Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
Jon's other site:
Screen Jam
TV and more ...
1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with
At It Might Be Dangerous... You Go First, Paul DePodesta uses the reports that Padres ace Jake Peavy might be traded to talk about the philosophy of dealing star players.
We are looking to get better.
It's really that simple. We're not trying to trade certain players, and we're certainly not looking to move players just to move them. As with any off-season or trading deadline, we're assessing the market value for our players to see whether or not that value surpasses their value to the Padres. If you have something you value at one million dollars, it would be foolish to refuse to consider selling it for twenty million dollars. On the flip side, it would also be foolish to sell it for anything less than one million. The thing that makes the market work is that each player has a different value to virtually every Club.
Furthermore, no one player makes a great team. This has been proven time and time again in baseball. We don't need to look any further than the 2008 Padres that went 63-99 with Jake Peavy ...
This, of course, doesn't mean that trading a star player ensures success. What it does show, however, is that trading a star player can buoy a team. That is what we're exploring.
As far as Jake's particular situation, we have him under contract for the next four years with an option for a fifth year. Our task, then, is to determine whether what we would receive in exchange for him would outweigh the benefits of having him for those five years (presumably some player(s) we would get in return could be of service for more than five years, so that needs to be factored in as well). Make no mistake, however - we place tremendous value on Jake's presence here. That is why any offers for him in past years and every day up until this writing have been rejected. ...
In short, we are charged with fielding the best possible team in both the short and long terms. Believe me, we wish we could put together a dynamic team comprised of players who would remain as Padres for the duration of their careers. On a personal level, we don't enjoy trading players. I don't know any executive who does. However, that just isn't the reality of today's game. Because of that fact, the best organizations out there can't really believe in the concept of "untouchable", because one can lose great opportunities with such blinders.
So, to answer the most basic question: are we going to trade Jake Peavy? We'll see if someone offers us a compelling deal that makes us better.
I've made a similar point on a number of occasions, saying that characterizing a team as a buyer or a seller is a false dichotomy. Teams are just looking to get better, the most efficient way possible.
D4P: Sort of sums up the last few posts (we sort of got out of sync), but my objection was when BH suggested he didn't feel victimized, you acted as though because he liked the team, he was finding Ned perfect, etc etc etc. It irked me, but I think most of that has been sorted out.
And:
123 Eric will not rest until he tries and make people despise Nelson more than I despise him for the Matt Stairs home run.
And the compliment made me happier than you may realize, TC. Thanks.
We are going to really need DeWitt to hit well enough to solidify third. If we cannot keep Manny, we are probably going to need to trade for an outfielder. Don't think we have enough to also trade for a third baseman.
That's something we should put on a poster around here this off season. Baseball is a strange game, ultimately, it is an individualized sport played at the team level. What the player in front of me does has little bearing on what I do at the plate, what I do has little bearing on what the player behind me does. Against Pitcher X, a team scores 7 runs in two innings, the next day, against Pitcher Y, the team scores 2 runs in 7 innings.
I think it really takes at least 2 great position players and at least 2 great pitchers (in the old days to great starting pitchers were almost a requirement, but today you might be able to get by on one great starter and a great closer, but I'd still prefer to great starters) to make a good team great. That's likely the problem with the Dodgers as presently constructed, with the exception of Manny and Furcal (both free agents) the Dodgers don't have any great players, at the moment.
Still, I like this core group of guys and really hope none of them get moved for PVL.
Heck, might not be a bad idea anyway.
I'm more one to think that my favorite teams have a solid 90% or so, top-to-bottom in the rotation, bullpen and line up with at least three great players spread through out it.
When this point comes up, I always think of the Mariners who couldn't win with Griffey, A-Rod and Randy Johnson. That is the ultimate lesson that winning baseball requires a balanced team much more than one, two or even three superstars.
If they are moving Peralta to 3rd and Cabrera to SS where do they have room for Casey?
It might be that the Dodgers were not very impressed with Casey, he didn't exactly do much during crunch time except hit one key home run. From Sept 16th till the end of the Dodger season he hit one home run. As a 3rd baseman. Carlos Santana could have done that from both sides of the plate in the same game.
* - Forgive me!
My mancrush on Carlos is ego related as I was asking BA questions on him dated back to his days in the Dominican Rookie League only to be ignored until one day they looked up and said Holy Crap this guy is the MVP of the California League and might be better then this LaPorta guy we wet our pants about when he was traded for CC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Brasky
"Teammates say Jones wants no part of a return to Los Angeles."
Re-signing Blake if Manny leaves is pretty much the worst consolation prize ever.
Looking at things, I think we almost have to sign Manny.
http://tinyurl.com/4vvhke
Heh, I was just gonna post that.
No matter what the Dodgers went through this week, nothing is as embarrassing as this ALCS is for Boston.
The Boston dynasty crumbles!! Hooray for everybody!
Oh phewie, since it's not the Dodgers, whatever.
Pierre wants to play. If he can't play here, then he doesn't want to be here.
Jones wants to get paid. The bottom line for 2009 is he'll get paid no matter where he is, but he might want to be somewhere else just so he doesn't have to deal with as much baggage. The baggage will accrue elsewhere too, but at least he'd start at a lower baggage level somewhere else.
Pierre, as I've said here before, will definitely be traded this off-season. To who, and for what, will be the questions.
There will be no press, cheerleaders or Joe Bruin in attendance.
However, expect Morgan and Gordon to learn what "hedging" means.
But off to soccer!
That video of the freshmen interviewing each other was pretty cool.
Another is the Whitesox-they need a speedy OFer, and have read about this need more than a few times this year.
Peavy-Olney reports he could be dealt fairly quickly:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3647795&campaign=rss&source=MLBHeadlines
sorry, no idea how to "tinyurl"
and Jones was quoted in a Dylan Hernandez article on Oct. 10th saying "I'm an everyday player or I'm out"....check it out.
Already an interesting offseason in LA.
As for Pierre wanting to be traded, the Dodgers can do just what the Red Sox did with Manny a couple years back - stick him on waivers, where no one will touch him with a ten foot pole; maybe that will clue him into the fact that he's not going to be a starter for the life of his contract on any team that's likely to win 70 games.
If Jones is a clubhouse cancer, then we might as well cut him, but I'd rather at least give him a shot to win a job next spring, just in case he decides to show up in shape.
San Diego, too, is said to be willing to deal with the rival Dodgers, who could conceivably have some excellent young players to dangle, like outfielder Matt Kemp and pitchers Clayton Kershaw and James McDonald. The Padres intended to wait until the Dodgers completed their playoff run before engaging in serious talks with L.A.
I'd have to think there's some team that would want Pierre for next to nothing except having to pay his salary. Right?
http://tinyurl.com/busterpeavy
If so, I'd be fine with Manny going elsewhere. He's great at honeymoons, but bad at marriages. Let's call it a good 2-1/2 months and move on.
With the outfield, first, and catcher set, let's give DeWitt second. I'm not sure he's the solution there, but he's earned 300 at-bats to prove himself. Shortstop can be up for grabs between Hu and DeJesus.
Which leaves third base. I'd be okay with Blake, but think we can do just as well for fewer dollars. Florida doesn't seem interested in giving Dallas McPherson a chance. Plug him in at third and seem if he can do an Adam Dunn inpersonation?
I am in complete agreement of addition by subtraction and a trade like that: getting Igawa might be the type of trade that will work. The problem I see that even paying lots of Jones salary, I still don't know how attractive he will be on the market. Would the Yankees entertain a Jones for Cano deal?
Ohhhhhhhhh NOOO!
James MacDonald has a #1 type ceiling. Maybe not the potential of Kershaw (left-handed) but almost as high of ceiling as Bills. The guy's stuff is nasty. H can get it up to 94-95 with a nice curve and a filthy change. I do NOT want to see MacDonald traded.
He's good but he's not a No. 1.
1. Manny's gone
2. Furcal's coming back
3. DeWitt's moving back to 3b
Right now, I'm interested in seeing a DeJesus/Hu/Abreu battle for 2b this spring. I'd also like to see the Dodgers consider converting Schmidt to a short reliever.
I really don't care about Jones/Pierre. Put 'em on the depth chart as our Cf platoon [while knowing Repko/Paul might well be more productive] and say a little prayer for Ned.
Among the questions I want to see addressed soon is what we plan on doing with Elbert. Will he be groomed as a reliever or a starter (in which case he'll likely need more seasoning)?
I just don't think that he'll get much better than he is today, but wouldn't be surprised if another team thinks that there is another possible 10-15% growth.
MacDonald can get it up to 94 or 95, but is consistant at 91/92. I feel with a little more work, his changeup can easily be his outpitch. The nastiest pitch I have seen a Dodger throw this year besides Kershaw's curveball is MacDonald's very first pitch in Philly against Burrell, a 74 mph changeup. Just FILTHY.
http://tinyurl.com/5g6k24
Problem is, with the indictment and bad PR, every team in the league had a legit reason to not sign Bonds.
This was the kind of playoff game I was hoping to see the Dodgers be a part of and win. Oh well, maybe in a few years...
1. Manny's coming back
2. Furcal's gone
3. Laroche's moving back to LA
I know... I know... I bury my head in shame... I can't believe it... I jinxed the game!
Of course it also just had to be J.D. Drew.
If I would've been man enough to give Drew a nice extension with a little more money per year, I would have an outfield of Kemp, Ethier and Drew. I also wouldn't have to deal with the freak out mistake of Pierre's contract and Jones' signing in an attempt rectify my first mistake. Damn! Damn! Damn!
1-pierre's gone
2-andruw's gone
3-manny signs
4-furcal signs
5-trade for peavy/sign CC
6-trade for beltre
not necessarily in that order, but the first two allow the next 3-4.
Like I said at that time, the party's now over. Here's the hangover. Manny comes back only if HE feels like it. Dewitt's great but he's not a prototypical thumper 3b. Santana's gone as he turns 23. May's not the answer at backup C. Is Ellis? The kids are approaching arby and not a one of 'em are signed L-Term.
And worst of all, Ned saved his job and is now a lame duck 2009 GM.
I look forward to picking up the great insight on this awesome source of Dodger info. Thanks in advance.
Heres hoping 150-1 pays off!
Hear Hear!
0.7 % win expectancy according to fangraphs
1 in 142 chance of coming back...
thats like being down ten and scoring the last eleven points in an NCAA tourney game.
One letter away from BallFour.
/depressed
I was this close to making a Bill Brasky reference this morning, so I fully endorse and appreciate your post earlier.
Also, remember, Matt "Up" Stairs.
That should stick in your head for 20+ years.
Today was the day for the Dodgers to clean out their lockers, and as Juan Pierre boxed up his things, he wasn't in the mood to talk.
I first read that as "boxed up his rings".
SS Furcal
2b Orlando Hudson (free agent)
3b Blake Dewitt
1b James Lonely
C Russel Martin
RF Andre Either
LF MANNY!!!
CF Matt Kemp
Pitchers
1. CC Sabthia or Derek Lowe (please sign with us Lowe)
2. Billingsley
3. Kuroda
4. Kershaw
5. Schmidt
Here is what I hope doesn't happen
SS Furcal
2b Hu
3b Blake Dewitt
1b James Lonely
C Russel Martin
RF Andre Either
LF Matt Kemp/Repko
CF Andrew Jones/Juan Pierre
Pitchers
1. Billingsley
2. Penny
3. Kuroda
4. Kershaw
5. Schmidt
Alyssa Milano = big time Dodger fan
Tony Danza = played Milano's father on "Who's the Boss?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqzlQu_6ZDk
(Courtesy of SI Hot Clicks)
My beef wasn't necessarily with Smith. It was with the reporter, but that issue is now dead to me.
I see how this works... when the Red Sox make a big comeback late, it's the Red Sox and their fans winning the game.
When it's anybody vs the Dodgers... its the Dodgers and their fans finding a way to lose.
Ok I'm back to hating ESPN. End of Diversion.
Separate issue actually. I am still a little miffed about how he slammed the Dodgers for not throwing at batters to retaliate for Meyer's junk on Friday.
The Nelson interview is just icing on the cake. Again, I'm sure this will blow over soon.
Was that your email read on the air?
My Facebook status pays small tribute to it. I thought about repeating another favorite line but it might inadvertently break rule 1.
Yep. He read my email leading into the Rob Neyer interview. What's fair is fair... :)
http://www.officetally.com/baby-shower-deleted-scenes
Basically I asked about how Joe Maddon erred with his bullpen decisions:
How [did] Joe Maddon [leave] in Wheeler for a whole inning. He had NOTHING! ...What on earth happened?
Then Jason Smith brought in Rob Neyer to help answer my question. It was a neat transition.
I feel like the Red Sox can make any baseball game last past Midnight. All of the NLCS games started 20 minutes later and still finished a good half hour before midnight.
With Tex signed, we could go after one more premier guy like Sabbathia or a lesser starter like Oliver Perez and have some change left over.
My only worry is the fact that we have so much to replace. We may have to replace Lowe, Beimel, Maddux, Kent, Garciaparra, Furcal, Manny, Bennett, Sweeney, Penny, Proctor, and Blake. Some of those guys are certainly easy to replace, but we have to replace quantity and hope that they somehow mesh as a team. This is the most intriguing offseason in recent memory.
I know Joey will approve of your plan ;-) The thing is that is very expensive while still leaving a hole in the outfield. Unless Loney brought back a good one. Can't count on Jones to be the Jones of old. If he is, that's a bonus. Some of the bench players can be filled from youth, like Delwyn Young, Hu and other guys like that, with a couple of vets brought in.
If they don't re-sign Manny, then go for pitching and defense, and let the youth continue to improve imho. Bring in one vet FA who brings offense to the table. Sabathia, Bills, Kershaw, McDonald, Kuroda (and guys like Elbert or Stults to fill in). That's pretty solid.
Honestly, two key signings will go a long way to offset whatever losses they're going to have.
Let's just say BYU had a bad night.
Thinking 2009 will be a stopgap to a thrilling 2010.
Its fun watching two well run franchises play some very compelling baseball.
Plus, its easy to root for guys like Drew, Aybar, Navarro, & Edwin.
While McDonald was dialing it up to the mid 90's for us it was in a relief role. While a starter in the minors he was topping out at 91-92 from the scouting reports I've read. I've never seen his stuff compared to a one. Ceiling would seem to be a 3 with the expectation that he is a back end rotation type. Which is still valuable but certainly tradeable depending on what is coming back.
I don't see how Peavy can be dealt without hurting the Padres or with the team making the deal hurting themselves. I see only Tampa and the Braves as competing teams who can trade an excess of young players without hurting their current makeup. If the Braves do it they are fools because that team is about to fall apart without the infusion they need from their prospects. Tampa could do it but the price should be Price/Jennings/Brignac. Then they have to answer the question is whether Peavy would even be better then Price by 2010.
Maybe because he's no longer a Dodger.
It was the greatest comeback I've ever seen in the postseason. Game six will be interesting. JD looked like he wanted to be anywhere else in the world rather then have to answer stupid questions from Sager.
OK, then along that line how about this:
1. Go hard after Sabbathia/Peavy assuming the price is reasonably outrageous and not Luis Castillo or Juan Pierre outrageous.
2. Go after Orlando Hudson to shore up 2B and move DeWitt and his glove to third (I think that this would give us the best infield defense in the league)
3. Trade Pierre and get Jones in shape while monitoring him in winter ball and hope that he figures out how to find the "on" button on his treadmill.
4. Get Lowe and Furcal back.
The comeback was simply ridiculous.
I was unhappy when we signed him, I was unhappy when he left. He is the reason we have Pierre and Jones on the payroll. I don't blame him for opting out I would have done the same. I don't blame Ned for not giving him an extension. I would not have done so. I don't blame Depo for giving him the option to leave. Without the option maybe he doesn't sign. In retrospect I'd rather have signed Beltre and not Drew but Beltre left first. When they both have Boras as an agent you know things are being orchestrated.
Unlike you, I'm all for trading prospects for good players. The reason Edwin Jackson sucked on the Dodgers was bc he got hurt & his good (97-99) velocity. Its good to see him regain it & put up an ok season for the Rays. He'll have to battle Sonnanstine next year for a spot in their rotation though. I wouldnt be surprised if he becomes their closer down the road.
But, perhaps if Edwin Jackson does well, then the current GM will be less inclined to give up future prospects for middle relievers.
Trading Edwin Jackson wasnt a bad decision. Dealing him for a middle reliever like Baez was.
If that were the case, I can't imagine their guys being markedly different from ESPN's guys.
You wouldn't have extended Drew because he couldn't be counted on to stay healthy to play enough games?
CC - $20M
O-dog - $12M
Subsidized outgoing Pierre - $5M
Lowe - $12M
Furcal - $10M
When I was a kid, I never thought about salaries or the possibility that players (especially those on my team) were playing primarily for the money. Players on "my team" were heroes, who were just as loyal to my team as I was.
I don't think that way anymore. As far as I'm concerned, they're all doing it for the money, and don't really care much about the team or being loyal to it (especially if being loyal means making less money).
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with a system where players go to the highest bidder, but it definitely makes me care about them a lot less.
Not that you were alone in thinking that way about high school pitchers -- back then. When I think about baseball ideas in the last five years, I can not think of any area of thinking that has so dramatically reversed itself than sabermetricians' condemnation of high school pitchers. Honestly, reading a Baseball Prospectus annual from just a few years ago (2002, 2003) makes me think of reading pre-1960's Southern politicians' speeches on the subject of race relations. A tune can change really abruptly.
I havent changed my feeling that taking high school pitching is risky. In the end, Miller did prove worthless & Jackson had to battle injuries to get where he's at.
No doubt, the Dodgers would have been better off trading both for something good, not middle relief.
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.