Dodgers Trade Deadline Preview
(Note: I actually wrote this article for MLB Daily Dish, but as the title indicates it's fairly relevant to Dodger fans. So without further ado...)
Buyers or sellers?
With the best record in baseball this season, there is just no way the Dodgers will be selling off any major league contributers. They will be in the same boat as last year, looking for veterans who can help the team reach the playoffs and then contribute if/when they get there. However, in 2008 the Dodgers were looking for bats (and they added Manny Ramirez and Casey Blake), this time around they will be looking for arms to add depth to the pitching staff.
Short-term need
With players locked in at every position around the diamond, the only way the Dodgers could really consider trading for another hitter was if an elite talent like Adrian Gonzalez became available. Even in that case a trade would be unlikely. The Dodgers have stuggled to find a dependable left-handed hitter off the bench but Doug Mientkiewitcz should be back before the postseason begins. In the rotation the Dodgers are looking for a back-end starter to replace Eric Milton, who was recently lost for the season. It's possible the Dodgers could get a decent arm to fill that role although ultimately not that important because the Dodgers already have four effective starters to use in the playoffs. A player like Roy Halladay or Cliff Lee would be a luxury but is in no way a need. Of more pressing importance could be the bullpen, where set-up man Ronald Belisario was recently put on the DL. With the injuries to Belisario, Hong-Chih Kuo, and Jonathan Broxton the Dodgers 'pen is thin. It wouldn't be surprising if an arm is added here, in fact general manager Ned Colletti has said it is the tea's number one priority.
Long-term need
It's hard to pinpoint many long-term needs right now because the current team is so stacked. Young pitchers are still plentiful in the minor league system but the starting rotation will probably need an infusion of talent in another couple years when Hiroki Kuroda and Randy Wolf could be gone. With Russell Martin's struggles this year it should be a priority to find a player who can spell him more often than the Dodgers current backup catchers can and potentially replace him if he doesn't rebound eventually as his salary is escalating. At the corners the Dodgers don't have a lot of firepower and they could use a power bat there in the next few years. Other than that, they should be relatively set for the near future.
Big Leaguers on the market
Barring a trade for Roy Halladay or a similiar player, the only major leaguers on the market are the youngsters who are still trying to earn their place on the team. Even if such a trade were to occur, the Dodgers would have a tough (read: near impossible) time parting with guys like Clayton Kershaw and Matt Kemp who have provided huge boosts to the team this year. Blake Dewitt and James McDonald, youngsters who have been promoted a few times this year, could find their way into deals for a mid-level starting pitcher. Others like Scott Elbert and Xavier Paul have more muddled futures with the team and may be in trades for smaller upgrades.
Minor league strength
The Dodgers have two areas of strength in their farm system, middle infield and right-handed pitching. Excluding the aforementioned James McDonald and Scott Elbert, the Dodgers recent high draft picks have produced right-handed pitchers Josh Lindblom, Ethan Martin, and Chris Withrow. Withrow and Martin are years away from the majors but Lindblom could help out the bullpen this year if neccesary. As far as middle infielders the Dodgers have Blake Dewitt, Chin-Lung Hu, and the currently injured Ivan Dejesus all at Triple-A with the potential to help out major league teams. Hu's future is in jeopardy because of his abysmal hitting this year (.624 OPS), but both Dewitt and Dejesus have above-average starter potential. At the lower levels Devaris Gordon (son of Tom Gordon) has is toolsy but raw but could turn into a good player down the road.
Take on short-term money to win?
This shouldn't be a problem as the Dodgers play in the second biggest market in the country. However, last year the Dodgers had to add additional prospects to deals because they refused to pay the salary of either Casey Blake or Manny Ramirez. Manny's suspension saves the team about $2.7 million and given the drop in team payroll from '08 to '09, the Dodgers should be able to add a reasonable contract without too much trouble.
0 recs |
43 comments
|
Comments
Love this...
…but please don’t mention Hu as a trade piece anymore. :o
Unless we are talking about getting Dannys Baez back or something.
What is Hu supposed to be?
He can’t hit at all, and we have several SS that already passed him on the depth chart.
John McDonald
has a decent major league contract based on his glove. Juan Castro cut out a nice career simply based on his glove. Hell, Marco Scutaro was what until this year.
Right now Hu is Juan Castro and should have little to zero trading chip worth.
by meercatjohn on Jul 17, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions
He should be a better fielder at least.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 17, 2009 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Ha Ha - Juan Castro leading RHH in baseball with 50 at bats
http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting/_/hand/right/type/expanded/minpa/50
Billion to one odds on that puppy on July 17th.
I was skeptical...
…of that one-year fluke increase in everything, but I didn’t expect him to crater like this.
Ugh. Wtf.
Thoughts on a Sherrill deal?
What do the Orioles want? Bullpen help, I would guess.
Garate and Schlichting? Leach? Or would they really start at Lindblom and work down the list?
Or what about the cheaper Jason Frasor?
What would he cost?
Presumably quite a bit less than Sherrill or the Jays’ Downs.
A lot less then Jason Werth
In retrospect the greatest deal Depo made except we only got one productive year but he knew what he was doing when he made the deal. If he doesn’t break his wrist, who knows how the last five years turns out. That little break changed many a career.
by meercatjohn on Jul 17, 2009 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions
It is easy for me to say deal Leach and Schlichting for him
but then I wonder if Leach isn’t already just as good and it is not like Sherrill have ever been involved in meaningful games himself.
by meercatjohn on Jul 17, 2009 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions
I liked my new partner's suggestion...
…of Garate/Schlichting.
I’m not convinced Leach won’t be than Sherrill soon enough.
Though the years of team control for Sherrill entices me. :o
Agreed
I don’t think Sherrill is really the right guy to get.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 17, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Elbert
I really hope they don’t trade him, or at the very least don’t trade him for someone middling. He’s impressed me and will only get better. I think it’s only his inexperience that keeps him from, well, keeping them from making a trade for a reliever. He could very well make a great starter, looked good doing that in the minors this year. But right now he seems like he can be a very good reliever. if it’s for a Halladay-like trade, I can live with that. But don’twant him just tossed away. I don’t think he will be, I think White and Co. are pretty high on him.
I wonder how Elbert scored on White’s psych test. :)
by Eric Stephen on Jul 17, 2009 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Take on short term money to win
However, last year the Dodgers had to add additional prospects to deals because they refused to pay the salary of either Casey Blake or Manny Ramirez.
Has this ever been confirmed? I know there were plenty of rumors to that extent, but has anybody ever asked Colletti or otherwise obtained confirmation of this? Is it possible that Santana was included in the Cleveland deal because Cleveland wanted Santana? I can’t remember if the selling Santana thing was ever proven.
Colletti nor McCourt haven’t commented, but I don’t think they ever will, either.
I still don’t think it was as simple as “Santana for $2 million,” but it was definitely the case of the Dodgers providing a higher prospect return for Cleveland so they didn’t have to take on salary.
by Eric Stephen on Jul 17, 2009 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions
I suppose you’re right. Why would Colletti or McCourt comment? I was wondering if perhaps any news out of Cleveland would have given us some sort of confirmation— as the Cleveland front office would have been less guarded on the matter.
I think one problem was simply that most people who have the means to ask Colleti that question wouldn’t have. Many beat writers (not all) view prospects in the aggregate and wouldn’t have felt the need to challenge the inclusion of Santana in that deal. I really felt it was the blogs that were the most indignant about the trade, and of course last year at this time blogs had no platform to ask Colleti his opinion on the deal. In any event, the issue is over now, but sometimes my memory gets foggy and I confuse whether or not these things were well known truths or just assumed.
by Michael White on Jul 17, 2009 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions
Simply assumptions
but even if they were assumptions, the front office at this moment looks like they misunderstood the skills set of Carlos Santana or he never would have been included in the deal, salary relief or no. They must have decided he was either not going to be able to stay a catcher or that if he was a catcher the skill set he was showing in the Cal league would not sustain itself against higher level pitching. So far they have been proven wrong as he just keeps moving up the prospect list to number 7 on the mid-season BA list as we stand today. Number 7 is pretty fucking high and every time I hear a new platitude coming from Keith Law my stomach turns.
I mean come on, how funny is it that he is now considered the better prospect then Matt LaPorta who was traded for CC Sabathia. Pretty damn funny if you are a Cleveland fan. Maybe the only good news they have had this year.
by meercatjohn on Jul 17, 2009 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions
No one who was part of the deal will ever answer that question, you have to look at the details and come to your own conclusions
The conclusion that BA, BP, and any number of other analysts have to come to was that we traded Carlos Santana for Casey Blake and salary relief. I asked BA this spring if any team had ever traded their top position prospect for a player the caliber of Casey Blake. They defended Blake but did note that no, they could find no historical deals that matched up. Without the salary relief Carlos Santana is still a Dodger.
It is very doubtful that Santana could have been a deal breaker if he was not involved. The Indians need and needed young pitching much more then they needed a young catcher with Martinez and Shoppach blocking the way. I had no problem with the Dodgers trading for Casey Blake other then the price of the deal. Frank McCourt in his cheapness screwed the pooch. Not only in trading Santana last summer but in trading a very valuable trading chip that could have been the centerpiece for a deal to strengthen the team.
Pretty funny quote by Sky Kalkman over at Beyond the Boxscore:
Sky’s Tip of the Day: If you’re a major league baseball general manager and anyone from the Blue Jays front office calls you up and even mentions the name Vernon Wells, immediately hang up, unplug your phone, announce a code Dunn over the PA, and organize the entire building’s retreat into the sub-basement biodome where you won’t come out until after 2014. (Don’t forget the Twinkies.)
I want a strong RH hitting right fielder
to platoon with Andre. Andre has displayed throughout his career and even more so this year that he just doesn’t have what it takes to man RF against LHP unless your happy with a .715 career OPS against LHP.
Shockingly they are hard to find. The only one who I can find that meets my criteria is Gabe Kapler .
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?n1=kaplega01&year=Career&t=b
Iwamura is coming back soon for the Rays after they thought he was out for the year. This leaves Ben Zobrist having to move back to the outfield and maybe make Kaplar expendable. The Rays have young pitching up the wazoo, but not so much in the bullpen. They have good young outfield prospects in Joyce and Jenning. Brignac and Beckham for the infield. Don’t think we match up, but I’d like Kaplar on my team.
For Snorts and Giggles
From Tom Verducci
2. The Dodgers may be considered a longshot to get Roy Halladay from Toronto because they have made left-hander Clayton Kershaw untouchable. Smart. But Los Angeles still thinks it has a decent fit with Toronto even if the prospects the Blue Jays like, including third baseman Josh Bell, aren’t exactly going to be big leaguers immediately. The Dodgers want a starting pitcher who would be certain to start one of the first three games of a playoff series. So, no, that does not mean Jarrod Washburn. It’s either Halladay, Cliff Lee or nothing. The Dodgers would still like another arm for their bullpen, such as Arizona’s Chad Qualls or Baltimore’s George Sherrill.
Jon Heyman Twitter:
#dodgers are looking at relief first. but they’ll aim high on starters. rotation wish list: 1) halladay, 2) cliff lee.
So
I like this part of the quote
The Dodgers want a starting pitcher who would be certain to start one of the first three games of a playoff series. So, no, that does not mean Jarrod Washburn. It’s either Halladay, Cliff Lee or nothing.
I think that is what we have been saying on True Blue for weeks. First time I can ever recall Josh Bell being discussed as someone a team may be interested in.
by meercatjohn on Jul 17, 2009 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions
I liked Verducci's
post more than Heyman’s because it seemed more trustworthy and logical.
Who would we give up Josh Bell for? Don’t know how people feel about him but worry about losing another Santana. For Halladay, yes. For Chad Qualls, no.
The key quote might have been:
But Los Angeles still thinks it has a decent fit with Toronto even if the prospects the Blue Jays like, including third baseman Josh Bell, aren’t exactly going to be big leaguers immediately.
If Toronto is actually interested in our prospects who are not going to be hitting the bigs for a while then you’d have to think Dee Gordon is a name that is coming up in that conversation.
by meercatjohn on Jul 17, 2009 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions
True
Although he isn’t as important as the other guys, he hasn’t really been successful this year.
by Brendan Scolari on Jul 17, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Brad Penny?
Brad Penny is available. Back of rotation, we probably wouldn’t have to give up much, and no long-term contract commitment.
(And no, I’m not serious.)
Fun with Twitter
Stupid Jay Mohr
Doug Mientkiwicz discussing trade ideas for the team he currently plays well doesn’t really sit right with me.
by Michael White on Jul 17, 2009 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I laughed at your failed westerns, BTW…I’ve been struggling to come up with one.
by Eric Stephen on Jul 17, 2009 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh there have been some great ones
but the new #failedhospicenames one is especially killing me. (As it were.) And I can’t come up with anything better than the ones they have so far. Oh man, tasteless but hilarious.
by underdog on Jul 17, 2009 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
My favorite one so far
courtesy of Michael Schur (aka Ken Tremendous):
The Assassination of Jesse’s Girl by the Coward Who Wrote the Song ’Jesse’s Girl’
by Eric Stephen on Jul 17, 2009 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh Jay Mohr
“The Dodgers HAVE to get Roy Halladay” tweets Jay.
I’d write back “Why do they HAVE to — they have the best record in baseball and their starters have been mostly excellent.” But he wouldn’t even see it probably.
Berkman might be out tonight
From Alyson Footer on Twitter:
By the way, Puma wasn’t walking well after last night’s game…look for him to miss some time

by 

























