Levine: Garland To Be Traded

[southsideirish71]

Dodgers GM Ned Colletti said he has enough payroll flexibility to sign a front-of-the-rotation starting pitcher, such as Jeff Weaver.

"For the right pitcher, we could do what we need to do, yes," Colletti said. "We absolutely need a pitcher, and I'd like to add two." If the Dodgers really have that much money to spend, they might prefer Kevin Millwood to Weaver. Dec. 21 - 3:58 am et

 

Kevin Appier, who hopes to return to the majors next season, threw for Dodgers scouts in Arizona on Monday.

He'd have to be better than Scott Erickson. Appier, 38, announced his retirement after failing to make the Royals out of spring training last season. Dec. 21

 

This has probably been hashed and rehashed on this thread but these rotoworld quotes let you know a few things.

 

Colletti is aggressive and is trying to put a contender on the field this year, and has money to spend. The dodgers can afford a top tier pitcher like Garland, and could have a 72 hour window to get a long term deal done. He is a better option from a durability standpoint than Millwood, and he provides a better pitcher than Weaver ever was.

 

The fact that they are having Appier throwing in a workout doesnt mean that he will make the team, it just means that they are open to getting pitching in any form or manner for their team.

 

Garland to Dodgers for top tier prospects sounds like a good fit for both teams.

[SSH2005]

Technically speaking Vazquez gives up a ton of hr's, but he's not exactly a fly ball pitcher.  Hell he's had some years where he was a ground ball pitcher.  I can only hope part of the reason for the HR's this past year were because he was in AZ (and for whatever reason the ball jumps out of there).  AZ (I don't know what the stats show) is one of the better hitters parks in the NL.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He is supposed to have a pretty good sinker. Maybe he stopped using it as much or that Arizona air killed the effectiveness of it?

[Rowand44]

The only reason this works out as a wash is because we control the rights to Javier for 2 more years than Jon.  Thats the only reason too, cause we gave up a stud CF to get him.

 

However, if we are able to turn that stud CF into a couple stud pitching prospects, than you won't see one complaint out of him. As a whole I like what Kenny's done this off-season.  I'm not much of a fan of Vazquez, but I admit the stuff is there.

 

However, he has attitude problems and I'm not going to just assume Coop can turn him back into the pitcher he once was.  Hopefully he can though.

To be honest, I'm more confident that kenny has seen something in Vaz that can be fixed, such as tipping pitches maybe. I say this because he's been after Vaz for a while kind of like he was with Jose when they knew he was doing just that thing. We'll see but I'm giving Kenny the benefit of the doubt, he deserves it.

[3E8]

So Braxton definitely isn't starting games anymore? I know he started all games he pitched in for 2004 and was mixed between starting games and working out of the pen last year.

[Chisoxfn]

It's not just Coop, though, or the 'Ozzie' factor.

 

He's going to be pitching in front of a defense that was #2 in converting balls in play into outs.  Likewise, wherever Garland goes, his defense will be worse, which can mean bad things, especially for a guy who doesn't K a whole lot of batters.

 

Vazquez was the right guy to go after.  I still don't like that they gave up Young, but if there was ever a guy to rebound, Vazquez is the guy.

That I don't have a problem with. I like that argument and I hope your right. I also have to say the fact we got rid of Duque was nice.

 

Put it this way if we can get Vazquez to pitch like Garland did last year (which is a possibility, although I have some doubts and I sure as hell don't guaranatee it). Than we swing a deal with the Dodgers for one of Elbert/Billingsley/Guzman, Broxton and Edwin Jackson (or some sort of deal like this) than we'll have essentially dealt Chris Young, Viz and El Duque for 2 more years of Garland (ie Vazquez putting up Garland like numbers) a potential Bobby Jenks clone, a #1-2 potential starter, and than a guy in Jackson who has the stuff of a frontline starter.

 

Not a bad deal considering Kenny likes pitching.

[Chisoxfn]

So Braxton definitely isn't starting games anymore?  I know he started all games he pitched in for 2004 and was mixed between starting games and working out of the pen last year.

No, the Dodgers converted him to the pen when Gagne was shut down for good. 5 weeks later he was called up to the big leagues. He was fast-tracked so to speak and many scouts believe in the end his home is as a closer. He's basically as highly touted of a closer prospect as there is right now (simply put you usually don't have highly touted closer prospects) and well they are almost always converted relievers.

 

With rare exceptions. Koch was drafted as a closer, Houston Street, Cordero.

[Cerbaho-WG]

If with the Dodgers.. Dewyln Young.. Otherwise no deal.

 

Thank God you're not the GM. You're trading away a young starter who put up a mid 3 ERA in the AL and you want a player who reeks of utility player. Add to the fact that the Dodger system is f***ing loaded with pitching prospects and a very good Joel Guzman...and yet you still want Delwyn Young.

 

Smart!

[3E8]

Why has no one mentioned Russell Martin yet?

[Chisoxfn]

Thank God you're not the GM. You're trading away a young starter who put up a mid 3 ERA in the AL and you want a player who reeks of utility player. Add to the fact that the Dodger system is f***ing loaded with pitching prospects and a very good Joel Guzman...and yet you still want Delwyn Young.

 

Smart!

If we want hitting prospects it Laroche or Guzman, no ifs and or butts. If we want pitching we have plenty of options: Billingsley/Elbert/Broxton/Miller/Jackson. All of those guys when healthy have darn good stuff. Miller and Jackson both have had some injury issues though (which should be noted).

 

Broxton is the one thats major league ready and you could make a case that Jackson is (if he puts his head on straight).

[Chisoxfn]

Why has no one mentioned Russell Martin yet?

I made mention of him a while back. But I don't see the Sox dealing for a catching prospect. Martin is a good prospect, but catching prospects are so hard to read. Not to many seem to develop for whatever reason so I'm always leery on that. Plus with AJ signed for another 3 years, that should give us time to find our own in-house between Hernandez and Lucy (who I think is a major sleeper).

 

I'd just rather nab pitching prospects and if I wanted a hitter from them I rate Laroche and Guzman as better options. Of course we have Fields at there spots, although Guzman may end up in LF or at 1st. In terms of Fields I hope to hell he breaks through this year. He has the skills and did some promising things in the 2nd half of the season at Bham, but he still has a lot to work on.

 

Finding a long term solution at 3rd (since it seems the Sox may not have Crede for too much longer) is not a bad option and the Dodgers can offer us that as well as some talented pitchers.

 

That whole list (aside from Miller and Jackson) of pitchers is better than any of our starting prospects. I think Jackson has better pure stuff than any of our pitching prospects as well and Miller (if he gets things back together) could find himself in that category as well (he looked good late last season after coming back from his injury).

 

The Dodgers are as loaded of an organization as there is. By far #1 in my mind.

[3E8]

That's the thing, I thought Martin could play C/3B? I just love K:BB ratios that are under 1.

[RockRaines]

Elbert, Broxton, Jackson would be a very good deal.  Elbert ranks somewhere near Gio in terms of a prospect.  They both were in the SAL last year (well Gio got promoted eventually) and both have high K numbers.  I think Elbert has a better build, but both are potential front of the rotation guys.

I agree with everything, I think that a couple of these guys are untouchable though, that why I was pushing for Elbert. He is not quite to that level yet, and not as heralded as their top three, but could end up being s tud.

[RockRaines]

No, the Dodgers converted him to the pen when Gagne was shut down for good.  5 weeks later he was called up to the big leagues.  He was fast-tracked so to speak and many scouts believe in the end his home is as a closer.  He's basically as highly touted of a closer prospect as there is right now (simply put you usually don't have highly touted closer prospects) and well they are almost always converted relievers.

 

With rare exceptions.  Koch was drafted as a closer, Houston Street, Cordero.

huston street.

[tonyho7476]

I don't know how you guys know all these Dodger prospects. I am clueless.

[nitetrain8601]

This has probably been hashed and rehashed on this thread but these rotoworld quotes let you know a few things.

 

Colletti is aggressive and is trying to put a contender on the field this year, and has money to spend. The dodgers can afford a top tier pitcher like Garland, and could have a 72 hour window to get a long term deal done.  He is a better option from a durability standpoint than Millwood, and he provides a better pitcher than Weaver ever was.

 

The fact that they are having Appier throwing in a workout doesnt mean that he will make the team, it just means that they are open to getting pitching in any form or manner for their team. 

 

Garland to Dodgers for top tier prospects sounds like a good fit for both teams.

 

Sure does. Get Kenny on the phone!

[Cerbaho-WG]

If we want hitting prospects it Laroche or Guzman, no ifs and or butts.  If we want pitching we have plenty of options: Billingsley/Elbert/Broxton/Miller/Jackson.  All of those guys when healthy have darn good stuff.  Miller and Jackson both have had some injury issues though (which should be noted). 

 

Broxton is the one thats major league ready and you could make a case that Jackson is (if he puts his head on straight).

 

Bingo. The pool of players should consist of LaRoche, Guzman, Billingsley, Jackson, Miller and Broxton. If LA doesn't at least offer two of them, KW would be wise to hang up.

[Rowand44]

I don't know how you guys know all these Dodger prospects.  I am clueless. 

Meh, some of us don't have lives. You should be proud that you don't know this stuff.

[RockRaines]

Bingo. The pool of players should consist of LaRoche, Guzman, Billingsley, Jackson, Miller and Broxton. If LA doesn't at least offer two of them, KW would be wise to hang up.

Cerb, you no likey Elbert?

[fathom]

Bingo. The pool of players should consist of LaRoche, Guzman, Billingsley, Jackson, Miller and Broxton. If LA doesn't at least offer two of them, KW would be wise to hang up.

 

Here's my overstated philosophy: KW depleted our farm system to get some highly skilled players who are question marks. If we're going to trade a highly skilled player with probably fewer question marks, then he needs to replenish our system with great prospects, not 2 or 3 average prospects.

[Cerbaho-WG]

Cerb, you no likey Elbert?

 

I've got nothing against him, but if you're trading a 26-year-old pitcher at the height of his trading value you'd be wise to get some major league ready prospects in return, not a guy in Low-A.

[nitetrain8601]

I think 3y 24mil is not a bad offer for Jon.  Unfortunately the market is crazy right now and he will get more elsewhere.  He has had 1 good year.  3-24 is not bad for a pitcher that has had 1 good year.

 

The way the market is set now, it's a horrible contract, especially for a 27 year old.

[beck72]

I'm calling BS.

 

If Arizona was able to get a five-tool, potential superstar in Chris Young for a pitcher who has been league average for the past two years, and who carries a big contract -- then we NEED to land either Billingsley or Guzman.  If we don't get those two, it better be one helluva package that includes both Miller, Jackson, Broxton, and possibly another prospect. 

 

If given the choice between Billingsley and Guzman, I think I'd take Billingsley, just because we're going to need a cheap starter besides B-Mac in the next year or two.  I'm also slightly worried about Guzman's 3/1 K/BB ratio (almost 130 K's); but that's me also doing a bit of nit-picking, as he was only 20 last year in AA.

 

If a team doesn't want to give KW a knock-your-socks-off type deal right now, wait till the trade deadline.  Because, I'm pretty sure Garland would be the TOP commodity at the deadline. 

 

Gosh, I'm so hoping for a Kazmir-for-Zambrano type, lopsided deal.

 

The sox are seemingly intent on trading a proven, durable #3/ #4 type SP with one year left on his contract yet most everyone wants LA's top SP prospect [potentially a #1, #2 SP] or top positional prospect, along with a bunch of other prospects like a few #3 type SP or stud relievers? Am I the only one who thinks the board asking price is a bit too unrealistic?! The Dodgers won't do it and few other teams will trade their top minor league pitching prospects, as those arms will be close to helping in the bigs very soon. Seeing how the sox need young arms [and the reports are that's what's being asked for Garland, it's imortant to see what the sox can realistically expect in return

 

If the sox could get 2 solid #3 type SP prospects and a prospect position player, that would be a good deal IMO.

 

BTW- the sox got Vazquez for Young and cash relief in terms of Duque's and Viz's contracts [close to $7 mill] and the cash thrown in.

 

As far as hoping for a Kazmir-Zambrano deal, most GM's aren't smoking crack.

Edited December 21, 2005 by beck72

[RockRaines]

I've got nothing against him, but if you're trading a 26-year-old pitcher at the height of his trading value you'd be wise to get some major league ready prospects in return, not a guy in Low-A.

fair enough, I think he is fairly heralded however.

[beck72]

Elbert, Broxton, Jackson would be a very good deal.  Elbert ranks somewhere near Gio in terms of a prospect.  They both were in the SAL last year (well Gio got promoted eventually) and both have high K numbers.  I think Elbert has a better build, but both are potential front of the rotation guys.

 

That's along the lines of a deal I think the sox could expect. A solid contributor in Broxton very soon for the sox, and 2 good arms but with question marks [Ebert's youth and Jackson's inconsistency].

[Chisoxfn]

The sox are seemingly intent on trading a proven, durable #3/ #4 type SP with one year left on his contract yet most everyone wants LA's top SP prospect [potentially a #1, #2 SP] or top positional prospect, along with a bunch of other prospects like a few #3 type SP or stud relievers? Am I the only one who thinks the board asking price is a bit too unrealistic?! The Dodgers won't do it and few other teams will trade their top minor league pitching prospects, as those arms will be close to helping in the bigs very soon. Seeing how the sox need young arms [and the reports are that's what's being asked for Garland, it's imortant to see what the sox can realistically expect in return

 

If the sox could get 2 solid #3 type SP prospects and a prospect position player, that would be a good deal IMO.

 

BTW- the sox got Vazquez for Young and cash relief in terms of Duque's and Viz's contracts [close to $7 mill] and the cash thrown in. 

 

As far as hoping for a Kazmir-Zambrano deal, most GM's aren't smoking crack.

No, they aren't unrealistic. This isn't a #3 or #4 pitcher, this is a guy that teams would be paying #1/#2 money next year and that on many teams last season he would have been a #1 or #2 and I think you can make a case that he was our best pither over the full season last year (Buehrle had that large stretch where he was struggling and Contreras had that amazing 2nd half, but was mediocre to poor in the 1st half).

 

We give up a 26 year old whose entering his prime, we get some damn good talent in return. No exceptions.