2019 LA Dodgers Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 244, 245, 246, 247, 248  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
LongBeachPoly
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 6848

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 9:58 am    Post subject:

Quote:
Friedman on the Luxury Tax: “We are well over, with no CBT gymnastics in sight that can get us under. I was joking with Stan [Kasten] the other day that he had some public comments about how he expected us to be over this year, and so I told him I want to deliver on that.”


If we don't get under the luxury tax, then our compensatory pick for losing Betts will drop to after the 4th rd

Quote:
The Dodgers are firmly in the luxury tax now — just as Stan Kasten foretold. Because of this, the draft pick compensation the Dodgers would receive should Betts sign elsewhere (because there’s no way they don’t give him a qualifying offer), would not be as valuable.

“If a qualifying-offer free agent’s previous team is over the luxury-tax threshold, said team will receive a compensation pick after the fourth round has been completed. If a team neither exceeded the luxury tax in the preceding season nor receives revenue sharing, its compensatory pick will come after Competitive Balance Round B. The value of the free agent’s new contract has no impact on the compensation pick in both of these cases.”

That just isn’t the same as receiving a Top 70 pick. In the 2020 MLB Draft, the first pick after the fourth round would be No. 134, so you can see why that pick wouldn’t be as enticing to a luxury tax team like the Dodgers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
aprevo15
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 1970

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:47 pm    Post subject:

Press conference.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39XsQ0tx28g
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 21501
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 9:59 pm    Post subject:

Maybe we are just posturing to make it look like we aren't desperate to trade Joc, but it really does appear that we have pivoted to wanting to just keep him now. If so, it basically gives us the option of always having a .900 OPS outfielder playing. Obviously, you know you have that with Bellinger and Betts. But now with Joc apparently staying, you can start him against righties and get that .900 OPS against them. Then you bring in Pollock vs. lefties, and his OPS against them is also about .900. Pollock is quite expensive for a guy who may only get 250-300 AB's, but if his role is simply to mash lefties, hey, it's not my money. And Stripling is the type that is nice to have on hand for depth, even if I don't think he's a guy I want in there for the postseason.

Of course, we can still move one or both of them, but Joc just lengthens that lineup all the more. You figure that he and Seager will hit 5-6 in some order, with Smith possibly hitting 7th (just to break up the lefties, since Bellinger probably hits 4th) and Lux 8th. Or maybe our plan is to just stack the lefties all in a row 4-7, and PH for Joc and Lux once a lefty comes in.
_________________
Two series wins down, two more to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 6848

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 6:29 am    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
Maybe we are just posturing to make it look like we aren't desperate to trade Joc, but it really does appear that we have pivoted to wanting to just keep him now. If so, it basically gives us the option of always having a .900 OPS outfielder playing. Obviously, you know you have that with Bellinger and Betts. But now with Joc apparently staying, you can start him against righties and get that .900 OPS against them. Then you bring in Pollock vs. lefties, and his OPS against them is also about .900. Pollock is quite expensive for a guy who may only get 250-300 AB's, but if his role is simply to mash lefties, hey, it's not my money. And Stripling is the type that is nice to have on hand for depth, even if I don't think he's a guy I want in there for the postseason.

Of course, we can still move one or both of them, but Joc just lengthens that lineup all the more. You figure that he and Seager will hit 5-6 in some order, with Smith possibly hitting 7th (just to break up the lefties, since Bellinger probably hits 4th) and Lux 8th. Or maybe our plan is to just stack the lefties all in a row 4-7, and PH for Joc and Lux once a lefty comes in.


Yeah, we're projected to be $13M over the luxury tax. There's no way to get under w/o hurting our team. Shedding Joc + Stripling is not enough. Plus, we need room to make trade deadline deals.

If we're going all in this year, we might as well bite the bullet and keep Joc and Stripling. Undoubtedly, they make our team better this year.

Pollock was a bad signing. We can't make it a better signing by getting rid of the better player in Joc.

Sure, if someone comes along and offers us a terrific package for Joc, then it's better to move him then lose him for nothing next year. But, we shouldn't be giving him away like we did in the Angels deal.

36 hrs from a part time player. Let that sink in.

If we keep Joc and he produces similarly to last year, would we offer him the QO this offseason? Would he accept it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
leor_77
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 23 Mar 2012
Posts: 19055

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 1:12 pm    Post subject:

Interesting...Every starting pitcher and reliever will have to face a minimum of 3 batters now. No more using a lefty specialist to get a lefty out, and then using someone else for the next couple.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/mlb-makes-it-official-the-threebatter-minimum-rule-is-here-212819166.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
greenfrog
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 2:26 pm    Post subject:

leor_77 wrote:
Interesting...Every starting pitcher and reliever will have to face a minimum of 3 batters now. No more using a lefty specialist to get a lefty out, and then using someone else for the next couple.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/mlb-makes-it-official-the-threebatter-minimum-rule-is-here-212819166.html


So that's why we're keeping Joc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lamar's Bud
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 1703

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 2:29 pm    Post subject:

leor_77 wrote:
Interesting...Every starting pitcher and reliever will have to face a minimum of 3 batters now. No more using a lefty specialist to get a lefty out, and then using someone else for the next couple.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/mlb-makes-it-official-the-threebatter-minimum-rule-is-here-212819166.html


They can still use a LOOGY - it'll just be much harder based only on circumstances. A pitcher does not have to face 3 batters if the inning ends, so he could get by with only facing 1 batter if said batter is the final out of the inning.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 21501
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 2:47 pm    Post subject:

LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
Maybe we are just posturing to make it look like we aren't desperate to trade Joc, but it really does appear that we have pivoted to wanting to just keep him now. If so, it basically gives us the option of always having a .900 OPS outfielder playing. Obviously, you know you have that with Bellinger and Betts. But now with Joc apparently staying, you can start him against righties and get that .900 OPS against them. Then you bring in Pollock vs. lefties, and his OPS against them is also about .900. Pollock is quite expensive for a guy who may only get 250-300 AB's, but if his role is simply to mash lefties, hey, it's not my money. And Stripling is the type that is nice to have on hand for depth, even if I don't think he's a guy I want in there for the postseason.

Of course, we can still move one or both of them, but Joc just lengthens that lineup all the more. You figure that he and Seager will hit 5-6 in some order, with Smith possibly hitting 7th (just to break up the lefties, since Bellinger probably hits 4th) and Lux 8th. Or maybe our plan is to just stack the lefties all in a row 4-7, and PH for Joc and Lux once a lefty comes in.


Yeah, we're projected to be $13M over the luxury tax. There's no way to get under w/o hurting our team. Shedding Joc + Stripling is not enough. Plus, we need room to make trade deadline deals.

If we're going all in this year, we might as well bite the bullet and keep Joc and Stripling. Undoubtedly, they make our team better this year.

Pollock was a bad signing. We can't make it a better signing by getting rid of the better player in Joc.

Sure, if someone comes along and offers us a terrific package for Joc, then it's better to move him then lose him for nothing next year. But, we shouldn't be giving him away like we did in the Angels deal.

36 hrs from a part time player. Let that sink in.

If we keep Joc and he produces similarly to last year, would we offer him the QO this offseason? Would he accept it?


I mean, we offered Brett Anderson the QO once (which was a disaster the second it was offered), so I suppose you never know. But if his value in his last year of arb was $7.75MM, and since it's hard to imagine him besting the season he had last year, you'd have to say that it's tough to imagine him landing a deal for $10MM per season, right? So with that said, I don't see how it makes sense to offer him a deal for roughly $18MM for one season. There's a very good chance he would accept that, in my estimation. He's basically established himself as a strong-side platoon player. Those guys just aren't going to get lucrative multi-year deals.
_________________
Two series wins down, two more to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 6848

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:44 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
Maybe we are just posturing to make it look like we aren't desperate to trade Joc, but it really does appear that we have pivoted to wanting to just keep him now. If so, it basically gives us the option of always having a .900 OPS outfielder playing. Obviously, you know you have that with Bellinger and Betts. But now with Joc apparently staying, you can start him against righties and get that .900 OPS against them. Then you bring in Pollock vs. lefties, and his OPS against them is also about .900. Pollock is quite expensive for a guy who may only get 250-300 AB's, but if his role is simply to mash lefties, hey, it's not my money. And Stripling is the type that is nice to have on hand for depth, even if I don't think he's a guy I want in there for the postseason.

Of course, we can still move one or both of them, but Joc just lengthens that lineup all the more. You figure that he and Seager will hit 5-6 in some order, with Smith possibly hitting 7th (just to break up the lefties, since Bellinger probably hits 4th) and Lux 8th. Or maybe our plan is to just stack the lefties all in a row 4-7, and PH for Joc and Lux once a lefty comes in.


Yeah, we're projected to be $13M over the luxury tax. There's no way to get under w/o hurting our team. Shedding Joc + Stripling is not enough. Plus, we need room to make trade deadline deals.

If we're going all in this year, we might as well bite the bullet and keep Joc and Stripling. Undoubtedly, they make our team better this year.

Pollock was a bad signing. We can't make it a better signing by getting rid of the better player in Joc.

Sure, if someone comes along and offers us a terrific package for Joc, then it's better to move him then lose him for nothing next year. But, we shouldn't be giving him away like we did in the Angels deal.

36 hrs from a part time player. Let that sink in.

If we keep Joc and he produces similarly to last year, would we offer him the QO this offseason? Would he accept it?


I mean, we offered Brett Anderson the QO once (which was a disaster the second it was offered), so I suppose you never know. But if his value in his last year of arb was $7.75MM, and since it's hard to imagine him besting the season he had last year, you'd have to say that it's tough to imagine him landing a deal for $10MM per season, right? So with that said, I don't see how it makes sense to offer him a deal for roughly $18MM for one season. There's a very good chance he would accept that, in my estimation. He's basically established himself as a strong-side platoon player. Those guys just aren't going to get lucrative multi-year deals.


Yeah, his arbitration numbers are weird.

$10M a year is a bargain for Joc.

3/4 of the pitchers in the league are RH pitchers. Even as a platoon player, he still got 450 ABs last year and 512 PAs.

36HRs is worth $18M a year to me. I don't know why his stock is so low.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LonzoLegend2
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 05 Aug 2017
Posts: 680

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 8:15 pm    Post subject:

LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
Maybe we are just posturing to make it look like we aren't desperate to trade Joc, but it really does appear that we have pivoted to wanting to just keep him now. If so, it basically gives us the option of always having a .900 OPS outfielder playing. Obviously, you know you have that with Bellinger and Betts. But now with Joc apparently staying, you can start him against righties and get that .900 OPS against them. Then you bring in Pollock vs. lefties, and his OPS against them is also about .900. Pollock is quite expensive for a guy who may only get 250-300 AB's, but if his role is simply to mash lefties, hey, it's not my money. And Stripling is the type that is nice to have on hand for depth, even if I don't think he's a guy I want in there for the postseason.

Of course, we can still move one or both of them, but Joc just lengthens that lineup all the more. You figure that he and Seager will hit 5-6 in some order, with Smith possibly hitting 7th (just to break up the lefties, since Bellinger probably hits 4th) and Lux 8th. Or maybe our plan is to just stack the lefties all in a row 4-7, and PH for Joc and Lux once a lefty comes in.


Yeah, we're projected to be $13M over the luxury tax. There's no way to get under w/o hurting our team. Shedding Joc + Stripling is not enough. Plus, we need room to make trade deadline deals.

If we're going all in this year, we might as well bite the bullet and keep Joc and Stripling. Undoubtedly, they make our team better this year.

Pollock was a bad signing. We can't make it a better signing by getting rid of the better player in Joc.

Sure, if someone comes along and offers us a terrific package for Joc, then it's better to move him then lose him for nothing next year. But, we shouldn't be giving him away like we did in the Angels deal.

36 hrs from a part time player. Let that sink in.

If we keep Joc and he produces similarly to last year, would we offer him the QO this offseason? Would he accept it?


I mean, we offered Brett Anderson the QO once (which was a disaster the second it was offered), so I suppose you never know. But if his value in his last year of arb was $7.75MM, and since it's hard to imagine him besting the season he had last year, you'd have to say that it's tough to imagine him landing a deal for $10MM per season, right? So with that said, I don't see how it makes sense to offer him a deal for roughly $18MM for one season. There's a very good chance he would accept that, in my estimation. He's basically established himself as a strong-side platoon player. Those guys just aren't going to get lucrative multi-year deals.


Yeah, his arbitration numbers are weird.

$10M a year is a bargain for Joc.

3/4 of the pitchers in the league are RH pitchers. Even as a platoon player, he still got 450 ABs last year and 512 PAs.

36HRs is worth $18M a year to me. I don't know why his stock is so low.


Just spitballin' but could be due to his feast or famine reputation and low career average especially since his lone ASG appearance. But anything's an improvement over the AJ playoff disappointment.....😝
_________________
MAMBA OUT

1978-2020
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 6848

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 9:09 pm    Post subject:

LonzoLegend2 wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
Maybe we are just posturing to make it look like we aren't desperate to trade Joc, but it really does appear that we have pivoted to wanting to just keep him now. If so, it basically gives us the option of always having a .900 OPS outfielder playing. Obviously, you know you have that with Bellinger and Betts. But now with Joc apparently staying, you can start him against righties and get that .900 OPS against them. Then you bring in Pollock vs. lefties, and his OPS against them is also about .900. Pollock is quite expensive for a guy who may only get 250-300 AB's, but if his role is simply to mash lefties, hey, it's not my money. And Stripling is the type that is nice to have on hand for depth, even if I don't think he's a guy I want in there for the postseason.

Of course, we can still move one or both of them, but Joc just lengthens that lineup all the more. You figure that he and Seager will hit 5-6 in some order, with Smith possibly hitting 7th (just to break up the lefties, since Bellinger probably hits 4th) and Lux 8th. Or maybe our plan is to just stack the lefties all in a row 4-7, and PH for Joc and Lux once a lefty comes in.


Yeah, we're projected to be $13M over the luxury tax. There's no way to get under w/o hurting our team. Shedding Joc + Stripling is not enough. Plus, we need room to make trade deadline deals.

If we're going all in this year, we might as well bite the bullet and keep Joc and Stripling. Undoubtedly, they make our team better this year.

Pollock was a bad signing. We can't make it a better signing by getting rid of the better player in Joc.

Sure, if someone comes along and offers us a terrific package for Joc, then it's better to move him then lose him for nothing next year. But, we shouldn't be giving him away like we did in the Angels deal.

36 hrs from a part time player. Let that sink in.

If we keep Joc and he produces similarly to last year, would we offer him the QO this offseason? Would he accept it?


I mean, we offered Brett Anderson the QO once (which was a disaster the second it was offered), so I suppose you never know. But if his value in his last year of arb was $7.75MM, and since it's hard to imagine him besting the season he had last year, you'd have to say that it's tough to imagine him landing a deal for $10MM per season, right? So with that said, I don't see how it makes sense to offer him a deal for roughly $18MM for one season. There's a very good chance he would accept that, in my estimation. He's basically established himself as a strong-side platoon player. Those guys just aren't going to get lucrative multi-year deals.


Yeah, his arbitration numbers are weird.

$10M a year is a bargain for Joc.

3/4 of the pitchers in the league are RH pitchers. Even as a platoon player, he still got 450 ABs last year and 512 PAs.

36HRs is worth $18M a year to me. I don't know why his stock is so low.


Just spitballin' but could be due to his feast or famine reputation and low career average especially since his lone ASG appearance. But anything's an improvement over the AJ playoff disappointment.....😝


Yeah, Joc reminds me of Khris Davis of the A’s and he got paid
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LonzoLegend2
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 05 Aug 2017
Posts: 680

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 9:38 pm    Post subject:

LongBeachPoly wrote:
LonzoLegend2 wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
Maybe we are just posturing to make it look like we aren't desperate to trade Joc, but it really does appear that we have pivoted to wanting to just keep him now. If so, it basically gives us the option of always having a .900 OPS outfielder playing. Obviously, you know you have that with Bellinger and Betts. But now with Joc apparently staying, you can start him against righties and get that .900 OPS against them. Then you bring in Pollock vs. lefties, and his OPS against them is also about .900. Pollock is quite expensive for a guy who may only get 250-300 AB's, but if his role is simply to mash lefties, hey, it's not my money. And Stripling is the type that is nice to have on hand for depth, even if I don't think he's a guy I want in there for the postseason.

Of course, we can still move one or both of them, but Joc just lengthens that lineup all the more. You figure that he and Seager will hit 5-6 in some order, with Smith possibly hitting 7th (just to break up the lefties, since Bellinger probably hits 4th) and Lux 8th. Or maybe our plan is to just stack the lefties all in a row 4-7, and PH for Joc and Lux once a lefty comes in.


Yeah, we're projected to be $13M over the luxury tax. There's no way to get under w/o hurting our team. Shedding Joc + Stripling is not enough. Plus, we need room to make trade deadline deals.

If we're going all in this year, we might as well bite the bullet and keep Joc and Stripling. Undoubtedly, they make our team better this year.

Pollock was a bad signing. We can't make it a better signing by getting rid of the better player in Joc.

Sure, if someone comes along and offers us a terrific package for Joc, then it's better to move him then lose him for nothing next year. But, we shouldn't be giving him away like we did in the Angels deal.

36 hrs from a part time player. Let that sink in.

If we keep Joc and he produces similarly to last year, would we offer him the QO this offseason? Would he accept it?


I mean, we offered Brett Anderson the QO once (which was a disaster the second it was offered), so I suppose you never know. But if his value in his last year of arb was $7.75MM, and since it's hard to imagine him besting the season he had last year, you'd have to say that it's tough to imagine him landing a deal for $10MM per season, right? So with that said, I don't see how it makes sense to offer him a deal for roughly $18MM for one season. There's a very good chance he would accept that, in my estimation. He's basically established himself as a strong-side platoon player. Those guys just aren't going to get lucrative multi-year deals.


Yeah, his arbitration numbers are weird.

$10M a year is a bargain for Joc.

3/4 of the pitchers in the league are RH pitchers. Even as a platoon player, he still got 450 ABs last year and 512 PAs.

36HRs is worth $18M a year to me. I don't know why his stock is so low.


Just spitballin' but could be due to his feast or famine reputation and low career average especially since his lone ASG appearance. But anything's an improvement over the AJ playoff disappointment.....😝


Yeah, Joc reminds me of Khris Davis of the A’s and he got paid


Very good comp but Davis has 50hr power but oft injured amd liability defensively.
_________________
MAMBA OUT

1978-2020
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 21501
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 9:59 pm    Post subject:

LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
Maybe we are just posturing to make it look like we aren't desperate to trade Joc, but it really does appear that we have pivoted to wanting to just keep him now. If so, it basically gives us the option of always having a .900 OPS outfielder playing. Obviously, you know you have that with Bellinger and Betts. But now with Joc apparently staying, you can start him against righties and get that .900 OPS against them. Then you bring in Pollock vs. lefties, and his OPS against them is also about .900. Pollock is quite expensive for a guy who may only get 250-300 AB's, but if his role is simply to mash lefties, hey, it's not my money. And Stripling is the type that is nice to have on hand for depth, even if I don't think he's a guy I want in there for the postseason.

Of course, we can still move one or both of them, but Joc just lengthens that lineup all the more. You figure that he and Seager will hit 5-6 in some order, with Smith possibly hitting 7th (just to break up the lefties, since Bellinger probably hits 4th) and Lux 8th. Or maybe our plan is to just stack the lefties all in a row 4-7, and PH for Joc and Lux once a lefty comes in.


Yeah, we're projected to be $13M over the luxury tax. There's no way to get under w/o hurting our team. Shedding Joc + Stripling is not enough. Plus, we need room to make trade deadline deals.

If we're going all in this year, we might as well bite the bullet and keep Joc and Stripling. Undoubtedly, they make our team better this year.

Pollock was a bad signing. We can't make it a better signing by getting rid of the better player in Joc.

Sure, if someone comes along and offers us a terrific package for Joc, then it's better to move him then lose him for nothing next year. But, we shouldn't be giving him away like we did in the Angels deal.

36 hrs from a part time player. Let that sink in.

If we keep Joc and he produces similarly to last year, would we offer him the QO this offseason? Would he accept it?


I mean, we offered Brett Anderson the QO once (which was a disaster the second it was offered), so I suppose you never know. But if his value in his last year of arb was $7.75MM, and since it's hard to imagine him besting the season he had last year, you'd have to say that it's tough to imagine him landing a deal for $10MM per season, right? So with that said, I don't see how it makes sense to offer him a deal for roughly $18MM for one season. There's a very good chance he would accept that, in my estimation. He's basically established himself as a strong-side platoon player. Those guys just aren't going to get lucrative multi-year deals.


Yeah, his arbitration numbers are weird.

$10M a year is a bargain for Joc.

3/4 of the pitchers in the league are RH pitchers. Even as a platoon player, he still got 450 ABs last year and 512 PAs.

36HRs is worth $18M a year to me. I don't know why his stock is so low.


If we're going strictly off WAR, Joc has been between 2.3 and 3.3 WAR in 4 of his 5 seasons, excluding his extremely poor 2017. If you think you're confident that you're getting a 2.3-3.3 WAR player, I suppose you can justify one year at $18MM. But I'm guessing that the Dodgers, with all of their depth, won't want to risk paying him that, especially if they are going hard after keeping Betts. But who knows what could happen. Maybe they can lock him into a multi-year deal for closer to $10MM a year.
_________________
Two series wins down, two more to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 6848

PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 5:59 am    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
LongBeachPoly wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
Maybe we are just posturing to make it look like we aren't desperate to trade Joc, but it really does appear that we have pivoted to wanting to just keep him now. If so, it basically gives us the option of always having a .900 OPS outfielder playing. Obviously, you know you have that with Bellinger and Betts. But now with Joc apparently staying, you can start him against righties and get that .900 OPS against them. Then you bring in Pollock vs. lefties, and his OPS against them is also about .900. Pollock is quite expensive for a guy who may only get 250-300 AB's, but if his role is simply to mash lefties, hey, it's not my money. And Stripling is the type that is nice to have on hand for depth, even if I don't think he's a guy I want in there for the postseason.

Of course, we can still move one or both of them, but Joc just lengthens that lineup all the more. You figure that he and Seager will hit 5-6 in some order, with Smith possibly hitting 7th (just to break up the lefties, since Bellinger probably hits 4th) and Lux 8th. Or maybe our plan is to just stack the lefties all in a row 4-7, and PH for Joc and Lux once a lefty comes in.


Yeah, we're projected to be $13M over the luxury tax. There's no way to get under w/o hurting our team. Shedding Joc + Stripling is not enough. Plus, we need room to make trade deadline deals.

If we're going all in this year, we might as well bite the bullet and keep Joc and Stripling. Undoubtedly, they make our team better this year.

Pollock was a bad signing. We can't make it a better signing by getting rid of the better player in Joc.

Sure, if someone comes along and offers us a terrific package for Joc, then it's better to move him then lose him for nothing next year. But, we shouldn't be giving him away like we did in the Angels deal.

36 hrs from a part time player. Let that sink in.

If we keep Joc and he produces similarly to last year, would we offer him the QO this offseason? Would he accept it?


I mean, we offered Brett Anderson the QO once (which was a disaster the second it was offered), so I suppose you never know. But if his value in his last year of arb was $7.75MM, and since it's hard to imagine him besting the season he had last year, you'd have to say that it's tough to imagine him landing a deal for $10MM per season, right? So with that said, I don't see how it makes sense to offer him a deal for roughly $18MM for one season. There's a very good chance he would accept that, in my estimation. He's basically established himself as a strong-side platoon player. Those guys just aren't going to get lucrative multi-year deals.


Yeah, his arbitration numbers are weird.

$10M a year is a bargain for Joc.

3/4 of the pitchers in the league are RH pitchers. Even as a platoon player, he still got 450 ABs last year and 512 PAs.

36HRs is worth $18M a year to me. I don't know why his stock is so low.


If we're going strictly off WAR, Joc has been between 2.3 and 3.3 WAR in 4 of his 5 seasons, excluding his extremely poor 2017. If you think you're confident that you're getting a 2.3-3.3 WAR player, I suppose you can justify one year at $18MM. But I'm guessing that the Dodgers, with all of their depth, won't want to risk paying him that, especially if they are going hard after keeping Betts. But who knows what could happen. Maybe they can lock him into a multi-year deal for closer to $10MM a year.


Yup. Agreed.

One thing why I think his arbitration numbers are weird - even when he was projected to make $9.5M, he was considered a bargain.

I think Joc gets a multi-year deal for $15M per. I could see 2 yrs $30M, 3 yrs $45M or even 4 yrs $60M.

I think he’s a lock to be a 3 WAR player.

And yeah, it’s a risk for the Dodgers to extend him a QO. 3 reasons.

1) the risk that he might accept which would hinder our persuit of
Mookie, like you said

2) Since we’re over the luxury tax this year, our compensatory pick is only after the 4th rd, which isn’t as enticing a draft pick to take the risk

3) Attaching a pick to Joc hinders his ability to get that multi year offer from another team.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 11851

PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 7:42 am    Post subject:

^That^ was a good conversation. I never stopped to think about his arbitration much as he was outta here. While $18M per is pushing it, something closer to $15M per should be easily attainable in the future as well as what appears to be a fair arbitration finding.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nickuku
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7054
Location: Orange County

PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:09 am    Post subject:

Any of you guys had the stomach to listen to the Astros "apologies"?
_________________
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lamar's Bud
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 1703

PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:39 am    Post subject:

nickuku wrote:
Any of you guys had the stomach to listen to the Astros "apologies"?


Really weak "apologies" if you even want to call it that. The fact that not one of any of them has ever mentioned the word CHEATING tells me they've been through some PR coaching on this and aren't really sorry for what they did - just that they got caught. Because they still currently get to keep the championship and rings, why would they need to feel any real remorse?

Jim Crane is an absolute joke of an owner/fan of baseball/competitor if he truly believes that stealing signs with technology and batters knowing what pitch is coming has zero impact on the outcome of a game. It's also comical how he contradicted himself so shortly after making that absurd statement. I really loved that question from the ESPN reporter that put him on blast.

With the statements coming out from players like Bellinger, I really hope more players and owners keep fueling the fire to get Manfred to vacate the 2017 title. The fact that he didn't do it already is straight up appalling. It sends a message that cheating is fine and you are able to reap all the rewards from it so long as you don't get caught in the moment. Do Olympians get to keep their gold medals after it was discovered they cheated? Nope. So neither should the Astros. Manfred answers to 29 other owners and I can't understand why they aren't turning the screws on Manfred to right this wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Surfitall
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 12 Feb 2002
Posts: 3794
Location: South Orange County

PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 10:04 am    Post subject:

Baseball wanted accountability and remorse from the Astros. That didn't happen.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/02/13/baseball-wanted-accountability-remorse-astros-that-didnt-happen/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nickuku
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7054
Location: Orange County

PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:29 pm    Post subject:

Got my tickets behind the Astros dugout on April 3rd Angels game. I may have to be dragged out by security.
_________________
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
h2omike
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 2762

PostPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 6:32 pm    Post subject:

If the leAgue won suspend them, we need pitchers around the league to bean a couple of their stars onto the disabled list.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 21501
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 1:24 am    Post subject:

Long post here, so forgive me.

OK, so now that we got our big-ticket talent this offseason, I wanted to take some time to look at what we might be looking at during the season in terms of possible trade targets. The way I see it, the need for someone like Lindor is far less likely, as our lineup looks amazing as it is. Yes, Lindor would help, but if we're going to move significant assets, to me we would be looking at starting pitchers or relievers. There's always the chance that the need for that dissipates (maybe Urias steps up, maybe Trenien is 2018 Treinen, maybe Graterol is incredible), but that's what I'm sticking to for now. With that said, let's take a look.

First, you immediately try to think of starters or relievers from teams that clearly won't be contenders. To do that, let's just rattle off the list of teams that basically have no hope of contending this season: Giants, Pirates, Marlins, Mariners, Royals, Tigers, and Orioles. Unfortunately, I don't see a single ace (starter or reliever) on any of those teams. I mean, if Johnny Cueto looks healthy, I could see him being of use, but it's probably very unrealistic to expect him to have ace-like impact, and that's what the Dodgers will be looking for; this doesn't even take into account that he's also due a large sum of cash in 2021. Chris Archer has talent, but has pitched like crap for multiple years in a row now. Matthew Boyd had a couple of great months last year but that's about it. Jeff Samardzija? Meh. Mychal Givens? Meh. I mean, maybe you could talk me into Keone Kela (the likely closer for the Pirates), but he's been pretty volatile in his early career, both from a physical and mental standpoint. So not anyone to really get excited about here.

That means we have to turn our attention to, well, all of the other teams LOL. Some could be pretenders just hoping to contend that won't end up doing so (maybe teams like the White Sox, Padres, Rangers, Mets, Angels, etc.), and some could be teams that we've seen have a lot of recent success but who surprisingly fall off this season (tough to see who those will be). I'll do the best I can to outline the rest of the teams where I see potential fits:

Rockies
Some may be surprised that I didn't include them on the "no hope of contending" list, but they did make the postseason a couple of times recently before last year's debacle. If they got a bounce-back year from Freeland in the rotation, and with Marquez and Gray around and with a good lineup, it wouldn't completely shock me if they hang around, although I think a teardown is probably more likely than that. If that happens, I think you could see them move Nolan Arenado, but, again, I don't know that we want to give up a ton of capital to get another position player superstar. I had some interest in Jon Gray, until I noticed that he actually pitches better at Coors Field than he does on the road. His 4.46 career ERA and much-better 3.77 career FIP suggest a guy who is more like a middle-of-the-rotation arm with upside to pitch great, but downside to get hammered. Scott Oberg is a bullpen arm that could be of some interest, though he's signed to a team-friendly deal and is coming off a blood clot in his arm.

D'backs
They could contend for a Wild Card spot with the additions they've made, but if they do fall out of it, maybe Robbie Ray becomes available. They could also make Archie Bradley available, but screw that guy.

Padres
If they don't contend, the obvious name here is Kirby Yates, who is going to be a free agent after the 2020 season. Keep in mind that they just traded for Emilio Pagan, who can serve as a much-cheaper closer replacement going forward, as Pagan hasn't even become arb eligible yet and won't be a free agent until 2024.

Cubs
Though I could see them trade some position players (Bryant, Contreras, etc.), it's hard to see a match for us among their pitchers. Maybe you can make a case for Craig Kimbrel if he re-establishes his dominance.

Reds
They seem to have gone all-in on trying to contend, but it wouldn't be surprising if they don't. With Trevor Bauer slated to hit free agency, if he can get back to his ace-like ways (no one was more mercurial last season than he was), he would be a good rental target. Closer Raisel Iglesias could also be on the move, as he's coming off a lackluster 2019 where he posted an ERA of over 4 and had 12 losses. Still, he's fairly affordable, owed $9MM this year and then $9.125MM in '21 before hitting free agency.

Brewers
I'm just going to mention Josh Hader, since it did seem like the team was at least willing to listen to offers for him this winter, even if I doubt they were looking to move him unless they were blown away with an offer. Still, he's just going to get more and more expensive through arbitration, and if they fall out of it, I wouldn't rule out a deal if they got back a lot of assets.

Cardinals
Tough to see a match here. They could make Andrew Miller available, but he hasn't been the same for a couple of years now, and even Carlos Martinez has been a little shaky since his arm issues came about.

Mets
This team has refused to have a sell-off of its veterans for a couple of years now, even as they disappointed. They failed to deal Wheeler last year, for example, and they are once again going for it this season. However, if they stumble yet again, you have to wonder if they will trade Noah Syndergaard, who will be a free agent after this season ends. If Edwin Diaz gets back to what he's capable of, he's another logical trade candidate. And if they really wanted to actually commit to a rebuild, no one would bring back more assets than Jacob deGrom.

Nationals
Maybe Sean Doolittle could become available, since he's slated to hit free agency. He struggled last season, but has a great track record overall.

Braves
Tough to see a match here; if they surprisingly fall out of contention, perhaps Cole Hamels, on a 1-year deal, is made available, but at this stage of his career, I don't know how much he helps us.

Phillies
Only match I see is reliever Hector Neris, who rebounded from a dreadful 2019 with a strong 2020 season. He's arb eligible one more time in 2021 before hitting free agency, so if he's having another strong year, it might be smart for them to cash him in before he becomes a rental.

Angels
Who knows if there is any bitterness after the failed trade, but it would make sense for them to see what the market is for closer Hansel Robles if they once again fail to contend. Robles will be a free agent after the 2021 season.

Rangers
They are hoping to contend with a revamped rotation that includes Corey Kluber, but if it doesn't work out, not only could I see them try to offload Kluber, but perhaps free-agent-to-be Mike Minor. Maybe they would also look to get back a bounty for young reliever Jose Leclerc, though he's signed to a team-friendly deal through 2024.

A's
Tough to find a match here.

Astros
F@*K THOSE CHEATERS

Twins
Tough to imagine them not contending, but if they don't, you'd figure that free-agent-to-be Jake Odorizzi would be available, though he's more of a mid-rotation type.

Indians
Beyond Lindor, the obvious names are Mike Clevinger and Brad Hand. Clevinger, of course, will have to prove his health as he comes back from meniscus surgery, but assuming that he can do that, he's a legitimate ace, though he'll cost a fortune. And Hand is a legit lefty relief ace, and is signed through 2021.

White Sox
Closer Alex Colome would be a logical trade candidate, as he'll be a free agent next winter, and they have Aaron Bummer ready to step in for future years. Colome is more of a groundball specialist reliever with his power sinker, but he's had a solid career and he gets guys out.

Yankees
Let's just skip ahead: the Yanks are going to contend.

Red Sox
Tough to see a pitching match here, but I'll just mention JD Martinez in case we have some type of injury to a star hitter in our lineup.

Rays
I could see them entertaining trade offers for Charlie Morton if they surprisingly fail to contend, but even if that unlikely scenario came about, I think Morton wants to stay near the East Coast, and I'm guessing that the club would try to accommodate him even if he got moved.

Blue Jays
I could see closer Ken Giles on the block, although he's been inconsistent in his career.
_________________
Two series wins down, two more to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jonnybravo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 26908

PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 2:19 am    Post subject:

I'm buying a Belli jersey. I just listened to his interview. Make him a Dodger for life.
_________________
KOBE
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 21501
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 2:47 am    Post subject:

jonnybravo wrote:
I'm buying a Belli jersey. I just listened to his interview. Make him a Dodger for life.


If I had to guess, I think we will strongly prioritize making he and Buehler Dodgers for a long time. I don't think the same about Seager.
_________________
Two series wins down, two more to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 6848

PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:02 am    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
jonnybravo wrote:
I'm buying a Belli jersey. I just listened to his interview. Make him a Dodger for life.


If I had to guess, I think we will strongly prioritize making he and Buehler Dodgers for a long time. I don't think the same about Seager.


I agree with you. But just to play devil’s advocate, if we end up signing Mookie Betts this summer...

Out of Seager and Bellinger, Seager might be playing the more irreplaceable position.

Of course, that depends on if we view Bellinger as a CF or corner outfielder.

But of course, Bellinger's the more irreplaceable talent by far. Just saying Seager might be playing the more irreplaceable position.

Nevertheless, if we're going to give big money to a SS in 2 years, I'd imagine they'd rather go after Lindor in free agency.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13062

PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:53 am    Post subject:

nickuku wrote:
Any of you guys had the stomach to listen to the Astros "apologies"?


The one from the press conference were pretty weak. The ones from the player interviews later weren’t. Correa seemed to be the most apologetic, but I don’t think any apology will suffice unless they forfeit their rings. So it really doesn’t matter....

The league likely blew it by giving the players immunity, but how else were they going to get the info? Serious question.


Last edited by Dreamshake on Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:58 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 244, 245, 246, 247, 248  Next
Page 245 of 248
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB