That wouldn't have happened with DePodesta in charge...

I think it's safe to say that this trade wouldn't have happened either with DePodesta in charge.

FYI-anyone here know grabowski was in a band?

http://www.orange32.com/grabowski/

1 - Oh, of course.

I'm not high on Ethier.

Can someone please explain to me why the dodgers could not have recieved more for two proven major leaguers?

that was because the giants disconnected ned's phone, right?

Instareaction: This trade might mean that Colletti is playing for 2007. Which might mean that our other minor leaguers won't be traded.

5. They didnt wait long enough. Someone's going to have to convince me how Either would be more valuable to the Dodgers, than Bradley/Perez.

On another note, lets just name Jeff Kent the GM.

If the Dodgers are gonna get ripped off, I'm glad it comes at the good fortune of the A's.

7 - Kent should be pretty worried then.

Wow our lineup looks anemic.

Ned, meet Overhyped Prospect.

Overhyped Prospect, meet Ned.

I'm not down on this trade, I think Ethier could be a fine player - but we did give up too much if that's all we got in return. I liked AP a lot. He may be the best part of the trade for the A's. I guess it was Bradley's injury (and contract?) status , too, that forced the Dodgers to give up more. But still... 1 minor leaguer?

There's gotta be one more deal in the works somewhere.

If you asked Jeff Kent right now, who he would rather play aside what would his answer be? The Dodgers with Milton Bradley and Antonio Perez or the the Dodgers with Ethier??? Kent is old and wants to win now, not in 2007.

7 - Or perhaps that he didn't want to settle for Corey Patterson.

There was seemingly never any intention of starting the season with Milton Bradly on the roster, so this was the best they could do without packaging him with a prospect.

I have to admit, I like Colletti's angle again here. I figured it was one of two scenarios in a Milton deal: settle for a substandard MLer (ie Patterson) in a straight up deal or package him with a top notch prospect to get something of value.

Instead he puts Perez in the deal (who didn't have a place on the team anyway) and gets back someone who could conceivably replace Milton soon.

5

Well, you have to keep in mind that (whether justified or not), Milton's net worth is equal to his onfield abilities minus his "character" issues.

5, 8 - Well, it's obvious that the health and personality concerns lowered Bradley's perceived value, in Colletti's eyes as much as anyone else's. There's no big mystery here.

Let's not oversell Bradley and Perez. They are flawed talents. But as I wrote up top, I think the key is Colletti really didn't value either of them as Dodgers for 2006. It would seem that he saw "anything" as value for them.

"Ethier won the Arizona Fall League's Dernell Stenson Sportsmanship Award, given to the player who is judged to disply the best attitude and character" I read this on his bio from Rotowire... I'll have to find the link.. Thought it was intersting considering who he was traded for..

I'm wondering if he's being packaged forsomewhere else?

Jon -- Ethier was Texas League Player of the Year, too, in 2005. He smacked 18 homers before being promoted to AAA Sacramento.

Maybe it is just about 2007. And Kent was told that he will be traded at the deadline to a contender.

Anyone surprised Choi was not thrown in too? If I read that Antonio Perez was dealt straight up for Ethier I would have been puzzled. How will this look if Perez starts at 2b for Oakland in 2007 and we need one?! Impartial bystanders on other boards think we got fleeced. Honestly I wish we non-tendered Bradley and kept AP.

5. i think that maybe we are underestimating Andrew Ethier. I wasnt to hyped about this trade when i first heard it. Ethier doesnt seem like anything special, and his name gives me lots of trouble to type. But Baseball America rated Andre Ethier the 6th best prospect in the Texas League, ahead of guys like John Danks, Kendry Morales, and Adam Jones. The lists are compiled mainly by listening to various scouts and coaches, so its very suprising that an A's prospect would get such high praise by scouts.

It would seem a face value that a Bradley/Ethier trade would be good enough for the A's. Why would we toss in Perez? Either Billy Beane just plain duped Ned, Ned really liked Ethier and Beane knew it, or Ned really liked Ethier and so does Beane and Beane wouldnt give him up unless he got more so Ned tossed in Perez. Im hoping that the third option is true, but i doubt it.

Interestingly, ive always thought of myself as a Dodger fan 1st, and an A's fan 2nd. I always worried about what that meant, can you really have two favorite teams, do i like the A's more? Seeing this trade, probably a very good deal for the A's, my reaction was dissapointment. I guess this means that i really do root for the Dodgers much more than the A's. At least i can still root for Bradley, who was probably my favorite dodger over the last 2 years, lets hope he really tears the angels a new one.

I assume that the Dodgers are increasing their prospect depth because they plan to make a nice trade for an older star to play outfield in exchange for prospects.

What do the rest of you think about that possibility?

his name gives me lots of trouble to type

So how is it pronounced? Eth-ee-ay?

It would seem a face value that a Bradley/Ethier trade would be good enough for the A's

I have a feeling that most Dodger fans were grossly overvaluing Milton's worth. Ned did his best to bluff, but Milton was apparently NOT coming back.

I think Nate was pretty high on Ethier. I guess I'd rather have the potential of him, than the known failure of Corey Patterson.

Most of all I'd rather have just signed Bradley to the 1yr cheap arbitration contract he would have gotten, and see what happens in 2006.

Of Ethier that much better than Ruggiano, Kemp, and Joel Guzman (if he's converted to Of)?

19. with aybar, izturis, young, abreu, and even hu around, i dont think that the Dodgers will have a problem finding a 2B in 2007.

23. does ethier have a beard?

It's funny that Beane is getting Depo's guys...

19 - Between Johnson, Swisher, and Barton, the A's are pretty well set at slugging 1st basemen types. That's been my impression from A's fans at least, since the natural idea would've been to spin Choi up to Oakland since the day Depo was fired.

Since Ethier is going to be 24 this season, I think Colletti is placing a substantial wager that he makes the team this year either out of spring or at least by mid-season.

Glancing at Ethier's stats for the first time, he seems to have a good eye at the plate and has produced a recent power surge at AA last year. This is interesting in that it shows Colletti may not be as old school in his evaluation of players as was thought. I'm cautiously encouraged. We're still going to need another established bat in the outfield with Cruz, Werth, Ledee, and Ethier battling for the remaining spot. Surely either one or a combination of players can produce a solid season at a corner outfield spot.

Giving up Perez in the deal may have been a little too much, but if Bradley has his usual amount of injuries and Ethier makes the team, this might not be so bad.

I guess after the dust has settled it is basically Franklin Gutierrez and Jason Romano for Ethier. ;)

Does Mr. Ethier play centerfield?

16. Cant wait for the Plashke piece comparing the sainthood of Andre Ethier, and the thuggishness of Milton Bradley.

Of course, how each helps the Dodgers win games on the field, only a Bill Plashke can understand.

I guess after the dust has settled it is basically Franklin Gutierrez and Jason Romano for Ethier. ;)

And a whole lot of flying ball bags and beer bottles in between...

As much as I like Antonio, did he have all that much value? He's only going to be a utility guy in Oakland, I'm pretty sure Beane only wanted him for depth issues. It was pretty clear that management never really wanted to give Perez a chance, and with plenty of 2B prospects in the pipeline he didn't have much of a future either.

Since I don't follow minor leaguers that closely I hadn't heard much about Ethier until this year. I think I remember hearing a lot of buzz about him from people whoe went to some AFL games. Adding another OF prospect makes our system even more complete. My assumption is that another outfielder will be signed/traded for (J. Jones?), and depending on how Ethier does in the minors he could get the call to replace the first OF injury.

23. forget those guys, is he really an improvement on Delwyn Young. Keep in mind that young is now an outfielder and the same age as ethier, and that the Southern League is much tougher on hitters than the Texas League.

Ethier in AA(Texas Leauge): 319/385/497
Young in AA(Southern League): 296/346/499

Please watch for occasional updates to this post.

The Dodgers were talking to the Phillies about Abreu. It's possible that they wanted an OF prospect in addition to what the dodgers were offering for him, forcing Ned to go out and get him. It could mean Abreu is coming to LA soon for Lowe, Sanchez, Ethier and another prospect?

[20] as a dodgers/A's fan i had kind of the same reaction, but knowing that bradley was almost certainly going to be traded, 1)i'm glad he was sent to oakland where i can still root for him and 2)with bradley and especially if they get frank thomas, the A's are a very deep and talented ballclub. if they keep everyone they have right now and simply add thomas, they could go very far in the playoffs, and who knows, maybe even win it all. the dodgers are not going to be winning it all in '06.

anyway, regardless of where bradley was traded, it was certain we were gonna get ripped off, which is why i didn't want him traded in the first place. but if anyone was gonna rip us off, at least it's oakland. and hey, we got a pretty good prospect in return. i can live with that.

Paging CanukDodger or Nate. Please pick up the white courtesy phone.

28 - I guess after the dust has settled it is basically Franklin Gutierrez and Jason Romano for Ethier.

...and a pennant in 2004. (The Bradley deal certainly made a big difference in 04).

29

Yes, he plays CF

Perhaps we need to dig into the DT archives to remind us of how we felt after each MB meltdown. I remember, and I remember being embarrassed after most of them. He may never have another one (that thing called 'maturity'), but we don't know that and apparently it's not worth finding out, at least in a Dodger uniform.

The need for an OF is making us forget how disruptive this guy is to a team. I agree with the math in 14, that's a big subtraction there.

I'm kinda tired of seeing the word "dysfunctional" preceding "Dodgers", so to me, this is a step in the right direction. This is a trade I won't look back on regardless.

Trade's fine, then.

Some stuff on Ethier:

From rotohelp.com, "... I find Ethier's campaign less impressive than many analysts otherwise wowed by his development. The good news is that he registered improved across-the-board averages despite advancing from A+ Modesto to Midland. His power boost particularly catches my eye, yet erosion in both his walk rate (.11 to .10) and especially his contact rate (.85 to .82) indicate potential problems as he heads to a full year at Sacramento. However, Ethier also ranks position as the most advanced outfield prospect in the system."

11/21/05 From sportsblurb.com, " ... Andre Ethier ... had the smoothest swing I saw in the AFL, and his plate discipline was tremendous. Scouts have argued that he will not develop the necessary power skills to hold down a job as a corner outfielder, but I saw him hit some mammoth home runs in batting practice, and he always hit the ball hard during games. He also has a great eye and should hit .300 or better in the majors. From what I saw, he also should be able to hit 20-30 homers a year, making him a major asset for the Athletics."

11/21/05 From Baseball America, " ... I figured there'd be some Ethier outrage, and rightly so. He was definitely in the mix, and that emerging power is hard to ignore. So is the plate discipline. But the league was so much deeper this year compared to last year. To give you some insight, I struggled to rank 20 players in 2004. This year, I started off with 46."

11/17/05 From sportsblurb.com, "... made a big splash at Midland, hitting .319/.385/.497 with 18 home runs and 30 doubles, winning the Texas League player of the year award. He also hit .366 in 82 at-bats in the AFL, bashing 12 extra-base hits and drawing 21 walks against just 10 strikeouts ... not a true power hitter, but might be able to tweak his swing to produce 20-30 home runs a year at the expense of a few points of batting average, and could hit 40-plus doubles a year in his prime. He is stretched defensively in centerfield but projects to be a plus defender in one of the corner spots."

11/10/05 From minorleaguebaseball.com, "... In 2005, Ethier took off, hitting .319 with 18 homers and 80 RBIs for Double-A Midland before finally getting bumped up to Sacremento for the PCL playoffs (where he hit .316 in five games). He won the Texas League All-Star Game Home Run Derby and the game's MVP award and was also named the league's Player of the Year. Ethier followed that up with a superb AFL season."

11/02/05 Ethier won Player of the Year honors in the AA Texas League this year.

P.S. He bats and throws lefthanded

Couple photos of Ethier:
http://tinyurl.com/cvupb
http://tinyurl.com/aw99h

Also Sickel's posted this about his perf in the AFL:

The [AFL OBP] leader was Oakland prospect Andre Ethier at .495. Ethier also posted a 21/10 BB/K ratio in 82 at-bats. The question for him is power. He slugged .598 but hit just two homers.

I have to say that I'm not inclined to put any weight at all on AFL stats.

40. i dont remember being embarrassed after Bradley's "incidents". i was generally happy that the Dodgers were actually getting some attention. Bradley's meltdowns were bad because they took him out of games, not because it embarrassed the Dodgers or anyone else.

i really hope the Lakers somehow trade for Artest now, just to balance the LA sports scene, because now there are no interesting personalities left.

What is he holding in that first picture, looks like a bottle something special, hopefully it is not produced by balco.

35 - If not Abreu, maybe a more conservative trade for Jason Michaels. You wouldn't have to gut the farm system (or the rotation), and would add depth to a pretty thin OF.

Start the season with Michaels/Drew/Cruz. Hope Werth comes back healthy. Ethier may be ready after a stint in the minors to start the year.

Perhaps we upgrade at 3rd to replace Bradley's production short term...maybe Nomar???

Jon - Ethier got yanked in 2004 because of microfractures in his vertebrae. He seems to me to be a younger version of Bradley, injury-wise.

43 - Ethier homered 18 times in the regular season in the Texas League.

43. It doesnt really matter if Ethier only hit 2HR's in the AFL. I dont think Andy LaRoche hit any.

Can Ethier make the club in 2006? Skipping AAA?

In Baseball America's Top 20 Texas League prospects, they liken Ethier to Garrett Anderson and (drum roll please) Shawn Green based on his "quiet approach" and ability to hit to all fields. Also says he's good defensively, although not really a center fielder. Like all scouts, there's question whether he'll be a pure power hitter or more of a line-drive 15-20 HR player. Either way he looks like a future solid regular to me.

-36

I agree. It's a sad state of affairs though, when we're happy to not have been ripped off too badly.

Jeff Kent, the Dodgers just traded your nemesis and weakened themselves for the coming year. How do you feel?
Best part of your post, Jon. Kent is thrilled, now he can go back to doing what he does best, sitting in the corner of the locker room, listening to music while reading motorcycle magazines.

I really hope that Bradley has a great year, so he can stick it to Ned and McCourt. I'm also an A's fan. Throwing in Perez was a move typical of an old school GM, who overvalues defense and undervalues offense. Hee Seop, you're next!

Who is the unlucky one who is going to pick up J.T. Snow from the airport next week?

I go to scchool in Northern California and the A's fan I know love the deal. Ethier is a decent prospect, but probably not much more than a 4th outfielder. Doesn't Jayson Werth do a decent job of filling that role?

Who knew there were TWO Andre Ethier's?? Apparently the other one is the lead singer of the Toronto garage rock band the Deadly Snakes. A review of his 2004 solo album says "Ethier blends Randy Newman, Leonard Cohen, and bits of early Ry Cooder."

47. jason micheals? why
48. one injury makes you injury prone?
51. i really hope BA is right on this one

48 Wow, you really are a scared duck. One injury and now he's injury-prone? For his career he seems pretty reliable to me.

45
i really hope the Lakers somehow trade for Artest now, just to balance the LA sports scene, because now there are no interesting personalities left.

I was kinda hoping the same thing. I think Phil would welcome the challenge to take on such a difficult personality. It would also be interesting to see how Artest and Kobe got along. From a basketball standpoint, Artest is the kind of player the Lakers could really use.

48 - You might be leaping to a conclusion, there. One injury (admittedly in a tough spot) does not a Bradley make.

I think Bradley often had muscle injuries. Anyone agree? Would Ethier have that? And were Ethier's injuries caused by trauma or wear and tear?

56 - Vertebra fractures don't strike me as a one-time-only deal.

58 - I got the impression from the BA article it was wear.

57. artest=rodman perhaps? id love to discuss this more, but it is a Dodger blog

57. Lamar Odom + future draft pick for Ron Artest.

Do it Mitch.

do we know how to pronounce Ethier yet?

I had a pretty bad feeling that colletti would get ripped off in a bradley trade. I thought the bradley for mench rumors were bad. I feel worse about this one, mostly because colletti included perez.

I had hopes that Perez would get a chance this season; that he might win the 3rd base job. Even if he didn't, he would provide nice depth. Now that I think about it, he probably will get his chance. Not with the Dodgers, though.

I kinda agree with the sentiment: "hey, atleast it was the A's who ripped us off." They are my second favorite team as well but it really doesn't remove much of the sting.

This isn't as bad as the news of when Depo was fired, but it still hurts.

On the bright side of things, atleast he got a guy with good plate discipline(apparently).

Artest can be had for MUCH less than Lamar.

Some Colletti quotes (from http://tinyurl.com/ark2z):

General manager Ned Colletti, hired last month by the Dodgers, believed he had no choice in the matter, that a reconciliation with Bradley wasn't possible.

"I went into it with the idea of trying to keep him a Dodger," Colletti said. "It was clearer and clearer there was no way to make this thing work. I got no glimmer at all that it could work."

Colletti said he didn't speak with Bradley until Tuesday.

"I was looking for a way to mediate," Colletti said. "I was looking for a way to keep him. At every turn, I just got stopped. I got it from a lot of different places including inside the clubhouse, outside the clubhouse, people who have known him very well and have known him for a long time.

"There hasn't been a day gone by where I haven't talked to somebody about this."

Colletti said his conversation with Bradley informing him of the trade was brief.

"He didn't have a lot to say," Colletti said. "I just gave him the information, and wished him well. That was it."

Colletti said he thinks Ethier has a chance to be "a very good everyday player in the big leagues" as a corner outfielder, but not right away.

The 23-year-old Ethier will probably begin next season in Triple-A, Colletti said, adding he could arrive at the big-league level sometime next season or in 2007.

"The scouts were very positive on him," Colletti said. "We had asked about him a while back. There was no way they were going to move him."

I recall that Perez was mentioned in a trade proposal last year to Oakland, something like Edwin Jackson and Perez for Hudson.

I liked Milton but after hearing Ned yesterday on the radio, I did not think he would be on the team. Ned also hinted strongly that Guzman would have to move positions probably starting in Spring Training and in AAA.

The problem for the Dodgers will be evaluating the progress in AAA. Name the last time the Dodgers had a AAA team with so many MLB prospects on it. With Martin, Loney, Abreu, Guzman, LaRoche, Ethier, Billingsley, and D. Young, at least 4 or 5 are probably in the top 100 in all of the Minors.

And that does not include pitchers like Broxton, Kuo, Schmoll and Osorio, who all pitched with the Dodgers this past season. And where does Edwin Jackson, Joel Hanrahan, Justin Orenduff all fit in.

Who would have thought that Ned would be here for nearly a month and no prospect has been moved yet?

Any word on Andre's defense and (lack of) running abilities? I'm guessing he's a future LF?

Well we traded the two players on the Dodgers who I've always thought DT posters overvalued. Scouts in Arizona saw Ethier as a tweener. Someone who doesn't really run well enough for CF but may not have the power for a corner. Of course they could all be wrong and he could be the next Jim Edmounds cause that is who he reminds me of. I liked what I saw of him in Arizona but he was old for AA so he should have dominated. Since Ethier was on the Dodger AFL team Logan White probably saw him play quite a bit and may have made the recommendation to go get him.

Ethier could probably do right now what Jaque Jones would have done for us at 1/10 the cost. We should be happy that Ned was interested in a OBP type of player like Ethier.

55 - jason micheals? why

Someone has to play the OF. We currently have Drew, Werth (inj), Ledee, Cruz, Repko, Edwards, and D.Young on the roster.

Rather than put a superstar in here, which weakens our rotation and minor leagues, I merely speculated on Michaels coming in.

Why him? Sweet OBP. 4th OF in PHI assuming Abreu doesn't go anywhere (and no one is offering starting pitching to the Phils for him, so he just might stay).

64 I would have been ecstatic about getting Mench for Bradley. I think you're confusing the Broxton for Mench rumor.

62. You're insane. IT would be fun to watch Artest beat the snot out of Kobe in practice, though.

I'm starting to understand this deal, whether we keep Ethier or trade him elsewhere. I liked Perez, and never thought he got a fair shot, but he was a bad fit for this team, and hopefully will be more valuable in Oakland.

What I really don't get is (what I think is) the overestimation of Milton Bradley. When he was healthy (not enough) and not suspended for one thing or another, he was a good player. But nowhere near a great player. At his best, I'd say he's above average, especially as a CFer. But I can't imagine him ever making an all-star team unless it's through that "every team must be represented rule."

Career OPS of .766. His 2003 season of .922 now seem pretty anomalous, and even then, he played only 101 games (377 ABs). He'll be 28 to start next season, so he's likely at his peak now.

So that's Bradley when he's healthy. Add in the injury history (his 516 ABs in 2004 were by far his most; next most was 377 ABs in that 2003 campaign) and add on top of that the personality issues, and I can see why Beane would have demanded a good utility player to agree to give up his top OF prospect (and apparently a good player).

I'm optimistic about this.

"I went into it with the idea of trying to keep him a Dodger," Colletti said. "It was clearer and clearer there was no way to make this thing work. I got no glimmer at all that it could work."

"I was looking for a way to mediate," Colletti said. "I was looking for a way to keep him. At every turn, I just got stopped. I got it from a lot of different places including inside the clubhouse, outside the clubhouse, people who have known him very well and have known him for a long time.

Ned: Jeff, do you want Bradley gone?
Kent: Get him off the team! He's making me look like a jerk! If you don't trade him, I'm not reporting to spring training!
Ned: Sure thing, Jeff.

Colletti said he didn't speak with Bradley until Tuesday.
Ned: Milton, you're not going to be a Dodger anymore. There's someone on the....it's just not going to work out.
Bradley: (silence)...ok

That wouldn't have happened with DePodesta in charge ...

I really, really dislike this comment, though I normally have the utmost respect for you, Jon. (I'm one of those long-time stalkers.)

While I liked DePodesta as well, it's impossible to tell what would've happened with DePodesta in charge. This comment reminds me of a blind nostalgia that people have of their "fearless leader," that nothing would have gone wrong if such-and-such was still in charge, times were better in the good ol' days, etc. etc.

DePodesta certainly wasn't infalliable. I'm sure you'd agree with me on that point at least, but like I said, that comment kind of irked me.

I'm sort of "bleh" on this deal. Maybe because I expected Bradley to be gone. Perez was already out of the loop so it's not too big a surprise seeing him go as well. I'm at least relieved we got somebody young who'll have a chance to help us soon.

Our OF is really horrible right now... I wonder what's next.

You can listen to Ned's conference call regarding the Bradley trade on Dodgers.com. Firefox users: disable your popup blockers.

74 I read that as sarcasm all the way.

I also agree that Perez was a little overvalued by the commenters here, but this deal really thins out the Dodgers' major league roster. This trade only begets more trades in my estimation.

74 , 77 Sarcasm was my 2nd guess. The first was that it was just an innocuous comment about the fact that DePodesta and Beane are friends, always talking to one another, and the "that" that wouldn't have happened was Beane's inability to get in touch with the Dodger GM.

Unless Mr. Ned is guessing it's "Eeth-ee-ur." Darn I was hoping it was French like Eh-tee-ay.

Also did anyone hear what sounded like a child asking a question on the conf call? Possibly Sarah from Dodger Place?

I'm pretty dissapointed that MB couldnt hold it together in LA. I really enjoyed watching him play...he plays hard, gets emotionally involved (duh), and seems like he really wants to improve his "character flaws".

I do think that the Dodgers could've secured Mr. Ethier's services without throwing in Perez had Kent kept his mouth shut. Why aren't Kent's statements that he wouldn't play with MB again viewed as a detriment to team chemistry? He basically shot MB's trade value to s**t.

As for Artest, hes totally a Phil Jackson type of player, able to play 4 positions, great defender. I can see the Lakers giving up Odom or Brown and a pick to get him.

74 - My comment was sarcasm - I'm sorry that wasn't clear. I was mocking the people who themselves always mocked DePodesta's communication skills.

I think I like this trade. I didn't care what they did with Bradley as long as he was not on the team. I never understood the love for Perez. He just didn't seem to be that much to me. Admittedly, just my impression. I have no stats to back that up

74: I think that is a joke based on Depo and Billy being friends?

So does this guy crack our top ten prospects as of today?

Ahn-dray Eh-tee-ay had a nice ring to it. Oh well.

84 - yeah, that was part of it too.

When does BA's top 100 list minors leaguers come out every year?

I blame myself for Bradley's meltdown. I bought a Bradley t-shirt about a week or so before his altercation with Kent.

I read in USA Today that for an Artest trade to occur, the other team will have to swap salary for salary.

That means the Lakers have to give up one of their big salaried guys.

THe only players that fit this would be Lamar Odom. Honestly, I'd be ecstatic if the Lakers traded Odom for Artest. Odom is just too lazy in way too many games. Sure he has some talent, but Artest is the better player. You can tell when guys are lazy when they shoot 3 times in a single game. Shooting the ball does take effort. Too many times Lamar Odom is a passive non-factor.

You may be able to get Artest for less talent, but the NBA rules state its gotta be salary for salary.

82 - Ah, the fallacies of the printed word.

Sorry for the scathing comment. :)

speaking of depodesta and beane being friends, it's interesting that beane went after bradley so persistently. i'm SURE he must have spoken at length to depodesta about bradley, because depodesta would have a very good understanding of the situation. beane conferring with depo especially makes sense if the reports are accurate that depo is going to be coming back to work in oakland soon anyway. and so would it make sense to suppose that depodesta might have been pretty sanguine about bradley's mental and physical health? that's reading into it a lot, i know, but it's got the ring of plausibility.

89 - Artest doesn't make very much - "only" ~$6M. Odom is $10M+. Kwame Brown is the only guy that matches salary, and he's not enough to get it done.

Artest to LA is a very long shot.

What impact does this trade have on the team financially? Has there been any rumors to clearing some salary to go after Damon?

92 - eh, I should say Artest to the Lakers is a long shot. The Clips have Corey Magette who could be dangled...

81

I don't think Kent ever said publicly that he wouldn't play with Bradley. Of course I would bet almost anything that he did say it in private.

Listen Bradley has no one to blame but himself (and apparently Still bevens for #88)

spin it all you want but this is all on bradley now and this might be his last chance.

Wow Colletti says AP may not have made the team out of Spring Training without a few injuries, adding that since he's out of options he might have been waived. I don't think anyone here thought he was the 25th man on this team.

96:

yeah, i wouldve definitely had perez higher than robles.

91

True but the A's are a team that have to take chances like these. not a lot of money and possible large upside.

Plaschke actually asked Ned about the possibility (raised here, and possibly elsewhere) that the Furcal signing might have been an indication that character issues were not an issue, and that Milton might be kept as a result.

96 - I'd have Perez higher than Edwards or Young, but Robles serves a purpose (defense). Perez seems redundant with Aybar and Robles around, and none of them starting (presumably).

After having listened to his conference call, I must say that Ned seems like a pretty good guy. Among other things, it sounded as if he made a genuine effort to resolve the Milton situation in a way that would enable Milton to stay.

96

Tracy thought he was #25.

[96] i don't mean this to sound dismissive, but who cares what tracy thinks anymore? :)

101 - Did he offer any insights into future moves?

Plaschke mentioned that "some people said that with Furcal's two DUI's that character was off the table". I think that was a clear reference to Jon's post a few days ago.

er, that was in re: [102], clearly.

Here's a transcript of the important things that were said:
Ned didn't speak to Bradley directly, before trading him according to conference call. What a great communicator. He didn't want it to turn into a "he said, she said" conversation. Basically, he's being whipped by McCourt and

"Ethier, is a 'baseball player', great makeup, 15-20 home runs, corner outfielder"

On Perez:
"Pretty good offensive player, out of options, didn't think he'd make the team out spring training"
What a bunch of BS. Who's going to beat him? Edwards?

He talked to J.D. Drew "longest and most detailed conversation out of all the players he talked to"

To early to tell on Johnny Damon---Damon is a longshot

Billy Goat Plaschke asked him to compare the character of Bradley and Furcal (who has 2 DUI's)
"Not comparable...the Braves wanted Furcal, his teammates had great respect for him, wasn't allowed in celebration with teammates because of campaign...he's more mature now"

Is the new regime more focused on character and makeup
"I love guys that got good makeup, I love guys that play hard...I'm not making any comments about anyone that was here before (Depodesta)..human element, you can't predict what others are going to do. There's always going to be the human element (taking shots at Depodesta)...(rephrases question about character and makeup)..Yea it's important"

Ned claims that he wanted to "keep Bradley a Dodger"

Was it more than just his dealings with Kent? "Yes"

3 teams were serious about Bradley "one dropped out last night. The other wasn't going to help now or in the future (whatever that means)"

Basically, there wasn't a ton of interest in Bradley. "The other team wasn't going to risk moving any players that they felt had any upside"
Sounds like he's talking about the Cubs offering Todd Walker. He said the other team wanted to dump salary (presumably Todd Walker)

"There was….only 1 deal to be made"

Plaschke sounds a little disappointed that Bradley was traded. Asked if it was sad that a player with Bradley's talent was able to workout playing in his home town. He also started the question by asking "As a baseball guy"
Frank and Jamie didn't demand that Bradley was traded.
More BS

Got his information from people who know Bradley, people inside the clubhouse

When told of the trade, Bradley said "ok"

Plaschke asked if Bradley hung up on Ned
Ned said "I don't think so"

Might be close to signing one free agent "in the next 48 hours"
Hello J.T. Snow?

104
Among other things, he acknowledged that the outfield needs upgrading. He said that Jacque Jones' agent was asking for something the Dodgers weren't willing to give. He also commented on Johnny Damon, but I can't remember what he said. He ended by saying that the Dodgers are "close" to signing a free agent, which may happen within the next 48 hours or so. (No mention of Choi or needing to upgrade 1B).

Listening to this conference call, it really sounds like M. Bradley is one son-of-a--. He mentioned that at every turn he was told the Bradley situation could not be fixed. He said that it was not just a "Kent-thing." Its hard for us fans not really knowing the ins-and-outs of the club house.

It sounds like the other team was the Cubs - the garbage being Patterson , etc.

I wonder who the third team was that fell out yesterday.

106

Just a joke. actually think it is a point in Aperez's favor.

Love the Jacque Jones news. Starting to really like Ned...

If a JT Snow signing is next, I guess its time to shift more attention the A's.

111
I certainly feel better about him after listening to that call then I did before, but maybe Uncle Miltie's cynicism in 107 is justified.

113
But PS: Any good feelings toward Ned would be erased if JT Snow is signed to replace Choi.

JT Snow is a deal-breaker.

JT Snow is the unpardonable sin.

Posting as Mr. Ned:

Are you guys kidding? JT Snow is the music-maker, the dreamer of dreams!

I think that there was not alot of interest in Bradley because he is viewed as a headache who is not that great a player. As much as everyone talks about his character issues, I was not overly impressed by him as a player during his two years with the Dodgers. As someone said, on his best day, he is above average, but overall, he doesn't hit for a real high average, doesn't have extra special power, is a good but not great outfielder, has a decent but not spectacular on-base %, gets injured alot, and has temper. We are now the third organization to give up on him.

As far as AP, I don't know--seems like he can hit, but not field.

Does anybody really think that had Perez not been included, that Beane would have walked away?

I see alot of people on the "Overrated" Bradley bandwagon.

I think we forget that he put up a 10- .345 .511 line at the All-Star break which had (albeit overzealous) many people chanting "MVP".

Bradley is suppossed to put up these type of #'s according to his hype and he did, now he got hurt and being injury prone hurts his value BUT would it have hurt the Dodgers if they would have taken a chance on his injury eight ball? I would say not at all, will it hurt the A's to take a chance with Milton when all they are giving up is Andre Either? I would say no its not going too.

The expectations are met, now his value isn't hinging on his potential, if he were to scratch that potential WATCH OUT! This is great for the A's, they fall back on his production and pray for his potential.

It is a tough spot for Ned or anyone who came after DePo to not come off as taking shots at him, one, the questions are going to be framed that way and two, he is going to mode the team the way he sees fit and if that conflicts with what DePo did, so be it.

Obviously, many of us felt that DePo got a raw deal but I am going to comment on what he does with the team, not any percieved shots at Paul DePodesta.

If the interest in MB was a sparse as Ned said it was, then either:

1) Perez was the real asset that Beane coveted and Perez is not the 25/26-man Ned described

or

2) Ethier does not project to be a substantial MLB player and probably does not possess much trade value

or

3) Mr. Ned pulled a fast one on Mr. Beane.

These are the options. I would hope that choice #3 is the right one and that Ned is truly our diamond in the ruff. However, I have trouble even convincing myself that this is the truth.

Plashke watch: First off, Ned is an "old school baseball guy" that Plashke says he pimped for back before they hired either Evans or DePo.
Second he hires another "baseball guy", not the beloved Jim Tracy but Grady Little.
Third, the Dodgers go out and sign a player for 39MM in Furcal, something that Plashke never would have dreamed.
And now, they trade the Poster Boy for all that is wrong with Dodgers for a kid with "good makeup."

I can't wait for the platitudes in tomorrow's LA Times.

At first glance, I thought that Oakland ropped LA blindly. After further review, it's probably not all that bad afterall. There was just no market for him, and when the choices are below average players or decent prospects at the position the system lacks, I have no problem opting for the later. As for the A's, I think it helps them quite a bit. I never did think that Payton was for real, so I'm thankful that he's not entering the season with as big of a role as before. And while Scutaro is SCRAPPY, I'd rather than Perez on the bench, or starting at 3B and SS when Chavez and Crosby take their annual trips to the DL. And I think winning this next season is more important to Oakland than hanging onto a B+ prospect.

Lastly, regarding Bradley, he might have been involved in a number of incidents, the two things that you could say about him were (1) he was proud to be a Dodger and (2) he always played his ass off. I really wish it would have worked out with him in LA.

JT Snow's presence on the Dodgers would send Plaschke into ever higher levels of delirium.

After all, JT Snow saved Dusty Baker's son from being trampled during Game 5 of the 2002 World Series.

BTW, heard the lovable A Martinez on 710 who said that Antonio Perez had the worst work habits on the team, he never wanted to play 3rd, and he all but threw Perez under the bus.

He says that the team is basically playing for 2007 without announcing it, they are waiting for the prospects to fill out the roster for the cheap, believes Martin is the best of them, not sure how he knows that.

Somehow the idea that we could have the starting corners of the 2002 SF Giants really worries me, though I would not mind Reggie Sanders because all he does is play for teams that win, so either he has no chemistry because he moves every other year or each team he leaves believes that he is done. I think more the latter.

I think people are forgetting how little value Perez and Bradley had around baseball. I do not think many teams thought a whole lot about Antonio Perez (aside from the smart A's who can use him to replace Scutaro and the useless Ginter). Bradley is someone I could understand people calling injury prone. He regressed since being traded to the Dodgers. His plate discipline declined as it looked like he was trying to hit a home run during every at bat. Bradley is still a very good player, but because of his issues teams were not willing to give up much at all to take him and figured the Dodgers may just non tender him so they could get him without giving up anything. Not to mention Bradley just had major surgery and could miss a decent amount of time this season. I am a Milton fan, but he did not meet my expectations and as an A's fan, I hope he meets them in Oakland. I happen to like Andre Either. I think he can be a solid outfielder. He has a good eye and that is really important to me. He can hit us 20 home runs, to me he can pretty much replace what Bradley gave us, without the centerfield defense. I am glad we are loading the team up for 2007, because I want to be great in the future and not just mediocre in the present. If Kent complains and wants out then we can get some more prospects for him and further improve our farm system. I think this is a fair trade for both teams. Obviously it will help the A's more this year and if Milton goes back to playing like he did in Cleveland then it will be a great deal for Oakland, but that is a big if.

Ned's use of the term "upside" warmed my soul. Maybe he'll pull the trigger on Nomar, the last FA bat with real upside.

If we start with the knowledge that Bradley would be non-tendered next week, how many here would prefer Ethier to Perez?

Let's keep Antonio's skill level in perspective. He only OPSed .758 last year under the tutilage of wunder manager Jim Tracy. He will have his 26th birthday next month, and is probably a slightly below average fielding infielder. He got off to a pretty hot start in 2005 when called upon, but really regressed once the dog days of August arrived. The Dodgers have plenty of 2B prospects and Aybar, so he is very easy to replace. As good as the Dodgers minor league system is, they don't have too much depth in the OF. It would be nice to see Guzman and Ethier as corner outfielders in 2007 if Guzman doesn't stick in the infield. Of course the A's got the better deal, any team trading for Bradley would've gotten the better of the deal given Bradley's circumstances. But who's to say that Bradley's knee will heal properly? The winner of this trade, like so many trades before, won't be determined for 2-3 years.
vr, Xei

128-
I would easily. We need outfielders, both players can get on base, but Perez does not have much power, while Ethier has some and I happen to think can develop more.

BTW, if Kent retires after 2006 and Drew opts out, why should we be optimistic about 2007? Maybe we're playing for 2010?

130 Yeah, while Ethier had just 18 homers last year, that was a big improvement over his prior 2 years in the minors.

I'm really not that upset that Perez was traded. I just don't like the fact that he was a "throw in". I think he could have been used in another trade.

How's Nomar's makeup? I doubt Ned will want him. In an article (I think in the LA Times), it said that Ned had no interest in Nomar because he is injury prone.

So Ned is building a team of veteran players, with good makeup to hold down the fort until the cheap prospects are ready to play. No wonder why there weren't many people interested in becoming the GM of the Dodgers.

He is like Loney (although so far Ethier has shown a little more power), a guy with a line drive good swing and many scouts and people like Logan White think Loney is going to develop power and I think Ethier is the same way.

I cant wait till next August.

SS- Furcal
2b- Izturis
RF- Cruz
3b- Randa
1b- Snow
LF- Werth
CF- Repko
C- Navarro

Talk about great defense! Furcal-Izzy-Snow...

Eh who cares if we lose 95 games.

We'll have speed and defense.

Beane just acquired 2 injured players. Perez's fractured cheekbone could be more serious than reported, maybe that's why Perez wouldn't have made the team? Colletti might not have been a huge fan of Perez's work habits if A Martinez is correct. I do wonder if Washington can do anything with his defense

I've convinced myself that I like this trade, as opposed to the alternatives (Patterson or Walker...). Perez didn't have a place on the team. Aybar is Perez, but younger and with better defense. Robles is a defensive replacement who probably isn't that much worse than Perez on offense (plus he was second in the NL for PH batting average, if that means anything)

My take on this trade, if anyone cares.
First, ethier looks like a great #2 hitter he has average and obp with some power (not alot of power tho).
second, we weren't going to get much for bradley, and antonio perez is just a average player with no power, i bet perez just puts up a high 200 average a mid 300 obp and 5-10 homers in a full season, plus we have no room for him on the roster this year, i was thinking for a long time what are we going to do about robles,aybar,perez all middle infielders someone has to go.

Altho i would have liked the dodgers keep bradley to try to win this season, apparently that wasn't the case.

And if i'm hearing right that we are not going to sign any of the top free agent pitchers left on the market, it is clear to me that the dodgers weren't going to win this season, so why not trade bradley for 2007 help in the outfield.

It all depends if we had a chance to win this season it would have been better to keep bradley, but if we didn't have a chance to win this season this is a good trade.

Also, the Marlins are considering acquiring Gathright for Scott Olsen, the marlins 2nd best prospect behind Hermida. If the DRays pull this off, then Friedman/Hunsicker have pulled off a Kazmir-esque trade, without all the other nonsense that Chuck Lamar did.

138-
Wow that is terribly stupid. Olsen is one of the best lhp in the minors. Gathright is uhhh really fast, I don't know what else.

How can you build your team for the future and concentrate on building a deep minor league system and then go do something dumb like that?

someone on athletics nation linked to an interesting article (one that also links to rob's blog, incidentally) which takes a more sympathetic tone to the bradley/kent feud:

http://www.themirl.com/writers_berg082505.html

probably doesn't matter anymore now that he's gone, but i thought it was interesting nonetheless.

Hi all - have really enjoyed reading the comments. A complicated deal; a lot of diff ways to look at it. A few reactions.

"Ethier blends Randy Newman, Leonard Cohen, and bits of early Ry Cooder." -- WOW

I'm glad for Colletti to basically play a long term game (don't know if that's what this is), but there's no reason to give up on 2006 given our division and Drew, Kent, etc.

I think it's pretty serious speculation to suggest we could have done the deal without including Perez. Why would we think that would be the case? I guess a better deal is always theoretically possible, but I really doubt Colletti didn't push his hardest to give away as little as possible. Why wouldn't he?

It's odd to me for him to say that he did everything he could to keep Bradley on the team, but also to say that he did not talk to Bradley until today. I understand he is saying that others he trusted advised him it wouldn't work, but still, it seems like he should have heard Bradley out if he really wanted to do everything he could to see if it could work.

Picking up JT Snow does not seem very interesting or fun to me.

141
Thanks, Vishal. That article is consistent with my views on the Bradley-Kent incident (i.e. that Kent deserves much more criticism and blame than he has received). I never wanted Jeff Kent on my team, and I will be glad when he is gone.

It was Bradley for Saarloos! Saarloos!

Hmm. Bradley had to go, Ned said.
I was in Orlando when Tracy McGrady wanted out - and to the front office, T-Mac had to go.
In these cases, you'll never get fair value for the player you're trading away but that's not the point. They have to go.

144
I heard the original trade idea was Bradley for Saarloos and Ethier.

125 - But Bob, who was about to do the trampling, eh?

145 - See the Artest mini-thread above.

146 -- That was DT rumor. The mainstream rumor was Saarloos and some guy named Ramos who sucks.

Another thing, i'm glad that ned didn't trade bradley for some mediocre guy that is out of options that would just take up a roster spot, some dead weight, someone like patterson or saarloos.

I was hoping it would be for a top prospect and it was.

147 I had to look it up. It was David Bell who had a bead on young Mr. Baker.

That's future Dodger, David Bell!

I think Bradley will get along well with the A's. A's have had the tightest, most friendly, and postive clubhouse for years now. Everyone who comes to Oakland praises how much they love the clubhouse atmosphere.

151
Did Jeremy Giambi say that?

150 - Ned could even pick up that other 2002 Giant Kenny Lofton, instead of Michaels!

Hahaha, Bell + Lofton for Ethier would have this board howling worse than the day DePodesta was fired ;)

152-
Who the hell is going to bother to interview Jeremy Giambi?

what happens if after Kent yelled at Bradley, Bradley told Kent to go fly a kite and then didn't speak with him directly? Instead he went to the press with Kent is a mean guy story. The story you linked to Vishal makes Bradley look like a complete wuss.

I done commenting on this issue because it looks like I'm anti- bradley which I am not.

155
I'm not sure about Bradley being a "wuss." I think he probably felt (whether correctly or not) that he didn't have many advocates on the team, and that he was alone. I also think he was making a concerted effort to reform and not to "act out," and didn't want the situation with Kent to escalate by "speaking with him directly." As it turned out, Milton's reaction didn't help him at all.

I have found it interesting to hear Tracy's comments on Milton since going to Pittsburgh. It sounds as if Tracy really supported Milton, and would liked to have had him play in Pittsburgh. Tracy must not have felt that Milton's reaction to the Kent incident was THAT bad.

151 So you're saying Billy Beane has assembled a team with a lot of...chemistry?

Who'd'a thunk it?

I guess by acquiring Bradley Beane's showing he's not afraid to wreck it.

I guess Billy Beane has just rolled a stink bomb into the tent like DePodesta did when he picked up Penny and Choi.

158
I don't think Penny and Choi were the stink bomb as much as Lo Duca was the Febreze.

If you're of the school of thought that Colletti HAD to trade Bradley, getting Ethier was probably the best he could do. I don't like including Perez, but the situation was probably such that in order to get a better prospect, they had to throw in Perez, who'll hopefully get a fair shake in Oakland and a chance to show what he can do with 300+ PAs. It's a hell of a lot better than Kirk Saarloos, but when you set the bar that low, then you can't help but be disappointed at how the Bradley saga played out.

Certainly Bradley deserves the lion's share of the blame for things that happened during his tenure in Los Angeles, though I don't think it wasn't anything that couldn't be taken care of via strong managerial leadership. Look for the fact that Ethier won the Arizona Fall League Dernell Stenson Sportsmanship Award last month to be played up.

On a side note, Bradley's move also, unfortunately, brings the number of African-Americans projected to be on the Dodger opening day roster to zero. Given the history of Jackie Robinson with the team, this point cannot be lost in the afterglow of getting rid of a "bad character" guy.

156 It's a mistake to credit Tracy with either intelligence or (especially) sincerity on anything related to the Dodgers. He got tickled by the idea of Bradley and himself on a jihad against the Dodgers in '06.

161
My point was not that Tracy is intelligent or sincere, but rather that he (a fairly well-known "chemistry" kinda guy) does not seem to have rejected Bradley the way most chemistry guys would be expected to do. To me, that speaks in Milton's favor. Even if Tracy wants revenge on the Dodgers, he presumably wouldn't want to extract it with someone he didn't like. For example, I don't hear him clamoring for the Pirates to trade for Choi.

Mark it on your calendars: Dodgers visit Oakland 6/16-18

Beane does his research on players and he thinks his clubhouse is so great that many players can thrive in it (for instance Payton after he ripped the Red Sox and complained about playing time) that have problems elsewhere. They are loose and fun, that is the difference with the A's clubhouse and everywhere else.

160 Edwin Jackson could have something to say about that.

163-
I hope I can be back in the bay at that time.

165-

I don't think he projects for next year's team, does he?

167 If Colletti doesn't get anymore pitching, as it appears he won't, Edwin is very much in the picture. He has little reason to stay in AA, and we all know how much Vegas helped

Ned said in his interview that there is a free agent that might get signed in the next 48 hours.
I wonder who it could be.

I know i keep going back to this but if ned can sign 2 of washburn millwood weaver and sign nomar for 3b, we could start the season with drew cruz ledee in the outfield and at the trade deadline bring up billingsley and trade either lowe or perez with houlton jackson izturis and ethier for abreu and go into the playoffs with drew abreu cruz or ledee in the outfield choi/seanz kent furcal nomar navarro/martin the infield penny 2 of washburn millwood weaver and either lowe or perez for starting pitching and the bullpen as it is right now, and still have all of our prospects for 2007 minus jackson(who i don't care about).

But i doubt it happens.

the dwindling numbers of african americans playing major league baseball is not a Dodger specific problem.

167--Right now, with at least two spots in the rotation up for grabs, Jackson has to be in the mix.

In time, we'll find out if Ethier is Henri Stanley/Cody Ross revisited, but under the circumstances it's better than seeing Cory Patterson in Dodger Blue.

The A's will be Perez' fifth organization.

163- hopefully Bradley hits for the cycle.

"I couldn't be happier," Bradley said during a conference call. "I'm playing major league baseball and having fun. I'm a California guy -- it's exciting for me. I wish the Dodgers well, wish their team well."

"As far as my dealings with Jeff Kent, we got along as well as we could," Bradley said. "It didn't work for me."

Bradley became a parent for the first time Sunday, when his wife gave birth to a son, Jeremiah.

"I know I'm going to be successful regardless," he said. "I'm a no-nonsense guy. I laugh and joke with everybody, but when on the field, I'm all about winning. I'm not going out there to just go through the motions and have fun. I'm going out there to win."

AP

In the long run you could say that the Dodgers traded Franklin Gutierrez (and Perez) for Ethier.

can edwin jackson's nickname be "action"?? that's got a bulldog-esque ring to it, no? edwin "action" jackson. i still really want him to succeed. if dj houlton can make the rotation, edwin should be able to.

174
I've always preferred "EdwinJacksonville."

I am not hearing from other sources that this guy is a centerfielder.

My sources tell me he's a corner outfielder.

He's not Saarloos

He's not Saarloos

He's not Saarloos

I think maybe I've been Collettied again.

131. If Kent retires and Drew opts out after 2006 it does leave us with two big holes to fill, but on the bright side, it does free up quite a bit of dinero. vr, Xei

It seems like Milton's value has coincided with the number of teams giving up on him pretty well.

2001: traded to Cleveland straight up for Zach Day - I'm pretty sure Day was a pretty good prospect and Frank Robinson was sick of him, so Montreal got about .90 on the dollar

2004: traded to LAD for Franklin Gutierrez and Andrew Brown - coming off 2003's .900+ OPS and only being 25, he should have been untouchable or equal in value to a grade A prospect. Instead the Dodgers gave up a B+ prospect and a B-/C+ pitcher. This was the first time he was truly given up on, seems like about .85 on the dollar.

2005: traded to Oakland with Antonio Perez for Andre Ethier - Bradley's injury-prone status is gaining steam, has now been truly outcast from 2 teams, has had mediocre results but still has not reached prime. Seems like the addition of Perez constitutes the difference between the 1st and 2nd outcastings since Ethier and Gutierrez are fairly equal and Brown was never much of a factor anyway. Exchange is about .75 on the dollar.

160 The diminishing numbers of African American professional baseball players is a league-wide phenomenon. The Angels, for example, have only two African Americans on their 40-man roster (I think): Figgins and GA. Even the White Sox, with an African American GM, have only two, as best as I can tell--Dye and Willie Harris--now that Frank Thomas is probably leaving.

some thoughts...

if you guys are a believer in logan whites ability, then you should be a believer in andre ethier. Like molokai was saying earlier, ethier played ont he same AFL team as the dodger prospects so dodger scouts and logan white so a whole lot of ethier.

mr. Ned is not a talent evaluator, he has to rely on logan white and his scouts for input. Most likely, logan white approved of ethier and felt he had enough future potential to trade bradley and AP for.

that said, take a look at your 2006 las vegas 51s.
C- russel martin
3b- andy laroche
ss- minor league filler
2b- delwyn young
1b- james loney
lf- andre ethier
cf- justin ruggiano
rf- joel guzman

dodger thoughts field trip to las vegas!?!?

I hope the free agent signed is not Jacque Jones, JT Snow, or Joe Randa.

But I've a bad feeling it will be.

There's no upside with any of them.

Steve,I think he is currently playing CF but projects as a corner spot. whatever the hell that means.

I thought the guy had promise, but what do you do with the potential for volatility? I hope he succeeds in Oakland, but I have to think we'll be reading about him periodically in the papers. He's the kind of player that can help you win some games, but not without the drama...

The signing of Johnny Damon to an insane contract or the trade for Bobby Abreu cant be far behind.

As others have already stated, I don't think Ned is done yet by a longshot. In my mind, there is no way he goes to ST with Billingsly, Jackson and Houlton vying for the 4th and 5th spots in the rotation. I am positive he will pick up at least one more pitcher and have the others fight it out for the 5 spot.

Who that other pitcher will be is another question. Quite possibly someone worse than the above mentioned three. Names to be considered (just for consideration's sake):
Tomko, Jason Johnson, Kim, Armas

I don't see him spending the money and contract length on any of the Boras clients, although he may yet pull off a trade.

nate- our AAA team looks great and our major league team...uh...

184- I thought Ned said that he wasn't going to give into Jones' agent's demands. I'm guessing it's Snow, though Dodgers.com thinks it's Kenny Lofton, who is beyond ancient.

182. That team is alot more interesting than the potential 2006 LA Dodgers:

SS- Furcal
2b- Izturis
CF- Jones
1b- Snow
LF- Werth
RF- Cruz
3b- Randa
C- Navarro

180

So, in other words, Milton Bradley is like Canadian money?

id consider tomko and kim if they want less than 6 mil a year.

id also consider mueller for 3b and nomar for LF.

sooo, if you add tomko (6), mueller(4.5) and nomar(5) for around 15.5 mil, call it an offseason and prepare for ST

189 -

For an ancient guy, Lofton wasn't actually all that bad last year and I believe he has some history with Grady.

189. Kenny Lofton and JT Snow... even better.

Kendrick is African-American.

In a few years we could have Loney/Kemp/Jackson/D Young

It is a serious problem not just in professional baseball but in college baseball. If you read any of the old books, the kids like Mays/Aaron/Banks/Robinson played ball all day long like the kids do now in the DR. No one plays baseball now except in organized leagues and no one is playing in the inner cities. Most of the African-Americans who are making it now are from the suburbs. Delmon Young, the Upton brothers.

lofton had a 392OBP last year.

ss furcal
cf lofton
rf drew
2b kent
lf cruz
1b choi
3b mueller
c navarro

thats a pretty high OBP lineup.

197- Mueller is close to signing with the Pirates. Make that David Bell/Joe Randa. Take out Choi, he has poor "makeup" and he's an awful defender.

Furcal SS
Lofton CF
Drew RF
Kent 2B
Cruz/Werth LF
Snow 1B
Randa/Bell 3B
Navarro C

Talk about great...veteran leadership?

That's the cold corner, apparently.

If the free agent is Snow I will be very upset. The guy slugged a measly .365 last year. Besides defense, anyone who thinks this would be an upgrade over Choi is a bit demented.

The silver lining for a Randa signing would be
a) it would be a short-term contract
b) it means we're not trading for David Bell

I'd rather give Aybar a chance, but Randa would be wiser than Bell by a long-shot.

Lofton I could live with. He'll come cheap for presumably a 1-year contract and he did put up some good numbers last year. He even stole 22 out of 25 bases. He can't be considered durable because of his age, but he appeared in more games than any of our outfielders last year.

Jones doesn't seem probable, and he's only valuable if he can platoon with Werth, which isn't likely for the beginning of the season with Werth's wrist problems.

im going to trust mr. ned until he shows me cant be trusted.

so far.... so good.

191 Or Monopoly money, either way :)

choi's got great makeup, what're ya talkin' about!! that guy is a gamer.

go ahead, try and prove me wrong.

[191] he's more like american money of late. the canadian dollar is getting stronger, and the american dollar is losing value relative to other currencies.

I am probably one of the few Dodger Thoughts readers whio has seen Ethier play. I saw him at the end of the year when he played for Sacremento against Tacoma in the Triple A playoffs. A good looking player. He does not have all of Bradley's tools, but he does not have all of Bradley's baggage either. Sort of reminded me of Jeremy Reed who I also saw in Triple A before he played in Seattle this past year. From what I saw, Ethier will be a credible centerfielder.

Seems to me the trade of Perez will open things up for Delwynn Young. I would have hoped that Mr Ned could have gotten an interesting arm from Oakland for putting Perez into the deal, but all in all I am in favor of this trade. By the way, I think this deal really make DePo look good. Gutierrez, Brown and Romano for Ethier is a steal. Bradley and Perez for Ethier is not a steal for the Dodgers, but it is a trade I would have made given all the circumstances.

Hope Bradley and Perez have success in Oakland (except when they play the Mariners) and that Ethier has a great career in LA.

Stan Opdyke

stan, can you comment more on ethier? how is hiw swing, his arm, just all around baseball ability.

also, molokai you saw ethier play in the AFL, what are your thoughts on him? i know you touched up on it earlier, but something in depth would be awesome.

back to Jon's 2nd update above - so when does Kent ask for his trade? Do the Dodgers have to get someone like Abreu now for Kent to want to stick around? He certainly can't be pleased with the current lineup around him.

kent for milledge!

oh my god if that happened, 2007 looks even more beautiful.

201 -- Hard to sort this guy out. It's almost like...everyone in baseball (including the media) thinks he's as dumb as they are...but maybe...just maybe...he's not. But JT Snow remains unsigned.

so far, he hasnt really done any moves i have disliked terribly. so thats a good sign.

209 -- Try as I might to just absolutely hate the Furcal deal, I still can't muster much outrage over it, and outrage is never generally in shortage.

exactly steve. it seems colletti has a little creativity to him.

people on this overrate bradley a bit. honestly, how many games could we have penciled bradley in for next season? the guy is an injury prone as it comes.

AP is a nice little hitter for a MIF position, but we are STACKED with AP type hitters in the minors. AP is redundant when you have willy aybar who is mlb ready and delwyn young a half a season away.

again, this isnt a terrible trade for the dodgers. There are so many variables that surround bradley that we could not honestly rely on him for 2006. his is emotionally and physically unstable.

I am surprised at the tepid reaction to this trade.

I hate this trade. Ned should have convinced McCourt to let him give Milton a contract. You don't trade guys when their stock is low. He didn't need to trade Perez, whose stock also is low.

And I don't think Ned is done getting fleeced. Ned is not going into the spring training with Ledee, Drew and Cruz. Everyone knows he must get an OF. So Ned's not going to get a good deal when he acquires an OF.

Score another one for Billy Beane. Like many on the board, the A's are my second favorite team.

Moreover, I object to this notion of playing for 2007. Last year the NL West was there to be had for anyone who could play 500.

Nate, I did not see a whole lot of Ethier. In September Tacoma and Sacramento played for the Northern Division title in the PCL. I remember Ethier and I remember thinking that he looked like a good player. I said the same about Aybar when I saw him earlier in the year. Nothing off the charts say the way Piazza destroyed the baseball when I saw him play in the minors (by the way Greg Brock destroyed the baseball too when I saw him in the minors-- prospects don't always pan out).

I still think Jeremy Reed is the best comparison I can think of. Line drive hitter, seems to me he was a little taller than Reed and I think a little better foot speed. Reed turned into an excellent defensive centerfielder for the Mariners last year despite having a subpar arm. I did not see Ethier make any tough plays, but he seemed to get a decent jump on a flyball. Don't know about his throwing arm.

I am not sure if any of that helps, but I think he has a chance to be a major league player.

Stan from Tacoma

I am surprised at the tepid reaction to this trade.

Nobody's more surprised than me. But there you go.

I don't understand why you would trade Milton Bradley before Johnny Damon signs with a team. I would think MB's value would increase when Damon goes off the market. Does Dodger Thoughts Nation agree?

207-

Kent for Milledge would be cool but then in 2007... Are you telling me that we are gonna start Loney, Guzman, Martin, Ethier & Laroche all at once? If thats the case then Little is the perfect coach seeing as how he helped develop all those Braves players.

I guess it could happen, but has it ever happened? Anybody know?

(by the way Greg Brock destroyed the baseball too when I saw him in the minors-- prospects don't always pan out)
Brock's OPS+ with the Dodgers:
1983 - 106 (83 BB as a rookie)
1984 - 103
1985 - 117
1986 - 106
I never would've guessed them to be that high.

215 - Could be the other two suitors for Bradley dropped out, meaning everyone knew it was Oakland or nowhere.
(Actually, from what Ned said, it was more like one team dropped out and the other didn't have enough to offer.)

218 - How many teams have offered Damon a contract? He can only play for one of them, and the others will still want a center fielder.

219 - Apples, meet oranges. Teams who want Damon have to fork over money, while teams who wanted Bradley had to part with players. Not all teams fit into both categories

I hereby refer all further CF rumors to post 153.

...and then quickly leave the building.

219
Yes, but they would want someone who can play CF. Since Milton is probably going to miss some time with his rehab taking him right to the start of the season and considering it was a knee injury the odds of him being able to play CF in the beginning of 2006 seem rather slim. The A's can DH him in the beginning then move him to the corner since they already have a solid centerfielder.

Coming in late on this, but it's telling (among a multitude of things that were telling on this story) that Ned doesn't seem to have spoken to Bradley directly.

Based on what I'm reading here and elsewhere, this is may take the most surprising non-story of the year award.

From August until now speculation has been all over the place, but when it came down, the Dodgers did a Pontius on Milton and the "situation" and found YAFP (yet another farm player) when the smoke cleared.

I don't think it's even worth saying we'll see. It feels more like, who cares?

I don't think it's fair to assume the market for Bradley was as soft as it seems. The money teams were waiting to see if he'd be non-tendered, and getable for free (well, free in the sense of the price of his contract, only; no players). The ante for seeing the real market for Bradley was taking him through arb. For whatever reason, (looks like PR, but what do I know) Mr. Ned wasn't willing to ante up. If there was no chance of Bradley being on the team, then there was also no chance of getting full value for him.

If you a guy you knew hated Florida had a plane ticket to Miami for sale, how much would you offer him for it? If there's no chance he gets on that plane, then you'd be crazy (or just, um, nice) to offer anything near fair market value for it.

224 - That's what sucks when everyone knows you have to trade a player.
Hey, was anyone complaining in 2004 when LA picked up Bradley for a couple of minor leaguers?

Rumor has it that Vazquez will go to the White Sox for Chris Young (the OF, not the tall guy that qualifies as Texas' only starter), El Duque Hernandez, and a second pitcher.

FYI
Career
Player A - 269/350/426 Defense Rate 102
Player B - 299/373/425 Defense Rate 104

2005
Player A - 290/350/484 Defense Rate 109
Player B - 335/392/420 Defense Rate 109

Player A is loved by all, Player B is discounted by many.

226 MLB.com says it will be announced tomorrow, so chances are some form of that trade will occur. The DBacks will be downgrading their rotation, while adding another very good OF prospect to their already extensive list of impressive OF prospects being blocked by Luis Gonzalez

Age at the 2006 All-Star Break:
Player A - 28
Player B - 39

225 - Case in point, the LA Lakers effectively trading Shaq for Lamar Odom and Kwame Brown after publicly committing to trade the Big Fella.

Lofton got into only 110 games last year. Hurt, or platooning?

224 continued: That seems like Mr. Ned's m.o., though. Acquiring Furcal hurts Izzy's value. He didn't destroy Bradley's value, but he's the one who liquidated him. He liquidated Perez. If he actually does sign Snow (Choi forbid) or any other 1B, he'll be doing the same to Choi. He bottomed out the market on Phillips, if he doesn't just let him go for nothing. That's a lot of selling low for having been on the job for a couple of weeks. DePo always seemed to be trading talent at it's peak price; even if you don't think he got back enough, it never looked like he was bargain binning players.

That can't continue. I'm not hopping mad about it yet, but it looks like the old Amazon strategy of losing a little on every transaction but making it up in volume. I don't think he's turned a profit on any transaction, to date.

At the moment, Izturis has no value.

229-
Let me guess A is Choi and B is Snow

231 - Or Michaels + Victorino + Marlon Byrd + Endy "Ew" Chavez?

At the moment?

Maybe Reggie Sanders is the mystery OF free agent we will sign in the next 48 hours.

232- With the obvious exception of Shawn Green. Duh. My bad.

I'm going back to the last Dodger transaction after reading Erik's thoughts over at Just A Bit Outside

Would you rather sign Alomar as Navarro's backup, or doing as Jim Bowden did, and signing no fewer than five backup catchers in one day? After Bowden attempted to acquire every toolsey OF he could last year (he went into ST with about 9 OFs, and traded for another midseason), he's now attempting to corner the market on AAAA catchers. Mike DiFelice, Alberto Castillo, Wiki Gonzalez and Brandon Harper will fight to become backup, with Robert Fick acting as 3rd catcher

Haha at this point I am wondering how Kent does not ask for a trade? Flanders has to be quite the salesman to convince him this team is significantly better than last year and can contend for a championship.

A is Andrew Jones B is Lofton? pure guess

Bradley is loved by all? Lofton is likely discounted by a lot of us, I'll admit. And he actually hit better on the road than at Citizens

bradley not jones

When did Javy Vazquez go from "Ok pitcher on a bad team" to "ridiculously overrated but teams will trade their future for him anyways"?

And I guess this answers our question: Yes, Kenny Williams DOES still suffer from Kenny Williams disease.

244 2003, when he had a 3.24 ERA, with 241 Ks in 230.2 IP. The he went to New York...

A - Milton
B - Lofton

240
That is just crazy. If is only Dec 13th and Ned added the best SS in the NL to the lineup and subtracted the guy that Kent didn't want to play with.

231
Platoon, he only had 46 ab's against LHP.

An update from gilmiguel55 (a poster who lives in the DR, and routinely goes to the games) over at dodgers.com:

"Brazoban keeps pitching very well, the other day i saw him get a save and was not depending as much on his fastball, he looks unbeatable when his off speed pitches hit the strike zone. 1.96era and 12 saves."

He knew about the Perez injury awhile before it was found in print, and has never lied, so I have no reason not to believe him. If this is true, I'd be quite happy

Plaschke Watch:

It seems that billly-boy admits to having been wrong with the "Jerks who can play argument."

He also takes a shot at Colletti for the handling of the trade (spec. not talking to Bradley), as well as trying to spin the media.

Indeed

New post up top.

Myself I'd just as soon not have the anxiety of keeping Bradley. To have durability questions and to be a head case, to be unable so far to get through a year without having a dustup with fans, teammates, or policemen, to say nothing of umpires, to not only be injury prone but to come up with debilitating mystery ailments, to not only have emotional problems everyone knows about but additional ones previously unsuspected – it's all a bit too much. The upside potential is an All Star caliber player if he could put all the trouble behind him, but trouble seems to be the element he lives in. If you're committed to him you're crossing your fingers and allowing yourself to see just the upside potential, but even if he appears to be living up to it you're not going to know if he's a ticking bomb. At some point you've got to ask yourself, why do you think his future career is going to be completely at variance with his career up to this point? The main thing in his favor is that people become more mature as they get older, but you get the impression that Bradley is the sort of person who finds his maturity after he's lost everything.

Wow. The Times' coverage just buries Milton Bradley.

I think I understand what Colletti was trying to do in mediating without talking to the principals Bradley and Kent. He was asking people hypotheticals, like, what if I had Bradley do X? What if he agreed to do Y? What if we give him X months to clean up his act? Hey Joe Player, you don't have a dog in this fight, do you think Milton could straighten it out? You don't? Okay.

But as much as that might've made sense from one executive to another, to the blowhards who write for the Times, it plainly looks bad. But they turn around and forgive Mr. Ned, because in the end, he did a good thing. He got rid of Bradley, and he got more value back than anyone could've hoped. Under the circumstances.

Oh well. I'm like everyone else. I liked the idea of a hometown hero, a local boy making good. Sad that it didn't work out. Next.

bradley & perez were both flawed players and are now gone. exit bradley & perez.

the focus here should be on ethier, who looks like our future lf, #2 hitter, and all-around good guy :)

with kemp a couple years aways, ruggiano & raglani relative unknowns, and d. young & guzman likely conversion projects, it's great to add a pure outfield prospect to our upper levels . . .