Ya, I'm human too.

What is the best site for payroll's around the league?

I'm with ya - will miss him, too (and also would be shocked if he isn't on the DL at some point this year).

Think there's any chance the Dodgers will try to bring him back after this season? Given what he means to the fans in LA...

I guess it all depends on: how he does; how Broxton/Saito do this year; how Colletti feels about dealing with Boras at that point.

I wish him the best. Well, not the best, just the... "good."

2 The best site for checking on salaries and contracts IMO is MLB4U.com, though many other resources have salary information.

Interesting article in the Times, in some ways it does verify what I think happens when teams and agents want to deal with the Dodgers from both a FA side and a trade side, they will always aim high, use the Dodgers as a measuring stick for other teams and then only go back to the Dodgers if they can't get something better from someone else.

Of course Scott Boras is going to deal with the Dodgers, it would be stupid for both sides to hold a grudge.

Andre Ethier in CF, did he play CF at all last year. Also, you do wonder in the Dodger braintrust really thinks Kemp is ready if they were willing to secure long term contracts for 2 of the 3 spots, actually this current scenario actually opens the door for him a lot sooner than if Drew had stayed and they got someone like Soriano.

Agreed. It's going to be really hard to see him pitch for the Rangers this year. But it Saito saves 40-45 games, all will be good.

i'll miss him too. even his name has a ring magicality to me.

I don't think there are any players in the league who make me human. Maybe Choi, but Hee's out of site, out of heart these days.

Everytime they retell the Pierre story it gets more pathetic.

8
But...but...

"For the second year in a row, Dodgers General Manager Ned Colletti was widely lauded for his off-season roster reconstruction"

Outside of Pierre, which was criminal, it hasn't been bad.

Outside of the outfield, it hasn't been bad.

7 - Yeah, I miss HSC. I wish that the Sox would give him a shot, but he was pretty terrible in the minors last year (.207/.347/.361/.708). He was walking a lot though, and didn't strike out more than he did with the Dodgers, so I think he just got really, really unlucky. He had a .275 BABIP last year, compared to a .336 career BABIP in the majors. His line would have been .251/.391/.405, if he had just gotten singles with a .336 BABIP last year. Poor Choi, you were the pawn that got taken off the board by Jim Tracy's hubris and Frank McCourt's thin skin.

12 - That should have been, if he just got singles to make up the differences between .275 and .336.

Did anyone ever link to part two of that Logan White interview?

I wonder if there's something inherent to the closer role, the drama inherent in it, that makes it easy to get emotionally tied to the person in that role, especially if they perform well.

I wonder this just because I don't think I've ever taken a liking to a player as quickly as I did Takashi Saito. When you pay close attention to what a pitcher does, when looking at a key, but brief situation, you can find something incredible there that isn't about numbers.

I will ache if I see Gagne start to rack up saves and Ks in a Rangers uniform, since his dominance and his personality were just so easy to enjoy.

From Boston Herald==

"A law professor of mine, who wrote 12 books on the subject of labor law, a very bright guy, said to me, 'I'm watching what you do here, you're going to be very good at what you do, so remember this -- if you're really good at what you do as a lawyer, 90 percent of what's said about you will be negative.' And you know what, that's just about right, just about right."
--Boras

Also, not a bad lighter read:

http://redsox.bostonherald.com/redSox/view.bg?articleid=182657

More Boras Q&A. Long but IMO worthwhile. Maybe bring lunch.

http://redsox.bostonherald.com/redSox/view.bg?articleid=181512

Yeah, but Kemp-Ethier-Gonzalez would have been ok for a year. It's Pierre that is the massive, bleeding head wound.

Yeah, but given Ethier-Pierre, Gonzalez became unacceptable.

The outfield is a disaster.

I don't know Jon, I remember at the time I thought the offer we gave Gagne was decent- $4mil, incentives up to $10 mil. Of course, it seemed like Gagne was looking for the most guaranteed money, which is certainly understandable.

Gagne offer was mentioned here:
http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/dodgers/la-sp-dodgers7dec07,1,136010.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-mlb-dodger

14 If I could do it, so could you, nah just kidding.

http://tinyurl.com/yovvop

White makes the point that it is easier for players like Martin and Ethier to adjust to MLB pitching because they have compact swings while players like Kemp will take longer due to their swing but once Kemp adjusts, he should have a higher ceiling.

The problem is that Ethier-Kemp-Pierre is also unacceptable. As is Ruth-Mantle-Pierre. As is ________-__________-Pierre

The one game where Pierre gets a bunt hit in the 9th, manages to steal second, and then comes around on a bunt and a sac fly to score the winning run, Bill Plaschke presses the "F6" key on his laptop which transmits the "See how great Juan Pierre is" column back to Spring Street.

Was the Gagne/Boras entity demanding his old closer job back with the Dodgers as part of their talks? If so, the Dodgers made the right decision.

Just think how great the Dodgers bullpen would be with Gagne, Saito, Broxton and Guo/Billingsley. Not bad. To me, Gagne's health risk and the fact that the Dodgers already have two closer quality relief pitchers, both cheap and one of them quite young, made letting go of Gagne at a high price tag a fairly easy decision.

How did Saito's numbers last year compare to some of Gagne's years as the Dodger closer?

vr, Xei

22 You've got to write a preemptive Viewpoint Letter to the Times, or else grant one of us permission to borrow the theme.

22
Waaaah....? Plaschke uses a LAPTOP....?

Indeed

Brad Penny and One Pierre for Andrew Jones.

24
Knock yourselves out.

Dear LA Times,

The one game where Pierre gets a bunt hit in the 9th, manages to steal second, and then comes around on a bunt and a sac fly to score the winning run, Bill Plaschke presses the "F6" key on his laptop which transmits the "See how great Juan Pierre is" column back to Spring Street.

Sincerely,
D4P

29 Nice effort.

23 When Gone-ye signed with Texas, someone associated with him said he wanted to go somewhere he could be the closer.

Which probably is why Texas bumped last year's closer.

It's amazing to me how smitten the LA media is with Colletti. That Henson piece is an absolute love letter to Ned.

Bad things that Ned did in the 06-07 offseason:

1) Signed Pierre, especially when it was the Giants who were about to be sandbagged with him. Just once, I'd like to read the word "overrated" mentioned in the same sentence as Pierre in an article by an LA sportswriter.

2) Signed Gonzalez, and initially offered him not one, but two prospect-blocking years.

3) Apparently got played like a fiddle in the Maddux negotiations.

4) Was totally blind-sided by Drew's opt-out (even though it was hardly a "hidden" clause in that contract), and whined like a little girl about it, embarrassing himself and damaging his credibility. Myself and several other DT commenters raised the possibility of the opt-out well before it ever happened, so it's not like it was totally unforeseen.

5) Failed to acquire a power bat, the lack of which I fear will sink our offense in 2007.

Good things that Ned did? Well, I'm happy with the Wolf and Schmidt signings (although Randy is a wait-and-see, and all things considered, I'd rather have Maddux than Wolf). I'm glad he punted on Zito. And I think the Gagne move was probably wise. It would be a mistake to tie up too much guaranteed money in pitchers whose health and effectiveness are serious question marks.

The whole signing-players-who-want-to-be-here theme is getting a little played out. It's good for PR purposes, and yeah, I appreciate the sentiment. But that closes us off from every Boras client, and let's face it, the man has an impressive stable of talent. It also allows agents like Arn Tellem to potentially game the system by appealing to Ned's soft spot, which is now very well-known. I mention this again thinking of Wolf vs. Maddux. They got similar money in their contracts (although Wolf's contract only has one guaranteed year and is far more incentive-laden). But the wants-to-play-here angle, combined with the fact that he's not a Boras client, led Colletti to take a gamble on Wolf, while Maddux signed with a division rival. I hope the gamble pays off.

I just wish there was someone in traditional media willing to cast a critical eye on Colletti's moves.

Gagne's three full years as the closer.
2002 1.97 ERA 82.3 IP 52 SV 192 ERA +
2003 1.20 ERA 82.3 IP 55 SV 335 ERA +
2004 2.19 ERA 82.3 IP 45 SV 189 ERA +

Saito's year, only half of which as closer.
2006 2.07 ERA 78.3 IP 24 SV 222 ERA+

I think Sammy matches up pretty well against Gagne in 2002 and 2004, but in 2003 (as Jon put it) Gagne split the atom.

Amen, Jon.

Gagne was Orel-esque and $2 million more guaranteed seems like small potatoes in this market.

Plus, as great as his fastball was, it was his ability to change speeds and throw multiple pitches that made him most effective. He knows how to pitch, so even if he's lost something off his fastball, I expect him to be okay. I predict a big year for him. This may end up being Ned's biggest mistake.

One of the great joys of being in Arizona for Spring Training is the possibility of seeing Eric Gagne throwing again. One of the great sorrows is seeing him in a Rangers uniform.

To me, letting Gagne go was a case of making the right decision for the wrong reasons. His recent tenure was like keeping around an old car just cause you like it, or it was a hot car once, but it's costing you a fortune just to take it out of the garage once or twice a year. That's o.k. for collecting, but not commuting.

I wanna say that what we did is like dumping the car because we're mad at the mechanic, but on reflection, I think I'll need some help completing the metaphor.

Signed Gonzalez, and initially offered him not one, but two prospect-blocking years

Did LuGo really turn down a 2-year offer in favor of a 1-year deal...?

Has Ned taken one iota of heat (as the previous GM no doubt would have) from the media for failing to resign Gagne?

Another thing I'm glad Colletti did this offseason: He held on to the prospects. That deserves to be mentioned.

However, when the season starts, he better not start panic-dialing the Tampa Bay GM's office again.

PECOTA hates Blake DeWitt. He rates as a fifth tier, or "Marginal" prospect, with a 9.9 score. For reference:

Pedroia- 178.6
Abreu-56.1

Kendrick...282.9

37 The Henson piece says Gonzo rejected a two-year, $10 million contract in favor of the one year, $7.5 million deal.

32 How about signed Nomar when we have pretty much the same player in James Loney?

32 - playing devil's advocate:

1) Signed Pierre, especially when it was the Giants who were about to be sandbagged with him.

Well, somebody had to play center, and it looks pretty dubious that the Dodgers' farm system has anything remotely resembling a centerfielder in it. Darin Erstad? (I hate the Pierre deal, too, by the way.)

2) Signed Gonzalez, and initially offered him not one, but two prospect-blocking years.

I'm sure Colletti was thinking that the years won't matter because the Dodgers can afford to throw him under the Matt Kemp bus if it comes to it. But do you want to bet that bus can really start?

3) Apparently got played like a fiddle in the Maddux negotiations.

Thinking... thinking... uh, aging pitcher, collapse... I guess Jason Schmidt represents an improvement, though at least they didn't end up with another Hendrickson-level cork at the back end of the rotation.

4) Was totally blind-sided by Drew's opt-out

"Blind-sided"? Production notwithstanding, I'm thrilled he exercised (to use a particularly appropriate word) that option.

5) Failed to acquire a power bat, the lack of which I fear will sink our offense in 2007.

I dunno. The Dodgers scored a ton of runs despite hitting relatively few homers, which is to say they're turning into an older, NL version of the Angels. Sort of. If they can save their heroics for four-consecutive-homer games with the pennant on the line, etc., I'd take it.

40 Probably because his best full season line is .244/.305/.415. Since PECOTA can't account for scouting information, it probably requires that a player have a good season at some point.

Saito
2006 12.3 K/9 2.64 BB/9 4.65 K/BB .906 WHIP

Gagne:
2002 12.5 K/9 1.75 BB/9 7.12 K/BB .862 WHIP
2003 15.0 K/9 2.19 BB/9 6.80 K/BB .692 WHIP
2004 12.5 K/9 2.40 BB/9 5.18 K/BB .911 WHIP

Saito walks a few more batters, but strikes them out at about the same rate (except for 2003, which was amazing). In short, Saito was a Gagne clone last year, if he replicates 90% of that we will have one of the nastiest bullpen in the NL.

43 How about "failed to acquire a power bat, while simultaneously losing our best hitter and replacing him with Luis Gonzalez."

46
I don't really find fault with not finding a power bat. It is not like they grow on trees and the price could have been our future. Not like you can just throw Tomko, Hendrickson, and what not out there and end up with a Dunn. We have plenty of power just about ready (Kemp, LaRoche) and Betemit will fill some of the gap this year. Everyone forgets that other then Utely, Kent still stands above everyone else at 2nd when it comes to power.

32 I agree that the "want to play here" schtick may be a bit overdone. But we will see if it works quickly, with short and incentive laden contracts. It does have a good feeling about it for this day and age, so I hope it works.

40 - Jered Weaver's PECOTA projection last year: 5.03 ERA, 123 IP, 99 K, 52 BB. In other words, it was off by a lot. Rich Lederer gently ribbed Nate Silver over this in a recent piece:

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2007/02/an_unfiltered_i.php

I wouldn't worry too much about particular projections.

47Oh, I agree that a premier guy like Dunn wasn't available, but I would have liked to see him make a play for someone like Craig Wilson instead of going to Gonzalez to fill in in left.

Instead of dumping homeless patients on Skid Row, we could have had them dumped in centerfield.

46 - Paul DePodesta "lost" the Dodgers' best hitter by inserting the one-way option clause into his contract.

51 - heh!

43 "Blind-sided"? Production notwithstanding, I'm thrilled he exercised (to use a particularly appropriate word) that option.

Thing is, I'm not really interested in anything notwithstanding production. As mentioned in 46, replacing Drew in the lineup with Gonzalez is going to be a huge step backwards for the offense.

The Dodgers scored a ton of runs despite hitting relatively few homers

Thanks to great OBP and great BA with RISP. The former has taken a hit with the loss of Drew and the addition of Pierre and Gonzo, and the latter will probably not occur two years in a row.

40,44 I think I've mentioned before that scouts must see amazing things in DeWitt because he has rarely shown much in stats.
He is young though. Still I am curious about which of those fuzzy areas (make-up, body type,projectability) he has such a quantity of.

49 I just thought the extreme disparity was interesting. Also, I'm not a big DeWitt fan. But using Jared Weaver as an example of PECOTA's flaws is, to my way of thinking, a little too outlier-happy.

17 Well, how massive could it really be. It's Juan Pierre we're talking about here.

I think 32, with the amendment, is pretty fair. I also think that, while "paying lots and lots of money to one of the top two FA pitchers on the market" counts as a good move, it sure isn't a very compelling one. Not to discount the skill invoved in convincing Schmidt and his people to take this deal rather than some other one, but it's not like he plucked David Ortiz off the Rule 5 wire or solved a Rubik's Cube or something.

Just to change topics a bit, anyone else thinks that Pete Carroll's name is going to come up for every vacant NFL job and is there a chance he even hints at listening to them.

Losing JD was a big loss, particulary if he was going to be our CF but it's not Ned's fault that JD left. Putting more years on his contract would have been crazy.

Ned's move in the outfield will hurt us in the short term(LuGo) and hurt us in the long term(Bullethead). I don't have a problem with bringing in a placeholder at a corner outfield spot in 06 but LuGo will become a distraction if Kemp proves to be ready. He made plenty of comments last year in Arizona when he lost at bats to the Arizona kids.

56
Part of the problem with Dewitt and Pecota is that he has barely played above A ball and when he did he was putrid in AA. If he kicks butt in AA ball this year the Pecota next year will be very very different. I'd trust the scouts more then Pecota until we have more data. At his point I'm more concerned with his ability to play 2nd base or not. The scouts seem to have conflicting opinions on this.

He made plenty of comments last year in Arizona when he lost at bats to the Arizona kids

That doesn't sound very Veteran Presence-y

choi's in tampa bay now, in case anyone was wondering.

But he does have triplets, so we got that going for us.

60 From what I gather, DeWitt is stonehands at third or second, doesn't have enough pop for third, and Abreu is the much better prospect anyway. If scouts are bullish on DeWitt, I'd be pleased as punch to see him packaged in a deal to a team that places a premium on scout's opinions. Of course, DeWitt could turn out to be a fabulous player, and this could all be moot.

57 Is Brian Cashman and Theo Epstein good GMs or do they just spend huge and inflated contracts that price everyone else out.

I think we remember the David Ortiz's or Johann Santana Rule 5 pick ups or trades like Nathan, Liriano for A.J., Kazmir for Zambrano because they are the exception.

Usually, teams win with a mix of guys that you got from lots of places whether from the waiver wire to the check book. The check book might appear to be less creative but should be judged no differently than any other way you get players.

I'll bet he likes Weird Al Yankovic too :)

So if Gagne only wanted to take a job as a closer in 2007, the Dodgers didn't really stand much of a chance of signing him, given his health risk and the emergence of Saito and Broxton, the Dodgers couldn't offer him that gaurantee. vr, Xei

40 -- How useful is PECOTA for determining the prospect status of players nobody thinks are major league ready? I don't think we need PECOTA to tell us that DeWitt would put up miserable numbers in the majors in 2007. DeWitt is at least two years from being MLB ready, and it might be three years. But when he is more polished, I think he has the swing to be a very good hitter in the majors. He already hits right-handers pretty well. It is his futility against southpaws that drags his overall numbers down, so if he learns to hit lefties he will be a full-time player, and if he doesn't, he will be the lefty half of a platoon, which is the half you want to be if you have to be in a platoon.

I've never seen a scouting report that said he had stonehands. Your just making that up.

i'm a bit concerned about our post-gagne bullpen. saito had an unbelievable year, but it's expecting a lot to ask him to duplicate it. obviously, broxton is a key figure as the dominant set-up man and closer-in-training, but how much can one man pitch?

therefore, i'm starting to give a lot of thought to moving billingsley to the pen to create a tag-team set-up situation with broxton.

advantages: we add another power arm to the pen, complimenting broxton and adding an element of fear/intimidation to late-inning situations; kuo gets the starting job he deserves/needs.

disavantages: we lose our most promising young starter from the rotation; we risk arm injuries tweaking his regular routine.

maybe it's just me, but saito/broxton/beimel/tomko/hendrickson/kuo
doesn't quite seem like the shut-down pen we need this year. i'm really rooting against seanez making the team, and tsao and brazoban can't be considered until later in the year.

another possible solution would be if meloan stepped up and claimed that set-up power arm role--or miller . . .

65: Well, I just said it was less compelling than other more creative moves as at the time I acknowledged it was an equally valuable form of team building. Seems to me you've got to be able to do it all. And even the big spenders are, after all, deciding where to plunge and where not to (on Dice-K not Zito; on Schmidt, not Soriano) etc. It just seems like a simpler form of decision making than finding undervalued or underrecognized talent, or making judgments as to who might bounce back from a poor year and who might not.

And I really have no idea if Theor or Cashman are good GMs or not. Cashman seems pretty impressive to me for the all pitching depth he's added this year and just for the patience he is showing in that marker. And getting Pettite back, while perhaps just another big check writing, came sort of out of nowhere.

Theo is hard to figure out; he seemed to panic last year re Mirabelli, that's for sure.

61 He also had an owner basically say he took steroids.

What should he have done, I'm not saying that he should have played as much as he did in the last 2 months of the season but he wasn't hurt, he was told in September that they were going to let him go, should he just sit there and not say anything. In the end, most of guys still believe they can play. From what I read, he was always supportive of the kids, he just thought how the management handled it (remember that they were changing the front office at the time too) was bad.

69 He has no range and is a poor fielder. You can use whatever term you're comfortable with. I'm comfortable with mine.

69 Baseball America says he's unsuited for second base. Whether or not that translates into stonehands is up to you.

68 The article in question is talking about the players production over his career, not just next year.

67. That's pretty much the way I get it. It was more about being guaranteed to be closer than extra $$$.

Gagne as Gagne was, that guarantee is a no-brainer. Gagne as who-knows-what-exactly, the Dodgers couldn't make that guarantee.

64 -- When you say that, it sounds like you have forgotten that WE are a team that puts a premium on scouts' opinions.

71 Then there is always Carl Pavano and Jaret Wright

74
John Sickels and Deric from HQ disagree.
5. Blake DeWitt 2B…..R/R…..20…..2004 (1-C) high school (MO)
Strengths: Athleticism/strength. Bat speed/BA ability/moderate power. Soft hands
Weaknesses: Pitch recognition. Speed/agility. Average arm strength. Reading groundballs
Comments: Bat speed and a more aggressive approach netted more power, but plate discipline regressed and didn't hit for BA. Improving pitch recognition could be the final hitting piece. Made smooth transition from 3B to 2B, showing soft hands, but must read groundballs better.
MLB Debut: 2008
Potential Rating: 9D

DeWitt's minor league FRAA (last three years):
-13, -11, -10. The scouting report I read from BA says the kid can't play second. You disagree with those particular assessments, which is fine. Accusing me of making something up, not really cool.

Not saying I'm in the DeWitt corner but a 20 year old will always have plenty of room for improvement. Check out Chase Utely's numbers at baseball cube and you'll see that Dewitt based on age is probably ahead of him and I remember a time when scouts said that Utley would not be able to handle 2nd base.
http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/U/Chase-Utley.shtml

79
I consider stonehands to be completely different then lack of range or agility. My apology if you think it means the same thing.

32 Was totally blind-sided by Drew's opt-out (even though it was hardly a "hidden" clause in that contract), and whined like a little girl about it, embarrassing himself and damaging his credibility.

I think that's a little over the top, and that you should issue an apology to any little girls you might have offended.

Bel