Trade Discussion: Matt Kemp
A lot of us are really bored over at Athletics Nation. There's been a lot of discussion on how the A's might improve themselves during the offseason. Back in August, one of our Front Page writers posted a story that clearly showed what a horrific pile of suck the A's had in RF. LF wasn't that much better but at least we were getting good defense from there. So, as A's fans, we've all been marginally obsessed with upgrading the corner OF positions. It just so happens that arguably the two best FA position players on the upcoming market are corner outfielders... unfortunately it's unlikely the A's will be willing to pay the huge sums of cash needed to land one of Crawford or Werth.
Thus trade scenarios are born.
It's no secret that things got strained between the Dodgers and Matt Kemp during the season. You know the story, probably better than I do, but the key thing from our side of the fence was Kemp's agent suggesting that a trade might be the best things for both parties. So earlier today one of the more responsible posters on AN suggested a possible deal that would send SP Vince Mazzaro and C Josh Donaldson to the Dodgers for Matt Kemp. Let me provide you with a quick run down on Donaldson: Fairly athletic, converted from 3B to C in college. The A's have had him play both corner IF positions in spot duty down in AAA just this year. He's shown good pop, he's shown good plate discipline... just not necessarily at the same time. Very strong throwing arm, he can control the running game. He's also uber-aggressive with his arm and has made a lot of throwing errors in the minors when attempting pick-off throws. he's athletic but tends to struggle behind the plate. He's allowed more than his fair share of Passed Balls during his run in the minors. Basically he's got the tools to be a very good Catcher but he hasn't put it all together. AN is fairly well split over if he pulls it all together or not.
Anyways... I'm not here to pimp Josh Donaldson. I'm here to ask for your help and provide a pro-Dodger viewpoint to the discussion we're having at AN. The only guideline I'm going to set is for you to presume that the word has come from on high that Matt Kemp is going to get traded this offseason. (I'm going to create a poll that includes the option to vote for Matt Kemp staying in LA. I would love to see how many Dodger fans expect to see Kemp in LA next season... I just don't want this thread to disintegrate into an argument over how a Kemp trade is never going to happen.) The A's are in a unique position (for them) in which they have a lot of money coming off the books and don't need to worry about having enough cash to pay for salaries in 2011. They (probably) won't be asking for salary relief as part of any Kemp deal, so please base any proposals on that factor.
'Cause I'm not sure a Mazzaro/Donaldson package actually addresses the Dodgers' needs. (Well, Mazzaro for the rotation makes some sense.) I don't know if they have an internal replacement to play CF in 2011 if Kemp goes elsewhere. I realize that if the Dodgers shop Kemp they'll get multiple suitors... although I'm not sure how many of those teams would want him for CF. I want to hear some True Blue bias on these matters. I want to hear what you would expect in return if you heard that Kemp was heading to Oakland.
Thanks for your time and here's a little something that I hope let's you leave with a smile. Muppets rule!
EDIT: Seems I missed a factor. There seems to be a "Colletti is an idiot" vibe going on. So please continue telling me where you see the Dodgers' problem areas are... but if you feel there is precedent for Colletti to move in a certain direction in this matter than please include which way he'd lean in this situation.
78 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hello Grover
Most of us Dodger fans expect Kemp to be in Dodger Blue next year. My own personal feelings are, with the new coaching staff, and the fact that just about everyone on the Dodgers had a down year, the players are kinda getting a mulligan. Colletti said he would be more open to trading the core, but he won’t be shopping them. That being said, I don’t believe your proposal would be enough for Kemp, but that is only my opinion. Hope that helped.
"Heroes get remembered, but Legends never die."
by Tommy Blackjack on Oct 21, 2010 3:45 PM PDT reply actions
I realize there's a strong sentiment around here to keep Kemp
Cool. I’m not here to push the idea that the Dodgers need to trade Kemp.
But I am curious to know what the Dodgers would want/need to make that transaction happen. Would it require a blatant overpay to make any sort of deal happen or are there areas the team would want to address if they were to make a deal? Colletti is willing to listen… what is he going to need to hear? I think the price is going to be too much, but I’ve got nothing to back that hunch up with.
Thanks for the reply.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Agreed
I’d look closer to Missouri if you’re looking to find an outfielder on the trade block. If I’m the Dodgers, I keep Kemp. However, if I were to open negotiations with the A’s involving Kemp, I start every and all discussions with Trevor Cahill. Here’s my reasoning:
- Oakland has a crop of good, young starting pitchers, the Dodgers still have two rotation holes to fill.
- Kemp had a down year, yes. But he also put up a 5.8 WAR season last year at age 25.
- Kemp has another year of team control. I realize Cahill has more.
- The difference between the 6th best catcher in baseball and the 30th is rather slim. Therefore, getting a catcher back who isn’t a difference maker really isn’t providing any help. I’d just assume use AJ Ellis and Rod Barajas and call it a season.
- position players are worth inherently more than pitchers, even good, young, starting pitchers. Cahill put up a very good season and was still worth about 1.5 WAR less than Kemp was last season.
- A straight trade would benefit both teams. We’d have a much improved rotation, while the A’s would clearly upgrade their defense and offense.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
I wouldnt even consider Cahill for Kemp. Cahill’s value last year was completely tied to his ridiculous BABIP that is completely unsustainable. He’s a good pitcher that gets grounders but doesnt k anybody. Kemp had a great season 2 yeas ago and i’m not trading him for a guy that profiles as a #3/4 starter.
by UCLADodger32 on Oct 21, 2010 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I realize I said ‘staright trade’ afterwards. At the top is what I meant. I said I would start any and all discussions with Cahill. I also would love to see Jack Cust platoon in LF with Jonny Gomes, but whatever.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
Well... I just mistimed my previous reply
Gomes is likely to stay in Cincy.
But I’d have little issue with including Cust IF the Dodgers included an enticing 2nd piece.
The monster at the end of this blog.
of course not. Because the A’s just DFA’d him last year. Nothing says they won’t do it again.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
A Cust DFA seems less likely this time around
He had a bounce back year (1.0 – 2.4 WAR in a partial 2010). He’s only looking at $4 million via arbitration.
The monster at the end of this blog.
So a straight Cahill/Kemp swap?
I’m not sure that works on my end. I think the A’s would need a little something on the back end to take away a little of the long term sting of losing Cahill. Oakland is likely to buy out Cahill’s arbitration years and tack on a team option to cover his first year of FA. That’s (probably) 3 extra years of Cahill.
The monster at the end of this blog.
See and I was thinking along the lines of “No way do I trade my gold glove/silver slugger CF for a guy who has been in the league for one year”.
I don’t think there is any sting of losing a player when you have guys to step in and fill a void. Plus, you get to see Rhianna at the ballpark.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
Kemp won the Gold Glove this year?
I really should pay more attention during the post-season.
And Cahill’s got 2 years in Oakland. He’s sort of a fixture now.
The monster at the end of this blog.
his first year was 10 starts.
Kemp had a terrible season this year. Understood by all of us here. But his trade value is still roughly based on his previous season. At least it would be if the Dodgers are going to be talked into trading him.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
I think that’s right. Kemp’s stock has fallen, but not to the point that anybody feels he must be traded.
That said, when he gets traded at the deadline for somebody useless, you can feel free to point out this thread.
Now with 33% more Kavula
by Humma Kavula on Oct 21, 2010 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not sure what source you're using
Cahill has 62 big league starts.
The monster at the end of this blog.
sorry I looked at it funny and added his 10 wins in 2009 to his 32 starts in 2010.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
Ned Colleti is going to want to see more veteran relievers to get that deal done
"Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something." -Robert Heinlein
http://www.accessorizeyourvehicle.com/
Colletti has a fetish for trading starters for decaying, limited use arms?
Might I interest you in a limited edition Ziegler?
The monster at the end of this blog.
We’ll trade you James McDonald, Andrew Lambo, Josh Bell and Steve Johnson for George Sherrill and OCtavio Dotel!
Oh, wait…crap.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
I might be interested in the baseballs...
If they were signed by Rhianna.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I don't think Kemp is going anywhere
head case or not. We need a corner outfielder ourselves, I don’t think we are giving up our ex-gold glove CFer for a minor league catcher and #4/#5 starter. James Loney on the other hand.
Loney isn’t worth six dozen anything. Dollars, baseballs, bedbugs.
Now with 33% more Kavula
by Humma Kavula on Oct 21, 2010 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions
If the Dodgers trade Kemp, who plays CF in 2011?
So much depends on what happens in 2011. If Kemp has another down year AND Robinson continues to develop, then I think a trade becomes more likely NEXT offseason. Until then, trading Kemp just opens another hole that might be an even more difficult hole to fill.
Now with 33% more Kavula
So no internal option to replace Kemp in CF.
Since the FA market looks decidedly thin on CF types, it’s safe to assume that Kemp’s replacement would have to come via trade. Possibly (probably) even the deal that sent him elsewhere.
Thanks.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I should say that we believe that every player (except Kershaw) is available, but not in a deal that, in its nature, waves the white flag on 2011. A trade of Kemp would have to result in major league players who are not great, but not terrible, and can contribute to the Dodgers’ thoroughly mediocre campaign next year as they shuffle toward Astro oblivion.
Now with 33% more Kavula
by Humma Kavula on Oct 21, 2010 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions
I see you're an optimist!
Although I’m compelled to ask… do you thusly declare Mazzaro to be “terrible”?
The monster at the end of this blog.
No. But I also think he doesn’t fit the criteria: his value is in that he is young and may develop into something more. That is not what the Dodgers would be looking for.
Now with 33% more Kavula
by Humma Kavula on Oct 21, 2010 4:56 PM PDT up reply actions
So you'd rather have a Dallas Braden than deal with development issues?
The monster at the end of this blog.
It’s not what I’d rather have. It’s what I believe the Dodgers would be looking for.
Colletti, you could shine that bauble that is Braden’s perfect game, not to mention his gritty attitude in telling A-Rod to shove it, and yeah, that’s what they’d want.
Me, I would blow up the team, lose 200 games over the next two years, but restock the farm and shoot for a competitive team in a few years. But you can’t listen to me. I might be wrong. Not to mention after the Dodgers lost 200 games over the next two years, I’d be fired. I just hate teams that win 83 games year after year, not competing but not rebuilding either.
Now with 33% more Kavula
by Humma Kavula on Oct 21, 2010 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Post edited to reflect the disconnect betwixt the GM and fan snetiment
The monster at the end of this blog.
And after you restock the farm system, the next GM and Owner would take credit for playoff success as the core you built succeeds at the major league level.
Sounds familiar.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
So... you've told me what you'd like in a Kemp deal
What do you think Colletti would do differently?
The monster at the end of this blog.
I lend my knowledge of Ned Colletti's thinking patterns to Jack Nicholson
I think of a good GM, and I take away reason and accountability.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
Though I would be shocked if Kemp were traded, I know you are asking IF.
Not sure if you are asking what I think the Dodgers would do, or what I would do if I was the GM…
Colletti would want Braden. Upon acquiring him he would say something like “He’s the type of pitcher you want on your team. He get’s after it, is no nonsense, will definitely help us win ballgames”
If I am the GM, and am going to trade a talent as rare as Matt Kemp to a team like the A’s who have a great need for a power hitting OF, I am going to ask for Gio Gonzalez and one of Oaklands middle infield prospects. I dont know enough about them to say who, I just know that there are a lot of promising 2B/SS types.
The closest thing to an internal option L.A has is Trayvon Robinson but he’s probably not ready to be a full time major league starter.
by Lex in Brooklyn on Oct 21, 2010 5:11 PM PDT reply actions
OK... I didn't factor on Colletti being an idiot
What do you think he’d want in return?
The monster at the end of this blog.
mmmm
does oakland has a good reliever 35+ ??
Hey Grover
I’m sure you have noticed this by now, but most of this community feels that Colletti is a moron. He is a bigger moron when it comes to trades. I’m sure you remember the Casey Blake and George Sherrill deals…
With you’re question, there is no way I see the Dodgers trading Kemp unless the team GREATLY overpays. Simple reason. He is a young, homegrown, core guy. He was loved by fans. Simply loved. He was considered, universally, the best CF in baseball just last season. Even if one of our top prospects(Trayvon Robinson) comes up and steals CF from him, he would then become one of the best RFs in the game, assuming a bounce back.
The Dodgers seem to trade young guys and watch them develop elsewhere. Prime examples are Mike Piazza and Pedro Martinez, and 2/3s of the Philly OF, Jason Werth and Victorino, with a DFA and Rule 5 pick respectively, and the inability of signing Chase Utley in the draft. Honestly, I hope these mistakes are the reasons that Russell Martin and Matt Kemp aren’t being dealt/DFA’d this year, and Billingsley wasn’t last year. We have seen so many players be thrown out and become stars. Hopefully, the Dodgers have learned from this and keep their young stars.
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Oct 21, 2010 8:51 PM PDT reply actions
Lakers and Dodgers I get... how the Hell did the Yankees get in the mix?!?!
OK… what’s you’re idea of the overpay? What areas do you see the moron focusing on in return for parting with Kemp?
The monster at the end of this blog.
Born and raised in NY
and then moved out to LA and couldnt see the Yankees, so I became a Dodgers, and therefore, Yankees fan.
If I was Colletti and I was told I have to trade Kemp, I have to get a 3B of the future and at least one top pitching prospect. Depending on the 3B, it could be one or even two top pitching prospects. The team would have to give a lot for Kemp…
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Oct 23, 2010 1:23 AM PDT up reply actions
I came a little late to the discussion
But I wanted to thank grover and everyone involved in this thread for keeping everything civil. There were lots of good questions and answers here, for the most part without an agenda.
I appreciated reading this very much.
Thanks.
Nice thread
the key point as someone else pointed out is that the Dodgers are short on outfielders themselves for the coming season. Any trade of Kemp would certainly require an outfielder coming back. We don’t match up well with the A’s in this area as I don’t consider Cust an outfielder.
They are right though, that of all the pitcher on the A’s Dallas Braden would be the man Ned would target. And all your relief pitchers, though the FA world is littered with decent relief options so I think Ned goes the FA route to get his relief pitcher fix on.
I do have a question for the A’s fan. Is Coco Crisp (10:$4.75M, 11:$5.75M club option ($0.5M buyout)) going to be an A next year since you don’t seem to have alot of outfielder options? Because if you decline his option I could easily see Ned going after Coco. And what about Mark Ellis (09:$5M, 10:$5.5M, 11:$6M club option ($0.5M buyout)) are you expected to exercise the buyout or pay Mark $6 Million? Both of those pieces are the kind of players Ned loves. And to honest I’d rather see Ellis at 2nd then Theriot even if it cost a little more. The Dodger defense needs to improve.
Most fans here would expect Kemp to be part of a larger package not a package for an unproven slight ceiling young pitcher, and backup catcher. Given the price of Kemp and his production in 2010 that might be unrealistic. We all know a big part of Kemp’s value was his higher then normal BABIP, and defense in center. When the BABIP cratered his numbers cratered, and for whatever reason his defense with it. How much value does he have right now? I have no idea but like others I do hope it is more then a 4th/5th starter and backup catcher. Still young and just a year removed from his golden year, I think Ned has to gamble that he gets closer to that level because he really has no choice because any trade of Kemp right now would make the team worse not better.
Yeah, we’d be looking to trade Kemp as part of a trade-up, not as someone to sell-low on. Getting rid of someone for peanuts because he had a down year and only hit a career high number of home runs is kind of asinine.
I think you’re right. We just don’t match up well.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
Thanks
Long story really short… would Ned trade Kemp for Matt Garza straight up?
The monster at the end of this blog.
Yes, but the Rays aren’t picking up all of Kemp’s salary, so I’d have less money, and now two outfield spots to fill.
I don't always walk, but when I do, it's into Mordor.
Just something that came up in a different conversation...
Merely curious if a straight up swap, salary and everything, would be something you’re accused idiot of a GM would do.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I'm sorry... I totally blew off your questions
Word is both Crisp and Ellis will have their options picked-up.
To the surprise of none… Eric Chavez will not be so fortunate.
As for needing an OFer in return… Rajai Davis strikes me as the kind of guy Colletti might love.
The monster at the end of this blog.
Yeah, we’d be looking to trade Kemp as part of a trade-up, not as someone to sell-low on.
And that, as Phil points out, is unrealistic. Kemp isn’t going anywhere.
Now with 33% more Kavula
I really dont think there are many trade up
OFs that could realistically be traded for for Kemp. Like I said, Kemp was considered the top CF just last season. There arent many guys that are better than Kemp, if he goes back to 09 ways
by lakersdodgersyankees4life on Oct 23, 2010 1:29 AM PDT up reply actions
I know the OP is trying to be respectful,
so I respectfully say “this trade proposal sucks”.
Mazzaro is a 4th/5th starter at best as someone said and while his minor league numbers are decent, they don’t make me believe he will ever become an ace-type pitcher.
Matt Kemp had one bad year, but this guy still is an elite talent and has huge potential that he flashed a lot of in 2009. And despite the down 2010, he still lead the team in homers and RBIs.
The Dodgers would be stupid to trade Kemp now while his value was low (unless they got a significant package in return) and not even Colletti is THAT stupid.
"F it, let's pitch." - Ervin Santana
by Chzburger Jones on Oct 22, 2010 6:49 PM PDT reply actions
Thanks for the reply
And for the record, I tend to agree with you on the original trade proposal.
But at least there’s 1 person around here who likes it!!!
The monster at the end of this blog.
Not even Colletti is that stupid
You wanna bet?
by preacher roe on Oct 23, 2010 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions
If we are going to trade Kemp, even though his stock has fallen, I’d shoot for the moon.
My eye would be set on Brett Anderson. Yes, I’m sure you just laughed your ass off just now, but the idea of trading Kemp to any of us is just as unlikely.
My offer would be Brett Anderson and Corey Brown for Matt Kemp, Chris Withrow, and Aaron Miller/Allen Webster.
I’m not sure what your thoughts are on Corey Brown, because he had a very nice year in what I believe was your AA team, but then played over a month in AAA and was absolutely destroyed by pitching. I think that bad month in AAA really hurt him from being one of your top prospects, but that’s just based off of a quick observation. But If we’re going to trade someone who’s already had close to a 6 WAR season just 1 year ago, I’m going to want back someone who is close to as good, and that would have to be Anderson.
"If we hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"
Well... I didn't laugh.
I think the plan you propose is a little too much to wade into but I appreciate the reply.
The monster at the end of this blog.
I realize it's not an attractive trade in A's fans eyes
But 2010 or not I still believe Kemp’s got a lot of value. If he slides over to RF, I have no doubt his defensive numbers go back up, and even though his offense was down this year, it was still above average, if only by a little bit. His homeruns are going up, and if he can get his OBP back up to the .340s and get his slugging up to about .500, which is very doable I think, he will still be a great player to have.
To get something you have to give something, and your first proposal was kind of awful in terms of getting anything with any actual value back. Again though, I’m sure mine looks bad as well, it’s just how fans making trade proposals are.
"If we hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"
by Ivdown on Oct 24, 2010 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
He's the kind of player every team wants
He’s a gold glove centerfielder with power, speed, average. However, I believe the Dodgers are going to try to resign him once he hits free agency because he has too many good qualities for a baseball player.
So far Coletti..
Has done a good job of kepping the core of the Dodgers together. I dont want to sound like a jerk, but this trade proposal is awful. If this trade went down, Id jump, head first, off the think blue sign. Matts going to go balistic for Mattingly next year, I gurantee it. Chili Davis will get the best out of him. I hear that kemp really likes Pentland too, and everyone on the team has praise for Donnie. I also read somewhere that Coletti and Kemp have kissed and made up since the “radio interview”, where Coletti called Kemp out. My hunch, is that Matt Kemp wears Dodger blue for a LONG time. That number 27 will hang in the outfield someday. I think that sometimes, you have to take a step back, before you can move foward, and I think thats just what Kemp has done. Pitching wasnt the problem for the dodgers last year, it was the offense. Kemp is arguably our best offensive guy, even in an off year. It just seems stupid to trade away one of the best pieces of an offense that struggled. It also leaves you with Ethier as our only starting OFer. And with the emergence of Chad Billingsley and Clayton Kershaw, and ted Lilly coming back, trading Kemp for a FOTR guy dosent seem to make much sense. Oakland dosent have any proven offensive threats, so there just simply isnt a match.
You really swung for the fences on this one
That number 27 will hang in the outfield someday
by Michael White on Oct 26, 2010 7:54 AM PDT up reply actions
why the hell would anyone do that trade on either side
One is sick on defense and can’t really hit, the other has shown the potential to be very good offensively with lots of power and is somewhere between a terrible fielder and an average fielder.
"If we hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"

by 



















