why muellar? why not nomar.

i want nomar!!

A Nomar Marching & Chowder Society is in order.

from gilmiguel, the resident DWL fan over at dodgers.com/dodgers.cc

According to sources (from Licey's office) they are talking with Lasorda about bringing in a pitching prospect from the Dodgers organization to pitch for Licey, the name of the pitcher is not known.

Not going to take sides in the Bradley/Drew CF debate, Jon? :)

the current lineup isnt half bad IMO.

if we can add nomar, i think we could be good to go in terms of positional players.

nomar could be our starting 3b, and if we have a surge of OF injuries again, he can move to left field, and aybar or laroche(midseason) can play 3b.

I remember as a kid I would try to put 2 guys at the same position in video games, try to trick the game. If I remember correctly, it was Ken Griffey Jr. Baseball on Super Nintendo where there was a gliche, but it made the player at that position move really really slowly and throw very very weakly. It was like a Jason Phillips/Juan Pierre combo. Let's hope Drew and Bradley in center can defend better than on Ken Griffey Jr Baseball.

It all comes down to whether Colletti has the guts to pull the plug on Izturis.

4 - Not at all :)

7
And to leave the plug inserted on Bradley.

Is this like getting the Delino DeShields of daydreams without trading a Pedro Martinez for him?

And then just like that, the thrill was gone.

10 - Yeah, a cautionary tale. But again, at least Furcal wasn't a big contract plus a trade.

my reasonabl nunmbers for furcal next season.

285/355/435 14hr 45SB 105runs

9 -- Absolutely. You can't sign Furcal, then go from Bradley to Pierre. You're just going in circles. Werth and Ledee become a nice lefty-righty outfield bench tandem. Repko is sent to Siberia.

Man, I thought 3 years/30 mil was bad. 3 years/40 mil is horrible. I'm bummed (again). I would have made that offer to Giles in a second; not to furcal.

It only took Colleti a couple of weeks to make a deal that is much worse than any that Depo ever made.

the furcal deal is getting a lot of different reactions.

it seems, the sabre minded, pro depo supporters like this move....

14
Well, aside from whether or not it offends your sensibilities that Furcal is making that much money to play a game and whether or not he deserves that much, the size of the contract only really matters (from a fan's perspective) if it precludes the signing of other players. We don't really know how much Colletti has to work with. There were rumors that he had $18 million, which if true would mean there's only $5 million left. But he's talking as if he still plans to sign a free agent pitcher, 3rd baseman, and outfielder, which he certainly couldn't do with $5 million.

7 - great minds with but a single thought, Steve:

http://6-4-2.blogspot.com/2005/12/furcal-dodger-40m3-years.html

Does anyone know what the net effect of this deal and the (presumed) loss of Weaver will be on draft choices? I assume both would be type A players. Does it depend on who winds up with Weaver?

I haven't seen that much of Furcal but I'll bet that by the time Izturis is ready to come back that the talk will be to move Furcal to 2nd. By then though, a lot can change.

It doesn't seem like a move depo would make. I think he would rather pay Nomar 6 mils to play ss until izzy comes back and spend the other 7 mil elsewhere.

we lose our 2nd round pick. we cant lose our first round pick because we are in the top 15 of the draft.

if weaver signs with a team that has a first round pick in the second half of the draft, we get thier first round pick+ compensation pick.

braves get our 2nd rounder+a compensation pick.

the best thing: when dessens signs with rockies or royals, we get their 2nd round pick :)

I haven't seen that much of Furcal but I'll bet that by the time Izturis is ready to come back that the talk will be to move Furcal to 2nd. By then though, a lot can change.

or how about izzy is traded and we keep the better SS?

18 We lose a 2nd round draft pick with Furcal signing. However, we'd get a draft pick for Dessens, and 2 for Weaver. If we get the Royals 2nd rounder, we actually improve our draft position

Just as an aside, read the sponsor link for Delino Deshields on Baseball Reference. You won't be disappointed, if only for the name of the blog.

16

I don't care that he makes 13 mils really, I do care that the dodgers are the ones paying him that.

I agree that it doesn't matter much if it doesn't keep us from signing other much needed free agents like a pitcher and a 3B. I have a felling that it will, though.

I would much rather the Dodgers spend that $$ on a pitcher, like Jarrod Washburn, who I think would help the team more than furcal.

22. natepurcell

I agree. A lot can change by then. An injury to someone will could effect what happens.

20 - if anybody signs Nomar to play SS I'll be shocked. IMO he's done at the keystone. His future is in the outfield or 3B, and the latter is only a waystation to retirement. He's far too fragile.

22 - I don't like Wash for the money he'll command, but that caveat aside, I think he's exactly the kind of pitcher who could do well in Dodger Stadium.

Another team who could pick him up where he'd be an interesting acquisition would be Boston or Baltimore; he's always done well in Yankee Stadium.

25- Washburn is a mediocre pitcher. He's a flyball pitcher, doesn't strikeout a lot of guys, doesn't go deep into games, and Scott Boras is his agent. Washburn is one my least favorite pitchers in baseball.

so how can we sell izturis to GMs at the trade deadline?

25 yr old defensive wiz shortstop who already has a GG and all star appearance under his belt. very affordablle contract. contact: flanders@ihaveastache.dodgers.com
will trade for top end OF prospect!

Is the LATimes the only outlet that's reporting the Furcal signing?

25. Furcal had more defensive value (41 FRAR) in 2005 than Washburn's value as a pitcher (40 PRAR) in 2004. With OBP now valued more or less correctly by the baseball talent market, defense is the "new" sabermetric skill to have (aka undervalued). You could see this move as pretty sabermetrically sound in that sense.

that said, im not crazy about $40/3yrs because furcal needs to play like he did in 2005 to justify the deal. Sure, it certainly possible and if he plays like he did in the second half, this would be a great deal, but if he settles into his 2002-04 he wont be worth the money. There doesnt seem to be much upside for the Dodgers in this deal. Luckily its only for 3 years. Im cautiously optomistic.

From 2002-5, Furcal was 9-55 at Dodger Stadium. I guess we have to hope that just reflects stellar Dodger pitching.

Luckily its only for 3 years.
I believe we're seeing a movement toward shorter contracts with higher per-year salaries. If I'm a GM, I'm happy with the development. It's those six- and seven-year deals that kill you.

34. we dont know if this is the start of a new trend or just an annomoly(sp?); has anyone else signed for less years but more per like furcal?

So this move is in celebration of getting rid of Dreifort? When compared to Dreifort (or Brown, or Green), I much prefer the Furcal-type contract.

36
...and Drew...?

i just realized we just replaced drieforts 13 mil salary with furcals.

nice trade off.

I think everyone agrees that Furcal is not going to be worth what he is getting paid. But at three years, he doesn't kill you. Now the question is who you surround him with. If you surround him with Izturis and Pierre, you're screwed. If you surround him with Bradley, Kent, and another solid platoon at first, you may have something.

So under the scenario that Choi is getting an "audition" at 1B until Izturis gets back, does that mean if Choi doesn't meet expectations, management will feel that Izturis would somehow be a better option in the lineup than Choi?

If Izturis must be played post-injury, play him at third. And bat him ninth.

dodgers.com says its 3yrs 39.5

not that it makes a difference.. i wonder why its 39.5 and not just 40 mil..

Sabermetric or not, this is an incredible deal (as long as the proposed position shift does not occur). 13 million for what may be his peak years for three, is better than 10 for four or five, when he more than likely will be declining. Pay more for less risk on an investment in possibly one of the top two or three shortstops in the NL. Furcal can run very well, hit for power, get on base at a clip about fifty points higher than Izturis... It's not Giles, but with Giles (as much as I love Giles) comes the much higher risk of injury or extreme drop off towards the end of the deal. If there is any truth of "contract years" Furcal should be in position for another huge payday by someone when he enters free agency again at 30.

32

I would expect Washburn to improve if he switches to the NL. Besides, I beleive a big contract to a pitcher would be more justifiable. I think the team would benefit more if Washburn would start instead of whoever we might throw out there if we don't sign another pitcher. As opposed to furcal's contribution compared to Robles/Izzy.

It doesn't have to be washburn, i'm just throwing him out as an example (although I feel he is a good pitcher). I feel like that money could have been used to sign a pitcher who's contribution to the team would be greater than furcal.

i like the lineup jon posted, only cruz and aybar are average or worse offensively for their position. if more players in your lineup are average or better than not, shouldnt you have at worst an average offense? of course injury and bench caveats apply.

does everyone think everyone in the gang of 4 was in favor of this or did colletti pull the dictator card on them?

There's nobody out there who is going to be an improvement on Weaver. Not that I'm advocating signing Weaver. In fact, I'm free to drive him to the airport.

i dont want to sign weaver because i want more elite prospects.

yes, i am greedy.

Of course, he's marketable as a Dodger because...well...he plays SS and steals bases, which supposedly should instantly invoke memories of Maury Wills and make everyone feel good. I'm sure we'll even be fed stories about how Furcal worked with Wills in spring training working on bunting that should somehow give us all assurance that he has embraced the Dodger way (whatever that means nowadays).

48-

Nate, shouldn't we sign our current elite prospect first (Hochevar)?

we will when he stop acting like an idiot.

which will be the 11th hour before the draft deadline.

44. you may "feel" that he's a good pitcher, but the facts dont point to him being very good going forward, something about a 4.8 k/9 or 1.33 whip dont point to him being worth the contract boras will be asking. All the dodger starting pitchers from last year topped 6.0 k/9, even houlton.

speaking of next years draft. drew stubbs is a player that would probably be on our radar.

I'm stunned at how well I'm taking all of this.

I remember reading some article here someone posted that said DePo targeted Giles and Furcal and that Kim Ng was prepared to go after Furcal before Ned was hired so I would think they approve. Ned seems to be a guy (hopefully I am right in my assestment) that likes to operate the GM spot from a group perspective which is a very good thing, especially when the other members of the group are held in high regard around here.

53. ive thought about him, we could use a center fielder and some lefthanded power. He seems very similar to Darrin Erstad at the same age, right down to the gutsy-football background.

I hate players that smile in the batter's box (like Parkman in Major League 2). I want them to get drilled in the face, so therefore I hope we do not sign Randa.

Pass

Ned seems to be a guy ... that likes to operate the GM spot from a group perspective
There's a new consensus builder in town!

I really see how Hochevar does not sign. If all the news is right, he is ineligible for college (which really does not even matter) and there is no way he gets taken earlier in the draft so his leverage for a bigger contract is gone. Plus no one wants to take a Boras draft pick that regused to sign twice with a team.

*ive thought about him, we could use a
center fielder and some lefthanded power. He seems very similar to Darrin Erstad at the same age, right down to the gutsy-football background*

comparing him to erstad isnt a good selling slogan!

i dont think hes similar to erstad at all. drew is 6'4, still growing into his frame, has TREMENDOUS speed and plays an elite CF.

he batted 311/384/527 283abs 11hrs 32SB 6CS
as a sophmore. hes probably a player logan white loves- has all 5 tools, knows how to put those tools to use.

he could be our long term CF answer if we dont trade kent for milledge.

*I really see Hochevar signing with us.

all that said, i would be really suprised if he lasts til the 7th pick (we have the 7th pick right?)

That's closer to Adam Dunn than Darin Erstad. Geez.

I was thinking about this deal and this thought popped into my head (close your eyes nate)
Guzman is going to be trade bait
I know they didn't expect him to play SS, but LaRoche should be playing 3B and Colletti seems to love Loney. Drew will be playing RF for awhile, assuming he doesn't opt out of his contract. Guzman doesn't have the speed to play CF. Good corner outfielders aren't hard to find. I see Colletti using Guzman to acquire an outfielder. The first guy that came to mind was Bobby Abreu (the Phillies would have to add cash). Some other possibilities:
Adam Dunn
Vernon Wells
Jim Edmonds (not that I want him)
Pat Burrell

If Joel Guzman is traded for Vernon Wells, words could not express the blood, horror, and carnage that would result. Though I would try my best.

the only player on that list i approve of trading guzman for is adam dunn.

if abreu was 29 instead of 32/33, then yes probably.

dunn is 26, so i see the sense in that.

61. i wasnt selling him, i assumed that an erstad comparison should speak for itself.
64. its not that great production for someone who's supposed to be the best college position player in the country. erstad hit pretty well in college

I don't see the logic in this deal at all. Furcal has a career OPS of .757. Dodger Stadium is going to sap a bit out of his average and OBP. He will hit a few more homeruns than in Atlanta, but because much of his slugging comes in the form of doubles and triples which DS suppresses, his slugging will actually decrease. Basically you've got a .750 OPS guy for over $13 mils a year.

Guess what, we've got a .750 OPS SS on the roster already -- A. Perez. His salary is the rounding error in Furcal's contract.

The only good thing about this deal is that someone recognizes that Izzy isn't carrying his weight offensively. All we really needed was a decent manager to bench Izzy and play Perez. Waste of $13 mils that would have been much better spent on OF, SP, etc.

i agree with steve, i would not be a fan of a guzman for wells trade.

59

I take it that you're a GBV fan? Is DT where baseball and indie rock combine?

69. furcal is 3-4 wins better than the glove than a.perez, but i dont think perez at shortstop was a bad idea ... id rather have him playing shortstop than robles or izturis

its not that great production for someone who's supposed to be the best college position player in the country. erstad hit pretty well in college

the junior year of a player is usually when it clicks and they break out.

hes improved from his freshmen to sophmore year, and i expec a huge improvement in his junior year.

alex gordon in his 2003 yr:
.319/.426/.495 7hr

alex gordon in his 2004 yr:
365/.493/.754 18 hr

i expect stubbs to have a pretty similar climb in production. Add in the fact that stubbs projects to be an amazing defender at a position of need for the dodgers, it would make a lot of sense if drew sees a bunch of dodger scouts in the stands of his games next year.

72. replace "than" with "with"

69

I agree, I think that money could have been spent in a much wiser fashion.

Good FA Pitcher + A. Perez > Furcal + The next Dennis Erickson.

Don't get this signing, and has Rosenthal says on Fox he is now the second highest paid shorstop behind Jeter, I know there is higher paid 3rd baseman who used to play short. For those who advocate trading Izturis, what will he be worth in July coming back from Tommy John surgery.

For those who think that Bradley will now remain a Dodger, didn't Kent say he wouldn't play with Bradley? I guess I would have prefered an outfielder or a top of the line pitcher...It least its only money

72 I'll give you that Furcal has better D than Perez at SS, but not by a ton. Most metrics show him to be a capable defender at 3B, SS and especially 2B -- nothing like the stone hands comments the old school crowd tried to pin on him.

So is that difference in D worth $13 mils a year? Wouldn't you rather overpay Giles, trade for Dunn, etc. Seems to me that would have been a muh wiser use of funds. Dodger LF's managed a combined OPS of .603 in 2005. There's the real hole that needs attention.

First post, been reading for a few months and had a few ideas now that the Furcal deal appears to have happened. I would like to see Ned fill in the roster with some veterans to tide us over till we see how some of the kids appear to be and the longterm health of Werth/ Milton, Therefore I see us needing another OF, a 1B to platoon with Choi and one more starter and let Houlton, Jackson, Billengsley battle for the 5th rotation spot.
A few suggestions:

OF - Reggie Sanders
1B- An Eduardo Perez/ Julio Franco Type
P- I have heard Jason Johnson, Matt Morris , and Kenny Rogers all mentioned and am fine with any of them, Not so much on Washburn.

To cover a couple other of the regualr topics I am good with giving Aybar/Perez a shot at 3B, Giving Choi another shot at first, and bringing back Milton.

Just some opinions from the Great state of Oregon. Go Ducks !!!
PS- All you California's please feel free to visit this fine state but go back when your done.

Spotted Owl

71 - Yes, I like GbV although I've never seen them in concert.
Did you know Robert Pollard pitched at Wright State, and he threw the school's first no-hitter?

If we did get Dennis Erickson, he could be a designated driver for Furcal. On second thought...

73. what are the odds that he slides to 7th if he does breakout like gordon? most of the teams ahead of the dodgers have centerfielders and need pitching, and this years draft should be deepest in college pitchers:

1.KC, they have dejesus and seem very likely to take Andrew Miller
2.Tampa Bay, they have more OF depth than they know what to do with
3.Pittsburgh
4.Colorado, they always need pitching
5.Seattle, they also need pitching and have some outfield depth
6.Detroit

hopefully Pittsburgh is scared by a high price tag following a breakout season, i dont know how he falls past Detroit unless he's asking something for crazy

i guess it is vaguely possible that stubbs could drop to LA if he does have a 350/475/750 season

75 - Yeah, what do we need with washed-up football coaches anyway?

If there's a Cora brother in the draft, he's Pittsburgh's

And if the Dodgers draft Drew Stubbs they could talk about the Dodger Way because he was part of the 1988 championship team. Oh wait, that was Franklin.

I'm not terribly excited about this. While it is far from the worst case scenario, it seems like money could have been better spent elsewhere.

Is anyone else concerned that Furcal set his career high in WARP by 3 this year? If it turns out he was just trying to get a contract, there is basically no difference between him and AP.

i dont think pitt would shell out the dough for stubbs. the tiebreaker that out detroit in front of us really hurts us because they have been spending money lately.

seattle and detroit are the biggest threats for stubbs.

I can't imagine that Izturis has a future in blue now... Izturis' only real value was his defense at SS; the Dodgers have to get more offense out of 2b than he can offer. Even if Ned is no Choi fan, I can't see him giving his ABs to Izturis.

As much as I dislike the signing, I like that Flanders signed a guy with a troubled background. Now I can email Plaschke tommorow and bug him about his boy Ned going out and getting Mr. DUI. If Depo would have signed him, Plaschke would be all over him about it. I have a feeling he'll be a hipocrite about this and will try to justify the signing.

Also, I like this better than the beltre signing. Mostly because it's for less years.

Henson says that the Izturis/Kent move is going to happen. Which makes this a crappy deal and sends our organization back into the toilet. But for three glorious hours, we had hope!

Furcal goes on the 40 man immediately, right? So somebody has to come off. Anybody know who that is? He's almost certainly going to get rule 5 drafted, right? So, if it's the next Johan Santana, that'd complete the Pedro/Delino analogy.

Unless Flanders gets busy trading JtD for Vernon Wells before the draft. Could be a busy week, coming up.

77. furcal has been worth an average of 26 defensive runs above replacement at SS per year since 2002. in 2004 perez was 9 runs worse than replacement level SS in 76 games at Las Vegas. Id say thats 3-4 wins and upwards of $6-8 million. I do agree with you though, Perez deserves a full times job, and SS was a great place to put him, a more efficient use of resources.

91 Where did you get those minor league stats for AP from?

89. it cant happen until july at the earliest, suddenly Choi has become our potential savior. if he hits well, then this move doesnt happen, he's our "keanu reeves-character"

80

Speaking of Dennis Erickson, I heard his lovely wife will be the cover girl for next month's Playboy.

we have 3 open spots on the 40 man roster- the gang of 4 was planning ahead. so we dont have to drop anyone.

92. BP's player card for Aperez, its also in the book

Withdraw 90. Grabowski is still on the 40 man. If Colletti manages to lose somebody good, it won't be Fucal's fault.

96 Thanks, never thought to look at his PECOTA for some reason.

Sheesh, I finally get out of the house to go to the movies and something encouraging happens.

I will try to avoid driving late at night in Glendale for the next few years.

Grabowski has, as I understand it correctly, actually fled the country.

I can think of many more useful pursuits than trying to prove that Antonio Perez is a good fielder.

90

If i'm not mistaken, there were only like 37 people on the dodgers' 40 man roster last time I read an article about it.

hey sanchez, another player i like, is Max Scherzer. its also a pretty rad name.

91 Don't get me wrong, I like Furcal. He has a gun of an arm and may well be the best defensive SS around today. Plus he has a respecable bat. I just don't think he's worth $13 mils, nor is it an area that the club really needed help in.

I'm afraid this was done more because Neddy & Frank wanted to sign a big name to make it look like they were doing something. If that's true, it's no way to run a ball club.

If they're determined to move Kent to 1b, let's platoon Aybar & Perez at 2b and sign a stopgap 3b (Randa/Mueller) until Guzman/LaRoche is ready...

And yeah, the 3-year deal is nice, but $13m sounds like one of those "yeah, we had to overpay to get the guy to come to our lousy organization" things...

95- Oh, even better.

I like it that the Times is still getting the juicy leaked scoops. Sure they spent the whole year kicking your ribs and stealing your lunch money, but maybe if you toss them the Furcal news, and dump Choi, maybe, maybe, maybe they'll respect you. Worth a shot, right?

The Orix Buffaloes are interested in Grabowski.

Grabowski has Japanese baseball written all over him. Japanese baseball is filled with Jason Grabowskis.

103 -- I think that's supported by this rush to hand Izturis second base. Dodger fans want McCourt to keep even stupid promises.

103. ya, im really much more interested in why Colletti signed furcal than the actuall terms of the contract. if they actually think furcal is worth $13 million, that one thing, if they think they needed to make some sort of statement, thats another.

I will try to avoid driving late at night in Glendale for the next few years.
You survived G-Mota's time there, didn't ya?

"...dump Choi, maybe, maybe, maybe they'll respect you..."

You have just commited one of the DT deadly sins. You suggested that the Dodgers dump Choi so that the LA times will respect them.

I think you need to take some time away from the keybord and think about what you've done.

Out of curiosity, would someone compare Izturis's 2004 with Furcal's 2004, statistically?

99 Did you enjoy "Walk the Line", Bob?

79 That's awesome. Thinking about it, Robert Pollard seems like the kinda guy to be a jock. Does GBV have any baseball themed songs? I saw them six or seven years ago, but I wasn't all that familiar with them back then. Robert Pollard did lots of high kicks and mic twirling. It was pretty awesome.

I guess I don't hate this signing, but I don't see how Furcal is anywhere near the player as Giles. If we were going to overspend, we should have made him an offer he couldn't refuse.

107 et al - Edwin Jackson was promised a spot in the starting rotation during the offseason two years ago. Things change between December and April, let alone July.

who gives a if the LATIMES respects you, id rather them not

105 -- Hee caught you! Sinner! Say 50 Holy Chois! Repent!

but $13m sounds like one of those "yeah, we had to overpay to get the guy to come to our lousy organization" things...
Sounds like a decision to offer more per-year money rather than a longer deal.

I take small consolation today in knowing that Pete Carroll's son, Nate, and his Peninsula High teammates were knocked out of the playoffs by Dominguez, 24-15.

In many ways I'm a small man and a petty man, but I take victories where I can get them. There isn't enough rubbing alcohol to sterilize the wounds I picked up today.

Izturis: .288/.330/.381 99 rate2 4.4 WARP1
Furcal: .279/.344/.414 102 rate2 5.2 WARP1

119 -- That's what I was afraid of.

120 Yeah, pretty much in every year but 2005, Furcal has been, well, Antonio Perez.

Im glad they got furcal, because it shows that the big names aint scared of the bullshit that Mc Court has pulled and also he's a proven player. You could talk till your black and blue about furcals stats but what matters is his pressence on the field, even if he is a little buzzed i would take him over nomar(over rated as hell) garciaparra.

112

It was pretty good and I got over being upset about a college football game.

There were was two groups of people in the theater who kept laughing very loudly at completely inappropriate parts. Someone yelled at one point, "This is not a comedy."

Then I went to the store and saw a woman wearing a USC sweatshirt and scarf pushing a shopping cart. I knocked her over, dumped out the contents of the cart, and stole her wallet.

I don't think anyone noticed though.

113 - For the sake of argument.

2005: Giles 65.1 VORP, Furcal 49.4 VORP

VORP doesn't include fielding ... so you can reduce the gap because of that, because Furcal has more fielding value.

Furcal is about seven years younger and more likely to replicate or improve his performance. Giles is likely to decline.

So, that would be how Furcal is anywhere near the player that Giles is.

If it gets Bill Plaschke to write one nice column about the team, it'll all be worth it. You'll see. YOU'LL ALL SEE! The Times is an opinion maker.

But it's just three years. We can handle three years. Right? Right...(chirping crickets...Jon telling the new guy not to swear...)

122 This is the same Nomar Garciaparra that's outperformed Furcal every year of his career, right?

I'd work for the devil himself for 3 years, 40 million. (If anyone was wondering how much my soul is worth.)

122 - No profanity on the site, please. Thanks.

126 - LOL (I'm so predictable.)

This is a good acquisition, even at $13 million a year, for a number of reasons, but I am most happy about it because of what it PREVENTS us from doing. Failure to land Furcal would have set off a domino effect that would have culminated in trading away possibly multiple quality prospects, both to get a "big name" player, and acquire a shortstop like Tampa Bay's Julio Lugo, for whom Tampa Bay reportedly wanted Chad Billingsley and Russell Martin. Did the Dodgers pay Furcal more than he is worth? Of course. But that is not important. We can be a bit stupid with money if it means we are not going to be stupid dealing away young talent whose cheap MLB salaries are going to give us enough payroll flexibilty to AFFORD to be stupid with money.

I recall back in the early 1980s when the Yankees were signing up every free agent outfielder on the market. Someone asked "How are the Yankees going to play all those guy? Are they going to use a dense pack?"

That joke was funny when the MX Missile was a hot topic.

125 "The Times is an opinion maker"

Obviously, you haven't been here very long. It may be an opinion maker to mindless fans, not here. That's why I love reading DT, and I hate reading the Dodgers.com forum.

130 Bear in mind that a non-crazy person is now in charge of the Devil Rays.

(reaches over to switch Steelyeri's sarcasm detector on)

asking for Billingsley and Martin for Julio Lugo sounds crazy to me. The only thing crazier would be to actually give them up.

130 Given the McCourt's firing mania and Neddy's obvious need to produce this year I can see your argument. But I am really tired of having to take the stupid deal because it prevents the really stupid deal.

130 - I think Canuck makes a good point. Part of the price we are paying Furcal is the cost of protecting our prospects as much as we can - since we don't know exactly which ones will pan out, the more the merrier.

hey canuck, since your here, lets talk 2006 draft. drew stubbs, max scherzer.. what are your opinions?

cody johnson and jordan walden are probably on your radar huh?

Hmm, I'm usually pretty good at leaving the switch on. Thanks for that, though.

130 I can see where you are coming from given the McCourts' firing mania and Neddy's obvious need to produce this year, but I am really tired of having to accept stupid deals to prevent really stupid moves.

135 The person that (I'm guessing) asked for that is no longer the G.M.

Matt Kemp was 19th over on Sickels' list in the pre-season. 19th! Who's the 19th best prospect in the Yankees organization? Bubba Crosby?

136 140

wow,the double post was arranged differently this time.

140 -- agreed. We need to do something that stands on its own two feet.

As far as LF, what about Young?

Be comforted by the fact that when it comes to Free Agents, anyone who signs a "premiere" free agent looks stupid the day he does it, and looks stupider as time goes on. It's McCourt, and yet, in this area, baseball is 32 McCourts.

That said, I'm kind of excited. That's a pretty meaty front end of the lineup if we go Furcal, Choi, Drew, Kent, Bradley, (Mueller/Randa), Cruz, Navarro.

I wonder--does switching Kent to first base (I'll believe it when I see it) mean he'll re-up? Or is this just for '06?

143 My first post didn't show up, so I posted it again from memory. By then, of course, the first post registered. Sorry , it's getting late.

Oh, I see. I thought I read that the new gm wanted martin for gathright. so i thought he would be crazy enough to ask for so much in return for lugo.

jayston stark in his winter meetings preview article states austin kearns is the most likely of the reds OF to be dealt. he would be a good pickup. he has minor league pedigree, still only like 25/26 or something, and has shown major league success.

and, he fits right in with our outher injury riddled outfielders!

Bill James' projections for 2006:
Furcal - 285/354/418/771 with 37 SBs.
Izturis - 269/310/345/655 with 11 SBs

147 This is true, but Chuck LaMar would at the very least ask for Billingsly for Lugo.

what are furcals ZIPs projections?

146

when I first saw your second post I thought "wow, that must be a record for time between double posts."

Then I realized it was arranged differently.

You read what the Reds asked for him? Going from memory here but it was four players, including a regular position player and two pitching prospects.

I think GMs are a lot like Congressmen. GMs know that all GMs are dumb, but don't really think that through to its obvious conclusion.

149

A. Perez' line last season...

.297/.360/.398/.758 (in 259 ABs)

I thought switching to all caps would give me away.

Seems like the McCourt's have battered wife syndrome. They get called snickering names by Simers, have Plachke all but call for a bleeding boycott of the team, but they're still giving the Times a heads up on Furcal, and on the DePo dump, and the Colletti hire. And they've sent out invitations (seven months in advance) to the crucifiction of Choi.

124

Okay, that one stung a bit. I guess a went a bit overboard with my Giles love. I don't presently have career VORP stats at my disposal, but I'd be curious to see how the two stack up over the last three or four years. 2005 was a career best for Furcal, no? Obviously, age greatly favors furcal, but we're only talking three years here.

Anyway, I feel a bit better about the signing now, especially considering the "protecting our prospects" argument. I'd still like to see a power bat in LF, though.

Then he will be resurrected with the As, and save baseball. It hath been written in the King Choi Bible.

2006 furcal ZIPs
.282/.352/.431 15hr 32SB 7CS

i could live with that.

149 And Bill James' projections for A. Perez in 2006: 284/345/412/757.

Also, remember that those projections figure in park factors, so they compare well with Furcal's 285/354/418/771 in Atlanta. Translated to Dodger Stadium Furcal's would be more like 280/350/406/756.

While I'm at it, projections for...
A. Perez - 284/345/412/757.
Robles - 287/348/393/741.

Does ZIPs take park effects into account?

161 yep

Late, by 29 seconds.

Of course it does. What are we? Luddites?

148- I like Kearns, but I wouldn't trade Guzman for him. They would probably ask for Broxton, which I wouldn't do either. I'd like to see the Dodgers go after an OF who can play at least 150 games a year.

Well, you've all taken my hope and smashed it to bits. I'm going to bed dreaming of 2009, I guess.

i personally dont see AP reaching those projections.

I'd like to get Kearns -- even with the health issues. Amongst Drew, Bradley, Cruz, Kearns, and Werth we should be able to get 3 full time equivalent OFs. Of course, I'd rather have Dunn.

FWIW, Turner Field's park effects are about average in all respects. But its HR factor (2003-05) is 95; Dodger Stadium played at 106 in the same span.

yea i was going to say, turner field is a pretty nuetral park; its dimensions are also like DS where the outfield walls are pretty normal.

i am going to watch some atlanta games on mlb.tv now haha.

What happens to Robles? He must be down, losing his starting job 2-1/2 months before arriving in Vero.

I don't know if Furcal hits triples, but he should say bye-bye to those.

167 Why not?
2005 actuals: .297 .360 .398 .758
2006 Zips: .269 .342 .423 .765
2006 James: .284 .345 .412 .757

These all seem to be in the same ballpark, although Zips is maybe a little high on slugging. .750ish OPS is a good estimate.

172 Hopefully what I had hoped he would all along, he becomes a nice asset off the bench.

Perez hit pretty bad in the second half of the year last year.

Furcal was third in the NL last year with 11 triples behind Jose Reyes and ... our hero ... Juan Pierre.

138 -- Nate, for the top pick in the draft, I want the best available high school pitcher, be it Walden, Matt Latos, or any other prep arm that might rise to the top next year, like Colton Willems, possibly. This will probably be our only chance to get THE top-rated HS arm in any draft for years and years (Billingsley was underrated going into the 2003 draft). About Cody Johnson, I am hearing bad things about his defense. He may even move to 1B.

As for Stubbs, I think that his premium position is making him a bit overvalued. People who watch him hit are not convinced there is a lot of offensive upside there. Besides, I think that with our having prospects just about everywhere BUT center field, we're fated in the next couple years to sign a big free agent CF. I think Andruw Jones is available next year. We signed Drew last off-season, now Furcal, so why not Jones next? We keep raiding the Braves.

Re park effects, Atlanta is pretty neutral, but Dodger Stadium suppresses doubles and kills triples. Furcal's HR's might increase by 2 or 3 in DS, but his slugging will likely decrease because he hits a lot of doubles and triples.

hmmm, maybe this is another reason he sign with the cubs.

furcal in day games:
245 .318 .396

furcal in night games:
302 .362 .443

cubs play a ton of day games...

Rafael Furcal will become only the second Dodgers player to have an unassisted triple play on his resume.

The other is Glenn Wright.

Of course, neither peformed the feat as a Dodger.

Yes, that Glenn Wright.

180 That's because he's still hungover for day games.

i like walden canuck. I like Latos but i have this uneasy feeling about him, he reminds me of AJ burnett too much, which means arm troubles in the future.

What have you heard about cody johnson? that would be a bummer if he has to move to 1b, a lot of people compare his bat to shawn green or so. maybe he'll drop to our weaver comp pick.

no offensive value with stubbs? thats kind of odd. he seems like a player scouts would love with his tools and everything. hes 6'4 200, so he still has projected power.

ha, i think it would be halarious if he sign druw next year. we do raid the braves, wierd.

175 If there's been a trend with Izturis and Robles, it's putting them in sub-optimal positions to succeed. Izturis is not a leadoff hitter, painfully obvious to all but Jim the Martyr. Robles isn't a starter, but until a few hours ago we all hoped he could last there until July.

178- Andruw would be great, but I think he's one of the guys the Braves are going to keep. His defense is overrated, but I wouldn't mind have an .900 OPS player patrolling CF (Bradley did post a .900 OPS in 2003- and I don't want to see Drew in CF). The fact that we don't really have any good CF prospects close to the majors makes him a logical target…but Scott Boras is his agent, so expect him to ask for 10 years $200 million. I could see the Yankees signing him for 7 years @ $15-16 million a year.

Just looked it up, Andruw is not a FA until 2008.

so who on the braves will we raid next season?

I love this Furcal signing. Colletti has the guts to pull the plug on Izturis, and it seems from all reports he's going to give Choi at least half the year to prove himself.

If Colletti just signs Bradley, and maybe makes a play for Nomar or Ted Lilly...

I'll give him a B+.

I think the people knocking this move dont realize what a hole Shortstop was in the organzation at all levels.

Colletti, now go get Lilly and Nomar and pray for good health.

lilly isnt a free agent...

The drivel reported by Steve Henson, Rosenthal, and Gurnick about Izzy moving to 2nd has probably been leaked out there by Camille Johnston as to not upset the Izturis fans that might buy tickets for the 2006 season.

In an ideal world, DePo would have traded Izturis last off-season. Antonio Perez would have played everyday at SS this past year. And we'd have a great idea as to whether signing Furcal is worth it.

But that didnt happen. So just have to be happy getting Furcal, and not worry about 'what could have been'.

At least Antonio Perez might make good trade bait now.

188 Good point about perceived adequacy. Sort of like the Cora vs. Kent debate of a year ago.

189. Colletti will still trade some of our prospects this off-season I believe. I read on another board our interest in Soriano? Thats interesting too...

Since Furcal is now in the fold, do we move Guzman to a different position for 06? Or keep him at SS?

At least Antonio Perez might make good trade bait now.
Robles too.
I remember making this point last year, as the Dodgers were churning through players: at least we were sorting the wheat from the chaff. Do that, and when your starters regain their health, sell from your stockpile of spare parts.

I say, play Guzman at short until he proves he can't handle it.

I read on another board our interest in Soriano? Thats interesting too

thats where i draw the line!

190, 193

Lets be honest, no amount of decent spare parts will net a well-oiled machine...

There are people who buy tickets to Dodger games just to see Cesar Izturis play?

Really? Is that person related to Izturis?

If we are going to trade ANY of our top prospects, I think we must get a top tier starter, someone like Barry Zito. Hitters will always be available of the FA market, but a top flight starter is a commodity that does not come available often. We trade for one and lock him up for a 4 year extension.

I don't think anybody here is going to argue that putting Izzy at second is a good idea. But Simers more or less endorses it, this morning, as a means to getting Choi out of the lineup. I'm not willing to chalk that up to PR, especially since Henson quoted Colletti saying it. It seems fair to assume that it's the plan, if only for now.

choi has april til the all star break to show his worth. its make or break time hee!

Bob, et. all, would you mind enlightening me. Perhaps I am naive and have not really studied the numbers, but I love Izturis. I always viewed him as one of the best, if not the best, defensive shortstop in the NL and perhaps the whole MLB. Last year for the first 2 months or so his hitting was awesome. I am at least willing to give the guy another chance at the plate considering all the injuries that may have contributed to his second half slump. Is there something that I am missing about him??

if only for now.
Yep. There's always the possibility Choi could be hitting 305/420/510 in July, making talk of pulling him out of the lineup seem crazy.
July is a long, long, long way off. No, come ot think of it, it's even longer than that.

re: 201

and that is the type of thinking i hope 5-10 GMs have come the trading deadline in 2006

Is there something that I am missing about him??
You're missing context, as in he's never hit like that, or even close, in his career.

199. Where is this Ned Colletti quote that says Kent will move to 1st base?

I've yet to hear Colletti say anything about Izturis, other than 'he's a good player. We'll still have a spot for him'....

I still believe Colletti trades Navarro for something good, especially with Russ Martin sitting in the minors. At least, I wouldnt have a problem if he did.

197. Izturis has fans just like Repko has fans. Thats why they go. Or maybe, they just post on messageboards.... Hmmm?

202- Yeah, that could happen. Or Choi could be hitting 240/365/485. Who does Colletti bench? I know who I'd bench, but there's no reason I can tell to suggest Colletti passes that test. Choi isn't going to turn in to Pujols. He's going to keep being Choi. Which should be good enough to keep his spot.

Hmm. Did it change? There's still this, in the latest Henson piece: "General Manager Ned Colletti said he would speak to Izturis and Kent about changing positions before signing Furcal."

But I could have sworn he originally sourced the Izzy to second, Kent to first idea as Colletti's. Maybe I misread.

The way this club works we may just as well see Philips at 1B until July, then we will accept Izzy at 2B because it will be relatively better.

Just because Tracy is gone doesn't mean the stupid managing will end.

I don't know if anyone has brought this up, but in the l.a. times it says the dodgers are expected to sign either mueller or randa.
And then in an article on dodgers.com it says that the dodgers are considering using a top prospect at a corner infield position, the prospects mentioned were loney, guzman, laroche and it said among others.

so my question is which do you think has got it right the l.a. times or dodgers.com or both?

Could we be looking at an infield of kent, furcal, mueller or randa, and a prospect, and which prospect, could mueller play 1b, i guess guzman can play both 1b and 3b, loney only 1b, laroche i guess only 3b.

ooops, here are my sources.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/dodgers/la-sp-dodgers4dec04,1,6759741.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-mlb-dodger

http://losangeles.dodgers.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20051204&content_id=1275704&vkey=news_la&fext=.jsp&c_id=la

208. So what you're saying is that we cant breathe easier until Jason Phillips is non-tendered?

I agree.

Temperered enthusiasm until the arbitration decisions on Phillips, Choi, and Bradley...

And then there is talk of izturis at 2b, so what is going on.

201

I don't think Izturis is a bad fielder or not exciting to watch, but he isn't that exciting that I would buy tickets to see him play and I think his reputation far outweighs his ability.

nomar>mueller>randa

this is whatis going to happen.

the cubs are going to trade for pierre to fill their leadoff role and go into the season with neifi starting at shortstop.

izzy will come back around the all star break, play like his 2004 self.

by the time the trade deadline comes around, the cubs are sick of neifi and come to the dodgers asking for izturis.

the dodgers asking price: felix pie and mark pawelek.

jim hendry says yes.

dodgers win forever!

201- I like Izturis. Just not that much. Dodger fans have lived with the Alfredo Griffen-Jose Offerman dichotomy for long enough. There are shortstops who can field AND hit. I want one of those.

Why are so many people (err, posters on DT) willing to trade Navarro right now?

Isn't Martin something like a year away still? Why would you trade a promising, cheap, and young catcher away while his replacement still isn't ready?

Did Werth and Gagne lose a fan?

i would have traded navarro if it brought us back beckett.

218
I changed my name, werth seems like he's out of a job on the dodgers and gagne probably becomes a free agent after 2006.
I'm a dodger fan first, players second.

I'm not the bullish on Beckett (except for his incredible stuff and lack of innings on his arm).

I can see trading Navarro for Beckett though.

ironically, Rene Francisco signed furcal from the DR. Francisco resigned this year and went back to the braves. furcal signs with the dodgers.

funny.

What if Kent is Choi's new platoon partner? Kent plays second against RHPs, and first against LHPs. Perez or D. (can't remember which is ours, and which is Tampa's) Young get a first half tryout. There are worse things that could (and almost certainly will) happen.

Anybody think the talk on dodgers.com article about one of our prospects playing an infield position is true?
And anyone think the rumor that the dodgers are trying to sign either mueller or randa is true?

ive heard the dodgers name connected to mueller but not randa.

225
Its in the l.a. times.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/dodgers/la-sp-dodgers4dec04,1,6759741.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-mlb-dodger

If you'll excuse the expression: who's to say that Colletti won't be willing to sign Gagne to whatever deal Boras puts in front of him? We didn't think DePo would, but I don't see why Colletti shouldn't. He's a close, after all. Everybody else is doing it. . .

By which I mean: closer.

muellers splits

home:
.283 .358 .450

away:
307 .380 .410

relatively same number of ABs for both.

227 DePo did give Gagne a pretty sweet deal. I still think people get the "Moneyball" idea about closers wrong.

There are only a couple of closers who are worth paying the "market value" for. Gagne is one of them (as long as he is healthy).

I know everyone is trying to stay positive and what not but am I the only one who thinks Rafeal Furcal getting 13 million dollars a year is far past the point of insanity.

" Ironically, the Dodgers might have been helped by their failure to sign veteran outfielder Brian Giles, whom they coveted but who returned to San Diego. Giles, who reportedly left the final decision to his wife and daughters, signed a three-year, $30 million deal with the Padres when the Dodgers were offering him three years and $39 million. Had the Dodgers signed Giles, they might not have had enough money left in their budget to make a competitive offer to Furcal."
From the Daily News
Misprint, or did the Dodgers offer Giles the same amount as Furcal? I'm too tired right now to e-mail Tony Jackson.

Furcal's career numbers at Dodgers Stadium:
.157/.253/.200 .453

Ouch, looks like Izturis' numbers in July. Ned better hope that Furcal doesn't hit like he did in 2001-2002
@ Arizona .360/.380/.520 .900
@ SF .200/.278/.231 .509
@ Coors .242/.299/.355 .653
@ SD .136/.259/.182 .441

For the Cubs fans out there:
@ Wrigley .190/.239/.349 .588

Throughout his career, Furcal has been a better hitter at home:
Home .305/.366/.432 .798
Away .264/.330/.386 .716

Finally, he's a good switch hitter beacuse he hits well from both sides:
Vs. LHP .281/.346/.430 .776
Vs. RHP .285/.348/.402 .750

Ugh. I'm not thrilled at all about this deal. I agree with many of you, that it's not a disaster if it doesn't preclude getting help at SP, LF and 3b (bigger budget that we've thought?), but if the best thing that can be said about it is that it's not the WORST thing that could have happened, well...

At this point, PR nonsense aside, the only way Izturis should play for the Dodgers after the trading deadline is if Furcal is injured. And even then, I'd be just as happy with Robles. Izturis now has no value for the Dodgers - Furcal trumps him in every way - but might have some on the trade market if he can come back and show himself to be healthy.

No thanks on Randa. I'd just as soon see Aybar or Perez or one of the prospects. Hell, we let Beltre learn at the MLB level. And I really don't like the Reggie Sanders idea. I haven't checked recently, but last time I looked, his overall decent career numbers hid a remarkable sawtooth pattern. A really good year, followed by a horrible year, back and forth, one year at a time, for over a decade. Eerie. So if he was at all good last year, NO THANKS!

And here I thought the Dodgers didn't need another catcher...

The Orioles, Dodgers, Angels and Padres are among the teams showing interest in Johnny Estrada, who could be traded this week.
It's also possible that Estrada could go to Tampa Bay in a Julio Lugo deal. That'd allow the Rays to move Toby Hall in another trade. Dec. 4 - 3:49 am et
- Rotoworld

This had me worried until I realized it was a mistake...

The Dodgers are looking at free agents Bill Mueller and Joe Randa to play first base.
With Andy LaRoche and Joel Guzman on the horizon, it'd be a mistake for the Dodgers to sign a third baseman to a multiyear deal. Mueller, though, seems nearly certain to get two years. The Giants, White Sox and Twins are also interested. Dec. 4 - 3:54 am et
Source: Los Angeles Times
- Rotoworld

Compare:

1
Kent 1B
Izturis 2B
Furcal SS
Randa/Mueller 3B

2
Choi 1B
Kent 2B
Izturis SS
Randa/Mueller 3B

The difference?

#1 costs roughly $12.5 million more per year
#1 substitutes Furcal (.757 career OPS) for Choi (.786 career OPS).
#1 has 2 players playing their normal positions; #2 has 4 players playing their normal positions.

Now: why is #1 better than #2?

It sure has been a long time since I've posted. I think I needed some time to clear my head of the DePodesta nonsense.

I can live with the Furcal deal. Sure, it's a lot of money per year, but it's only 3 years, and Furcal is not only a good player, but it potentially replaces what would be one of LA's two worst hitters. It's for his prime years, and Furcal has played about 150 games per season over the past 4 years. So all in all, in 3 years we might say "we overpaid", but I doubt anyone will be saying, "wow, that was dumb."

236 - excellent point. If the reason to sign Furcal is to get Choi out of the lineup, then it's a huge mistake. If it's to have an excuse to trade Izturis, then it's not.

Last thought, but let's say they really do want Izturis in the field. Would it make more sense to play either him or Furcal at 3B, and leave Kent at 2B?

Re: 179. What he's saying is Furcal might represent the latest in a series of "white whales" the Dodgers have pursued--the slashing doubles hitter. Has any Dodger player ever led the league in doubles?

Among active players, what would comprise the best possible lineup that takes best advantage of Dodger Stadium park effects while minimizing disadvantages? And how different would that optimal lineup be from a generic NL optimal lineup?

237 There are other ways they can try to get Choi out of the lineup. I don't think this move is so much anti-Izzy as it is:

-- A pessimistic assessment of Izzy's ability to come back and be the Izzy of old, or to do so at any time in 2006;

-- A desire to have a player perceived as a top-drawer hitter in our lineup, which even Izzy's biggest fans would not claim for him--not yet anyway.

I think this move enhances Choi's chances to earn a temporary shot at full-time starting, which could turn into a permanent slot or a platoon slot, if he performs.

A couple of interesting paragraphs over at espn.com. Quote:

However, the Dodgers made a late rush into the bidding, and Furcal and agent Paul Kinzer flew to Los Angeles on Thursday to meet with owner Frank McCourt, GM Ned Colletti and a Dodgers delegation that included Manny Mota, whom Kinzer described as "a father figure" to Furcal and many other Dominican players.

"Raffy was torn between the Braves and Cubs, and he was close to a decision," Kinzer told Stark. "Then, all of a sudden, the Dodgers got into this and asked us to fly out there and check them out. Let me tell you. Frank McCourt was really impressive. Raffy really liked what he had to say. They want to turn their franchise around, and Frank McCourt has a real passion for the game. Raffy was really impressed."

I like the idea of Mueller. He's a hitter for sure, but I don't know what his d is like. And if they are thinking he can play first if LaRoche is ready, then that works even better. The bottom line with Izzy is that we have no idea what is going to happen with him. I also realized today, that I secretly like driving a brand new Furcal around the league. Sleek, cool, expensive as all heck, and fast. I am ashamed of myself. But not that much.

240 So, will Ratt agree that, for the day, Camille Johnston earned her pay?

I think this is a very astute analysis of why the Furcal deal feels OK: "We can be a bit stupid with money if it means we are not going to be stupid dealing away young talent whose cheap MLB salaries are going to give us enough payroll flexibilty to AFFORD to be stupid with money." 130

[240] mr. furcal can now have the distinction of being the only person in LA to be "really impressed" by frank mccourt.

There's another post above, FYI.

242 I think Camille Johnston earns her pay every day. The point of my jibes is that her client, the McCourt! brand, is a fraud. You can have the most talented, experienced PR person in the world, but PR doesn't work unless it's true. When the client/boss is a tool like McCourt, some PR people try to impress the boss by overreaching, by buying into the boss' fantasy self-image, and pushing it onto the press long after the press has stopped buying it. Eventually, that dynamic plays out in the way all the other PR help McCourt has experienced--they get blamed, they get fired. So in that sense, I feel for Camille, hope she's getting paid a lot, and hope she's putting a lot of it in the bank.

Good PR people are also lucky. Camille is lucky that Furcal's agent, counting up 10 percent of $40 million, wanted to blow a little smoke up McCourt's skirt.

It is possible Kent has already signed off on this signing. In fact, he may have caused it. What if he requested to be traded and Flanders wants to keep that fact under cover for awhile? Sign Furcal, move Izzy (or use one of the prospects) and trade Kent for a big outfielder. How about Kent for Manny and some salary help? Choi gets to play, we try some prospects at third or sign someone, hopefully Nomar. It is possible.