I guess the gamble is two-fold:

1) whether or not the Dodgers can win the World Series; and

2) whether the Dodgers will re-sign their rentals, Manny and Casey.

1 Or if the Dodgers can convert the draft picks they'll get from departing Free Agents into serviceable big leaguers.

If you had asked me when Furcal got hurt if I thought the Dodgers could even make it to a high stakes table, I'd've said they didn't have what it takes. In that way, Coletti and the plumb crazy gang have impressed me. I'd have never imagined going after Manny. Now, I have to say I could see him staying. I'm not sure I'd pay the money sure to be asked, but if they can some how get out from under either Jones, or preferably Pierre, I can see it.

But I think they should keep Lowe and not Penny. (And I'm a Penny fan). The stakes seem higher to me because they will have to replace some of the free agents. And Schmidt and Pierre and Jones are locking up cash.

3

At this point I would re-sign Lowe and let Penny go, but I guess a lot of it depends on the severity of the injury to Penny. It is definitely cause for concern.

It's strange, watching Maddox in anything other than a Braves jersey. Even now. I'll enjoy watching him pitch, if he can show the shades of Mad Dog past.

As to the Dodgers trading stock. Well, yeah. And that's really one of the reasons you go get good prospects. At some point, you have to stop playing for the future and start playing for the now. The front office has made the decision that they were at the point this year. All in all, this is the team that most of us wanted: Kemp, Ethier, Martin, Loney, Billingsly, and Broxton. Kuo and Kershaw have made contributions. DeWitt is promising, as are DeJesus and Hu.

Hopefully it works out. But if not, there's still enough young talent in the organization to last a while. And there's also enough that the Dodgers can make some smart moves in the off season to supplement what they have.

I guess my main issue is the Dodgers had no reason to go all in this year, we could have easily been very competitive for the next few years with our start of 2008 team. We're not hopeless now by any means, but the future looks way more bleak than it did a few weeks ago.

I was thinking this the other day, the one thing that surprised me this year is how long they went with the cast of rag tags as SS and playing DeWitt when he was clearly showing that he had hit a wall.

One has to believe the asking price for some of those shortstops was astronomical because I would have thought they would have pulled the trigger even back in May. I know Nomar was always the wild card, never knowing if and when he would come back and that the staff liked DeWitt a lot and wanted to give him every chance to succeed.

And they also never really explored a deal for a 5th starter (until Maddux). I mean they had Loiaza, Kuo, Park, Stults, Kershaw, Jason Johnson all fill in when Kuroda and Penny went down and when they needed that 5th starter.

So it seems to me that the whole year was spent with a spending limit in place and they were going to make due with the players on hand or those picked up on the cheap.

At least that was how it was going until the Blake, Manny and Maddux deals.

5
...if he can show the shades of Mad Dog past

I was just thinking, this means Greg's parents grew up in a house with Mike & The Mad Dog.

I think the most important question vis-a-vis this discussion is whether the decision to trade the stock (prospects) for cash (expensive major leaguers on the cheap) was influenced by the fact that Colleti may have felt that he was running out of time to make a big play and even though it may not have been the best strategy for the team and its long-term health, he made the decision to take the chance that he would not have another chance if he did make the calls now.

What's so bleak about the future? Yeah, it sucks that LaRoche didn't get a fair shake in LA. But The Dodgers got Manny for him, and the inside track on resigning Manny.

Santana was never going to play for the big club. There were 5 guys on the depth chart that he'd have to pass.

I just don't see us being able to re-sign Manny without really hampering our chances at signing quality talent for other positions.

If Andruw can just promise to come back to his peak form next year...

Looking at next year.

Did anyone look at what the money picture is for next year.

Kent gone
Nomar ?

Andruw traded to an all you can eat buffet.

Find the money for Casey for sure, he's a gamer. Andruw is gone after next year and as far as I'm concerned, outright him after this season if he comes back up and does not beak the Mendoza line this year.

Manny is worth his rumored asking price of $20 Million a year, compared to the obscenity of $18 Million a year for Jones, but maybe 3 years.

So what's the table stakes for next year's poker game? Anyone?

11 Nononoonononononono. The Andruw Jones ship has sailed. Sailed so far that it's never reaching Dodgers land again.

11

Adruw needs to be given his walking papers after this year if he does nothing better than the .16x that he's been doing.

Enough with him stinking up the team.

Going to need some sort of sacrifice to Jobu to make the bats happy after he's gone.

Signing Blake would be a big mistake.

So we will probably do it.

13
Ned Colletti held up his hands
Saying "we'll meet all your demands"
As D4P would shout "your days are numbered"
And from Cleveland's Tribe
Casey Blake's now on our side
And Colletti, still has prospered.

Even the Yankees have a spending limit. Just curious, does anyone know where the luxury tax cutoff is? If the Dodgers absorbed $10 between Manny, Blake, and Maddux, would that have pushed them over?

I am not convinced yet that an owner spending roughly $120 Mil for on-field product is in huge dire straits financially. McCourt has shown that he will spend. However, if I was spending millions for Jones, Schmidt, Loaiza and others, I think I would be a little gun shy about adding much more payroll as well. This might be one of those everyday scenarios when you have to "put yourself in somebody else's shoes."

Jon I think Coletti is spending too much of his future capital by sending all these minor leaguers out in trades. I don't agonize over any one loss in particular, but if you look across the players left at Las Vegas, Jacksonville, Saginaw, and other locations, I am underwhelmed by the talent.

Re: 15

Hey, T-dub. Curiosity knocks at your comment. Do you think the other Blake (aka "D-dub") would be an adequate replacement?

Well said and clear-headed, as always, Jon. The only minor nit I'd pick is, from everything I'd read and heard about him, including from someone who knows him, Kyle Blair was almost completely adamant about wanting to go to college and was practically unsignable. One could argue that maybe even more money dangled in front of his nose would eventually have had him changing his tune, but I'm not sure there was ever much chance there. But either way, your overall point there is still valid -- being stingy on prospect signings and yet throwing money at washed up players never seems to display much common sense. Whether for Blair or another draftee, or another player, the money spent on Loiaza could have been much better spent elsewhere, even if I understood their desperation at the time.

10 It's true Santana would have Martin in front of him for years as blockage, but who are the other four guys in which you speak? He's a better prospect than AJ Ellis or Lucas May, to be sure, though he still has some to learn about catching.

19
I am not sure DeWitt will ever hit for enough power to stay at third.

But if there are no other alternatives, I would rather save money and play DeWitt at third instead of re-signing Blake.

10 When you knew you would have a big shopping list in the off season, adding anything to it makes things a lot more painful.

When the biggest obstacle on the depth chart is Lucas May, it's not hard to vault up it. Even if he never would have played, he could have become worth more than half of Casey Blake's salary. (I don't particularly think he was going to help either though).

20 - I'd say Ellis, May, Martin, Adrion, and whatever stiff the Dodgers get to be Martin's caddy next year.

Honestly, I just wasn't sold on Santana. He was 22 playing in high-A, after four years in the minors. Position change or not, that just does not strike me as impressive.

Resign Lowe. Resign Manny. Three year deal, up to $23 Mill. Resign Blake. One or two years. Promote Hu. No idea what to do about 2nd base. Donno about Penny. I'm thinkin', cut bait. I don't know why Pierre's still on the team.

Back to the off-topic from the previous thread: I spent the entire '80's trying to pretend I liked the music on KRock. I guess one of the less objectionable one-hits for me was Kate Bush "Running up that Hill". One of my favorite '80's hits was "Jenny Got a Gun", basically classic rock. Also most of Don Henley. That tells you I wasn't really an '80's guy. But, bringing up that old stuff, what about The Time? What was their hit? And George Clinton, "Why must I be like that? Why must I chase the cat? Nothin' but the dog in me?" Cindy Lauper.

21 - Since the odds are they can't re-sign both Blake and Furcal, nor should they sign them both, if DeWitt were better suited to play 2nd (to replace Kent), then who would play 3rd now that LaRoche is out of the picture and if they can't/don't re-sign Casey B? Just wondering aloud. Either way they're going to have a hole to fill. A lot hinges on how Furcal looks when he does come back and how expensive his demands are.

But they could have three holes on the infield next season which is kind of unprecedented. So I'd be stunned if they didn't re-sign one of Blake or Furcal at least.

17
does anyone know where the luxury tax cutoff is?

2008: $155m
2009: $162m
2010: $170m
2011: $178m

1st offense is 22.5% of salaries above each the threshold. If a team goes over the limit in successive years, it can jump to 30% or 40%.

For purposes of compiling these salaries, the money is averaged over the life of the contract, not necessarily when the money was actually paid.

For example, here is Juan Pierre's current contract:

2007: $7.5m
2008: $8m
2009: $10m
2010: $10m
2011: $8.5m

He's making $8m this year, but for purposes of computing the actual club payroll his 2008 figure is $8.8m (the average annual value).

Keep in mind also that the allowances mentioned yesterday ($89 per day on the road and travel days, etc) are also included in determining the "actual club payroll" for luxury tax purposes.

23 - You may be right about Santana ultimately, but you could also argue the same re: May, that his stock has fallen and where he is now relative to age isn't advanced enough, etc. Whatever Santana's flaws his swing and potential as a hitter are still more exciting than the other guys you mention outside of Russell.

AJ Ellis strikes me as a guy who deserves a shot as a solid backup, though, from what I've heard/seen.

If Manny turned down 2 years 20mil, why do we keep thinking this will be the asking price. Aren't we looking at more of a 3/80 or 4/100...I think someone will pay that.

I would like to see Dewitt take over at 2nd. Are there any other options in FA for 3b other than Casey?

25
I think we will re-sign Blake. I don't see Ned letting DeWitt, Hu, and DeJesus all come up at once.

22 - fair point about the anticipated hole. I'm leaning towards LaRoche being an acceptable cost to have Manny (it's not like we're talking Ruth with the Braves or Mays with the Mets), but reasonable minds can disagree.

The Astros claimed the Giants' Jose Castillo and he's all theirs, apparently. Huh. Okay.

Also, I think if the lineup continues the way it does, and if we re-sign Manny, Pierre will be begging for a trade

Two words: Joe Crede.

Nice logical post Jon. I like the stock market analogy. What seems to be on the back burner right now is that Torre's long leash early in the year with Pierre and AJones is probably the difference right now in the Dodgers being one game out and one game ahead (or something close to that).
vr, Xei

Players under control or contract for 2009

25-man roster (11)

Kuroda
Billingsley
Kershaw
Kuo
Troncoso
Broxton
Martin
Loney
Ethier
Kemp
Pierre

DL (8)
Schmidt
Brazoban
Proctor
Wade
Abreu
Jones
Young

Out of Options in Spring 2009 (2)
Miller
Repko

Free Agents (16)

Lowe
Penny (team option)
Maddux
Park
Johnson
Sturtze
Beimel
Ardoin
Bennett
Kent
Furcal
Garciaparra
Blake
Ozuna
Berroa
Ramirez

35
Brazoban is also out of options next year.

29 - Yah, true, though again if they do bring Raffy back I could possibly see DeWitt at 3rd and Hu or DeJesus at 2nd. Or something along those lines. And of course, that's assuming NedCo is back for the off-season, too. Who knows.

Other free agent 3rd basemen (from MLBTR, with my rankings 1-5 * in front of them):

Rich Aurilia (37) *
Casey Blake (35) *
Hank Blalock (28) - $6.2MM club option for '09 with a $0.25MM buyout
Joe Crede (31)
Nomar Garciaparra (35)
Wes Helms (33) - $3.75MM club option for '09 *
Chipper Jones (37) - $8-11MM vesting option for '09 but I assume he's staying in Atl
Dallas McPherson (27) **1/2 an intriguing possibility

35 - wow, 16 free agents? geez.

The only name on that list that I really want to see back is Ramirez.

How much longer is Schmidt under contract for?

Oops, forgot the stars get confused when posting here. Let's try again:

Other free agent 3rd basemen (from MLBTR, with my rankings 1-5 +'s in front of them):

Rich Aurilia (37) +
Casey Blake (35) +++
Hank Blalock (28) - $6.2MM club option for '09 with a $0.25MM buyout +++ but too expensive
Joe Crede (31) ++
Nomar Garciaparra (35) ++
Wes Helms (33) - $3.75MM club option for '09 +
Chipper Jones (37) - $8-11MM vesting option for '09 ++++ but I assume he's staying in Atl
Dallas McPherson (27) ++1/2 an intriguing possibility

Why am I getting NY Jets and Brett Favre ads?

I just hope the Dodgers don't do something reckless like sign Durham to man 2B next year.

31 Ha, man it's crazyville in Houston and Mr. Wade is the mayor.

Until their elimantion # is 0 they'll keep throwing stuff against the board and see's if it sticks.

Free agent 2nd basemen are an even sorrier lot, imho:

Second basemen
Jamey Carroll (35) - $2.5MM club option for '09 with a $0.15MM buyout
Ray Durham (37)
Mark Ellis (32)
Mark Grudzielanek (39)
Orlando Hudson (31)
Tadahito Iguchi (34)
Jeff Kent (41)
Felipe Lopez (29)
Mark Loretta (37)
Aaron Miles (32)
Nick Punto (31)

Hudson's the only one worth anything, plus Ellis, but he will probably be back in Oakland or overpaid for what he is.

One thing about the Dodgers spending stock instead of cash.. they have been better at spending stock by far. I will be the first one to say that Colletti has wasted cash and not used it wisely, but as far as stock is concerned, he has traded wisely. He has made the 2008 team exciting and we definitely look like contenders. As long as he didn't give up too much for Maddux, and all indications are he didn't, I think he has made some excellent trades. Blake has helped us lots and the Manny trade was awesome. I don't care how LaRoche pans out, he was worth giving up for a real chance to win this year, especially if the Dodgers were down on his future health which they might have had good reason to be.

As for the Dodgers being competitive in future years with their start of 2008 team, that is a lot of wishful thinking, especially with Furcal and Kent leaving. And I don't like giving up Santana and Meloan, but if we are going to compete this year, we needed a bat like Blake. Again, it is way optimistic to assume that LaRoche would have given us the same bat, especially in hindsight.

So, the 2008 Dodgers are in with a chance. And they are exciting and fun to watch. Falling behind 2-0 is not the end of the game. As for the future, other than LaRoche, none of the stock we gave up was going to help us in 2009 or even beyond. Maybe Meloan would be a plus reliever, but one thing the Dodgers have done well is cultivate good relievers. And with Santana, all we did was sell high. Let's see if he can even hit in AA or AAA before we lament losing him.

38 Through 2009.

Actually its 17, I forgot Sweeney.

Did you know that despite the high number of free agents it comes out to only around $58M in payroll.

At the end of 2009, the Dodgers will shed another $34M and only have $31M total in committed payroll for 2010 and 2011.

I think we re-sign Manny 3 years for $60 million.

Re-sign Park and Blake. Maybe Nomar.

Pick up Penny's option. Sign some cruddy starter like Paul Byrd, because Ned won't count on Schmidt and McDonald.

44
What if we do not make the playoffs? Were all these trades worth it then?

The Astros. Leaders in the "What in the heck are they thinking." Division.

Lineups:

DODGERS
Pierre, CF
Kemp, RF
Kent, 2B
Ramirez, LF
Garciaparra, SS
Blake, 1B
Martin, 3B
Ardoin, C
Billingsley, P

ROCKIES
Quintanilla, 2B
Taveras, CF
Holliday, LF
Hawpe, RF
Atkins, 1B
Stewart, 3B
Tulowitzki, SS
Torrealba, C
Francis, P

43 I guarantee Ellis will be underpaid.

Of course, I might be the only one here who thinks he's a top five second baseman. I'd rather have him than Hudson right now.

50
He is easily the most loved Athletic, so you are not alone. He is also the best defensive second baseman in the league.

I can't believe an 80s Music Thoughts was conducted without me.

Billy Beane is the devil.

52
Feel free to give me your thoughts. I'd love to add to the list.

50 Actually I agree with you, I would rather have Ellis than Hudson, too. I do think he'll come back to the A's though; I know Beane loves him. As much as Kent, even old man Kent, can sometimes still mash with the best of the 2nd baseman, it will be nice to have a guy with great range there again. Whether Ellis or an in house guy like Hu or DeJesus. I do not think even Ned would go for Ray Durham, ex-Giant lineage or no, given RD's deserved rep as a poor fielder. (I will cry if I'm wrong.)

49
Alex41592 was dead on!

47 If you could make trades that come with a guarantee, everyone would be a genius. The decision has to give us a better chance of winning. The trades definitely have, in my opinion. You cannot ask Colletti to do more than that. It's unreasonable to say a trade is ok if we make the playoffs and not ok if we miss by a game. If Santana does not pan out, is the trade ok? If LaRoche does not pan out, is the trade ok? I don't think you can do what ifs? I think the trades make sense. If they had given up Kemp or Kershaw for Ramirez, then even if they make the playoffs, the trades do not make sense.

One more thing about LaRoche is that everyone assumes that he is the same player who put up great numbers in the minors two years ago (ignoring short stints in the minors last year and this year). He has had injuries, especially the back might be a serious one. He may have a good career, but there is also a decent chance that he will not be anything more than average. No one ever brings that up.

Starting tonight, the Dodgers will probably face 5 lefthanders in their last 12 games of August.

If he holds to this new pattern, he may use those games to play Pierre, give Loney a few days off and move Martin from catcher to 3B.

49 As odd as it may look, that's the line-up I expected tonight vs. Jeff Francis, except wasn't sure Martin would play (3rd). God forbid Pierre should ever bat anywhere but first, but whatever, he's done well vs Francis in the past.

54
What's the nature of the list?

28 Manny didn't turn down $40M for the next two years; he didn't want Boston to control each of the next two years with a $20M option for each year. If Boston decided he was worth the option each year, he wouldn't be an FA until 2011, at age 39. Certainly he wants a big contract, but I think the goal is more guaranteed money overall.

57 No one ever... ? A lot of people here have expressed that very sentiment about LaRoche actually. Some doubts about his ability to stay healthy with any consistency, and so on. Lots of us are rooting for ALR and wish he was still around but there has been plenty of doubt about his long term potential here lately.

57 That's not true, I think there is general acknowledgement that LaRoche may not equate those expectations.

The frustration was more with the lack of opportunity to see what he could do.

There is certainly a risk when you expose a prospect in the majors (or even as you advance him in the minors) because there is greater likelihood of failing than succeeding and you may lose more in terms of value.

I think we might be able to unload Andruw Jones back to the Braves and only pay most of his salary. His problems are clearly psychological to large degree, and being back home would help him. Atlanta may be willing to gamble a small amount of money on that. That is the only possibility I see of getting out from under the full $18M burden. Unless his contract is insured and his current 'rehab' assignment is being paid for by the insurance company. He might be 'injured' all of next year if that's the case.

57
I would rather have a better chance to win year after year than trying to save Ned's job this season.

We created more holes for the future to go for it this year, so not making the playoffs would be a big deal.

haven't we eliminated DeWitt from playing second because he is a lefty?

66
DeWitt throws with his right hand.

64 If that's true, they could have offered him arbitration (for a lot less than $18M) rather than let him go for nothing last year.

Insurance doesn't work like that and really those days are long gone, teams really can't afford the premiums and then there are issues of whether the player is really hurt or just kept off the active roster to try and collect insurance.

I would say its probable the Dodgers don't have any insurance on any of the players out on the DL. And I think that goes for most of baseball if not all of professional sports.

56 - Thanks. I expect Ethier and Loney to start tomorrow afternoon against the lefty De La Rosa. If Pierre is going to start you start him against a guy he's 13 for 27 lifetime. It was just a question of who would play first base for Loney tonight. Blake or Nomar.

I like the lineup with Blake at first and it keeps Berroa off the field. Ardoin is pretty good behind the plate.

60
A little over a year ago, my computer crashed with all my un-backed up music on it. I have finally gotten around to repopulating my iTunes, but I don't have a ton of CDs from the 1980s (I have all of U2, Springsteen, and some of the bigger stuff). I was just trying to brainstorm to see if I could come up with anymore bands/songs I want to add to my 1980s playlist.

66 thank you, I had no idea

62 , 63 My bad then. I have missed those. It feels like the talks are more weighted towards "can't believe we gave up on him" than anything. Sorry I missed the other side of it. For the record, and I have said this before, I liked Andy and hope he does really well in PIT.