>> I don't care if Cliff pitches a perfect game tonight- the Phillies gave up MINOR LEAGURES for him, whereas Bills is already a major league All-Star, who had a peculiar- and yes, extremely frustrating- second half.
The deal that brought a bargain-priced Cliff Lee to Philadelphia - along with Ben Francisco, in exchange for prospects that didn't include any of the top three in the Fillies system - was one of the most one-sided deals in baseball history, based on what was known at the time of the deal. The Indians could certainly have gotten a whole lot more in exchange than they did; from their standpoint, it really didn't make any sense, then or now. Maybe there was more to the story, but we'll probably never know why they did it.
{open up several old wounds at once via circuitous illogic:} "Too bad the Dodgers traded Carlos Santana to the Indians once before. They could've offered him to Cleveland in the ultimately-rejected Cliff Lee package!"
My dad talked about "Good AJ Burnett" and "Bad AJ Burnett" all season but I guess I've now seen both examples first hand in his two games in the WS. (Still early of course.)
The Yankees are still going to to have trouble scoring a lot of runs in this game since Girardi decided to go with a "House Money" lineup in the World Series.
Or you can think of this as the Dodgers lineup from Games 4 and 5 of the 1988 World Series with the notable addition of Alex Rodriguez.
I guess, if you twist my arm, I will admit that Teixeira is better than Stubbs.
I spent much of the day telling folks how my baseball expert friend assured me that, if you run the history, this whole "ace on short rest" thing hardly ever works out. And if by "ace" you mean AJ Burnett, it is an especially dubious proposition.
So thank you Eric Enders for making me seem smart and well-connected.
And to be fair Gardner is playing because Cabrera is injured and Damon is... not a good centerfielder. But it does smell of an "On to Game 6!" kind of game... Maybe he should have started Gaudin after all as some have suggested.
I wouldn't mind seeing Cliff Lee struggle some more, though.
>> I thought the most pivotal part of last nights game was Rivera not being afraid to go after Stairs with the three run lead..
Remember what Jim Kaat said earlier this season - "Tell me the game situation. If I'm facing Willie Mays with a three-run lead and nobody on, I'll throw the ball right over the plate." Or something to that effect.
Just checkin' in to say hi fom Sonoma wine country and let Humma know I've lifted his trade talk ban. ;)
I also saw this in the Huffington Post and thought it was kinda neat and sweet...
"I didn't really know him growing up. He was a little ahead of me, but I knew who he was, obviously," Lee said. "It's not very often two guys from the state of Arkansas make it to the big leagues, much less square off against each other in the World Series. ... That's going to be a neat deal for our state and going to be a lot of fun, and something we can talk about for the rest of our lives."
Jim Kaat never faced Willie Mays in a regular season game. They did face off in the 1966 All-Star Game. Mays got a leadoff single in the fourth inning and came around to score the tying run on an RBI single by Ron Santo.
Kaat pitched two innings in the 1966 ASG.
In his first one he faced, in order: Mays, Clemente, Aaron, McCovey, Santo, and Torre.
In the other inning, he faced Jim Lefebvre, Leo Cardenas, and Dick Allen.
Update | 7:55 p.m. Before every postseason game, the video screen at Citizens Bank Park has played a montage of regular-season highlights set to The Black Eyed Peas’ “I Gotta Feeling.” With the Phillies one loss from elimination, the song changed to Journey’s “Don’t Stop Believin’.”
Thanks, Craig, for lifting the ban. I will celebrate by suggesting that we trade James Loney for Albert Pujols straight up.
1) Loney is younger than Pujols
2) Loney is cheaper than Pujols
3) Loney is under team control longer than Pujols
4) Loney has more upside than Pujols. After all, Pujols is as good as he's gonna get. Loney could be a lot better!
So now, a rested Pedro against Andy Pettitte, who from a quick glance, has pitched once on 3 days rest between Game 6 of the 2003 ALCS and Game 2 of the 2003 World Series. In that World Series game, he went 8.2 innings (Game Score of 76) and beat the Marlins, 6-1. Pettitte and Martinez have never faced each other in post season, they had six matchups in the regular season, they each won three and lost three.
I was really disappointed to see the series extended, but really please to see ESPN's rumor mill. Seattle might being looking ot trade King Felix to get Chapman, and Manny wants to be a DH!!!!
If Manny opts out, I seriously wouldn't mind an attempted trade of JP to the Blue Jays for Wells, Doc, and 25ish million. Maybe even throw in a James Macdonald type to replace Doc in their rotation and help offset the money. The way I see it, get rid of JP's 20ish million plus the 25 from the Jays would put Wells at 5 years and 55ish million. I would pray that a change of scenary might help Wells return to form, and that Kemp could handle a move to right and Ethier to left. Plus, we'd have Doc.
If I'm understanding the previous post correctly, that means the Jays' net gain would be the opportunity to pay $45 million for 2 years of Juan Pierre, plus having James McDonald on their team instead of Roy Halladay. I'm not sure what the benefit is for them.
The benefit is ridding themselves of Wells and his 100 mil still owed. This is the team that let Rios go on waivers without taking anything in return. What I proposed was a way for the Jays to free up 55 mil over 5 years, not too dissimilar from the Rios situation.
Basically Pierre for 20 mil-2years and 25 mil spread out over 5 years for Wells' contract, and Mcdonald vs. Wells for 100 mil-5 years, and Doc-15mil over 1 year. Subtract 20 mil for Manny suposedly opting out and our payrol is about the same.
(b) assuming he does opt out, the trade is still pretty terrible for the Dodgers. The trade, as laid out by jujibee:
Pierre to Toronto
Doc, Wells & $25m (spread over 5 years) to Dodgers
Here is how much would be added to the Dodger payroll (as previously constituted assuming Manny stays) from 2010-2014, factoring in the deferred money due Manny and actual contract payouts for each player:
The Dodgers would thus pay nearly $51m over 5 years for the privilege of having Halladay for one year. And we would be saddled with a replacement level player (Wells had 1.9 total WAR over the last 3 seasons) in the OF for 5 years, his age 31-35 years.
I see your point Eric, but either way we are still going to need that 3rd outfielder when Manny's done. Assuming the alternative; Ned going out and buying a 3rd outfielder, our payroll is going to increase anyway for those years. Plus, (and I didn't do the math, just referring to your post where you included this in your additions) the deferred money to Manny is something we are stuck with and cannot be added to the payroll as that is already figured in regardless of who plays that 3rd outfield spot. I saw the whole proposal, as ludicrous as it might have sounded, that we get Wells for 5 years at ~12 Mil per year factoring in the Jays' payment and the departure of JP, and 15 mil for Doc. Subtracting Manny's contract, yeah our payroll rises a little bit next year, but then Manny is off the books and it should go down the next years. Manny is set to make 20 mil next year, JP (I think) 8.5 Mil. Wells is set to make ~20 next year including his signing bonus, and Halladay 15. If you subtract the 5 that the Jays would pay us in the trade, our payroll isn't that much effected by this deal.
I counted the difference in deferred salary due Manny based on the two scenarios. For instance, in 2010 the Dodgers either owe Manny $10m (if he stays) or roughly $3.6m (in 2009 deferred money; if he opts out). So the net Manny gain in 2010 is about $6.4m if he opts out.
Craig, which ones do you like? Lambo? Paul? Hoffman? I don't think any of them will out-produce the numbers Wells would put up in a change of scenery. I have more faith that Wells would be more worth the money than the likes of Dreifort or Schmidt. I was more thinking how we could get that elite pitcher without emptying the farm.
Eric, I was under the impression that the deferred money due Manny that we already owe him, 5 mil for the next 3 years, is what you were factoring in. If he opts out, like I suggested in this proposal (if he doesn't this trade makes no sense at all) we are only responsible for the same 5 mil over the next 3 years, which we already owe ( before factoring in the suspension).
To add Eric, if he stays, we're on the hook for the 5 mil (before factoring in the suspension) in 2010, plus the 10 mil contract. The next years are the more pressing for the deffered money as we will be paying him deferred money for 2009 and 2010 for 3 years after 2010, years in which he won't even be playing. If he opts out, we're only responsible for the deffered money for this year, which will run through 2012 regardless of who plays that OF spot next year.
I stand corrected. I just reviewed the contract. If he stays, it appears his contract rate is 5 mil plus the 5 mil deffered from 2009. Either way, the 15 mil he is owed in deferred (finally spelled it right) payments from 2009 is owed to him, if it's in 2010 0r 2013.
If Manny stays, here is his salary:
2010: $10,000,000
2011: $6,967,213 ($5m from 2009, less suspension, plus $3,333,333 from 2010)
2012: $6,967,213 ($5m from 2009, less suspension, plus $3,333,333 from 2010)
2013: $6,967,213 ($5m from 2009, less suspension, plus $3,333,333 from 2010)
If Manny opts out, here is his salary:
2010: $3,633,880 (which is $5m, less his suspension)
2011: $3,633,880
2012: $3,633,880
2010
add $15,750,000 for Halladay
add $12,500,000 for Wells (signing bonus is already incurred; Blue Jays are responsible)
subtract $10,000,000 for Pierre
subtract $6,366,120 for Manny ($10m minus $3,633,880)
subtract $5,000,000 for money from Toronto Total added: $6,883,880
2011
add $23,000,000 for Wells
subtract $8,500,000 for Pierre
subtract $3,333,333 for Manny ($6,967,213 minus $3,633,880)
subtract $5,000,000 for money from Toronto Total added: $6,166,667
2012
add $21,000,000 for Wells
subtract $3,333,333 for Manny ($6,967,213 minus $3,633,880)
subtract $5,000,000 for money from Toronto Total added: $12,666,667
2013
add $21,000,000 for Wells
subtract $6,967,213 for Manny
subtract $5,000,000 for money from Toronto Total added: $9,032,787
2014
add $21,000,000 for Wells
subtract $5,000,000 for money from Toronto Total added: $16,000,000
More Blue Jays contract details here:
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/toronto-blue-jays_05.html
Nice work Eric. After seeing the numbers and proposing the trade without the benefit of the number crunching, I'd still consider it if I were GM. I'd consider it based on this:
-Doc for 1 year (maybe that'd get us over the hump)
-Wells for 5 years (not a great deal for us if he produces the numbers he put up last year, but I feel he's due for a rebound. <- prediction more than fact! We'd get a gold glove outfielder in CF, could move Kemp to RF and Ethier to LF and have a great defensive outfield.
-although the money due that you produced for Wells is more than I'd pay, I don't think it would be near the bad contracts that the Dodgers have had recently (Ashby, Dreifort, Pierre, Schmidt)
-we wouldn't have to see Pierre put on a Dodger jersey
Your point is well taken, especially considering the large raises some of our young players are going to get if we want to keep them around, but I feel our time is coming up with this young core (closer to free agency and not having enough money to keep them all) 1 year of Halladay, with a more experienced Kershaw, and a rejuvinated Billingsley going into the playoffs with a great defensive team and a wonderful bullpen is something I might take a gamble on.
That would be fine if Vernon Wells was still a good fielder. From the Fielding Bible, Wells has been 10 & 17 runs worse than average the past two years, making him the 32nd and 35th ranked CF in MLB.
Plus he has been awful at the plate in two of the past two years. I would rather play and pay Pierre for 2 years than Wells for 5.
Oh, didn't realize he was such a bad fielder. The games I saw this year were an exact contradiction of the fielding bible stats, though I don't watch the Jays much. Either way, it was just an idea should Manny opt out, get us an elite pitcher, and have a productive lineup in the absense of Manny's bat (though I know Wells couldn't live up to Manny's bat anyway)
I would keep Pierreville in LA, play De Solution at 2B,
and bank the difference in DeWitt and O-Dog salaries
to sign John Lackey as my #1 starter (and to tutor our kids). :)
and really, our standard can't be lets add Vernon Wells insane contract to the Dodgers books for the next 5 years because we have had other really bad contracts in the past
The ONLY way we can make the JP signing worse, really the only way, would be by turning the last 2 years of his bad contract into 5 more years of someone else's really bad contract. Vernon Wells is that mistake renewed. Insert inappropriate joke about divorcing a woman only to find you are married to her again.
On a side note, I think you can probably make a reasonably defensible argument saying that contracts that turned out badly because the player got injured (or in DD case injured and injured and injured) are not nearly as bad as contracts where the player was simply overpaid.
There was a value we were hoping to get from JS or DD, there was an upside there. What we get from JP, is exactly what he has always been. I am more inclined for forgive a big bet gone wrong, then I am overspending for the same mediocre skills
I can't believe someone is advocating that the Dodgers trade for Vernon Wells. He has the most poisonous contract of any pro athlete in America, and is single-handedly sinking the Blue Jays franchise.
Along with Fatdruw Jones, Wells is the poster boy for why baseball should not have guaranteed contracts.
What's the date by which Manny must notify us whether he's taking his option for 2010?
Manny has until five days after the World Series or November 10, whichever is later, to decide on his option. So, unless there are weather delays in New York, Manny will have to decide by next Tuesday.
Sorry if this has been noted already, but Stanford is +5 this weekend at home against Oregon. That's a lot of respect for the Cardinal. As a Ducks fan, I'm mortified of the game. It has all the trappings of a let down. Plus, Stanford is good.
Those of us who have been wondering whether Phillies or Yankees fans were more insufferable should have a look at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/03/daily-show-asks-which-cit_n_343369.html
LATimes.com now offers tickets to popular events around the world including Dodgers tickets to all home and away games on the Dodgers schedule. Additionally, we have MLB tickets to just about all games on the schedule, including Angels tickets and Padres tickets.
Tonight Cliff Lee gets to show that the Phillies would be the team that got to lose the World Series in 6 games to the Yankees instead of the Dodgers.
I feel the need to blame someone. I will wait for Bill Plaschke or Steve Lopez to tell me.
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 04:52 PM
Can Rollins and Victorino get on base before Utley and Werth hit home runs? I've given up on Howard.
Every HR the Phillies have hit has been solo. That's not good enough.
Posted by: Linkmeister | November 02, 2009 at 04:54 PM
That article by Lopez to Jamie McCourt was just weird.
Posted by: Kevin Lewis | November 02, 2009 at 04:55 PM
The Phillies have scored 16 runs in the World Series, 7 by solo home runs.
Posted by: bhsportsguy | November 02, 2009 at 04:56 PM
Except for the obligatory slap at Manny, I found Lopez's column sardonically amusing.
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 05:06 PM
Maybe Cliff Lee isn't an ace after all.
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 05:07 PM
Looks like the Yankees will no longer have to be gnashing their teeth about their inability to win a World Series. They've waited so long.
It's not unlike Lakers fans complaining about the wait to win another title.
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 05:07 PM
I suppose I can live with a Yankees title, as long it's at least another nine years until the next one.
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 05:08 PM
"Well, that didn't take long." - Vin Scully
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 02, 2009 at 05:12 PM
I for one welcome our Yankee overlords.
Posted by: Marty Leadman | November 02, 2009 at 05:15 PM
Jayson Werth is going to be empathetic here with Victorino.
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 05:16 PM
>> I don't care if Cliff pitches a perfect game tonight- the Phillies gave up MINOR LEAGURES for him, whereas Bills is already a major league All-Star, who had a peculiar- and yes, extremely frustrating- second half.
The deal that brought a bargain-priced Cliff Lee to Philadelphia - along with Ben Francisco, in exchange for prospects that didn't include any of the top three in the Fillies system - was one of the most one-sided deals in baseball history, based on what was known at the time of the deal. The Indians could certainly have gotten a whole lot more in exchange than they did; from their standpoint, it really didn't make any sense, then or now. Maybe there was more to the story, but we'll probably never know why they did it.
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 02, 2009 at 05:18 PM
There, see? Rollins and Victorino got aboard.
Somebody got a link to that Lopez column you're talking about?
Posted by: Linkmeister | November 02, 2009 at 05:18 PM
I guess we're not going to have a pitchers duel tonight...
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 02, 2009 at 05:18 PM
Whatever the over-under is for number of runs scored tonight, the over looks really good right about now.
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 02, 2009 at 05:20 PM
{open up several old wounds at once via circuitous illogic:} "Too bad the Dodgers traded Carlos Santana to the Indians once before. They could've offered him to Cleveland in the ultimately-rejected Cliff Lee package!"
Posted by: underdog | November 02, 2009 at 05:21 PM
My dad talked about "Good AJ Burnett" and "Bad AJ Burnett" all season but I guess I've now seen both examples first hand in his two games in the WS. (Still early of course.)
Posted by: underdog | November 02, 2009 at 05:22 PM
The Yankees are still going to to have trouble scoring a lot of runs in this game since Girardi decided to go with a "House Money" lineup in the World Series.
Or you can think of this as the Dodgers lineup from Games 4 and 5 of the 1988 World Series with the notable addition of Alex Rodriguez.
I guess, if you twist my arm, I will admit that Teixeira is better than Stubbs.
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 05:25 PM
Nice play by Tex.
Posted by: underdog | November 02, 2009 at 05:25 PM
I spent much of the day telling folks how my baseball expert friend assured me that, if you run the history, this whole "ace on short rest" thing hardly ever works out. And if by "ace" you mean AJ Burnett, it is an especially dubious proposition.
So thank you Eric Enders for making me seem smart and well-connected.
Posted by: Sam DC | November 02, 2009 at 05:26 PM
The Lopez column is at http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez1-2009nov01,0,560031,full.column
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 05:29 PM
And to be fair Gardner is playing because Cabrera is injured and Damon is... not a good centerfielder. But it does smell of an "On to Game 6!" kind of game... Maybe he should have started Gaudin after all as some have suggested.
I wouldn't mind seeing Cliff Lee struggle some more, though.
Posted by: underdog | November 02, 2009 at 05:30 PM
In comparing Teixeira with Stubbs, do you mean offensively or defensively?
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 05:30 PM
Damon is not a bad centerfielder, but his throwing arm makes Juan Pierre's look like Roberto Clemente's.
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 05:32 PM
Thanks for the link, WBB.
That column's just...off. He missed the snark target by a foot or two.
Posted by: Linkmeister | November 02, 2009 at 05:34 PM
Franklin Stubbs batted .500 in his career against Greg Maddux. Mark Teixeira was 1 for 6.
Therefore, Franklin Stubbs was the better hitter.
QED
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 05:45 PM
I thought the most pivotal part of last nights game was Rivera not being afraid to go after Stairs with the three run lead..
Posted by: jasonungar | November 02, 2009 at 05:50 PM
>> I thought the most pivotal part of last nights game was Rivera not being afraid to go after Stairs with the three run lead..
Remember what Jim Kaat said earlier this season - "Tell me the game situation. If I'm facing Willie Mays with a three-run lead and nobody on, I'll throw the ball right over the plate." Or something to that effect.
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 02, 2009 at 06:05 PM
We are not werthy.
Posted by: Bob Hendley | November 02, 2009 at 06:08 PM
Just checkin' in to say hi fom Sonoma wine country and let Humma know I've lifted his trade talk ban. ;)
I also saw this in the Huffington Post and thought it was kinda neat and sweet...
"I didn't really know him growing up. He was a little ahead of me, but I knew who he was, obviously," Lee said. "It's not very often two guys from the state of Arkansas make it to the big leagues, much less square off against each other in the World Series. ... That's going to be a neat deal for our state and going to be a lot of fun, and something we can talk about for the rest of our lives."
Carry on. :)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 06:09 PM
The situation last night and in the NLCS were not equal. Sorry.
Phillies looking good to force the first Game 6 in the World Series since 2003.
Burnett on three days rest goes 2+ innings.
Posted by: Alex41592 | November 02, 2009 at 06:11 PM
Hmmmph...did Kitty ever face Willie...
Posted by: Bob Hendley | November 02, 2009 at 06:12 PM
Tyler Kepner will tell us that there will only be a Game 6 because the Yankees are playing. They are the saviors of the World Series.
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 06:15 PM
Jim Kaat never faced Willie Mays in a regular season game. They did face off in the 1966 All-Star Game. Mays got a leadoff single in the fourth inning and came around to score the tying run on an RBI single by Ron Santo.
Kaat pitched two innings in the 1966 ASG.
In his first one he faced, in order: Mays, Clemente, Aaron, McCovey, Santo, and Torre.
In the other inning, he faced Jim Lefebvre, Leo Cardenas, and Dick Allen.
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 06:23 PM
The Yankees 1B and 3B are 4 for 32.
I doubt Loney and Blake would be 4 for 32. ;)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 06:29 PM
Craig is partaking of the local swill.
Posted by: Bob Hendley | November 02, 2009 at 06:33 PM
If it gets close, will Manuel bring in Lidge for the save?
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 06:47 PM
Charlie Manuel will consult the Brad Lidge Wheel of Redemption to see whom to use in the late innings.
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 06:52 PM
From the NY Times live blog of the game:
Update | 7:55 p.m. Before every postseason game, the video screen at Citizens Bank Park has played a montage of regular-season highlights set to The Black Eyed Peas’ “I Gotta Feeling.” With the Phillies one loss from elimination, the song changed to Journey’s “Don’t Stop Believin’.”
Noooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 06:54 PM
AReix 2 headed monster down again: 4 for 33
Goin' back and forth.
MNF 2 minute warning...
Falcons 14 0 - - 14
Saints 7 7 - - 14
C'mon, Cajuns & Creoles!
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 06:58 PM
Reggie Bush TD!!!
Now, I'll drink to THAT : )
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 07:02 PM
The Chicago Cubs are now openly gay: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/02/laura-ricketts-is-first-o_n_342172.html
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 07:03 PM
South Park - "The Phillies took 'R song!"
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 07:05 PM
Given the Dodgers' "current executive drama", as Ken Gurnick put it, I have to ask, which Rickett's family member is the "sole owner" of the Cubs?
Posted by: El Lay Dave | November 02, 2009 at 07:13 PM
Party in Philly and Nah'leans!! ... so far tonight...
7th:
Yankees 1 0 0 0 1 0 - - - 2 4 0
Freedoms 3 0 3 0 0 0 - - - 6 6 0
Half:
Falcons 14 0 - - 14
Mardi Gras 7 21 - - 28
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 07:21 PM
Time to pull Lee.
He may have to go 4-5 innings in game 7.
Pitchers IP H R ER BB SO HR PC-ST ERA
Cliff Lee 7.0 4 2 2 3 3 0 103-63 1.13
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 07:28 PM
Chase that!
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 07:33 PM
Willie Wilson and Reggie Jackson jump up off their couches...
as both WS records are tied this inning!
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 07:39 PM
I absolutely agree. Lee should be pulled now with a six run lead and be saved to go in relief in a potential Game 7.
Posted by: Alex41592 | November 02, 2009 at 07:45 PM
Only Victorino gets relieved.
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 07:47 PM
Maybe Lee's continuing tells us what Manuel thinks of his bullpen. Koufax, on the other hand, would go on two days' rest in game 7.
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 07:47 PM
Now Lee should be pulled for other reasons.
Posted by: Alex41592 | November 02, 2009 at 07:50 PM
I'd like to see Lidge in the ninth, if only for the entertainment value.
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 08:02 PM
Posada, Matsui and Jeter will face Madson in the ninth.
Posted by: Alex41592 | November 02, 2009 at 08:07 PM
Thanks, Craig, for lifting the ban. I will celebrate by suggesting that we trade James Loney for Albert Pujols straight up.
1) Loney is younger than Pujols
2) Loney is cheaper than Pujols
3) Loney is under team control longer than Pujols
4) Loney has more upside than Pujols. After all, Pujols is as good as he's gonna get. Loney could be a lot better!
Posted by: Humma Kavula | November 02, 2009 at 08:11 PM
The Brad Lidge Wheel of Redemption told Charlie Manuel to put in Ryan Madson.
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 02, 2009 at 08:11 PM
Well researched.
Posted by: Bob Hendley | November 02, 2009 at 08:16 PM
If A-Rod comes up this inning, the Phillies are in trouble.
Posted by: bhsportsguy | November 02, 2009 at 08:20 PM
Derek Jeter is obviously not a clutch performer.
Posted by: WBB | November 02, 2009 at 08:21 PM
Jeter is not Mr. November today.
Posted by: bhsportsguy | November 02, 2009 at 08:21 PM
Mr. November no more. Huge rally killing double play by Jeter.
Now the tying run moves from the batters box to the on deck circle.
Posted by: Alex41592 | November 02, 2009 at 08:22 PM
FOX just made $130 million dollars.
Game 6. Six years in the making.
Posted by: Alex41592 | November 02, 2009 at 08:27 PM
Baseball survives for at least one more game, thank goodness.
Add this: I hate the Yankees and seeing them lose the World Series at home would warm the cavernous space where I used to have a heart.
Posted by: Humma Kavula | November 02, 2009 at 08:28 PM
So now, a rested Pedro against Andy Pettitte, who from a quick glance, has pitched once on 3 days rest between Game 6 of the 2003 ALCS and Game 2 of the 2003 World Series. In that World Series game, he went 8.2 innings (Game Score of 76) and beat the Marlins, 6-1. Pettitte and Martinez have never faced each other in post season, they had six matchups in the regular season, they each won three and lost three.
Posted by: bhsportsguy | November 02, 2009 at 08:50 PM
If there were any doubts it is official that Pedro will start Game 6.
Pedro vs. Pettitte.
The last time they met was September 5th, 2003 in the Bronx.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYA/NYA200309050.shtml
Posted by: Alex41592 | November 02, 2009 at 08:53 PM
I was really disappointed to see the series extended, but really please to see ESPN's rumor mill. Seattle might being looking ot trade King Felix to get Chapman, and Manny wants to be a DH!!!!
Posted by: SteelMohawk | November 02, 2009 at 09:10 PM
If Manny opts out, I seriously wouldn't mind an attempted trade of JP to the Blue Jays for Wells, Doc, and 25ish million. Maybe even throw in a James Macdonald type to replace Doc in their rotation and help offset the money. The way I see it, get rid of JP's 20ish million plus the 25 from the Jays would put Wells at 5 years and 55ish million. I would pray that a change of scenary might help Wells return to form, and that Kemp could handle a move to right and Ethier to left. Plus, we'd have Doc.
Posted by: jujibee | November 02, 2009 at 09:28 PM
If I'm understanding the previous post correctly, that means the Jays' net gain would be the opportunity to pay $45 million for 2 years of Juan Pierre, plus having James McDonald on their team instead of Roy Halladay. I'm not sure what the benefit is for them.
Posted by: Eric Enders | November 02, 2009 at 10:08 PM
The benefit is ridding themselves of Wells and his 100 mil still owed. This is the team that let Rios go on waivers without taking anything in return. What I proposed was a way for the Jays to free up 55 mil over 5 years, not too dissimilar from the Rios situation.
Posted by: jujibee | November 02, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Basically Pierre for 20 mil-2years and 25 mil spread out over 5 years for Wells' contract, and Mcdonald vs. Wells for 100 mil-5 years, and Doc-15mil over 1 year. Subtract 20 mil for Manny suposedly opting out and our payrol is about the same.
Posted by: jujibee | November 02, 2009 at 10:50 PM
seriously peepz, Hamels for Broxton and maybe we'll even throw in Victorino??
pics from tonight being uploaded here, apologies for the out-of-focus-ness of many bc many are from a new camera:
http://community.webshots.com/user/das411fall09
Posted by: das411 | November 02, 2009 at 10:59 PM
(a) Manny is not opting out;
(b) assuming he does opt out, the trade is still pretty terrible for the Dodgers. The trade, as laid out by jujibee:
Pierre to Toronto
Doc, Wells & $25m (spread over 5 years) to Dodgers
Here is how much would be added to the Dodger payroll (as previously constituted assuming Manny stays) from 2010-2014, factoring in the deferred money due Manny and actual contract payouts for each player:
2010: $6,883,880
2011: $6,166,667
2012: $12,666,667
2013: $9,032,787
2014: $16,000,000
Total: $50,750,000
The Dodgers would thus pay nearly $51m over 5 years for the privilege of having Halladay for one year. And we would be saddled with a replacement level player (Wells had 1.9 total WAR over the last 3 seasons) in the OF for 5 years, his age 31-35 years.
No thanks.
Posted by: Eric Stephen | November 02, 2009 at 11:13 PM
I see your point Eric, but either way we are still going to need that 3rd outfielder when Manny's done. Assuming the alternative; Ned going out and buying a 3rd outfielder, our payroll is going to increase anyway for those years. Plus, (and I didn't do the math, just referring to your post where you included this in your additions) the deferred money to Manny is something we are stuck with and cannot be added to the payroll as that is already figured in regardless of who plays that 3rd outfield spot. I saw the whole proposal, as ludicrous as it might have sounded, that we get Wells for 5 years at ~12 Mil per year factoring in the Jays' payment and the departure of JP, and 15 mil for Doc. Subtracting Manny's contract, yeah our payroll rises a little bit next year, but then Manny is off the books and it should go down the next years. Manny is set to make 20 mil next year, JP (I think) 8.5 Mil. Wells is set to make ~20 next year including his signing bonus, and Halladay 15. If you subtract the 5 that the Jays would pay us in the trade, our payroll isn't that much effected by this deal.
Posted by: jujibee | November 02, 2009 at 11:27 PM
I'm with Eric on that one and with Humma on his, too, if Pujols agrees to rigorous testing.
This following might interest Jon and other Cardinal...
"Stanford game set for 12:30 p.m.
By Ben Malcolmson on November 2, 2009:
The USC-Stanford game on Nov. 14 at the Coliseum will kick off at 12:30 p.m. and be televised nationally on FSN, officials announced today.
The game is ALSO the centerpiece of USC's Homecoming weekend."
-Now if we can just get the Stanford football team to cooperate and let us win. ; )
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 11:33 PM
Jujibee, my friend, who's to say that we can't plug in another outfielder from our farm im 2011?
I know there's a couple that I really like. :)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 02, 2009 at 11:38 PM
I counted the difference in deferred salary due Manny based on the two scenarios. For instance, in 2010 the Dodgers either owe Manny $10m (if he stays) or roughly $3.6m (in 2009 deferred money; if he opts out). So the net Manny gain in 2010 is about $6.4m if he opts out.
Posted by: Eric Stephen | November 02, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Craig, which ones do you like? Lambo? Paul? Hoffman? I don't think any of them will out-produce the numbers Wells would put up in a change of scenery. I have more faith that Wells would be more worth the money than the likes of Dreifort or Schmidt. I was more thinking how we could get that elite pitcher without emptying the farm.
Eric, I was under the impression that the deferred money due Manny that we already owe him, 5 mil for the next 3 years, is what you were factoring in. If he opts out, like I suggested in this proposal (if he doesn't this trade makes no sense at all) we are only responsible for the same 5 mil over the next 3 years, which we already owe ( before factoring in the suspension).
Posted by: jujibee | November 03, 2009 at 12:00 AM
To add Eric, if he stays, we're on the hook for the 5 mil (before factoring in the suspension) in 2010, plus the 10 mil contract. The next years are the more pressing for the deffered money as we will be paying him deferred money for 2009 and 2010 for 3 years after 2010, years in which he won't even be playing. If he opts out, we're only responsible for the deffered money for this year, which will run through 2012 regardless of who plays that OF spot next year.
Posted by: jujibee | November 03, 2009 at 12:04 AM
I stand corrected. I just reviewed the contract. If he stays, it appears his contract rate is 5 mil plus the 5 mil deffered from 2009. Either way, the 15 mil he is owed in deferred (finally spelled it right) payments from 2009 is owed to him, if it's in 2010 0r 2013.
Posted by: jujibee | November 03, 2009 at 12:14 AM
Jujibee,
Here is the math behind my post.
If Manny stays, here is his salary:
2010: $10,000,000
2011: $6,967,213 ($5m from 2009, less suspension, plus $3,333,333 from 2010)
2012: $6,967,213 ($5m from 2009, less suspension, plus $3,333,333 from 2010)
2013: $6,967,213 ($5m from 2009, less suspension, plus $3,333,333 from 2010)
If Manny opts out, here is his salary:
2010: $3,633,880 (which is $5m, less his suspension)
2011: $3,633,880
2012: $3,633,880
Details here: 2011: http://www.truebluela.com/2009/1/14/720656/dodger-payroll#manny
Here is a year by year breakdown:
2010
add $15,750,000 for Halladay
add $12,500,000 for Wells (signing bonus is already incurred; Blue Jays are responsible)
subtract $10,000,000 for Pierre
subtract $6,366,120 for Manny ($10m minus $3,633,880)
subtract $5,000,000 for money from Toronto
Total added: $6,883,880
2011
add $23,000,000 for Wells
subtract $8,500,000 for Pierre
subtract $3,333,333 for Manny ($6,967,213 minus $3,633,880)
subtract $5,000,000 for money from Toronto
Total added: $6,166,667
2012
add $21,000,000 for Wells
subtract $3,333,333 for Manny ($6,967,213 minus $3,633,880)
subtract $5,000,000 for money from Toronto
Total added: $12,666,667
2013
add $21,000,000 for Wells
subtract $6,967,213 for Manny
subtract $5,000,000 for money from Toronto
Total added: $9,032,787
2014
add $21,000,000 for Wells
subtract $5,000,000 for money from Toronto
Total added: $16,000,000
More Blue Jays contract details here:
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/toronto-blue-jays_05.html
Posted by: Eric Stephen | November 03, 2009 at 12:21 AM
Nice work Eric. After seeing the numbers and proposing the trade without the benefit of the number crunching, I'd still consider it if I were GM. I'd consider it based on this:
-Doc for 1 year (maybe that'd get us over the hump)
-Wells for 5 years (not a great deal for us if he produces the numbers he put up last year, but I feel he's due for a rebound. <- prediction more than fact! We'd get a gold glove outfielder in CF, could move Kemp to RF and Ethier to LF and have a great defensive outfield.
-although the money due that you produced for Wells is more than I'd pay, I don't think it would be near the bad contracts that the Dodgers have had recently (Ashby, Dreifort, Pierre, Schmidt)
-we wouldn't have to see Pierre put on a Dodger jersey
Your point is well taken, especially considering the large raises some of our young players are going to get if we want to keep them around, but I feel our time is coming up with this young core (closer to free agency and not having enough money to keep them all) 1 year of Halladay, with a more experienced Kershaw, and a rejuvinated Billingsley going into the playoffs with a great defensive team and a wonderful bullpen is something I might take a gamble on.
Posted by: jujibee | November 03, 2009 at 12:37 AM
-Doc for 1 year (maybe that'd get us over the hump)
+ 2 draft picks if he leaves
Posted by: jujibee | November 03, 2009 at 12:43 AM
That would be fine if Vernon Wells was still a good fielder. From the Fielding Bible, Wells has been 10 & 17 runs worse than average the past two years, making him the 32nd and 35th ranked CF in MLB.
Plus he has been awful at the plate in two of the past two years. I would rather play and pay Pierre for 2 years than Wells for 5.
Posted by: Eric Stephen | November 03, 2009 at 12:47 AM
Oh, didn't realize he was such a bad fielder. The games I saw this year were an exact contradiction of the fielding bible stats, though I don't watch the Jays much. Either way, it was just an idea should Manny opt out, get us an elite pitcher, and have a productive lineup in the absense of Manny's bat (though I know Wells couldn't live up to Manny's bat anyway)
Posted by: jujibee | November 03, 2009 at 12:58 AM
Juan Pierre 30 steals .308 .365 .392 .757
Vernon Wells 17 steals .260 .311 .400 .711
I would keep Pierreville in LA, play De Solution at 2B,
and bank the difference in DeWitt and O-Dog salaries
to sign John Lackey as my #1 starter (and to tutor our kids). :)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 03, 2009 at 01:15 AM
and really, our standard can't be lets add Vernon Wells insane contract to the Dodgers books for the next 5 years because we have had other really bad contracts in the past
The ONLY way we can make the JP signing worse, really the only way, would be by turning the last 2 years of his bad contract into 5 more years of someone else's really bad contract. Vernon Wells is that mistake renewed. Insert inappropriate joke about divorcing a woman only to find you are married to her again.
On a side note, I think you can probably make a reasonably defensible argument saying that contracts that turned out badly because the player got injured (or in DD case injured and injured and injured) are not nearly as bad as contracts where the player was simply overpaid.
There was a value we were hoping to get from JS or DD, there was an upside there. What we get from JP, is exactly what he has always been. I am more inclined for forgive a big bet gone wrong, then I am overspending for the same mediocre skills
Posted by: Hollywood Joe | November 03, 2009 at 04:24 AM
and further for the record
I am more inclined for forgive a big *PITCHING* bet gone wrong than a big position player bet.
and if you make a bet, I think it should be around health and not skills
as in, let's sign and hope he stays healthy enough to play X% of games at y% of his previous skill level - can be a reasonable bet
let's sign him and hope he develops X skill - likely not as good a bet
Posted by: Hollywood Joe | November 03, 2009 at 04:31 AM
Good morning!
>> Time to pull Lee.
>> He may have to go 4-5 innings in game 7.
There isn't going to be a game 7.
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 03, 2009 at 07:09 AM
>> which ones do you like? Lambo? Paul? Hoffman?
Mitch Jones!
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 03, 2009 at 07:12 AM
>> to sign John Lackey as my #1 starter
If the Dodgers signed Lackey, he would not be the #1 starter. More like #3 or #4, depending on which Chad we get next year, Good Chad or Bad Chad.
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 03, 2009 at 07:15 AM
What's the date by which Manny must notify us whether he's taking his option for 2010? (I believe it's early in the off-season.)
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 03, 2009 at 07:16 AM
I don't think Roy Halladay would accept a trade to the Dodgers. He seems to want to stay in the Northeast, from what I've read.
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 03, 2009 at 07:17 AM
I can't believe someone is advocating that the Dodgers trade for Vernon Wells. He has the most poisonous contract of any pro athlete in America, and is single-handedly sinking the Blue Jays franchise.
Along with Fatdruw Jones, Wells is the poster boy for why baseball should not have guaranteed contracts.
Posted by: DL | November 03, 2009 at 07:29 AM
He has the most poisonous contract of any pro athlete in America
Hmmm. I guess I should say North America.
Posted by: DL | November 03, 2009 at 07:32 AM
What's the date by which Manny must notify us whether he's taking his option for 2010?
Manny has until five days after the World Series or November 10, whichever is later, to decide on his option. So, unless there are weather delays in New York, Manny will have to decide by next Tuesday.
Posted by: Eric Stephen | November 03, 2009 at 07:32 AM
Sorry if this has been noted already, but Stanford is +5 this weekend at home against Oregon. That's a lot of respect for the Cardinal. As a Ducks fan, I'm mortified of the game. It has all the trappings of a let down. Plus, Stanford is good.
Posted by: kinbote | November 03, 2009 at 07:57 AM
I think the LA Times biggest problem these days is that it doesn't have enough fistfights in its newsrooms.
http://bit.ly/knuFd
I propose a Bill Plaschke vs. Steve Clow foofaraw.
Posted by: underdog | November 03, 2009 at 08:27 AM
Today, on this election day, I cast a straight ballot...
1. Manny for El Capitan of LA
2. Pierre as his loyal Lieutentant Juan
3. Bills/Kersh/Kuroda/Wolf/Lackey for Sergeants at Arms and
Doorkeepers to the best record in the National League AGAIN in 2010! :)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 03, 2009 at 09:21 AM
Those of us who have been wondering whether Phillies or Yankees fans were more insufferable should have a look at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/03/daily-show-asks-which-cit_n_343369.html
Posted by: WBB | November 03, 2009 at 09:21 AM
New post up top.
Posted by: Jon Weisman | November 03, 2009 at 09:27 AM