’t great against lefties, but he is a solid hitter against lefties, and he hit 15 HRs last year, and hit just under 290.
Solarte will cost more than you think He did all of that while his wife was dying of cancer last year. He was their cleanup hitter too.
From Bleacher Report: Rating the Top Rotations:
1. Red Sox
2. Mets
3. Cubs
4. Indians
5. Giants
6. Nationals
7. Blue Jays
8. Dodgers
9. Rays
10 Cards
Just FYI
Just a projection!!! I wonder how far from # 1 Bleacher Report has the 2017 Dodger rotation?
Here is an article singing praises about the 2017 Dodger rotation with a link to Fangraphs, which rates the 2017 Dodger rotation as # 1.
https://dodgers.mlblogs.com/dodgers-2017-starting-pitching-c7517133eddc#.kvx0rqm3h
Jon Weisman works for the Dodgers. I would think he has the rotation #1.
Does Fangraphs also work for the Dodgers?
If we can’t get rid of McCarthy or Kazmir, in one of the worse years for starting pitching, that says it all.
And let’s just see if they do move these pitchers, how much money will we have to pay the other teams.
And if they are not going to sign Kenley, what are they doing, to get another closer?
The Cubs sure went to work on that fast.
And what about second base, and help against leftie pitching?
I think the problem here with some people, is that they think that we made it as far as we did, because of the moves made by the front office last year.
The team made it as far as they did last year, despite what the front office gave Roberts to work with, is much more the truth.
The front office didn’t give this team, the starting pitching that they needed!
Did Anderson, and McCarthy, really make a difference last year?
Did Kazmir really help the team get where they were?
Those first two pitchers barely made it out to the mound, and when they did, they were mostly bad.
And with Kazmir, we were lucky if he could pitch past four or fifth innings, productively.
Because he usually had us behind by quite a bit, before he could record five innings, in the books.
Our young pitchers, are what went right with the team last year, but there still was a learning curve there.
It was the Roberts his coaches and the players, that mostly got the team as far as they went.
And because the front office didn’t bring starting pitchers to the team, that pitch deep into games, are bullpen had to step up even more, then they probably should have.
And that cost us a couple important games in the post season, because the relievers were so over used, that they weren’t able to pitch as well, in the post season.
Kenley did blow six saves last year, but how many games did he save, and how important was he, to the success we had in the post season?
And Turner is difinitly the most important bat in our line up.
Remember when he wasn’t able to hit, at the begining of the season, because he was still recovering from his surgery?
The offense was terrible then, and it didn’t take off, until Turner started hitting.
Everyone knows about the payroll, but with that in mind, how could this front office gIve these subpar pitchers, multi year contracts?
And for the people claiming that Turner and Kenley are asking to much, where were you when this front office, wasted over a hundred million dollars, on these three pitchers?
And although I believe that Hill has much more of a upside then those other pitchers, the front office has once again, made a move, that is more questionable, then paying two players who actually excelled last year, and have for the last few years for this team.
MJ,
You need to stop on a couple of subjects.
First, 6 innings for a starting pitcher is NOT a Dodgers phenomenon. It’s an MLB trend. Everyone is going more and more to lessening the gameday demand on starting pitchers.
Second, you seem to have this analysis of last year that what didn’t work was due to the front office, and what did work was due to Roberts. Ask any of those two parties, and they’ve said it’s a complete collaboration. Don’t cherry pick, it’s easy and it’s wrong. Who pushed Stewart up through the minor leagues so he could pitch in the majors? Roberts? Doubt it. Who was bullish on Stripling? Giving him the shot over DeLeon? Who put together the bullpen?
Asking for too much is NOT a money discussion. It’s a money and years discussion. That’s why comparing a ONE-YEAR Anderson deal to a 5+ Jansen deal is significant. There really are, for a big market team, no bad one-year deals. Kazmir’s deal was for 3 years. A starting pitcher for 3 years, with an opt-out and deferred money. For a 31 year old starting lefty.
Bluto
First I am not going to stop speaking the truth.
I know you want to believe that starting pitchers don’t pitch much past five innings in Major League Baseball, but that isn’t the truth on the whole.
And by the way, our starting pitchers didn’t pitch six innings on an average.
That stat is skewed by the innings Kershaw pitched.
Our pitchers barely made it through five innings.
Some teams might have some pitchers that can’t pitch past five innings, but that is more because some teams can’t afford good starting pitching, because they are not a big market team.
Starting pitchers should pitch on an average, 6 or 7 innings in a game.
And starting pitchers that can’t pitch productly, much beyond four or five innings most of the time, shouldn’t be starting pitchers, or pitchers, that this front office should make deals with.
Believe it or not, a starting pitching rotation, is one of the most important things a team needs, to hold up in a long season.
And you don’t fill a rotation and count on pitchers to make there starts, with starting pitchers, with long injury histories!
Because pitchers with long injury histories, don’t make most of there starts, or pitch 200 innnngs, which is a good measure, for starting pitchers, to pitch in a season.
And I am not cherry picking as you say, because this front office, didn’t give this team a good starting pitching rotation to work with last year.
And because of that, I am just merely stating the truth.
They just didn’t give Anderson, only a one year contract.
They also gave him a QO, that netted him another 15 million, that he collected, by just sitting on the bench.
Both Anderson and McCarthy,
didn’t contribute much to this team last year.
And the truth is, that these two starters when they did make it to the mound, it didn’t turn out well for the team.
And although Kazmir managed to make most of his starts, until just before August, he really ”didn’t pitch well.
And because of that, he wasn’t reliable, from a production stand point.
And this front office is solely responsible for the signing of all of these starting pitchers.
And these are the starting pitchers, that they choose to use, to build our starting pitching rotation.
And the front office are also the ones, that expected these pitchers, to make most of there starts, even with there injury history.
And if we didn’t have our young pitchers, this could have turned out, really bad.
And you also don’t give a pitcher like Kazmir, an opt out, and expect him to opt out, when an opt out, is based on how well a pitcher has performed the year before.
Most teams wouldn’t even give Kazmir, a multi year, contract, let alone, think he would take an opt out, after signing a multi year contract.
And by the way, even three year contracts are not good, when a pitcher, doesn’t make his starts, or doesn’t pitch well.
Oh. My. God.
This board is in bad shape when it comes to posts. The last two were borderline moronic and definitely poorly-thought out.
Who cares whose money it is! Good businesses are based on spending money wisely!
The issue isn’t raising ticket prices! Are you insane. Ticket prices!?!??!!!? They are on the margin of the margins when it comes to digital revenue and local TV deals.
The issue is that you blow the top off the reliever market, it negatively impacts EVERY market. This leads to spending a lot more NOT for the 3+ WAR closer, but for the 0.2 WAR LOOGY. The rising tide raises all ships and soon, we’re all underwater.
To run a business, both a club and (on a larger level) a league, you need to appreciate and properly construct value structures and adhere to them. Otherwise, pretty soon, you’re overpaying for Matt Kemp.
Jesus christ, can we please get some sensible writers here?!??!
‘can we please get some sensible writers here?!??!’ Ah, I take it that you do not own the blog or else there would be ‘sensible writers.’ Do you think this is a community blog or something provided by your government? Or does everyone that posts on the blog has equal ownership, you know like a company that sells stocks, us stockholders have final say so. I would recommend another site but that guy took his ball and went home.
Here’s what some of us are saying….’can we please get some sensible decision making from the Dodgers Front Office?!??!’ And if I may continue…..’please quit wasting money on the old and/or decrypted.’
Here’s their great free agent signings…..
The Dodgers have spent $26MM on Anderson.
The Dodgers have spent $48MM on McCarthy.
The Dodgers have spent $48MM on Kazmir.
The Dodgers have spent $48MM on Hill.
The Dodgers spent $48M on Oliveria of which a lot of that was a signing bonus.
That is $218M on just those 5 players. Go back and look at their history and please tell me if those 5 guys were worth that money.
Oh. My. God. ‘can we please get some sensible decision making from the Dodgers Front Office?!??!’
Well, Olivera yielded Wood and others and they actually spent about $30M on Olivera.
Anderson, McCarthy and Kazmir have yielded about two seasons of Greinke production at less cost. Did you want to be sensible and sign Greinke for $206M? Oh, and we were also able to sign Maeda with the savings!!!
Today, we need a crystal ball to know if the Hill signing was good!!
So getting below the luxury tax is not a ‘real’ issue, hence the fact that we moved money from one player to a couple others.
And if you have been reading these blogs for a year and a half or longer I was the one stating that either they get Grienke signed to an extension or trade him for 3,4 or 5 prospects. THEY DID NEITHER. No vision whatsoever.
So GM Chili would have traded Co-Ace Greinke at the trade deadline in 2015??
Maybe FAZ’s 2015 vision was Co-Aces Kershaw and Greinke win 75% of their playoff starts and Dodgers win a Championship!!! GM Chili trades Greinke at the 2015 deadline for prospects with Dodgers in 1st Place, GM Chili finds himself in the same place as AZ GM Stewart.
I can just hear you at your firing interview, “Well we didn’t know if Zack would resign with us after the season, so we shit canned any chance for a championship this year for some PROSPECTS. You got to have vision you know.”
Exactly. You make a reasonable offer to extend Grienke. If he doesn’t take it than he basically saying that he’s taking the money. If you are not prepare to match ALL offers, you trade him. I would have picked up 2-3 ML ready players. Top prospects. But thats not the whole story. You see,
I’m proactive. I would have went hard after Max Schurzer prior to 2015. If I get him than its a different story. 3 aces and we should win the Championship. But I dont need to be hit over the head after 2013 & 2014 that Kersh & Grienke isn’t enough to win it all. Then after trading Grienke, I would have went hard after Cueto in a similar contract that the Giants gave him. Would have kept Frazier in last off seasons trade as an insurance policy against both Gonzalez and Turner not making it through the season. With or without Cueto, I’m going hard after Sales. I would not have signed McCarthy, Kazmir, Hill or Anderson. I would have been willing to sign either Leake or Samardzija. As both are inning eaters. And your plans are doing exactly as FAZ has done?
Chili,
I have no idea what your opening paragraph means or implies.
Are we not allowed to opine negatively and still participate on a blog? Where do I ask for ownership? What do ownership or Government sponsored programs have to do with a Dodgers blog? Does your thinking imply that every time I have an opinion on something, I have to have an equity investment to voice it?
Decrepit, not decrypted and “old and decrepit” is redundant.
Well the gentleman that started this blog is the writer of the article of which you stated, ‘Jesus christ, can we please get some sensible writers here?!??!’
Scott has enough class that he’ll let you voice your opinion and not take it personally but if you truly want ‘sensible writers’ that think along your lines than there are other Dodger blogs available that would cater to that. Simple enough.
In comparison I have never ripped Mark’s writings, neither here or at his previous site. I read and learn how others might think and view the same things I’m seeing. That’s how I broaden my mind.
You and I have that in common.
I don’t and shouldn’t expect everyone to look at the Dodgers the way I do. That would be silly and boring. It also has no bearing on my ability to discourse.
I do expect people who write for the public to properly use words and phrases, and to be based in reality though. This article isn’t. It tells a business not to run their business like a business. It implies that the owners are making money on the Dodgers, when they are not. And it makes an absurd and incomprehensible equivalence between McCourt’s time as owners and the current situation.
The previous article revolved around Chris Sale being a “Once in a lifetime” pitcher. Um. WHAT?!?!?!?
That’s great.
I mean just think about this article.
It basically says,
“Because it’s ‘not your money’ feel free to have expectations not based in reality and to daydream and fantasize about how the Dodgers operate to your hearts’ content.”
Then it goes on to say, and I’m paraphrasing, because economics don’t matter to the fans (remember it’s not your money) then it shouldn’t matter to the team.
Or at least that’s what I think it’s trying to say. I’m not sure, maybe you can tell me what the basic point of the article is.
To me, it’s inane.
And I’m still posting here.
Bluto,
I have never and hopefully will never tell anyone to not post here. First of all, that is not my place and secondly if I would get to that point, I would hope that I would step away. Now if it was MY blog…..well that might be a different story. LOL
IMO, Scott’s article was being a fan or was written from a fan’s perspective. Dodgers lost Grienke last year, ‘probably’ will lose Jansen this year and ‘might’ lose Turner. It’s a trend that some are going to struggle with. Especially when considering the folks management is giving money to.
Regarding James’ writing. What he meant about Sales ‘being a once in a lifetime ace’ is that it is very rare to have an ace under a 3 year VERY FRIENDLY team controlled contract. Most aces either have large contracts or are not available in a trade (untouchables). A player of Chris Sale’s ability is not usually available, hence the comment ‘once in a lifetime.’ It might behoove you to read writings in their entirety and not look for 1 line or statement and then go on the attack. Just my advice. Otherwise post away.
Chili is correct. I respect everyone’s opinions over here. That’s what this site is all about, Dodger discussions. I would never ban someone for having a differing opinion.
Bluto, if you want respect here, you will need to give it to others.
I have plenty of respect, or at least I think I do.
Actually, I don’t really care.
I come here for good conversation, and I’m not sure respect even matters. Does it? How does one convey respect on a blog comment roll?
Does respect matter?
Bluto: “I come here for good conversation, and I’m not sure respect even matters. Does it? How does one convey respect on a blog comment roll?
Does respect matter?”
Good questions! I come here and usually feel like either Randle McMurphy or the Chief in “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”. How does one convey/receive respect from the rest of the crazies here???? And does it matter????
Bluto,
Let me explain how the market works here. Salaries for all players go up. Every position player, outfielders, pitchers, infielders, catchers, closers, etc, all are going up. Salaries don’t go down. It doesn’t work that way. If all the MLB clubx decided not to offer contracts to closers and all refused to offer what the market is dictating that star elite closers get then that falls into the line of collusion. It’s something the owners did back in 1987 and got hit hard on big time.
They can’t just all refuse to give out deals to certain players and then the salaries all go down. Again, the system doesn’t work this way. At the same time, why do you care so much how much money Chapman or Jansen or any other closer makes? Is it tied to your bank account? Will your house get foreclosed on if closers are making 18 million per season? Will your life personally crumble when this happens?
My point is arguments about payroll from fans, writers, and people that are not working in the game are ridiculous. It’s not your money man, so why do you care if Matt Kemp gets overpaid?
Who is talking about markets driving costs up not down? Not me. I never once said I think salaries should or will go down.
I’m talking about stupidly driving costs well above their value.
Why does it matter?
Because the closer your costs are to the value of your assets or, (best case) the lower the costs are to the value the better your position is. Regardless of the business and regardless of who’s paying.
1. Because sports are a business, and businesses being healthy businesses are vital to their long term viability.
2. Because I’m a fan of the Dodgers, not the 2017 Dodgers solely. Because having a philosophy that works and scales over years is important.
3. Because value is important across MLB. I care about Matt Kemp being overpaid because eventually that bad contract makes his value ZERO (he was literally traded for a player who has not value) while his cost is HIGH. You get a team of players like that and you’re screwed.
Bluto,
I think you are completely missing the point of this article
1. Even if the Dodgers are in debt, and we don’t know for sure the severity, they have enough assets (in the billions) to cover it. They’ll work something out with MLB and they’ll be just fine, regardless of how much money they give free agents like Jansen and Turner. If the Dodgers are so much in debt, and in the “red” and the sky is falling, then what about actual small market clubs like the Pirates, Padres, Rays, A’s, Mariners, etc. Those clubs are in the red. Those teams are the ones who really have problems retaining players and signing free agents because they don’t have billions of dollars like large market behemoths like the Dodgers and Yankees, and Cubs.
2. We all want the Dodgers to spend their money wisely and operate their business correctly and efficiently. The way to do that is to actually retain your star players and keep them in town. Keeping star players on the roster helps the team win and helps fill seats. Those are facts. Fans will support a winning team better than they will support a mediocre team. Not saying the Dodgers are mediocre, but you understand what I mean.
3. The Dodgers were already spending ineffectively throwing lots of money at terrible players. I.E. 48 million dollars for Brandon McCarthy, over 25 million for Brett Anderson. Millions on Carl Crawford, Chris Hatcher, Brandon League, Hector Olivera, etc etc. Yet they still have and will have the highest payroll in MLB. It surely hasn’t stopped them.
4. you sound like an accountant spouting terms like “long term viability” and value of assets. Were you happy in 2010 when the Dodger’s payroll was 80 million dollars and they won 80 games?
5. This is not about long term viability, or cost of assets, or anything boring like that. Those all help businesses run better and yes that helps overall, but this is about one thing only..,….WINNING CHAMPIONSHIPS. I don’t care if the Dodger’s payroll is 500 million dollars as long they are winning and or win championships. That’s what this is about, winning championships. Keeping your franchise closer in town helps reach that goal.
6. I don’t care about second or fifth round draft picks. I might care about first round draft picks.
7. The point of the article was not about how the Dodgers run their business, but about how fans react to the way the Dodgers are doing business. The way the fans take things so personally and root for odd things. It’s odd to root for sleazy executives to save money. It’s correct to root for the team to win a championship…..
I root for the Dodgers, not for executives, and not for their bottom lines to go down. Who or what do you root for?
hi Scott,
Here are two things in your explanation:
First:
We all want the Dodgers to spend their money wisely and operate their business correctly and efficiently.
Second:
This is not about long term viability, or cost of assets, or anything boring like that. Those all help businesses run better and yes that helps overall, but this is about one thing only..,….WINNING CHAMPIONSHIPS. I don’t care if the Dodger’s payroll is 500 million dollars as long they are winning and or win championships.
Bluto
Please don’t hold back on the way you feel!
the cost of seats went up and the parking went up …so yes it is our money ..but for the rich ..it pennys on the dollar.. take it or leave it
The Dodgers are not going to sign Jansen. They must sign Turner. These decisions has nothing to do with how much money they have. It is a business decision. We have a lot of dead weight that is still receiving money. The trade with Boston was bad. So we’re some of the signings in the last two years. Also, the signing of Ryu. Especially when they knew he had arm problems. There is enough blame to go around for the past two GM. Regardless what you think of the ownership. They are not going to continue to pay this luxury tax. It is a good business decision.
Kenley can be replaced. Turner cannot. We have no one in the system. By the way, the three players we gave to Oakland was a stupid trade. All three were in our top 10 farm kids. Montas could have been our closer. All three are probably going to be on Oaklands team this year. We got two rentals for these kids. Dumb. That is why we must sign Turner. If we do not, then we will have to trade. There goes some more farm kids. You are not going to get rid of Either, McCarthy, and Kasmir.
I don’t know if Idahoal is right or wrong on the three prospects traded for Hill, but there’s some unintentional cognitive dissonance between those (again, not Idahoal necessarily) who look back negatively on the Hill trade, yet want trades for Chris Sale or irrational spending on Jansen.
This is all strictly my opinion, and I haven’t even fully thought it out so it may be a little faulty:
The Hill trade was made to put the Dodgers over the top last season. They were a very strong team, but lacked a 2nd starting pitcher they could rely on in the playoffs against good teams. So the team got Hill, a very good pitcher.
Now, this off-season, people are complaining the Dodgers aren’t doing enough in comparison with other top teams. Look at what the Cubs have done. The Giants are better, Boston is better….
Yada yada.
I think you have to be rationale and consistent. If you want the team to better prepare themselves for upper-echelon talent, then support past moves that were done for that exact same purpose.
And saying the Hill deal was fine, except I don’t like three prospects given up is equally inane. The Dodgers don’t choose who other teams want. It’s a negotiation. You have to give something the other side will want.
If I am going to be critical of FAZ it would be because they were supposed to have a huge team of experts to evaluate talent better than other teams’ smaller executive offices. Those experts failed to realize Anderson would accept their QO. That led to them passing on Hill which led them to trading Holmes, Cotton, and Mantas to get Hill.
FAZ could have been the team to sign Desmond to a one year contract instead of Hendricks for two.
FAZ probably could have signed Scherzer to a front loaded contract with an opt-out and been in a better position to win in 2015 and 2016.
Again, its not that they didn’t do those things and more that their hype indicated that they would.
I agree with Bluto, that signings and trades have to be rational and not emotional and not ignore the penalties in the new CBA.
Turner should jump at a 3 year, $60M offer. A more fair offer for both teams would be a 4 year, $60M offer of $20M, $20M, $10M, $10M with incentives for the last two years and an opt-out after 2 years along with a no-trade clause during the first 2 years.
Excellent post.
Bum
I will say this, most of Friedmans success with the Rays, was making good deals at the trade deadline, but he was on the other side, of the deal.
I don’t think he picked especially well, it was more of the above.
Wow. MJ, if I had an award to give out……you would get it. You are the first person to question his drafting ability. Congrats.
Over the 9 years with Tampa, only 4 players that were drafted by him would I classify as bona fide ML players with 2 of those being the First overall pick (Price) and the Third overall pick (Longoria). He didn’t miss on those, so I will give him credit there but he will not be drafting that high while with the Dodgers.
This is right on, but every team has warts.
Even the Cubs needed to trade significant prospects at the deadline for Chapman.
Even the Cubs signed Hayward to a deal that didn’t result in value.
The Dodgers are not going to sign Jansen. They must sign Turner. These decisions has nothing to do with how much money they have. It is a business decision. We have an a lot of dead weight that are still receiving money. The trade with Boston was bad. So we’re some of the signings in the last two years. Also, the signing of Ryu. Especially when they knew he had arm problems. There is enough blame to go around for the past two GM. Regardless what you think of the ownership. They are not going to continue to pay this luxury tax. It is a good business decision.
Kenley can be replaced. Turner cannot. We have no one in the system. By the way, the three players we gave to Oakland was a stupid trade. All three were in our top 10 farm kids. Montas could have been our closer. All three are probably going to be on Oaklands team this year. We got two rentals for these kids. Dumb. That is why we must sign Turner. If we do not, then we will have to trade. There goes some more farm kids. You are not going to get rid of Either, McCarthy, and Kasmir.
They won’t be getting under this luxary tax, until after 2018.
I think Rhame or Ravin can be our closer. We also have Broassard who moved from high A to AAA last year. I just wished we still had Montas.
Scott: “Let’s get one thing straight here. Anytime I hear somebody complain about the Dodger’s payroll it makes me irritated. Some fans are really weird these days. (No not you guys). First of all, it’s not your money. It’s not my money. It’s not our money. ”
But, but, Badger tells us “IT IS OUR MONEY”!! I do agree with you Scott!! It is the owner’s money! They are the people responsible for paying the Dodger’s bills, including bad contracts. We all get to determine, with OUR money, if WE can afford to buy tickets or Dodger TV, etc. when they raise prices to cover the bills. Many here already say NO.
What I don’t get, is how some people think they have the right to determine how someone else spends their money!! I know a lot of posters here sure thought Greinke was the cat’s meow last off-season. Wanted him signed at ANY cost, after all he surely would age like a fine wine!! Many “experts” think AZ lost $100M + on his contract last season. How many posters here would have been willing to send FAZ a check to help cover that loss if FAZ had signed Greinke?? I think zero!!!
I know fans all have an opinion, including me, about the best way to build a MLB winner. But, “the buck doesn’t stop here”. So we don’t get to decide!! My advise, sit back and enjoy the ride, remembering our billionaire’s payroll is already the highest in baseball. Looks to me they will continue being among the highest, but, remember even billionaires have their limits. You want to know what that limit is? Look to what the other MLB billionaires are willing to spend. Looks to me the limit is right around the luxury tax threshold.
Boxout
We know you are a billionaire lover, so how can we take you seriously?
Ha Ha!
Hadn’t really thought of being a “billionaire lover”, but, in the old days, I admit, I would think it wouldn’t be bad to marry some “hot young number” who was rich. I met a lot of hotties, but, not many rich ones. Sadly, most of those hotties were also crazy!!!
I agree with Scott on the $. These guys are in their own markets, not in ours. Baseball is immensely and financially profitable, so why not let these guys play with their money the way they want? It doesn’t have to show up in ticket prices, but it will because ownership knows that at the end of the day, people will fill the seats. And TV runs everything anyway. 1 mil a year is stupid for any of these guys. Once we get over that and figure it is entertainment, not building cars, the sky is the limit. Players and owners love it. So should we. The union won’t allow a hard salary cap, and that is the reason for the luxury tax. It is a compromise so that there would not be a salary cap. And all the while, the value of the franchises keep going up. It is a win…win…win except for those of us who resent it so much that we give up being fans. I think those guys are rarer than it might seem. There does come a point when a certain salary for a certain player does not make sense for a certain team. That should be Jansen and, probably, Turner, although no-one really knows what the market for Turner is. For Jansen, we all know.
B17,
Well stated.
Bobby 17
Is a closer like Kenley rare?
Enough with the money already. If that is the issue, then make some smart trades. They have been linked to several and have made none. At this point I do not care who they trade for, just do something constructive. The total lack of action suggests to the average fan that they have no urgency to do anything. That is not comforting to those who pay through the nose to watch these guys. Reduce payroll? Trade the 2 biggest wastes of money on this team, Kazmir and McCarthy. Problem there is that at this point, nobody wants either one of them.
Since this comment was awaiting moderation, I broke it up so that only one link were in each comment.
All teams need to sign a free agent from time to time including the Dodgers. But, if a QO is attached to a free agent and a team is over the payroll penalty, signing that free agent will cost a second and fifth round draft pick, or something like that.
It is not just payroll affordability. Teams that are over the penalty are going to have to trade for what they need due to the new CBA.
I hope Turner is signed and I hope whomever winds up at second base is a fast player that plays great defense and hits well from the right side and is controllable for 5 years. That leaves out Kinsler and Dozier.
If Dozier is going to cost De Leon and Stewart why not add Verdugo and try to get Brendan Rodgers or Ian Happ or Franklin Barreto or Dansby Swanson or Ozzie Albies or Gleyber Torres.
Those players can be reviewed here: http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2016 except for Torres.
Gleyber Torres who can be found here: http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/yankees-prospect-gleyber-torres-continues-to-dominate-in-arizona-fall-league/
Like I said above, where was everyone that is talking about being careful with the money, when they didn’t handle the money well, and signed these terrible pitchers.
And I certainly don’t think Hill is more important to this team, then Turner!
Bum
We won’t be giving up a pick for Turner or Kenley, only the other teams will.
And I don’t think
Hill who was here only one half of a season, is more important to sign then Turner and Kenley.
And the Dodgers are going to get under the luxary tax, in two years.
MJ, FAZ seems to like getting first round draft choices for players they offer QOs to that other teams sign as much as they dislike giving away first round draft choices for signing other teams’ free agents that received a QO.
I think I knew the Dodgers didn’t have to give themselves a draft pick for signing Turner and Jansen.
Hill gives the team a second ace that they need and although he might not be available when really needed, I like that better than trading for Sale. They used their financial strength instead of their prospects unlike when they traded for Casey Blake and gave up Santana and Meloan.
There is no doubt in my mind that the signing of Hill will not affect the signing of Turner and Jansen as those signings will be totally based on their demands. Would I rather have Turner for $100M and not have Hill? Hell no. The Dodgers can make a trade to replace Turner and while that player might not be as good as Turner, he might be better against lefties.
Turner is a great clubhouse teammate. He plays great defense. He is a legitimate #3 hitter. He is not the best fit for the Dodgers though due to hitting more like a lefty hitter on a team full of lefty hitters.
Bum
I do think the risk on Hill, is at least worth his upside, but we need Turner more, even with his weakness with lefties.
Turner is the best fit for us, because we won’t get a middle of the order bat, like Turner’s, at Turners price.
And hopefully they might find someone that hits lefties well, for second.
Bum
Why would we give up our three good prospects, for one prospect?
The Red Sox got a very good major league starting pitcher for that type of prospects.
You are valuing prospects to high.
We don’t know that these prospects will make it, and most don’t.
MJ, you answered your question for me.
I don’t like 2 year rentals and like you have often said, players don’t make the move from one league to another all that well or at least not that quickly.
Badger has said a few times that he now wants to wait for 2018 and keep our future intact. I am also willing to go with Taylor at second due to his speed and defense. Hernandez has never impressed me but I would prefer him before I gave up too much for 2 years of Dozier or worse 4 years of Kinsler.
I would be hesitant to give up three good prospects for one prospect. Sometimes I exaggerate to make a point and that point was if I were to give up 3 good prospects I would want more than a 2 year rental.
Another thing. If you do not agree with someone’s post and feel a need to say something about it. I suggest we all be a little more civil to each other and not call names. It has gotten pretty testy on here lately and what we all need to remember is that everyone is entitled to their take no matter if you think it is lame or not. Disagree or agree, it makes no difference.
Agree 100%
I actually think that is the first time we have agreed on anything…that’s progress….
Hill 110 innings
Kenley 68 innings, and 47 saves.
Is that really that big of a difference?
And who pitched more stressful innings?
Don’t only look backwards, also look forward.
Starting pitchers > relief pitchers
Bluto
Is 110 innings, a starter, or a long relief pitcher?
If you consider Rich Hill closer to a long relief pitcher than an elite starter then we are definitely coming at this from different places.
When Hill is healthy he is a 7 or 8 inning pitcher. He is all in or all out, nothing in-between.
I love KJ, but how many of his innings were stressful until the playoffs? A lot of 2 and 3 run saves in there. So, I would say Hill.
Hawkeye
I just hope if we are in the post season next year, that the Nats don’t bring in Kenley, and use him against us.
Me too but I think KJ is a goner.
Question: Does referring to someone as a narcissistic asshole, mean that you are name calling or just being very descriptive of that person?
Answer: YES
Yes, you are name calling or yes, you are being descriptive?
I was just playing with you guys, but not having Kenley next year, is going to make that last inning, hard to watch.
Unless the front office finds someone.
Kenley is getting married this weekend, and Turner is going to be at Kenley’s wedding this weekend too.
And no Mark we can’t have Baez closing.
YES
A weird tidbit here…when I go to foxsports.com and it logs me into the Dodger home page, for some unknown reason the story I see everyday is that the Dodgers are close to signing Olivera…….and this is long after that happened and the guy has been traded twice! Totally weird……
Wow – more snarky, less filling. (I remember a beer commercial like that.)
Anyway:
1 – IF the model is to develop your own players and then keep them, then losing Jansen seems to be inconsistent with that.
2 – I get the money piece of all of this.
3 – Like my comment about Mark’s post about the Red Sox’ production from low cost, team controlled young players, they don’t stay that way forever. What’s the point of developing talent and being competitive only to lose the players that you develop?
4 – That’s the A’s/Rays model – be competitive for a couple of years until you “can’t afford” to keep your players anymore and then trade them for more prospects.
5 – If you run a big market team, you fill in the gaps left by your farm system with big $$ free agents – thus the Cubs signed Lester, Zobrist and Heyward last year. The Dodgers are filling in gaps with the likes of McCarthy, Anderson, Utley, Kazmir and now Hill.
6 – I can’t consider Hill to be an “elite starter”. He is a 100 inning pitcher until he proves that he isn’t. He has only thrown over 100 innings 2 times in a 13 year career. I hope that he throws more but don’t expect it.
7 – Agree that it is easier to “replace” Jansen than Turner at this point but have seen no evidence that anyone currently on the roster has either the stuff or the makeup to pitch the high leverage innings that Jansen has pitched so well over the past 4 or 5 years. I am amused at the suggestion that some minor leaguer that has never pitched a single big league inning is ready to do the job or that somehow Ross Stripling will be the Dodger’s version of Andrew Miller. I REALLY don’t want the Dodgers to give Jansen’s job to the likes of Hatcher or Baez, and there isn’t anyone else on the roster that I’ve seen who is ready to do the job. McCarthy – really? What makes anything think that his arm won’t fall off again?
8 – Turner would seem to be a must sign at this point. Absent a “let’s move Puig to 3B” discussion, there isn’t anyone on the roster who is an obvious replacement.
9 – Lest we forget, the Braintrust likes the 3 team 9 player trade. This is what I expect – we will end up with a 2B or a 3B or a closer or some combination as the result of some trade or trades that we don’t know anything about yet and will probably be an unexpected surprise.
10 – The roster won’t be finalized until March. Until then, we can hope that the Dodgers keep the players that we fans like to watch in Dodger Blue but I wouldn’t bet on it.
I’m ambivalent. I realize it’s there money to spend but it’s our $ they want.
So I do think there is some sort of connection.
Artie – Hope life is good.
I’m off to watch Watford v The Toffees (Everton) tomorrow.
2 poor teams in poor form.
Can’t wait.
2 poor teams in poor form.
And it’s soccer….
Helll Watford. At the time of this writing its about 1:00 am on your side of the pond. The Toffees stared well under new manager Ronald Koeman but have since hit a rough patch. Enjoy your day at Vicarage Road.
As far as our Dodgers go it’s basically wait and wait and wait.
MJ: “If we can’t get rid of McCarthy or Kazmir, in one of the worse years for starting pitching, that says it all.”
Did they tell you their plans to get rid of these two pitchers? I think they would like to get rid of them no later than when they would be included in 2018 luxury tax calculation, maybe the plan is to showcase them in 2017 to maximize value.
MJ: “And let’s just see if they do move these pitchers, how much money will we have to pay the other teams.”
OK
MJ: “And if they are not going to sign Kenley, what are they doing, to get another closer?”
Internal options to close
Dayton
Liberatore
Rhame
?????
External options to close or beef up bullpen
Greg Holland
Neftali Feliz
Boone Logan
Shawn Tolleson
Chris Withrow
??????
MJ: “The front office didn’t give this team, the starting pitching that they needed!”
Yes, actually they did!! See 2016 division winner! See 2016 division champion! It is called depth!!!
MJ: “And although Kazmir managed to make most of his starts, until just before August, he really ”didn’t pitch well.”
Yeah, Kazmir had a Greinke type year, not the best, but, he was a lot cheaper. Good job FAZ. Didn’t you want Greinke at $206M + ???
MJ: “And if we didn’t have our young pitchers, this could have turned out, really bad.”
Finally we agree on something!!! Depth Depth Depth!!! Good job FAZ!!! That Maeda acquisition was “pure genius”.
Rhame hasn’t pitched a single big league inning and he’s to be the closer?
Logan has a career ERA of 4.45 and he walked 20 in 45 innings last year.
Tolleson and Witherow are recovering from major arm surgeries. They would therefore be perfect to be on the Dodgers’ pitching staff this year. Same with Holland – I read that he is throwing in the high 80’s now – none of these 3 are likely to be ready for the start of the season.
Libertore recovering from arm surgery too. Dayton – a 28 year old rookie last year. As the guys at Dodgers’ Digest have written, he has less than a full major league season under his belt and the Dodgers don’t know for sure what they have as the league adjusts to him.
Other than Feliz, none of the guys you mention are ready to be closers for the Dodgers next year.
dodgerrick: “Rhame hasn’t pitched a single big league inning and he’s to be the closer?”
I wonder what your first client said about you? “He hasn’t tried one case and he is going to handle our case????”
Point is, lots of options/depth, for the price of Jansen the “depth” of the bullpen can be deepened. I really like Dayton, he could be the 2017 version of Colome at TB. But, if he doesn’t work out, maybe Feliz and Dodgers have others. You have got to give FAZ credit, they know how to build a bullpen!!!
I didn’t start out trying big cases. I started out doing research, doing simple hearings and small value cases and went from there.
You don’t start a pitcher’s major league tenure as closer.
No, but I could see them “manufacturing” a closer by finding a bullpen arm on another team with good swing and miss stuff, and seeing if that works as a closer.
I could see the above well before I see rushing a rookie arm, or overpaying Jansen, or giving the Jansen too many years.
But I could be wrong.
They have their own style on bullpen management: mass quantity, rotate them, all have very short stints on the mound. It can work, it’s just annoying to see it in action. I personally don’t like a parade of relief pitchers. But that’s just me.
Boxout
There starting pitchers did nothing, including Kazmir at 16 million a year.
In fact Kazmir, did the team a favor by going out, because he was more help to the other teams.
Kazmir probably only managed to pitch two good games all year, and didn’t pitch the last months of the season.
Our young pitchers pitched the innings, that these pitchers were being paid to pitch.
As well as a few pitchers off the scrap heap, started games.
Most of the season Anderson, and McCarthy, sit on the bench tweeting, and Kazmir joined them, for the last couple of the months of the season too.
MJ: “There starting pitchers did nothing, including Kazmir at 16 million a year.”
Did you see my comment above? Yeah, Kazmir had a Greinke type year, not the best, but, he was a lot cheaper. Good job FAZ. Didn’t you want Greinke at $206M + ???
What do you say about that?????????????
Holland, Ravin, Dayton. Zigler will hold down the late innings next year. sounds like the Nationals are going to make a final run at KJ.
Hawkeye
If we get Holland.
His velocity was down when he was showcased.
And the Giants GM was the only GM at that showcase, and the Giants passed on him, so who knows what he will be like.
I wonder if the money that the front office offered Kenley, would have got Melancon.
There have been more than the Giants looking at him Can’t say am excited about that option though.
Scott: “We all want the Dodgers to spend their money wisely and operate their business correctly and efficiently. The way to do that is to actually retain your star players and keep them in town. Keeping star players on the roster helps the team win and helps fill seats. Those are facts.”
Got to disagree!! “Keeping star players on the roster helps the team win and helps fill seats” only when star players keep playing like star players. Fans are fickle and are not loyal, when stars fade, fans hate them and their CONTRACTS!!
Scott: “I don’t care if the Dodger’s payroll is 500 million dollars as long they are winning and or win championships. That’s what this is about, winning championships.”
Spoken like a “true fan” with no sense of reality or accountability!!! Let’s meet for dinner, YOUR TREAT, I don’t care what is costs, it’s all about having a good time!! Lets Party, I’ll bring lots of friends!!!!!
Do any of you posters really not get that bad moves have future consequences?
Like signing Boone Logan to close?
Sure if he is signed and doesn’t get the job done. But the future financial consequences of signing Logan would be minimal if he failed and his low cost would also allow Dodgers to sign other options.
A better example of a bad move having future consequences would be Greinke or Jansen if he blows out an elbow.
Here are a few indisputable facts:
1. The Dodgers starting pitching depth is the deepest in baseball. Maybe they haven’t traded Kaz or Mac because they don’t want to. Maybe the best time is at the trade deadline. Maybe we see what youngster takes a big step.
2. I think there are many candidates to be the Dodgers closer on the roster. I would not worry about it.
3. If the Dodgers don’t pare down payroll to say “below $235 million” MLB is going to flex their muscles on their debt ratio. The Dodgers know that and will get it down. In 2018, they will be very close to the luxury tax maximum. The Dodgers have no choice but to toe the line… no matter what Kasten says.
4. Sometimes you just are best to stand pat – don’t push the envelope – let the game come to you.
5. Even if the three pitchers we traded for Hill make it big (which is unlikely), we still have greater pitching depth than anyone in baseball. We won’t miss them. It’s funny that some say “Not all our prospects pan out” but then treat all of those prospects like they will. I guess you just want to have it your way. OK, but it’s a weak argument if you can’t apply it evenly. I have always believed Grant Holmes = Zach Lee.
6. People are still complaining that the Dodgers didn’t re-sign Greinke? If it made sense to you then, it’s should certainly not make sense now.
7. I would sign Turner for $60 million/3 years, but I think he will get a lot more, however I hope not! I’d like to have him back.
8. I have found that in baseball unlikely things happen, but that you have to stay the course to allow it to happen.
9. If you build it right, you keep a core of players as they get expensive and trade others for prospects to keep perpetuating the system.
10. Everyone seems to be down on Kike right about now. I think you may have a different opinion next year. It’s also Barnes Time – I look for him to have a nice season.
No dope fiend moves!
I dispute your statement re: starting pitching depth so it isn’t indisputable, but that being said, there is something to be said about quality over quantity. As Jon Weisman put it the other day, “What happens to this formula in the postseason, when the value of volume gives ground to the need for elite performance?”
Name one guy on the 40 man roster that you would like to see closing games for the Dodgers next year.
You trade from your abundance – the Dodgers have more right-handed pitching prospects than anything else. If you are going to trade prospects for a player, then they traded what they had most of. You can debate whether they traded the right guys but I am OK with the trade.
There is no point to growing your own if you are going to do the A’s/Rays and trade them for prospects every few years. The hated Giants won 3 titles in 6 years with mostly home grown players that they resigned or extended.
Name one guy on the 40 man roster that you would like to see closing games for the Dodgers next year.
Baez – Yes, speed him up and teach him the cutter.
Liberatore – His surgery was not serious. He’s in the mix.
McCarthy – Failed Starter – He can throw 97 – I’d consider him
Stewart – High 90’s out of the pen – good control
Rhame – A fireballer
Sborz – Another guy with the requisite stuff
…. and De Leon – Let him close for a year – he would be in the high 90’s as a reliever.
Will all of those guys work? Of course not, but one or two might!
I think Stewart could do it. He has a big fastball, a nasty change, and great composure.
I think that distinction between value of volume vs. need for elite is a really interesting one.
I would think it’s the reason behind their move for Hill.
Didn’t Farhan say something similar?
ejg
You haven’t always believe Grant Holmes equals Lee. I’ve never heard you touting him as an Ace but I seem to recall you being pretty positive about him until he was traded.
The last time I did a Top 20 (2 years ago) he wasn’t in it! He really has not progressed. I never saw him in the rotation unless it was as a #5!
Some of these commenters make a certain part of my anatomy hurt… And I’m not talking about Timmons, I think I have developed an immunity to him.
Wondering
Sorry if I am part of that problem.
I just hate when people try to constantly revive those bad signings.
Culberson has been removed from the 40-man roster. Something is coming.
Culberson just outrighted from the 40 man roster.
I hope something good is going to happen!
Seems to imply a player is coming in but no one going out. No one on the 40 man roster, that is. Turner?
Sorry McCarthy and Kazmir isn’t depth, or even good pitchers.
The depth is mainly our young pitching prospects, and Kershaw, Hill, and Wood.
And they were trying to shop McCarthy and Kazmir, but I guess there was no takers..
And we saw way to much of Kike, and he had more at bats this year, then last year, and hit below the mendosa line all year.
And his defense wasn’t that good either..
There’s a lot of talent that haven’t found homes yet. Guys like that moving could happen still. I think McCarthy to Yankees makes sense.
MJ: “Sorry McCarthy and Kazmir isn’t depth, or even good pitchers.
The depth is mainly our young pitching prospects, and Kershaw, Hill, and Wood.”
Why do you FAZophobes always want to forget MAEDA?????
MJ: “And they were trying to shop McCarthy and Kazmir, but I guess there was no takers.”
Yeah, maybe CWS didn’t want to do Sale for McCarthy and Kazmir. You must not be a very good shopper!! Don’t you sometimes wait for a “Inventory Reduction Sale” to try and get a bargain on what you want? The hot-stove season is young, no reason for Dodgers to sell low right now and no reason for other teams to buy high right now. Let’s see who blinks first!
My, but you’re being aggressive today, Catbox. It’s just as well to let people rant, doesn’t cost anything, and doesn’t change anything. Maybe it makes them feel better? None of it means anything anyway…
So true!
If the Creator gives me the opportunity to reach your level of age I hope to have some of your wisdom!
I sure am Wondering about your “shit fetish”! Oh well, to each their own!
Is it worse than a box fetish?
Wondering
That is so true, that is why I was messing with Bum and Bluto today.
Wondering
What time do you get up, and go to bed at?
Whenever the mood strikes me, which is the exclusive province of the single man… I could go to bed as early as 7PM, later than 8:30 would be rare. I get up when I awake, which could be anything from 4AM to 7AM. Same way with food, whatever I want, whenever I want it. Trouble is, there is little I want these days.
Boxout
The problem with most of the important things, you usually pay for what you get.
Wondering, Boxout is lost today, without Badger being here.
Perhaps Taxidea Taxidea is hibernating, or looking for worms, insects, and the eggs and young of ground-nesting birds…
Wondering
That makes life pretty easy.
I thought you said that you went to bed early.
And I know you were not happy with the time change, so I thought you might go to bed early, and wake up early, to get a fuller day in.
Because it gets dark so early right now.
I just read that a GOP rep, that was bringing a bill, that will cut a lot of seniors social security.
And that same bill, would stop any cost of living raises too.
I guess he doesn’t know that seniors go out and vote, more then others do.
Now that we have an open spot on the 40 man roster, who will fill it?
Answer…………………………………………Tyson Ross who is said to want $9-$11MMand should be ready by opening day.
PIRATES and others seem to be interested.
Richie
The Pirates have the pitching coach, that makes major league pitchers better again.
Like Nicasio?
Wondering
That makes life pretty easy.
I thought you said that you went to bed early.
And I know you were not happy with the time change, so I thought you might go to bed early, and wake up early, to get a fuller day in.
Because it gets dark so early right now.
I just read that a GOP rep, that was bringing a bill, that will cut a lot of seniors social security.
And that same bill, would stop any cost of living raises too.
I guess he doesn’t know that seniors go out and vote, more then others do.
Cost of living raises will only be cut for people making more then 80,000 a year, my bad.
Not his call,,,,,SSA is not controlled by congress…and our COLA this year was .03 %….I got a 4 dollar raise….that was after not getting squat last year….so this year I get 48 bucks more…….whoopdeedoo!
And Happ!
Who knows. Maybe they want a spot free for appearance. Teams may feel they have the Dodgers over a barrel if they’re sitting at 40.
Another thing that the decision to sign Jansen (or not) might impact:
Will Kershaw think poorly of the Dodgers if Jansen leaves? Here is from Dodger.com:
http://m.dodgers.mlb.com/news/article/210826486/jansen-dodgers-decision-could-impact-kershaw/
“The ace will have already watched Zack Greinke leave the Dodgers last offseason after one of the best seasons of his career, perhaps followed by Kenley Jansen, the best closer in the league in 2016 and the franchise saves leader.
What happens to Jansen in the coming days and weeks not only obviously impacts the Dodgers’ roster for ’17, but it likely will be an important data point in Kershaw’s decision to stay or go.
Management’s well-stated desire of a sustainable financial model for acquiring and keeping personnel rarely sits well with veterans who have made their money and now just want to win.”
What does that tell Kid K if the Dodgers blow Jansen off?
“The club didn’t sign Jansen when it had exclusive negotiating rights, maybe because the situation was complicated by Justin Turner’s free agency, although the same playbook was used with Greinke, so it seems to be club policy.”
That article seems to ignore that Kershaw only has to worry about not getting a big offer from the Dodgers is if he opts out of an already big contract.
If I were the Dodgers, I would want Kershaw to tell us if he plans to opt out and if yes, I would trade him.
Bum
That would be the idea situation.
We will know what we have in Urias by then too.
I know it takes a long time for a young pitcher to develop, but I think two years down the line Urias will be so much better.
And like I have said before, a former major league pitcher, said that Urias has better stuff then Kershaw.
The idea he would leave has come up before, but not having a dominant closer is something new. If we lose both free agents Kershaw might find it wise to follow the Greinke model, walk cautiously through ’17, put together a strong ’18 and then get extended in Texas. He says his back is fine because of course he would. We don’t know that. He doesn’t know it either. The Dodgers would be perspicacious to plan a future without him. And that is good enough reason not to trade any more young pitchers.
By the way, Timmons may think Holmes will never make it but MLB had him at #68 in there Top 100. Cotton is undefeated as a ML starter with a Jansen like 0.8 WHIP, and Montas is throwing 100 mph again. Rich Hill won a couple and cost $48 million. He’s only 37 so his future looks bright. For him. And all the little Hill minnows running around his new mansion.
By Hill joining the Dodgers at the end of the season he and the Dodgers got to know each other and that comfort probably was key in the Dodgers offering that contract to him and him accepting it. Looking at it that way, the Dodgers traded Holmes, Cotton, and Montas for 3+ years of Hill which included having him for last year’s playoffs.
A 2019 rotation of Urias, De Leon, Alveraz, Buehler, and Stewart could be an outstanding rotation plus leave Schefield, Stripling, Sborz, Rhame, Wood, Garcia, Frias, Dayton, Liberatore, Hatcher, Diaz, Avilan, Ravin, and others to make up the bullpen.
Artie – one for you from the Vic
Me & my Bro
I think whether Clayton Stays or goes depends upon just one thing: Does he want to go home. If he does… nothing the Dodgers can do will stop it, but he also needs to recognize that he will not pitch as well there. His career ERA will rise a lot!
By the way, Timmons may think Holmes will never make it but MLB had him at #68 in there Top 100.
Well there you go. Just elect him to the Hall-Of-Fame… oh wait – he is not rated as highly as Zack Lee who was #42 in 2012! Just saying… Allen Webster was #72. Chris Archer was #81. Trevor Story was #78 and Corey Seager was no where. Jurickson Profar was #1 and he’s still knocking. You never know how fast these guys progress!
I don’t like the fact that we gave up Montas and Cotton for Hill. I don’t care about Holmes, but the fact remains, we got Hill to put us over the top and he was a game away from having the opportunity to do that… if our Ace could have Aced the Cubs. FAZ did their job – Clayton didn’t. It’s a disturbing pattern. If Clayton had dominated then Hill was next, pitching in the game of his life and it did not happen.
Hill is a bridge – another contract that won’t kill you. I wonder how his stuff would play out at closer? I was listening to MLB last night and they were talking about Santaigo Castilla and how you can’t win with a closer who blows 9 games. Jansen blew 6 in his CAREER YEAR. You know I have been down on Jansen at times although he pitched well in the NLCS.
But we dealt from a position of strength and no one is even talking about Alvarez and Sierra. I hated to lose Cotton and Montas but it was worth the risk in my opinion because of the depth we have.
I think Alvarez is a son-to-be Ace and Sierra is a soon-to-be two of clubs.
If a fastball was all it took to be a closer then Sierra would be an applicant.
Apparently the Dodgers have two minor leaguers that have shown the mental toughness to close.
“Tucked away in the Dodgers farm system are two very capable potential future major league closers – right-handers Joe Broussard and Josh Sborz – both of whom enjoyed tremendous success during the 2016 season.”…. http://www.thinkbluela.com/2016/12/dodgers-have-two-very-inexpensive-closer-options/
I think Stripling can be an excellent 2 inning relief pitcher and used similarly to how Cleveland used Miller.
The best way to keep Baez from slowing down games is to trade him to an American League team.
I saw Sborz pitch at Rancho. Kid has lightning stuff
Bum
Doesn’t Miller have much better stuff then Striping?
It doesn’t look like hitters, have a lot of trouble hitting Stripling.
The Cubs who haven’t seen much of him, hit him hard in that fifth play off game.
Miller is dominate like Kenley is.
I don’t think Stripling could come close to matching Miller’s era or whip but I do think he can get the Dodgers through 2 innings and still be in the game. I would use him that way but not necessarily expect equal performance.
Bum
I think your right on both.
Mark
I agree with you about Kershaw, and the post season.
I was another one that was disappointed with Kenley during the regular season, because he blew some really important games, and he blew a game in SF that cost us two games.
But I just think he needs more work to stay sharp during the regular season.
Because he got better the more he threw in the post season.
And the way he threw during the post season, changed my mind about Kenley.
If a team is going to give a multi year contract to a closer, at the amount we have seen, Kenley is the ideal closer to sign.
He is only 29, he doesn’t have a lot of miles on his arm, because he was a catcher, and he only throws that one pitch most of the time, and that pitch plays if you throw a good one.
And the best closer in history used that same pitch for a long career.
After watching Chapman throw during the post season, I now think Kenley is a much better closer.
Kenley is stronger mentally then Chapman, and built better then Chapman.
I also am afraid the front office won’t do enough to fill Kenleys role too.
Blanton turned out to be a good signing, but he shouldn’t have to be a set up man.
We now need a set up man, and a closer.
And it looks like they will march Hatcher out there again.
Hatcher couldn’t do his job last year, and that is why Blanton was setting up.
And Hatcher has no options, so once again he will stay on the big team, even when he doesn’t pitch well.
I think if the Dodgers had the option to stick Hatcher down in AAA, when he isn’t pitching well, he wouldn’t be so annoying.
Just saw a bit of MLB TV, and their review of some of the key OTHER teams and closers.
The Giants with a new closer, the Cubs with a new closer, the Yankees with a new closer, the Cardinals with a new center fielder, and so forth.
But the Dodgers might sign Jansen, and might not. Other teams will offer him deals.
As said here many times — Jansen is a key to the 2017 season. If not Jansen they better get something done. Or, it is back to Spring Training and getting no sleep trying to teach pitchers control . . . and that is not easy.
Jansen is as good as gone. But luckily for the Dodgers it will be an east coast team and not a division rival. He will get crazy money for a closer. I think their direction now will go one of two ways, closer by committee, or sign someone like Holland. The D-Backs just signed Rodney, so we will have to look at his ugly puss again this year. They need to address the problem vs lefty’s, and oddly signing Turner does not really solve that. He rakes against RH pitching and struggles with the southpaws. If Puig and Thompson are both healthy and contribute what they are capable of, that would help a lot. I think at this point they will platoon a lot. If Turner leaves, I think they will actually opt to trade for Frazier. The one thing the guy does well is rake against leftys.
I still think the trade with Oakland was a bad trade. We gave up to much for two rentals. Montas could easily be our closer this year. This is why we need to sign Turner, if we do not, we will give up more farm kid to get someone not as good as Turner. I can live with losing Jansen, but not Turner. Cotton and Montas will both be on Oakland’s team this year with Holmes not far behind. I am ok with Hill, but I do not consider him to be an elite pitcher. He is also 36 years old. We could have Cotton starting for us this year and much younger and much lower salary. Bad trade.
Idahoal
I agree with you, because it is bad enough we had to take Reddick with Hill, let alone to give them so much for that rental.
I agree Al. I also think they really need to lock up Turner, and I worry what kind of message losing Jansen sends to Kershaw. I agree the contract is way to high, but losing Greinke and now Jansen has got to impact a players thinking. Are they really trying to win or what. Hill is a journeyman with an injury history and 2 decent seasons in a 13 year career. Sounds a lot like McCarthy doesn’t it? Hill will be 37 during this next season. He won 3 regular season games after the trade and Reddick was a total bust. And for that we gave up 3 of the kids they say they covet. It was much worse than any mid season deal Ned ever made.
I sent a link to Oscar about a new gadget he’s going to install for us. It is a Like/Dislike Button. It will appear after each individual message here and I think its usuage will be self explanatory. I think it will a real eyeopener to a lot of us, myself included. We tend to think that almost everyone agrees with us, because we’re so smart, naturally, so it may come as a surprise to some of us just how far out of touch we are…
Dislike
Awww, Fred, you’re just doing that because you know I’m going to “dislike’ every one of your wild-assed trade proposals…
What? Fred makes wild ass trade proposals???? Ridiculous!
Not true Art. I did it just to be funny.
Wondering and Bum,
I don’t think Bluto needs one of those choices to say what he likes, or dislikes.
I agree the Oakland trade was bad. Add it to the list.
I can see why some don’t like Holmes. Wait, no I can’t. First round pick. His fastball is graded 65, his curveball graded 60, he hit 100 mph in high school and has settled in at 92-95 in the pros. He can miss bats with both pitches, just needs to refine that change-up and he’s a mid rotation guy. And he might have been the third best prospect in that deal. For two rentals – one on the disabled list. We just have to do better if we’re going to move top prospects. I still say don’t move top prospects.
Not to mention any names, but they get angry with us for criticizing FAZ, claiming we don’t understand his MO, won’t give it a chance to work. They are wrong, some of us are in agreement with what he is trying to do, lower the payroll and stop being held up by free agents. What we are criticizing him for is his appallingly bad judgement in trades and talent. The Oakland trade is a prime example.
FAZ would not be getting criticized at all if, and this is a HUGE IF, he had signed guys that actually were healthy and contributed. If the people he traded for actually contributed on a regular basis. Do you realize that Kike Hernandez had probably the best season of any of his acquisition’s in 2015? Then fell on his face in 2016. Grandal had a great 1st half in 15, a few decent weeks in 16, and disappeared in the playoffs in both years. Hill oddly enough had the best playoffs of any of his pickups this year. The only redeeming factor from the trade. Reddick gave them poop. It is not that he is doing it the wrong way. It is that it looks like all they want are guys who have had injury issues and are seemingly low risk signings. They will never be like Dombrowski and make high risk moves.
Michael
It looks like the front office, only wants to keep the players, that they have brought to the team, like some here, have said.
Why is Hatcher still here?
If Colletti had brought Hatcher in, would he still be here, or get a raise from last year?
Hatcher went on the DL again, last year, and the time he did pitch, he was terrible!
Hatcher had one good month, but he hasn’t even pitched an entire season, since he has joined the team.
He missed most of his first year, as well as last year.
And he has been the worse pitcher in the bullpen, in the last two years.
But he is not only still with this team, the front office actually gave Hatcher a raise for last year.
They should have given Blanton that raise, not Hatcher!
The thing I don’t like about that trade, is why did we have to take the A’s big negative Reddick, and still have to give up a third prospect?
We should have only had to give up two prospects, since we took that A’s player Reddick, off there hands.
We had no need for another leftie, and this was only a rental of Hill
And he was injured when we made that trade, so we didn’t even get Hill for a full half season.
And Reddick was a big negative, and he blocked out our young players.
He shouldn’t have been given all of that playing time either.
If Puig and Toles were played instead, Toles might have been even better, as well as Puig, once the post season began.
Puig was playing everyday in AAA, and when he was brought up, he didn’t get much playing time, so eventually his production went down, after sitting on the bench so much.
And Toles wasn’t getting consistent at bats either in September.
And that is why when people bring up what Toles did in September, I don’t take it seriously.
Both Toles and Puig were everyday players, and everyone knows when a player sits to much, they will lose there sharpness.
It was bad enough that Reddick was not producing much at all offensively.
But it was even worse, because he kept on making errors on defense, and making bad plays on defense.
But even after Reddick’s poor play on both sides of the field, he was still played over both Toles and Puig.
And he shouldn’t have been playing.
Our GM better stop making moves with the A’s for there terrible players, because he is making Dodger fans sick.
It is bad enough these are marginal players, and pitchers, but our GM is not going to get the best of a deal, with his former boss.
MJ, they were trying to make the trade look good. And the only way they do that is if Reddick produced because Hill was on the DL. So he was anointed the everyday RF. Roberts was trying to make Reddick feel comfortable in his new environment, and he was juggling all those OF’s trying to make everyone happy. Puig did not return until September, so that was not an issue until later. I really think, had Thompson not been injured, they would have only made that trade for Hill. Faidi knows the A’s players, and Friedman knows the Rays system, that is one reason they have made a lot of deals with those two teams. They are comfortable that they know the players capability’s and talent. If they were really worried about bad fan feedback and such, they would have cut Hatcher by now because for the most part, the guy has been a total bust. But they resigned him. Why? Low cost, high reward, that is their mantra. For a guy slotted #2, Hill is not getting crazy money, only 12 million this year, then 18 the next 2 years. The fans contention, and mine, is that he is not a # 2 and he has not done anything to merit that status.
Michael
Toles was on the team at that time, and he was way out performing Reddick.
I understand what Roberts tried to do, but it still wasn’t right, to continue playing this guy over Toles and Puig, once Puig came up.
Especially with the problems, that the team had, hitting leftie pitchers.
Mark said that taking Reddick was a condition, that the A’s insisted on, to trade for Hill.
But why give up the third prospect, if that was true?
That makes it look like the A’s took the Dodgers to the cleaners!
Hill was on the DL then too.
Well right or not it was his decision. We as fans look at it differently. Toles did a good job, but he was not the big piece in a trade so he was on the bench…..part of the FO’s depth. You can complain all you want but it does not change facts, and the fact was he was traded for, is a 8 year veteran and has a lot more experience playoff and season wise than Puig or Toles.
Well said, Wondering.
I think GMs could certainly use more imagination in player contracts. Turner, for instance. What are we offering, 3yrs/$54MM? And he wants 4 years? No problemo. We add a fourth year mutual option, same salary, and make it vesting if he starts 130 games in that third year. We could even add a fifth year, same way. Player keeps playing as long as he produces, club is protected if he tanks.
They would benefit from a contract like that. I have seen the team do it before with other players. Actually the Maeda contract is very creative. Probably because of the concerns they had about his health. Everyone complains about the Kemp contract, but at the time it made total sense. Matt Kemp had just had a monster season and was relatively young, 26 when he signed the deal. Nobody could have foreseen him crashing into a wall that very next season and derailing a superstar career. Ethier’s deal was a knee jerk reaction because they were afraid he would jump to the Diamondbacks.
Michael
The owners wanted Colletti to sign Ethier then.
Look at the multi year contract that Friedman gave Longoria.
I think that deal
didn’t start until the beginng of last year, and Longoria is not much younger then Turner.
I hope they told Turner if he gets a better offer, somewhere else, to come back to them, to see if we can match or beat the other offer.
I think with our really good players, they should show some kind of loyality, and not take it down to the last dollar.
That is what the Giants do, and they have had some good results because of that.
I know they should have never gave the freak that extension, or Peavy, but Peavy wasn’t a great player for them, and the Freak had made a lot of money already, but loyality does make a team, more desirable to go to.
The Giants also lock up their young guys early. Crawford, and Belt both signed long term deals during the season and Posey has been signed for a while. Peavy got a one year deal last off season. His long term deal came when he was a Padre. The Freak was coming off 2 Cy Young seasons. His deal also made sense at the time. Loyalty is no longer a big thing in the majors unless you are a superstar. In order to keep Bryce Harper after 2018, DC is going to have to pony up some serious cash, or he is walking, and they are talking 400 million plus for that guy………no way he becomes a Dodger.
Wondering
I agree with you
I think taking a hard stand against one of your best players, isn’t a good move.
They could be more flexible like you said.
JT is asking for 5 yrs
Hawkeye
What I mean if one of our really good players, wants a four year contract, why don’t they just give that player, not that fourh year, but just over pay them, for the three years.
Like with Turner, pay him 70 million for three years.
Why don’t they offer Kenley a four year contract with an opt out, after two years, or three years, that wouldn’t be that bad.
And like you said, Kenley was almost getting paid the same by year.
I know they both want five years, but try to be somewhere in between.
They may have. I have plenty of criticism for this front office, but I don’t think creativity is one of them. I give Turner 4 with an option and I think it will get done. I hold out hope for Kenley, but the amount is now high enough that i can’t fault them if they lose out. If they do lose out, I wouldn’t trade for Robertson to be the closer. Rather than giving Robertson $25 million for two years and trading prospects, I would definitely pay Kenley or sign some guys like Zigler, Feliz, Holland to go with our own pitchers.
I hate the idea of trading for Longoria. His salary will be right with JT’s, he’s not that much better and it would cost a bunch of our best minor league players.
It’s been interesting reading on a Twins blog what they think they will get from the Dodgers for Dozier.
Hawkeye
I don’t really know if Longoria is a better player right now.
In an article I read, they named all of these different type of wars, and Turner was rated fifth, in all of baseball.
The only players listed above him, were some pretty good players.
They were Bryant, Machado,
Josh Donaldson, and one more player, that was ranked higher then JT.
Like I said, JT is a poormans Donaldson.
The Cardinals gave Fowler to long of a contract.
I think Turner has better numbers offensively, and Turner will probably be better defensively at third, then Fowler will be down the rode in center..
And Fowler is only two years younger then JT.
I was actually directing the 5 years answer to Wondering. Sorry, I put it in the wrong spot.
At this point in time my frustration level is through the roof. Complaining actually takes more energy than I am willing to expend. Time to just sit back and see what happens.
No, it’s our responsibility to argue a bit with Mark, Catbox, and Bluto. Sort of like having to take the pooch out to poop every day…
Oh that part will keep on keepin on. It is my duty to disagree as much as possible……………….but it will have to wait until I get back from California in January. I leave in 10 days for the Xmas season…….
Take this with you…
100% Agree
Wondering
Yes we have to do our duty everyday, like our doggies, do.
And sometimes it does have a bad smell to it, doesn’t it?
I’m not frustrated yet – just waiting for the other shoe to drop. Will we or won’t we:
Sign Jansen
Sign Turner
Replace either or both
Sign or trade for a 2B, a righty hitter, a set up man?
Until the shoe drops, don’t be frustrated. Wait and see what happens.
The Braintrust doesn’t have the market cornered in brainpower:
http://www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/76926/winning-is-harder-when-everyone-is-smarter
“But in this new world, the Red Sox and Nationals understood that repeating their success in 2016 isn’t necessarily guaranteed unless you make the team better. So they went out and made those trades.”
“With Sale, the Red Sox are more likely to win 93 games again, more likely to make the playoffs and thus more likely to win the World Series. With Eaton in the outfield, the Nationals believe they have a better chance of running down the Cubs. Every team is searching for and finding the small edges: shifting, pitch framing, spin rates, exit velocity and on and on, down to new sabermetric studies on things like nutrition, team chemistry and work ethic. But Chris Sale isn’t a small edge; he’s a big edge.”
Here’s the issue – is the best the Dodgers can do is to not get worse, or will they actually be better in April than they were in October?
Rick
And the Nats might end up with Kenley too.
MJ:
I just read that the Dodgers will NOT match the Marlins offer. If the Nationals do or if the figures are close, my bet is he signs with the Nationals.
The Nationals have a much better chance of making the PS than the Marlins do IMHO.
I’ve already written off as returning to us. Sure if he goes to Miami he’ll be reunited with DM, AJ, etc. but he’ll lose the PS share of mucho dinero.
Which is hardly anything. If the Dodgers got close I think he would stay home or he would have already signed with Miami. AJ sitting on the bench in Miami will not be a factor.
Probably not so much. The Collective Bargaining Agreement defines how much of the playoff/series money goes to the players. It’s just under $70MM this year. Players who got as far along as the Dodgers and whichever American League team lost the Division Series shared 24% of that money, about $17MM. There were 50 players on the two teams but usually the players are very generous in dividing the money. So my guess is a players share would end up somewhere around a quarter million. That gets sort of lost in an $80MM contract…
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2016/12/06/cubs-world-series-shares-postseason-shares/95052434/
Dodgers got $124,000 each this year.
Richie
Kenley doesn’t like Mattingly that well.
So I don’t see that as a factor.
If it is close, why would he want to go to the Marlins, especially after his last post season.
I just wish Mattingly, and the Marlins, would just get lost!
Thanks for posting the correct answer, Hawkeye. The Internet research and math workout probably did me some good.
With what they are willing to pay him, I doubt he will care..if he was making MLB minimum maybe,,,,,,but not with millions of dollars headed his way…..
MJ,
I don’t think there is any substance to the Kenley not liking Mattingly thing. If anything he would have had a bone to pick with Coletti over Brandon League getting signed to be the closer.
Hawkeye
Yes I remember Kenley saying he felt Mattingly didn’t have any confidence in him.
It happened either 2012, or 2013.
Mattingly gave Kenley’s job to someone else, for a while, but then went to Kenley again.
And Kenley has done nothing but talk how much he likes working with Roberts.
Fine with me…
On the Dodger program today, Orel said that Kenley wouldn’t have wanted to go to NY, so maybe we still have a chance.
The Nats are also in a big city like NY, and the weather can be terrible there too.
And why would he want to go die on the Marlins.
I can give you millions of reasons……………..we have no shot with what he is asking…….this FO will not commit that much money to a closer……
Money.
It’s been said by a team-mate, that he’s looking to earn his worth on the open market.
Can’t criticize him for that.
Tree up.
Lights on it.
Village decorations up.
White Christmas on the TV.
Wine open.
Retired.
Dinner ready.
Dodgers? Who cares for now.
Keep on trucking…
Wondering
That is for sure.
And one shouldn’t take themselves to seriously either.
I am not a big Xmas person, and I will be glad, once we get past this year.
Absolutely!!!! The three worst days of the year (for me, anyway) are Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Years. Seems like everyone quits doing their normal things (even Internet) and disappears. I can’t complain for people with close family, I’m glad for them. But even loners like me withdraw from activities. I suppose it’s Holiday Depression. I’ll meet you here Christmas Day and have a Cyber Toast for a better 2017.
Wondering
That sounds great to me!
https://mlbreports.com/2016/12/06/the-dodgers-will-regret-the-rich-hill-deal-yet-another-injury-prone-chucker-in-the-rotation/
MLB says Dodgers will regret signing Hill. We could have told them that.
Wondering
They also have an article in Fox sports about what other teams think about McCarhy and Kazmir, in there Dodger site at Fox.
FAZ must have some good stuff on Stan Kasten.
Wondering
Your post is even better then Fox’s post.
And that says exactly what everyone has been saying here, for a while!
I think I remember someone told me, it wasn’t either Hill, or Turner and Kenley, but it has to be.
At 80 for five years, Kenley would have the same yearly wage as Hill, but Kenley’s contract is for five years.
But I believe the payroll is based on a players yearly salary.
And Kenley is much younger, and doesn’t have a long injury history.
Good read Wonder.
Anything happen? I’ve been busy. Heading home tomorrow.
Not much. Catbox and Bluto came in, pooped in the floor, but left when you weren’t there to play with them…
Badger
Howard Cole does his best with this same article on Forbes.
Nothing but Culberson being taken off the forty man.
Ok. I’m going back out to the hot pools.
Angels got Espinosa from DC, and UCLA won again beating the Wolverines. Finally..ARMY beat NAVY!
Michael
I keep on missing UCLA, next time they are going to be on, can you are someone here, mention that they are playing that day, and also mention the time?
That site is definitely not MLB’s.
Good article. Interesting point in that they should have allowed Hill to walk. But it’s more about the luxury tax problem, then the “dead money” to those not on the roster, then the walking wounded, before finally saying that Hill is basically the second coming of Kazmir. Yipee!
Artie boy
That is why when Mark are someone else, claims that the front office is spending money, by mentioning the payroll, that isn’t proof, because of all of the players getting paid, that are not even on the team.
I for one love Christmas. I do not care for how commercial it has become, but the reason for it and the joy you see on kids faces has always made me smile. I loved it when my kids would be so excited Christmas morning. We Dodger fans could use a couple of nice gifts in our stockings. Turner back, another power RH bat in the lineup, a certified option at the closer spot and not so much uncertainty, and McCarthy and Kazmir sent packing elsewhere with our compliments. Not much to wish for, just not much chance of it happening by Christmas.
Bah humbug.
Army beat Navy? I can’t remember the last time that happened. Wait – yes I can, 2001. The Admiral was a Lieutenant J.G.
Heading home today. Dammit. I like this place.
I think something big will happen this week. Might not involve the Dodgers, but it will be yuge.
The Vortex misses you Badger.
Yeah it was a while ago. Squids just have had better teams. I will be heading to Cal on the 20th and be there until the 5th of January. Can’t wait to work on my tan……….
I read the blog: The Dodgers Will Regret The Rich Hill Deal: Yet Another Injury Prone Chucker In The Rotation
One only needs to read the last paragraph to understand this guy is an imbecile: I understand the need to spend money on Free Agents, but really with these 2 guys making a collective $32 MIL a year for the next couple of seasons, they would have been better of to have signed Zack Greinke (who was 51 – 15, with a 2.30 ERA and 1.027 WHIP during his tenure in LA, before signing for a $34.42 AAV with the Diamondbacks last year as a Free Agent. )
Let me get this right: Because Greinke was 51-15 with a 2.30 ERA in his 29, 30 and 31st year with the Dodgers he will do the same up to age 38? And 6 years at $34.5 million to him is better than 2 more years at $32 million? What an idiot!
Now now……even idiots are entitled to their opinions…..
Mark
That same argument can be used with every starting free agent pitcher, that they have signed, and Hill will be 38 in the second year of his contract, unlike Greinke.
But the starting pitchers that they have signed, have even bigger risks then what comes with age, because of there long injury histories.
And Kazmir has had problems producing at the major league level, and suddenly he has a chronic condition now to.
But that is ok it only messes with his control, oh wait, pitchers must have control, and really, major league pitchers, have to have commmand too.
And he probably already knew he had that condition, considering he hasn’t pitch well for just under a year and a half.
A lot of pitchers have been good in their late 30’s and early 40’s. Greg Maddux was still an effective starter late in his career. I can name a lot of good pitchers who stayed that way. Now Hill has a injury history. Greinke has been on the DL a couple of times, but has never had major arm problems. I see no reason Zack cannot be good late in his 30’s. The guy is a finesse pitcher and does not rely on a blazing heater like Verlander and Scherzer. Even CK sets batters up off his fastball. Nobody knows how effective he can be late in his career. All pitchers are injury’s waiting to happen, which is the reason most teams shy away from giving long term deals to a pitcher unless he is young. Greinke was in the right place at the right time twice. Kershaw will have the same opportunity. I think management knows Kersh will opt out after 2018. And I also believe they will not give him a huge deal to stay. There is nothing we can do about Hill coming back because it is a done deal. Right or wrong he is the #2 now. Personally I trust Greinke to be a better pitcher at 37 than Hill will be. I also think Greinke will bounce back and have a much better season this year. The guy is too much of a pro not to. I think he got what the market dictated and you cannot begrudge the guy that. If we had a chance to make 206 million all of us would jump at that chance. Jansen is where Greinke was now. He is going to cash in one way or the other. And the options for the Dodgers are diminishing as time passes by. So the best option right now is make the offense better ASAP. Get solid guys for the bullpen and since they are so high on the depth of the starting pitching, put as much of the burden as they can handle on the young guys. Stewart, Stripling, Deleon, Urias, they have all had a taste of the bigs. Wood, if he is healthy can give them some innings. I still think they need to unload McCarthy and or Kazmir. Somebody who can actually give them starts who was not all that great with another team might blossom under Honeycutt. You never know. Look how Serage, and exe Dodger, has turned pitchers around in Pittsburgh. Of course, until spring training we will not have a clue what they are going to have to work with.
I read that Jansen got married this weekend in Curacao. Turner, Puig, SVS in attendance. It sounds like Jansen and Turner have other things on their minds right now. It might be a couple of weeks until things calm down for Jansen, Turner. The photos looked like all were having a good time. There is still a chance with them. Maybe. Family? Home town discount? Maybe. If the team gives them what they want, I’m ok with it. If not, I think there is enough depth to fill in adequately, assuming the same or better production from Agon, Seager, Pederson, Grandal, and………..Puig. I also think that most teams have a closer who can close 25-30 games. 40 is another story. But do we need a 40 save guy to win the Division/Pennant/Series? That, I don’t know. I think bullpen depth is more important than a dominant closer. It’s nice to have both, but it’s not critical. Maybe.
Sure makes a lot of sense to me.
1. If you score enough runs, you don’t need a high dollar closer.
2. If you have an effective bullpen, no reason they can’t pitch in the ninth inning, in which case you don’t need a high dollar closer.
More than one way to skin a cat…
Wondering
and Bobbie 17,
If that is what we are going to need, the front office better start working, and not wait until all the good reliefs pitchers are gone, like they did last year, with starting pitchers, and they signed Kazmir.
And if anyone really thinks the team will still be ok offensively without Turner, try to remember how bad the offense was last year, before Turner recovered enough from his surgery, and started hitting.
The begining of the season, the offense was terrible, and a lot of people, including me, thought that Roberts needed to move Turner down in the order, because he wasn’t hitting, because we were disperate to get the offense going.
Just remember how big a lead the Giants had at the allstar break last year.
MJ, How effective the offense will be without Turner depends on who or how many they bring in to replace him. Frazier would make up for the loss of power, but the defense would suffer some. Segedin, the lone in house solution, is an unknown. He had only 83 at bats last year. Now it has been suggested that they bring in a SS who is decent and move Corey to 3rd. Corey has played some there and I am not sure how his defense would stand up at the hot corner. I doubt his offense would have a fall off. He is heading into that sophomore jinx year, so it will be interesting to see how he does. Now if they also trade for a RH hitting OF, Braun, McCutcheon, that will help them against lefty’s. Right now the OF has LH Pederson, Ethier, Toles, they list Hernandez as an OF, so that gives them 4 RH OF’s including Puig, Thompson, and SVS. They have 6 infielders listed and it is a 3 and 3 split. That includes Ruf, who can play a little OF, but is mainly a 1B. The backup SS is Taylor, Johnson the backup 2B, or the starter barring a trade for a better option. We all remember how big a lead they had at the all star break. First half’s are always pretty much for finding out what you have……remember that 42-8 run they had a couple of years ago.
Michael
I don’t see them trading for Braun now, and McCuthen didn’t hit lefties well either.
And he has never hit as many HRs as Turner did last year.
Corey is more comfortable at shortstop, and he isn’t going to get moved over to third, for a very long time, if ever.
And those minor leaguers are minor leaguers for a reason.
The bottom line is what they are going to get Turner for, is going to be a bargain, for a middle of the order hitter, that plays gold glove defense at third.
Because of the things he has going against him, also makes him a bargain.
And why trade prospects, when you have the perfect guy to play third for you?
Save those prospects for our new second baseman, and less likely, a big right hand hitter.
MJ; First off, he hit 31 in 2012 which is 3 more than Turner hit last year. He also has a .317 lifetime batting average against lefty’s in over 1000 at bats. So both those statements are wrong. I never said they would move Corey to 3rd, I merely said it was a suggestion by some. Minor leaguers are there to get better and learn the game. Some do it well, others not so much. I think at this point the FO is looking at all their options, and they have had talks with the Sox about Frazier and Robertson the Sox closer last year. Who knows, they might want Thompson back. But most likely they would want at least 1 of the top tier kids. The price for Dozier would be higher. And the way FAZ has talked they actually consider Hernandez an option. Or some sort of platoon with Johnson, or maybe even Calhoun. It all boils down to one thing and one thing only. Do they want to give Turner the years and salary he is asking for. I have heard all sorts of rumors about what he wants but nothing concrete. I do know they are not going to give the guy a 5 year deal. He turned down a guaranteed 17.6 million dollar 1 year deal. But his options have been drying up faster than the desert after a summer rain storm. If, and it is a big if, Turner goes elsewhere, they will be forced into either trading for someone, or using the assets on hand and making do with what is on the roster.
Michael
From what I heard, Turner wants five years, and our front office is offering him, three years at 60.
And I am sure they will find some middle ground, in between these two offers.
And apparently Turner isn’t getting a lot of interest from other teams, so it does seem posible.
McCuthen didn’t hit lefties well last year.
And he hasn’t hit over 25 HRs, in the last three years.
His numbers have went down a lot, in the last two years.
And that is the reason the Pirates want to move him.
He would be another guy, that will cost some good prospects, and he will only be a two year rental.
And we don’t really need another outfielder.
Well McCutcheon would benefit from a change of scenery. A lot of people think the same about Puig. But they are at a point where even if Turner comes back, they need another power RH bat no matter what, and the options are limited. I do not think McC would cost as much as you think whereas Dozier is going to cost 2 maybe 3 frontline guys. And the Twins covet Stewart. As far as McC not hitting over 25 the last 3 years, well he has been a 20 homer guy consistently. Turner has done it once in his career. The only OF on this team who hit 20 last year was Pederson. McC hits pretty good in LA. I am not advocating that they go out and trade for him, but I am saying they need someone who can actually hit left handed pitching. Turner has not. His defense is vital, and his bat is needed. But he will not fix the problem against lefty’s. You are also wrong that his number have dropped a lot. Last year was the worst of his career, but in 2015 he hit .292 and drove in 96 runs. No Dodger OF approached that many ribbies. The year before he hit .312. One bad year does not a career make. And it is not like he is 35 years old. He is 30……
Nats traded Espinosa to Anaheim for prospects. That frees up $5 mil for them in their pursuit of Kenley.
No worries, we have Pedro Baez waiting in the wings.
Baez huh? I doubt the human rain delay is a good option to close…….
Bobby
I read that he didn’t show up for the Nats fan weekend, because he was upset, that Turner will be the Nats starting shortstop next year.
And Because if that, the Nats GM moved him to the Angels.
Espinosa could have plated second base for us, or possibly even shortstop, and he was cheap enough. Do you suppose made any effort to acquire him? Or do you think the Nats wouldn’t deal with us?
Angels are going to use him at 3rd, and I do not think FAZ had any interest in him.
Wondering
This guy struck out more then Joc and Grandal last year, and hit just above 200.
You know how I don’t want another all or nothing hitter in our line up, but he is solid defensively.
Bobby
Baez is Mark’s candidate to close next year, he must love slow unmerciful pain.
Do not be surprised if they really try Hatcher at that spot in the spring. That was why they traded for him in the first place. Maybe they feel he will get his mojo back. He has electric stuff, you just never know if it will be right down the middle or on the corners.
Michael
I wouldn’t doubt that, or why is he still on this team?
Eric Stephen’s “Kenley Come Back” video is hilarious. Popped up on my Facebook feed today.
Dodger owners doing their classic monkey imitation…
…going to sink or swim with FAZ.
“Let me get this right: Because Greinke was 51-15 with a 2.30 ERA in his 29, 30 and 31st year with the Dodgers he will do the same up to age 38? And 6 years at $34.5 million to him is better than 2 more years at $32 million? What an idiot!”
There may be an idiot about, but it isn’t him.
The Dodgers WANTED Greinke for not just the 2 years mentioned, but for 3 after that, 5 years in total. The Dbacks gave him the 6th just so they could get him away from us for those 5 years. Screw the 6th year. He might still be throwing well then, but who cares. That becomes one of those dead weight contracts that everybody has, but nobody cares, especially if it worked out the previous 5. And yeah, everyone but FAZophants would like to have seen Greinke taking the ball after Kershaw at least through Clayton’s opt out year.
I think you can judge by the Dodger effort to re-sign Kenley and Turner, just how much effort they are going to put into retaining Kershaw. Someone needs to look ahead and start an Ex-Dodger Fan Blog…
There seems to be some question about how good the Dodgers will be next year. I saw a power ranking recently that had the Dodgers at 13 and the giants way ahead of them. Until we have a third baseman and know what Jansen is doing its hard to argue that, though I know some will. Who knows where we will be after ’18.
Can’t argue that last statement, inasmuch as we don’t even know where we are now….
Ok I am back, fellas. Had a huge case that went down to the wire, which would have caused me to have to negotiate (and sit) through a 2 month civil trial, except the other side took our settlement offer just before I got on the plane and we worked out the details after I got off.
Trial lawyers like dodgerrick must hate me, ha ha. But business owners like Mark love me (sometimes).
On the plan for 2017. I just want Turner back. Kenley back ok too, whatever price FAZ wants to pay is fine with me, and if he goes to the Marlins it will be because of the zero state income tax vs. California the tax capital of America. Right now I have little confidence in FAZ delivering a good trade. So let’s roll the kids out and see how they do. For this reason, I think having a couple of grinders and model vets is crucial – so I’d really like them to bring Turner and also Utley back.
If Kershaw has a career year, we should try to trade him for some prospects in 2017. By 2018 all the recently good teams will have depleted their farm, but maybe Texas will have rebuilt theirs. We can always try to resign him back during his FA year if the stars align.
https://twitter.com/Joelsherman1/status/808345661020262404
Deals close. Kenley 5 years, Turner 4.
https://twitter.com/Ken_Rosenthal/status/808374442434895872