Dodgers OFs

[Eminor3rd]

Couple things to keep in mind:

 

1. Lots of teams like Kemp's bat and would like to have him if the Dodgers pay a bunch of money for the contract. There's no way we're going to be able to get him for Danks and expect them to throw in money. Whichever team gets him is going to pay for it -- either by taking on way more money than they want to get him for little talent, or by giving up something of real value to get Kemp at a reasonable salary.

 

2. Matt Kemp has made it publicly clear that he wants to play center field, and has a a history of inconsistency that appears to be at least partially related to his happiness level. I don't think that he's likely to get exactly what he wants (CF) anywhere, but you can bet he would be very vocally angry if he's relegated to DH, and that's not something that his acquiring team will want to deal with. If we get Kemp, he will be in the field every day, most likely in left.

[lasttriptotulsa]

I would be all for an Ethier, Danks swap if it could happen. Ethier is owed 56 million over the next 3 years (with his 2018 buyout) but subtracting Danks' contract makes it a much more reasonable 27.5 million over 3 years. He had a bad year last year, but before that he was a consistent 120-130 wRC+ hitter that plays decent defense. Then go and sign Sandoval/Headley, a FA righty starter, a couple bullpen guys and call it an offseason.

 

A lineup of

 

1. Eaton (8)

2. Ramirez (6)

3. Abreu (3)

4. Sandoval (5)

5. Garcia (7/9)

6. Ethier (7/9)

7. Semien/Sanchez/Johnson (4)

8. Gillaspie/Tank (DH)

9. Flowers (2)

 

and a rotation of

1. Sale

2. Righty FA (Masterson, Shields, McCarthy, etc..)

3. Quintana

4. Rodon (if they deem him ready)

5. Noesi

 

looks pretty good to me and puts the payroll in a seemingly doable $95 million range.

 

 

[Balta1701]

Couple things to keep in mind:

 

1. Lots of teams like Kemp's bat and would like to have him if the Dodgers pay a bunch of money for the contract. There's no way we're going to be able to get him for Danks and expect them to throw in money. Whichever team gets him is going to pay for it -- either by taking on way more money than they want to get him for little talent, or by giving up something of real value to get Kemp at a reasonable salary.

 

2. Matt Kemp has made it publicly clear that he wants to play center field, and has a a history of inconsistency that appears to be at least partially related to his happiness level. I don't think that he's likely to get exactly what he wants (CF) anywhere, but you can bet he would be very vocally angry if he's relegated to DH, and that's not something that his acquiring team will want to deal with. If we get Kemp, he will be in the field every day, most likely in left.

One more thing to keep in mind - if the reports of the Dodgers needing to cut payroll from a couple weeks ago are accurate, and so far that does seem to be consistent with how rumors like this are being presented, then the teams that offers the Dodgers the most salary relief for 2 of these guys are probably the teams that will get them. In other words, Danks going back would be very unlikely.

[southsider2k5]

Phil Rogers ‏@philgrogers 1h1 hour ago Chicago, IL

 

If Dodgers are willing to pick up significant $ in a deal, John Danks could put White Sox in play for Kemp, Crawford or Ethier.

[TheFutureIsNear]

I would definitely try to swap Danks and Tank for Crawford or Either. Not saying I wouldn't want Kemp, but it just seems like a hassle that could easily blow in our faces. Just get the Dodgers to throw in like $10M or so for their 2017 contracts and it makes a ton of sense for both clubs.

[caulfield12]

I would be all for an Ethier, Danks swap if it could happen. Ethier is owed 56 million over the next 3 years (with his 2018 buyout) but subtracting Danks' contract makes it a much more reasonable 27.5 million over 3 years. He had a bad year last year, but before that he was a consistent 120-130 wRC+ hitter that plays decent defense. Then go and sign Sandoval/Headley, a FA righty starter, a couple bullpen guys and call it an offseason.

 

A lineup of

 

1. Eaton (8)

2. Ramirez (6)

3. Abreu (3)

4. Sandoval (5)

5. Garcia (7/9)

6. Ethier (7/9)

7. Semien/Sanchez/Johnson (4)

8. Gillaspie/Tank (DH)

9. Flowers (2)

 

and a rotation of

1. Sale

2. Righty FA (Masterson, Shields, McCarthy, etc..)

3. Quintana

4. Rodon (if they deem him ready)

5. Noesi

 

looks pretty good to me and puts the payroll in a seemingly doable $95 million range.

 

Just switch 2 and 3 in the rotation around.

[Balta1701]

I would definitely try to swap Danks and Tank for Crawford or Either. Not saying I wouldn't want Kemp, but it just seems like a hassle that could easily blow in our faces. Just get the Dodgers to throw in like $10M or so for their 2017 contracts and it makes a ton of sense for both clubs.

I have no clue why the Dodgers would have any urge to take on a $4 million bill for Viciedo. Their 1b slot is full, they already have too many outfielders, they don't have a DH slot, and he's a terrible guy to have on the bench for an NL team because he's not versatile and terrible on defense.

[caulfield12]

I have no clue why the Dodgers would have any urge to take on a $4 million bill for Viciedo. Their 1b slot is full, they already have too many outfielders, they don't have a DH slot, and he's a terrible guy to have on the bench for an NL team because he's not versatile and terrible on defense.

 

Yeah, Van Slyke fills that role much more effectively, and they don't even have any playing time for him with Pederson pushing up.

[TheFutureIsNear]

I have no clue why the Dodgers would have any urge to take on a $4 million bill for Viciedo. Their 1b slot is full, they already have too many outfielders, they don't have a DH slot, and he's a terrible guy to have on the bench for an NL team because he's not versatile and terrible on defense.

 

Ehh it was worth a shot in the dark lol...Cuban company for Puig??

 

Realistically Hahn has to find something to do with Viciedo other than just outright non tender him. Don't know about you, but I sure don't want to see him get another 500 AB's in a White Sox uniform.

[Andy the Clown]

Phil Rogers ‏@philgrogers 1h1 hour ago Chicago, IL

 

If Dodgers are willing to pick up significant $ in a deal, John Danks could put White Sox in play for Kemp, Crawford or Ethier.

 

Hey, look who reads Soxtalk. Hi Phil!

[Bob Sacamano]

Preference of which I'd want in a deal:

1. Kemp DH/OF

2. Crawford OF

3. Ethier DH/OF/1B

[BlackSox13]

Hey, look who reads Soxtalk. Hi Phil!

Seriously, no s***. Throw Levine in there too.

 

Preference of which I'd want in a deal:

1. Kemp DH/OF

2. Crawford OF

3. Ethier DH/OF/1B

I'm with ya on the preference order.

 

Just taking a guess but if the Sox do end up with any of these three I think Ethier might just be the player. He would probably cost the least as far as what the Sox would send to LA.

[witesoxfan]

The more and more I have thought about this, the more I believe Ethier is the least likely player to be traded. Among the three-headed albatross that is Kemp, Crawford, and Ethier, consider the following:

 

1) He's the cheapest least-expensive.

2) He also has the least amount of value.

3) He has the greatest positional versatility while being competent defensively.

 

I just think the Dodgers are going to look into moving Crawford and/or Kemp prior to moving Ethier, and I think they're preference would be moving Kemp. I do not think the Sox should attempt to acquire Matt Kemp as I do not believe he would be happy as a DH nor should they want to pay him $20 mill a year to be a DH.

 

Crawford is a bit different, as I could see some appeal to him, but again, you're likely going to have to include Danks and then another couple pieces as well, perhaps Semien (as he's a guy I think Friedman would value quite a bit). That's a price I would be hesitant to pay because I really, really like Semien, and I don't think Crawford is going to be worth it long-term.

 

Frankly, even as I was hoping the Sox would be in on this early on, I now hope they stay away because I do not believe anything good will come of it long-term, and I'm not sure the Sox are close enough short-term to make it worthwhile. What stinks is that it seems to be the best opportunity to move Danks, but the only one that makes sense is dealing Danks for Ethier and I don't think that'd be a move Friedman would make at this point.

[BlackSox13]

The more and more I have thought about this, the more I believe Ethier is the least likely player to be traded. Among the three-headed albatross that is Kemp, Crawford, and Ethier, consider the following:

 

1) He's the cheapest least-expensive.

2) He also has the least amount of value.

3) He has the greatest positional versatility while being competent defensively.

 

I just think the Dodgers are going to look into moving Crawford and/or Kemp prior to moving Ethier, and I think they're preference would be moving Kemp. I do not think the Sox should attempt to acquire Matt Kemp as I do not believe he would be happy as a DH nor should they want to pay him $20 mill a year to be a DH.

 

Crawford is a bit different, as I could see some appeal to him, but again, you're likely going to have to include Danks and then another couple pieces as well, perhaps Semien (as he's a guy I think Friedman would value quite a bit). That's a price I would be hesitant to pay because I really, really like Semien, and I don't think Crawford is going to be worth it long-term.

 

Frankly, even as I was hoping the Sox would be in on this early on, I now hope they stay away because I do not believe anything good will come of it long-term, and I'm not sure the Sox are close enough short-term to make it worthwhile. What stinks is that it seems to be the best opportunity to move Danks, but the only one that makes sense is dealing Danks for Ethier and I don't think that'd be a move Friedman would make at this point.

You think maybe the Sox would be better off kicking the tires on a player like CarGo? He is younger, cheaper and a better fielder than what the Dodgers have to offer.

 

I'm actually warming up to the idea of Cargo but I'll save further comment for the CarGo thread.

[LDF]

 

ref the dodgers.

 

I always like Crawford. plus less yrs than Kemp. but I really have some opposition

to Kemp, esp if he really don't want to play cf.

[witesoxfan]

You think maybe the Sox would be better off kicking the tires on a player like CarGo? He is younger, cheaper and a better fielder than what the Dodgers have to offer.

 

I'm actually warming up to the idea of Cargo but I'll save further comment for the CarGo thread.

 

My concern with Gonzalez is primarily the injury history. If the Sox looked at him and felt he could withstand the season, I'd love it if the Sox brought in Carlos Gonzalez.

[LDF]

 

this news of the dodgers willing to absorb salary and a trade for Danks for 1 or there

of"ers kind of threw me for a loop. I never thought that will be done. I was hoping for

a dodger prospect to be thrown in to sweeten the deal.

[Balta1701]

this news of the dodgers willing to absorb salary and a trade for Danks for 1 or there

of"ers kind of threw me for a loop. I never thought that will be done. I was hoping for

a dodger prospect to be thrown in to sweeten the deal.

That tweet from Phil Rogers may not have any information in it more than anyone else in this thread - good chance he's just speculating exactly as was done here.

[LDF]

That tweet from Phil Rogers may not have any information in it more than anyone else in this thread - good chance he's just speculating exactly as was done here.

 

thank for the input

 

either way, it was a great way to talk about sox baseball.

[BlackSox13]

My concern with Gonzalez is primarily the injury history. If the Sox looked at him and felt he could withstand the season, I'd love it if the Sox brought in Carlos Gonzalez.

Yeah, the injury history bugs me too. Outfielder injuries is why I'm so big on the idea of having four starting outfielders and rotating them through the DH spot. Eaton, Avi and any of CarGo, Crawford and Kemp could benefit from the rotating DH spot given their histories.

 

The more I think about the Dodger outfielders, the more leery I become.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Couple things to keep in mind:

 

1. Lots of teams like Kemp's bat and would like to have him if the Dodgers pay a bunch of money for the contract. There's no way we're going to be able to get him for Danks and expect them to throw in money. Whichever team gets him is going to pay for it -- either by taking on way more money than they want to get him for little talent, or by giving up something of real value to get Kemp at a reasonable salary.

 

2. Matt Kemp has made it publicly clear that he wants to play center field, and has a a history of inconsistency that appears to be at least partially related to his happiness level. I don't think that he's likely to get exactly what he wants (CF) anywhere, but you can bet he would be very vocally angry if he's relegated to DH, and that's not something that his acquiring team will want to deal with. If we get Kemp, he will be in the field every day, most likely in left.

 

In that case, absolutely no one here should want Matt Kemp. As a CF, he's worth about $12M a year. He's getting paid $22M a year. If $40M and John Danks is out of the question, then Hahn should just hang up the phone because Matt Kemp, in CF, would have to come with about $65M for it to make sense for us, especially since we have a much better CF.

Edited November 10, 2014 by Chilihead90

[LDF]

In that case, absolutely no one here should want Matt Kemp. As a CF, he's worth about $12M a year. He's getting paid $22M a year. If $40M and John Danks is out of the question, then Hahn should just hang up the phone because Matt Kemp, in CF, would have to come with about $65M for it to make sense for us, especially since we have a much better CF.

 

the dodgers need to clear up to two outfield positions. they have some heavy contracts

the they will need to eat some salary.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

the dodgers need to clear up to two outfield positions. they have some heavy contracts

the they will need to eat some salary.

 

Right, we all know this, the question is about how much they consider "significant" money. Is $20M all they will eat? Or are they willing to eat half the contract? It's such a massive difference in value that until we find out, it's hard to gauge what a return might be if we don't know the lengths to which they are willing to contribute money.

[Vance Law]

Couple things to keep in mind:

 

1. Lots of teams like Kemp's bat and would like to have him if the Dodgers pay a bunch of money for the contract. There's no way we're going to be able to get him for Danks and expect them to throw in money. Whichever team gets him is going to pay for it -- either by taking on way more money than they want to get him for little talent, or by giving up something of real value to get Kemp at a reasonable salary.

 

2. Matt Kemp has made it publicly clear that he wants to play center field, and has a a history of inconsistency that appears to be at least partially related to his happiness level. I don't think that he's likely to get exactly what he wants (CF) anywhere, but you can bet he would be very vocally angry if he's relegated to DH, and that's not something that his acquiring team will want to deal with. If we get Kemp, he will be in the field every day, most likely in left.

 

Yep. Excellent post.

[LDF]

Right, we all know this, the question is about how much they consider "significant" money. Is $20M all they will eat? Or are they willing to eat half the contract? It's such a massive difference in value that until we find out, it's hard to gauge what a return might be if we don't know the lengths to which they are willing to contribute money.

 

what I was implying and this is my fault, even if the dodgers clear up 1 outfield

position, then still need to address the other.