Chad Moriyama Dodgers, Sabermetrics, Scouting
The Dodgers being in on Ryan Dempster has been beaten to death already, but competition is apparently heating up.
The Dodgers and Tigers are among the most serious suitors for Cubs right-hander Ryan Dempster, Morosi reports. Ten teams have reportedly shown interest in Dempster.
That deal that was on the table? Price has probably gone up a bit if the interest from other teams is serious, and maybe it has gone into unrealistic territory at this point.
Either that or this is just bullshit to get the Dodgers and Tigers to give up more.
—–
So … the Dodgers have interest in Shane Victorino.
One executive predicts Shane Victorino will be the first big-name player traded. The Dodgers have some interest in Victorino, and the Rangers, Tigers, Pirates, Marlins and Giants have all scouted him recently.
Why though? He plays center and Matt Kemp is already back. If they move Victorino to left, then he loses a lot of his value. That is especially true in 2012 since he is hitting .251/.316/.389/.705. Granted, his BABIP stands at .265, so some of that is luck-related, but his pop is way down. Even if he regresses to his norms, he projects at .267/.334/.434/.769 the rest of the way.
Not the impact bat the Dodgers need in left. Plus, he’s a douche.
—–
A more interesting option on the Phillies? Jimmy Rollins.
A baseball executive recently suggested that Jimmy Rollins’ contract would be a deterrent if the Phillies were to move him, but they may have one suitor. Danny Knobler of CBS Sports writes that the Dodgers are looking to upgrade at shortstop, and have some interest in Rollins.
The biggest red flag with Rollins is, of course, the aforementioned three-year contract he signed this offseason. The Phillies guaranteed Rollins $33MM through his age-35 season, and the contract also contains a vesting option for a fourth year at another $11MM. That option is said to be easily attainable for Rollins, and is contingent on plate appearances. As Knobler points out on Twitter, Rollins also has 10-and-5 rights, which give him the ability to veto any potential trade.
To be honest, I don’t even get why he would be available. What would the Phillies do at shortstop? That’s not a team built to rebuild and they aren’t going to find a superior replacement.
Regardless, if he does become available, the Dodgers are right to be interested. In 2012 he’s hitting .262/.317/.421/.739 with a .322 wOBA, which is unimpressive until you consider how terrible MLB shortstops are (average SS wOBA is .297). Factor in defense and baserunning and he’s on pace for a 3-4 WAR season, well worth the $11 million.
What about after that though, right? Well, he’ll probably regress a bit, especially as injury becomes a concern. I’m not saying there aren’t red flags, but the better question is what other options would be available? I looked at the 2013 and 2014 free agents, but couldn’t find a single one that I’d rather have, even considering the price tag.
Best of all, I can’t think of a reason the Phillies would move him if not in a salary dump for whatever reason, so the cost in prospects shouldn’t be significant.
=====
Here’s an unpopular thought: Maybe the Dodgers shouldn’t buy at the trading deadline.
It’s quite the flawed team, so even if they do manage to get into the playoffs, barring a miracle run (it’s the playoffs after all), they would likely run into trouble early.
I suggest this change in 2012 philosophy primarily because if the Dodgers continue to falter, and they are like 3-5 games back of the division at the end of the month, it’s not worth it for them to be giving up any of their future to improve this season.
The way the NL West is going, the second place team isn’t going to be in wild card contention anyway, so if the team does in fact stand pat or make only minor moves, maybe it has less to do with a lack of will to win and more to do with just making sense.
I’m with you 100% on that last point. It’s already well known that the Dodgers’ farm system is thin at the present time. Just as with the Puig move, it’s good to see the new ownership wanting to make a splash but let’s not shoot ourselves in the foot just so ownership can benefit from a positive PR buzz in the short term.
Just have to hope Yasiel Puig works out.
-_-
Obviously we all want Puig to work out but he is actually the exact type of gamble the rich new ownership can afford to take. After all, despite the tens of millions that were lavished on him, the Dodgers (or rather their owners) won’t lose anything but cash if he doesn’t work out.
A trade for yet another shitty vet because Ned Colletti has a hard on for dudes with grit which costs the team prospects is something that would hurt the team in the long run.
Assuming they have unlimited finances, sure. I doubt that though.
It’s likely 50 million that could have been spent in an off-season move or an extension (Clayton Kershaw? Please?!).
Money is certainly fungible but the annual breakdown of the Puig deal is what? $7MM/annum? If that’s the make or break number for the new ownership then yes, we would seriously have a problem.
And you’re right, in the absolute terms we definitely don’t want to see ownership throw away their money because it isn’t a limitless bucket. My point was that between a pile of cash and a smaller pile of cash with prospects, it’s much more preferable to lose the pile of cash.
$7 million is never a big deal for a franchise, but $7 million over 250 years would be.
Point being, if Capuano was $7 million more a year, this performance would be expected, not surprising.
Difference between offering Hamels $18 million or $25 million annually.
I get your point, but until scouts see him in action and say he actually is a quality prospect, I’m going to remain skeptical about throwing that type of money at him.
We seemed to have gotten a bit lost in the weeds. I share your caution about Puig but wanted to contrast that kind of move vs. a more traditional trade.
I’ll never know how I feel about it until I get a good sense of what their budget actually is.
He won’t.
of course they shouldn’t buy. play Jerry Sands the rest of the season, see what you have there. get rid of anyone you can dump on another team, take back any prospects no matter how average they might be.
then go hard on David Wright (if he’s available after next season or can be had in a trade this offseason) and Cole Hamels.
Like other players the team has given up on, I don’t think they consider Jerry Sands an option anymore.
WTF? Can anybody explain how this sort of close-mindedness happen? Or is this just how things go across the league?
Think it happens everywhere. Teams sour on a prospect and they need a change of scenery.
Jerry Sands isn’t even hitting at AAA though, so they won’t bring him up.
Dodgers need to make at least one move…Fire Ned Colletti Now! Then all future crises will be averted…well that is assuming they get a competent GM who can work out good deals.
Not gonna happen. If they don’t make the playoffs this year, the excuse about the finances will come up and he’ll be extended.
I know he’s not going to get fired right now (that’s just me pipe dreaming), but what is leading you to believe that he will actually be extended? Even if there is an excuse about finances, what has Ned done to secure his job that well to be guaranteed an extension? I can’t imagine that there’s a lack of a better option out there.
Stan Kasten alluding to it.
Kasten is all over the place proclaiming that the people who work for the Dodgers should be thought of working there forever. Until they aren’t.
Hopefully he’s keeping his cards close to the chest but seriously contemplating throwing a couple dagger in Colletti’s back.
While I understand he can’t come out and proclaim Colletti a lame duck and what not, he is going out of his way to be complimentary to him, so I just don’t see him getting canned.
Ugh, I know you’re probably right but dammit, what are we without dreams!!
I don’t understand it though, this is a premium situation.