UCI is participating in this, but I have a class at 10AM, so I might as well duck and cover to freak everyone else out.

It's not something you want to have to do. But on the other hand, it inspires me to keep a large supply of cat litter around.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LUT35wmlb8 (skip to the 8:50 mark)

I'd bet the same amount Chicago would not trade us Dye for Pierre.

In Score's first two seasons (1955-1956), "he was the only starter in baseball history to have struck out more than a batter per inning over a season (and he had done it twice)."

To quote Johnny Carson, "I did not know that."

11/15/08 - 12:00 a.m. EST - All teams are able to negotiate with all free agents.

11/20/08 - Teams must file their reserve lists for major and minor league rosters.

12/01/08 - Last day for teams to offer arbitration to any free agent in order to be eligible for compensation. (Note that if a free agent is signed on or prior to this day, the former team is automatically awarded any eligible compensation)

12/07/08 - Last day for a player who declared free agency to accept an arbitration offer from former team.

12/08 - 12/11/08 - Winter Meetings, Las Vegas

12/11/08 - Rule 5 draft.

12/12/08 - Last day to tender contracts for 2009.

Okay, I read Canuck Dodgers' post on the prior thread regarding Manny and C.C. (which was one of my favorite cartoon shows from my childhood by the way). I'm partly persuaded, particularly on the greater need for Sabathia, but on behalf of those who got a real charge from having a charismatic ultra-masher on the Dodgers for a couple months, I want to pose a question:

Why can't we sign Manny for, say, four or five years and then, after two or three years, trade him to an AL team to finish out his contract? Why can't that be the de facto plan?

Manny's fielding isn't so awful now that we should think he couldn't handle the field in 2009-10, especially if Pierre sticks around for late-inning work. If, after a couple of years, it's obvious he shouldn't be in left field but is still a great hitter -- a reasonable forecast -- the AL will still be interested in him. Trade him then. There would be takers, if he can still hit. Chances are, Manny would prefer to move, too, if he can't play the field, so a no-trade provision won't be a serious obstacle. I could see this happening in mid-2011 and I could see some good prospects coming back.

If that's not a reasonable forecast, i.e. if the more likely forecast is his hitting will decline along with his fielding, then that supposition is probably shared by all 30 teams. And, therefore, he won't get a 6-year offer from anyone.

The Dodgers' offer is neither insulting nor a PR stunt. It is probably a near-accurate assessment of Manny's value, and not very far from what he'll sign for. Manny is not more valuable to an AL team, just because he has DH written all over him. He is merely less valuable than a younger player or more adept fielder would be. Just because Scott Boras thinks he "deserves" a six-year deal doesn't mean he'll get one.

But if the consensus is that Manny does deserve a six-year-deal, there is no reason an NL team wouldn't be as wise as an AL team to give it to him, because he can always be traded to the AL when the time comes.

http://www.bb-ref.com/pi/shareit/ECgG

This earthquake thing seems like a very good reason to sleep in. I've already accepted death in lots of other situations, why should a 9+ quake be any different.

I can always go into looting.

That and their unholy alliance with Southside Towing.

Manny's getting a three-year deal, four at the outside. From somebody. If that's the limit, the Dodgers are in the hunt.

Got tired of SB.

I went to Sea Harbor for dimsum Sunday. I was eating ox belly when I lost a temporary crown. Luckily I was able to pop it right back on.

23
As bad as Pierre is, Colletti will want to ensure that Jones can actually play before he lets Pierre go. I do not see him going into next season with a Jones/Ethier/Kemp outfield with only Young and/or Repko as injury/suckitude backup. I just can't see him using prospects and money to get rid of Pierre even if he gets Dye in return.

No, I think we are stuck with the Pierre/Jones duo for another year...

Especially if we don't sign Manny.

If we do sign Manny, it's hard to imagine keeping all of Manny/Pierre/Jones/Kemp/Ethier.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/sports_blog/2008/11/rams.html

--

I have a bad feeling the Yankees' offer to CC is going to be, to channel the Godfather, one he can't refuse.

If the Dodgers still need to bring in another starter, does anyone think it would be a bad idea to pursue Randy Wolf again? When healthy he's pretty solid, and wants to return to the West Coast pretty strongly. He's not a #1 of course, more like a solid 3 or 4. Just sayin'... if they lose out on CC, and end up putting money towards Manny.

I am the guy in charge of announcing the earthquake drill on the floor I work.

That makes Cirque du Soleil look like a NASCAR rally.

Camera's over here, Jackie!

I do not know why that upsets me, I do not even want Manny back. But I am hot right now.

Beyond all the obvious problems with this comment, it doesn't even really make sense. There are really only two responses to a contract offer: sign, or not sign.

The notion that some contract offers would be "accepted" but not ultimately signed doesn't compute.

Yeah, I could do this all day.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/69344/super_bowl_shuffle/

Oh, there it is.

I didn't feel one in Long Beach.

No simulations of simulated earthquakes on the thread.

Canuck knows more about baseball that I know about anything (or everything), so it's with no small amount of trepidation and respect that I approach this comment.

I am not against going after Sabathia. As others have pointed out, that is a deal that is extremely likely to work out. He is a great pitcher, and even though he'll be expensive, I don't expect that he'll be an albatross.

But that leaves two questions.

(1) What if the Dodgers can't get Sabathia? There is only one of him.
(2) Why can't we look at the lineup?

The Dodgers surely will sign a free agent pitcher this offseason. If that's Sabathia, great. But if the Yankees get him, what then? If the Dodgers sign, say, Paul Byrd, do they just accept their fate or do they look elsewhere?

The answer to that is that the Dodgers will have to improve the lineup. But where? And how? After all, Canuck argued that the Dodgers don't have a fit for an outfielder.... he said:

1. Jones/Pierre can't be traded because nobody wants them. Undoubtedly true.
2. The Dodgers won't DFA them. Also true.
3. It would be awkward to have them both sitting on the bench. Well, that's true, but it's not really an argument that the Dodgers shouldn't get somebody to replace them. That is a prediction that the Dodgers WON'T get somebody to replace them, because it would be embarrassing, which isn't the same thing.

The Dodgers absolutely do have a hole in the outfield. Just because there are two expensive warm bodies that they can play there does not make the hole go away.

Assuming that the Dodgers can only afford one very very expensive contract this offseason, I'm on board with Canuck. Get Sabathia. But if:
(1) They don't get him, or
(2) That assumption is wrong and the Dodgers can afford two very very expensive contracts,

THEN, I think, it would not be foolish to look at improving the outfield. Ned might be embarrassed to have Pierre and Jones riding the bench, but he'll be more embarrassed by having them play every day.

If we have some doubt, we like to have a veteran in that position--especially in a big market--until we are more certain that the young player is ready. If you provide a young player with the position prematurely and the speed of the game and the pressures of the big leagues exceed where that player is at, at that point in his career, then we have done an injustice to the team and to the young player. And finding out that we've overestimated a young player 50 games into the season is a very difficult point of the season to make an adjustment.

http://www.theslot.com/a-an.html

convinces me that we only use "an" before a word starting with "h" if the "h" is silent.

But certainly, my expectation is that McDonald will follow the typical Billingsley/Kershaw minors-to-bullpen-to-rotation route.

Whereas, overpaying Tomkos and Loaizas and Hendricksons and Baezes and Pierres and Joneses does no injustice to the team, and makes it easy to adjust 50 games into the season.

I still don't see the Dodgers going into next season with both Pierre and Jones, regardless.

The general consensus in baseball is that Steinbrenner will do whatever it takes to get Beltran, and there's certainly no doubt that, in the end, the Yankees will be able to outbid the Astros. - 12/25/04

The New York Daily News reports that the Yankees now consider Guerrero their No. 1 right field priority over Sheffield.

I agree, to a point. I would certainly prefer to sign Martin, Billingsley, Ethier, Kemp, Broxton (before he starts accumulating saves to increase his value), etc to long-term deals, but of course it takes two to tango.

I don't think it's an either/or choice here. All of the young guys are under club control through at least 2012, so they will be here for the foreseeable future regardless of whether or not they are signed.

I'm guessing the club has factored in raises through arbitration for budgetary purposes at least for the next few years.

Right now, the 2009-ready starting pitchers are:

Billingsley
Kuroda
Kershaw
McDonald
Stults

We literally have to sign at least one starting pitcher regardless of any of the young ones are signed to long-term deals. Why not make it CC?

Which is a just as well. Might as well get rid of Pierre (and his three more years! contract) and suffer through just one more year of the FTOG, than vice versa.

--

Okay, why do people decide to start renovating their home and chainsawing things on the day I'm working from home? Sigh. Time to head to the office after all.

42 Ks and 14 walks in 30 innings in the Southern League ain't too shabby. The Cubs got him when they dumped Todd Walker on the Padres.

I'm going into the ToyCannon think tank and resolving that we're getting neither CC nor Manny, and just hope we don't get another sub-average albatross in an AJ Burnett or some such.

Wouldn't that be nice!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/eonline/20081113/en_top_eo/68582;_ylt=AtDdkGy8YWoyiDGCPLQR0G6s0NUE

I would be okay with that scenario, but I am a Sheets fan.

Whats with the Marlins? I thought they got approval for a new stadium, and they are still selling off everyone. Not that dumping Gregg is a bad move--> he'd likely get more than he deserved in arbitration.

I agree that selling high on Kevin Gregg is probably a good idea. But it's pretty obvious that they aren't even willing to try and contend.

http://tinyurl.com/6nfccf

p.s. i was kinda sad when the a's gave away harden to chi. why didn't we make more of a play for him knowing penny was hurt? meh.

You counted them out last year when they dealt Miggy and I'd say their season was a huge success. That team is loaded with pitching and with Hanley they have a real super star they can ride.

Morrison, Uggla, Hanley, Hermida, Maybin, Ross is a decent enough core to go with the best pitching the NL is going to see in 2009.

doesn't it make more sense for a "small market" team (and in my opinion, if Oakland is a small market team, than so are the Angels) to try and build a perennial winner/competitor that would be able to expand the fan base outside of the local metro area? There's plenty of merchandise to be sold in other towns and around the world. And I have to believe that teams make a lot more money selling shirts and hats than they do selling tickets.

There has to be a formula beyond trading guys for prospects or getting extra draft picks when players leave, that would allow a team like, say, the Kansas City Royals to have a profit margin large enough to afford larger contracts.

I do not deny Sheets's talent, but I can't get on the Sheets bandwagon for the injury concerns. It's fine to make a calculated risk like the Dodgers have done oh so many times in the past, but at a certain point you have to look at the DL payroll and wonder if you wouldn't be better off spending less money on a lesser talent that will almost assuredly be healthy.

It is a small bandwagon. We have to write the name of our bandwagon in very, very tiny letters. and it is not so much a bandwagon as it is a OneGuyPlayingTheHarmonicaWagon.

Chad Billingsley's ERA+ the last 3 years:

2006: 118 (in 90 IP)
2007: 138
2008: 135

Billingsley runs circles around AJB.

Look, I don't EXPECT the Dodgers to follow my plan. For all the reasons Canuck pointed out, it's likely that they won't. But I still advocate it.

1. Career .300 hitter
2. Old
3. Hurt a lot lately
4. Former Giant
5. Likes to pee on stuff

2008

Burnett
BB/9 IP- 3.5
HR/9 IP- 0.77
K/9 IP- 9.4

Billingsley
BB/9 IP- 3.6
HR/9 IP- .63
K/9 IP - 9.0

Burnett pitching in the NL West is a very safe assumption his K's will go up and his HR's will go down.

6. Name anagram: Louse, so aim!

Burnett seems to me what Dreifort might have become if he was ever relatively healthy.

Nice work, Kenny.

http://tinyurl.com/5nulhj

-------------
"Randy instructed us not to file for free agency until we made every effort to reach an agreement. The Diamondbacks have a budget based on their club's financial situation and obviously viewed Randy's contract in that context. Randy considered every reasonable compromise including offering to take a 50% pay cut, all to remain a Diamondback. However, the economic situation did not lend itself to an agreement."
---------------------

50% of his 2008 salary would have been $5m. A one- or two-year deal wouldn't be too bad for Johnson.

Shades of a former Nebraska punter.

I don't think this deal affects the Yankees' pursuit of CC. Their offer will be formidable regardless of other deals.

Now if Sheets will take the same deal we offered Schmidt I'd be very happy. I do expect AJ to get at least a four year deal which is why I don't think we are in the running for him.

CC - No Ned fiction for a year
Sheets - Happy but apprehensive
Randy - simple nod of acceptance

We can also see a 600th HR perhaps in late 2010.

Damn, Yankees!

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

The Dodgers do have one. His name is Andruw Jones. He also coached first base during the season.

Er, no, Kanekoa Texeira.

When was this?

A propane stove is quite important as you'll want to boil stuff. The best thing to do is stock up on the lousy tasting backpack food which lasts forever. I find my camping equip to be my earthquake stuff.