Manny a Dodger

yessir. you were wrong about Hu, but right about this. His record doesn't indicate how well he has been with the Dodgers because the Dodgers average 1 run a game it seems. The offense sucks and has for years. With 10 batthing coaches over 8 years, and now this Manny move (which is genius because the Dodgers don't have to pay him anything) it's clear that Colletti is simply reaching to get offense somehow some way to match up with solid pitching efforts we've had for the last 3 years. I don't give a fuck how we do it, I just want to win a playoff series for the love of Christ. I'm tired of spending billions to only keep remembering 1988 and say "wait til next year".

 

Huh? How was I wrong about Hu? You said he could play third base and I said he was strictly a middle infielder. Obviously I was the one who was right and you were wrong, so I have no idea what you're thinking about here.


In any case, this basically just fell into Colletti's lap, so I don't really give him much credit for it. He's been one of the worst general managers in MLB, and if not for his screw-ups, the Dodgers would be a formidable contender. Seriously, how could someone do worse with the excellent farm system Logan White built for him?

 

I erred when I included Damon in the "significant drop in productivity". But, he isn't the player he was 5 years ago and certainly isn't a value. If the Red Sox re-sign the above players, then they suddenly become the Yankees of the past 5 years. Giambi, Damon, Sheffield, Pavano, Brown, Jaret Wright, Heredia, Jeff Weaver; Overpriced salaries at the end of their careers with their best years behind them and no titles.

The Red Sox, by not re-signing the above players, have positioned theirselves to be able to keep talent like Jon Lester, Jon Paplebon, Clay Bucholz, Dustin Pedroia, Jacoby Ellsbury, Josh Beckett, and Dice-K in Boston when their contracts are up. Would I rather have Ellsbury patrolling CF at 406K or Damon at 13 million at this point in their career? The Sox won a World Series with both, but Ellsbury could have been MVP last year. He is in a bit of a soph slump at the plate, but he is a much better outfielder and his future is tremendous.

Back to Lowe, as far as his ERA, playing in the American League will definately bump your ERA up at least (.70). Dice-K, who is 7 years younger, is making almost 3 million less a year than Derek Lowe. Getting rid of Lowe freed up cash to sign him.

My original point was and still is, the Red Sox have been the best organization in baseball at knowing the value of their players and the market. They have made the best player moves (not all good) over the last 5 years. Right now they are ranked as the 4th highest payroll. Next year, they could drop down as low as 9th. I think their office recognizes when a player's career is through maturing and they let them go at that time.

 

Manny in LA

I grew up a Dodger fan, 1988 seems like a long time ago. Who are they going to put around Manny to keep teams from pitching to him? Does Andruw Jones become an 18 million dollar platoon man?

I don't think Manny will resign there. He spends an awful lot of time in the Dominican in the offseason and LA is a long way from Santo Domingo. I think he would prefer to be on the East Coast. I look for him to end up a Yankee or Met in the off season.

He does have a good relationship with Joe Torre. Scott Boras, his agent, has a "friendly" relationship with the Dodgers as well, so maybe.

 

you said he would take Furcals place and could play middle infield, which you were right and I was wrong, but he can't do either because he can't hit for shit.

 

I agree, I was just pointing out that it's not like he suddenly got worse when the Red Sox let him go. Plus I don't see J.D. Drew for $70 million as being a much better bet than Damon at $52 million, so Boston has made some questionable fiscal decisions.

Not really, no. A jump like that happens for some pitchers, but the average ERA in the N.L. is only about 0.30-0.35 less than the average ERA in the A.L.

Uh ... no. Matsuzaka's contract averages only $333,333 less per season than Lowe's, and that's only if you ignore the additional $51.1 million posting fee.

No way. Oakland doesn't do stupid things like giving J.D. Drew $15 million a year or Julio Lugo $9 million a year. Boston has made some smart moves, no question, but they aren't even close to the best.

That's what I was telling you in that thread, that he didn't hit well enough to be considered at third base. I told you that he's a good glove guy, which is useful, but he's never going to be a very good hitter. That said, I still think they might let Furcal walk and start him at shortstop.

 

I agree that Drew is overpaid, but at least this year he is earning some of the 70 million.

I do ignore the 51.1 million, when speaking of Dice-K; But even if you figure that in, Dice-K is still a better value. He has been very, very solid this year (11-2, 3.09). He is still only 27.

Lugo has been a bust. I think he will be replaced. That is where the Red Sox will spend money in the off season. Either that, or Jed Lowrie will take over.

If Oakland were to win a World Series, I would agree with you. But that is the main goal......to win a World Series. If the Yankees were to win the series, I would say all there spending was worth it. The Red Sox have won 2 in the last 4 years, so I think they have made the smartest moves to get them to that point.

I get tired of hearing about how well the "small market" money pinching teams are doing. It doesn't mean squat unless they win something. Series, League, Division.......something. Oakland does a terrible job with their facilities. Their stadium is one of the worst in baseball. They run their team like a cheap business that is afraid to put a little money into it. I would hate to be one of their fans, because I really don't think the owners care very much about winning.

I don't think you can say that about the Yankees and Sox.

 

$17.2 million per season is not a better value than Lowe at $9 million per. Not even close. And he's not been nearly as good as his ERA or win total indicates. He's walking guys at a worrisome clip and his strikeout rate has declined as well. He's gotten lucky for the first part of the year, but he needs to cut down his walks dramatically.

That's not what we're discussing. You said that Boston is the best organization at valuing players, but it's pretty obvious that they've made some bad mistakes in addition to some good decisions. They don't even come close to Oakland in that respect. Florida would be another good example, and they have won a recent World Series.

Boston and New York don't make more money because they've been smarter. They make more because they have natural demographic advantages.

 

Are the Raiders at a disadvantage because they play in Oakland?

Florida is a better example because they have won and continuing to win and compete. Oakland is not, because they don't win. There is no value there if the determining factor is a championship of some sort. The A's are no different demographically or geographically than San Francisco. The Giants spend money, although poorly. Why have these two franchises gone in opposite directions as far as facilities, interest, and fan support? Granted the Giants stink, but geographically and demographically they basically are separated by a bay. The A's dominated the bay area in the 70's, 80's, and 90's as far as attendance and interest. Now there is none. They hardly can get 15,000 there on a good night.

Rich Harden, Danny Haren, Joe Blanton, Mark Kotsay, Barry Zito, Tim Hudson, and Mark Mulder are all guys the A's have been forced to trade or not to re-sign. But what have they got in return?

You would really rather have Lowe in your rotation than Dice-K? The 51.1 million the Sox paid for the rights to talk to Dice K should come into effect because he didn't get that cash.

 

You answered your own statement. Oakland doesn't spend the amount money like the Giants. But the A's get more in return knowing they'll lose them anyway