DODGERS News/Rumors Thread

Discussion in 'Los Angeles DODGERS' started by irish, Apr 1, 2013.

  1. doyerfan

    doyerfan MODERATOR Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    26,713
    Likes Received:
    13,016
    Trophy Points:
    228

    like Chad did to take lesser money ;)

    But I mean, it's how it works. He gets what he gets, and why should he take less when Kemp, Ethier, Puig, and Ryu didn't? Like I said, it's easier said than done to take less.

    And that Braun deal was fantastic for Braun, he got insane financial security.. Sure, he might be underpaid sometimes but he gets great security in case of anything happening to him. Same for Longoria, Rizzo, etc. We coulda pulled a Tampa Bay Rays and tried to sign Kershaw long term way early into his career but now it's too late for that.

    You have two simple ways to approach these youngsters: Sign them early and guarantee them years but potentially save yourself money if they do pan out as your scouts/projections think, or take it year by year to take away risk of injury, not panning out, or not being a good fit, and then pay him big money when the time comes if they turn out great. Ned usually always takes the second route which is why we always have to pay huge money to these guys, meanwhile teams like the Rays and Brewers go for the first route because they have to be economical and take risks like this.
     
  2. LAFord

    LAFord DSP Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    8,465
    Likes Received:
    4,267
    Trophy Points:
    173
    My point is because we've gotten contracts like Crawford, Ethier, Kemp, makes it less likely to assume we could take on more big money. You somehow view it the opposite....but there has to be an end somewhere.
    There is a luxury tax problem.
     
  3. phils phanatic

    phils phanatic Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2013
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    28
    The rangers would probably toy with the idea but considering they went out on cliff lee and greinke then I doubt they'd be a finalist.the yankees would either have to throw their hopes of getting under the tax out or fall out.the angels have weaver due for another extension in a few years and are saddled with pujols and hamilton so they're out.the phillies would have to move BOTH of papelbon and lee/howard without eating money and thats VERY unlikely.the mets still have tons of money to pay back due to madoff and would be better suited spending any spending money on offense.the cubs could be serious contenders but I think for ck to take them serious they'd have to make a HUGE jump next year.the red sox could afford him but I need to see more of cherington before I decide if he'd do a significant long tern deal,keep in mind they handed out only 1-3 yeardeals this offseason so idk there
     
  4. LAFord

    LAFord DSP Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    8,465
    Likes Received:
    4,267
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Those deals are team friendly. There's no way you can say otherwise....except Braun NOW. At the time it was team friendly.
     
  5. phils phanatic

    phils phanatic Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2013
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    28
    They were very team friendly deals considering what each can get as a FA.also surprising is weaver and cargo are boras clients
     
    LAFord likes this.
  6. LAFord

    LAFord DSP Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    8,465
    Likes Received:
    4,267
    Trophy Points:
    173
    The problem with your argument is it only takes 1 team...just 1 to out bid us or drive it up.
     
    Irish likes this.
  7. LAFord

    LAFord DSP Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    8,465
    Likes Received:
    4,267
    Trophy Points:
    173
    All this shit makes me not like Kershaw a little bit. It's reminding me of Piazza. I don't like it.
     
  8. IBleedBlue15

    IBleedBlue15 DSP Stud

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    16,150
    Likes Received:
    5,815
    Trophy Points:
    198
    I understand that and don't think that we should just throw huge contracts around; but not signing our best player because we have guys that make more than they should on our roster is pretty bad business to me. I think it's been pretty obvious that Crawford or Dre won't be in blue for their entire contracts. Plus, I believe we have like $50MM coming off the books this offseason.
     
  9. IBleedBlue15

    IBleedBlue15 DSP Stud

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    16,150
    Likes Received:
    5,815
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Keep in mind that the only reference point we have is a Ken Rosenthal report. We really don't know anything, and I doubt Rosenthal does either.
     
    LAFord likes this.
  10. doyerfan

    doyerfan MODERATOR Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    26,713
    Likes Received:
    13,016
    Trophy Points:
    228

    I mean this not to get you to hate other people or to try and point you in another way but just to honestly ask, why do you dislike this info we have on Kershaw (since some of it has gone public we know more than any other situation but still probably know VERY little of the story given we don't know where the leak came from, don't know CKs true intentions, and what if any pressure he gets from the union/agent) but were okay with Kemp getting what was at the time the largest contract in NL history?
     
  11. LAFord

    LAFord DSP Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    8,465
    Likes Received:
    4,267
    Trophy Points:
    173
    What? Kemp's contract was the largest? Really? I wasn't at all aware of that. Then again NL/AL really matters not at all IMO. It seemed like less than market value to me at the time. To me it's only bad because he's been injured, which could happen to CK too.
     
  12. doyerfan

    doyerfan MODERATOR Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    26,713
    Likes Received:
    13,016
    Trophy Points:
    228

    Yeah largest in NL at time, 2nd largest in MLB, only behind Prince Fielders I believe.

    And yeah, it seemed like less than market value at time to some and thats what kinda got me. It's not to say maybe someone would have possibly paid more, or that no one would have matched cause I think both of those are very possible, especially someone matching, but he didn't take a good discount for it by any means. But same thing with Kershaw, someone could exceed 7/210, and quite a few could match, it's a huge contract that is where the market is at and he might be able to fetch more somewhere but he isn't guaranteed health/production in 2014 and isn't taking far less in 7/210 (I keep repeating that number but it could be something way different) and is gonna be possibly coming off one of the best pitching years since who knows when... So although it's an outrageous number, it's a similar situation to Kemp and it's probably what we have to do to keep him, just like we had to do with Matthew.
     
  13. LAFord

    LAFord DSP Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    8,465
    Likes Received:
    4,267
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Good point I agree.

    Again, I think I'm looking at things in the opposite direction as you are here. There is a limit and we've already surpassed it...bad contracts are there already.
    IMO, Kershaw has to realize that's the price we pay to have the best team in baseball for now, so he also has to give a little and not try to take everything he can get. I know it's his right to do so, but does he want a great team behind him or not because there's only so much money to go around. The Dodgers have to realize the more they give him, the more we are screwed down the road when we try to get our payroll to a respectable level instead of this ridiculousness we have now. That Luxury tax is pretty huge after a few years.

    And that $50M coming off is chump change when you consider we have to fill 3B and 2B, resign Hanley or fill SS too. The rotation has 3 holes in it(1 possibly being CK). Don't forget Jansen will demand the world someday at the rate he is getting it done.
     
  14. doyerfan

    doyerfan MODERATOR Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    26,713
    Likes Received:
    13,016
    Trophy Points:
    228
    and before it's taken that way, I'm not slighting Kemp or trying to say he's a greedy, money first motherfucker but I mean, him and Kershaw are pretty much doing the same thing here and management has treated their contract status the same way: Trying to extend a year before the final arb year, and Kershaw is obviously going to get loads more given what he's done and his age.
     
  15. LAFord

    LAFord DSP Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    8,465
    Likes Received:
    4,267
    Trophy Points:
    173
    I still view an everyday player as worth more too. The part that starting pitchers pitch every 5th day is bothersome when comparing contracts. I don't think they deserve the same kind of money. Kemp was way more valuable to the team(as far as winning games everyday) when he was at his best than Kershaw is right now IMO.
     
  16. doyerfan

    doyerfan MODERATOR Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    26,713
    Likes Received:
    13,016
    Trophy Points:
    228

    Sure, all things equal, a position player is more valuable. But we're talking about comparing Kemp who we gave the contract to for his 28-35 ages compared to Kershaw for 26-33 and the track record for Kershaw is superior to Kemps. We're comparing Kemp who had one elite season with two good seasons and two meh seasons sandwiched in there, and who should be a COF, but of course has insane potential to be amazing, to Kershaw who is going to have his 5th straight elite season, and has that same amount of insane potential.

    (Again i want to note I'm not bashing Kemp, just cause I say one is better than the other doesn't mean I hate the other but yeah, theres a reason Kershaw is going to ask for this and get more than Kemp in a semi-similar situation)
     
    LAFord and Irish like this.
  17. doyerfan

    doyerfan MODERATOR Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 2011
    Messages:
    26,713
    Likes Received:
    13,016
    Trophy Points:
    228
    with alllllll that said, I find it very unlike Kershaw isn't signed to an extension given all thats been said, Ned's history, and it's very unlikely this is possible with the current contracts we have so one big contract will have to go in a way that we save money, and I'm hoping someone is a taker for Crawford. Even if we don't get any players for Crawford, saving the cash to be able to use elsewhere is gonna be worth it, and hopefully that can happen.
     
  18. phils phanatic

    phils phanatic Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2013
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    28
    While true why overpay when you MIGHT be able to get a lesser or equal deal in FA?my point is why bid against yourself?the yankees are doing the same with cano,although his situation is a little different.
     
  19. phils phanatic

    phils phanatic Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2013
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I guess let me say this to close my argument,if the dodgers are in on cano when he hits FA then give ck w/e he wants RIGHT THIS SECOND bc no matter if cano signs with la or ny or sum1 else even than you know that ny will be driving the price up in kershaw if he would hit the market.if they don't plan on pursuing cano then I think it's safe to wait.also,keep in mind a lot of things can happen in a year too,I mean who knew verlander would struggle this early on in his contract?
     
  20. phils phanatic

    phils phanatic Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2013
    Messages:
    423
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Also,for the record,I find it VERY UNLIKELY ck pitches for any1 other than LA in 2015 either way they cut it
     

Share This Page