PDA

View Full Version : Dodgers falling out of contention



flyer85
07-27-2006, 09:21 AM
... interesting since the media out there loved the firing of Depodesta and the hiring of Colletti. Hmm.

M2
07-27-2006, 09:49 AM
I figure the Dodgers are about two years away from a major spasm. Right now a lot of people are still counting on the farm system to ride in and save the day. If that doesn't happen then there's going to be blood in the cubicles.

flyer85
07-27-2006, 09:52 AM
I figure the Dodgers are about two years away from a major spasm. Right now a lot of people are still counting on the farm system to ride in and save the day. If that doesn't happen then there's going to be blood in the cubicles.BP has an article how Colletti has been dealing away young players for essentially nothing. Will it continue?

lollipopcurve
07-27-2006, 09:58 AM
BP has an article how Colletti has been dealing away young players for essentially nothing. Will it continue?

Then there's that Ethier for Bradley deal he made with Beane.

flyer85
07-27-2006, 10:06 AM
Then there's that Ethier for Bradley deal he made with Beane.and the Sanchez for Seo deal he made with Mets.

lollipopcurve
07-27-2006, 10:40 AM
and the Sanchez for Seo deal he made with Mets.

Hardly robbery. Sanchez is a 26-year-old middle reliver who's having his first decent year. Seo was then packaged with Navarro (who they decided they didn't need after giving 23-y-o Russell Martin lots of starts) for Hendrickson and Hall. Hardly a "nothing" return.

Ethier: .344/.396/.532, 24 years old

Johnny Footstool
07-27-2006, 11:10 AM
Mark Hendrickson and Toby Hall are as close to nothing as you can get. Hendrickson is 32 and his last good year was...well...never. Toby Hall's lifetime OPS is .681.

Ethier has turned out great thusfar. Other than that, I'm unimpressed.

lollipopcurve
07-27-2006, 11:13 AM
Ethier has turned out great thusfar. Other than that, I'm unimpressed.

Other than Coletti totally fleecing Beane, you're unimpressed.

Ignoring about 35 games, I'm calling the Tigers a .500 ballclub.

flyer85
07-27-2006, 11:17 AM
Other than Coletti totally fleecing Beane, you're unimpressed.

Ignoring about 35 games, I'm calling the Tigers a .500 ballclub.Excellent attempt at a strawman

Cedric
07-27-2006, 11:18 AM
Oh Paul D.

The bruised ego of a certain subset of fans. The hero. The legend.

What did he do good again? Can anyone name more than two things the guy did right? And two important things.

SteelSD
07-27-2006, 11:26 AM
Oh Paul D.

The bruised ego of a certain subset of fans. The hero. The legend.

What did he do good again? Can anyone name more than two things the guy did right? And two important things.

You mean other than producing the Dodgers' first full-season division championship since 1988 while getting the Marlins to swap Brad Penny for pile 'o junk?

Those are just two. There's more. You know that, Ced.

lollipopcurve
07-27-2006, 11:29 AM
Excellent attempt at a strawman

Strawman? Explain to me.

Apparently, BP's contention is that Colletti has been frittering away young talent for nothing. That was your characterization of the piece.

I presented counter-evidence -- Ethier for Bradley.

Johnny says, "other than that, I'm unimpressed."

I say, "that's like saying, 'other than about 35 wins, the Tigers are a .500 ball club.'"

In other words, I used an analogy based on Johnny's position to say that I don't think Johnny's response legitimately invalidates my presentation of evidence that, in fact, Colletti's performance can't be summarized as "trading youth for nothing."

Strawman -- per Webster's, "a weak argument set up by a politician, etc., so that he may attack it and gain an easy, showy victory."

So, JOhnny's shifting of the debate from "is he really trading youth for nothing?" to "is he impressing me (other than fleecing Beane)?" is strawman.

And, you're playing "the strawman card" is strawman.

So -- where is the overwhelming discarding of young talent for nothing in LA?

IslandRed
07-27-2006, 11:45 AM
Here's a clip from that article:



Colletti has now made five trades since the start of the year, and in three of them, he’s traded prospects for major-league talent. (The exceptions were this week’s swap of Sandy Alomar Jr. for right-handed reliever B.J. La Mura, and January’s four-pitcher deal with the Mets, which defies classification.) He’s dealt away Edwin Jackson, Chuck Tiffany, Dioner Navarro, Johnson and Pimentel and received Danys Baez, Mark Hendrickson, Toby Hall and Dessens in return. Baez’s gaudy save totals aside, Colletti hasn’t added a single player who is likely to have a high-profile role with a good team.


I thought the article was a little weak by BP's standards; Sheehan is looking at Colletti's moves so far and extrapolating that he shares his former boss Sabean's tendency to freely swap talented minor-leaguers for incremental big-club upgrades, which would fritter away a good farm system. I don't think it's an open-and-shut case, for what it's worth. It could also be that he's a Schuerholz, someone who knows the difference between the gold and the pyrite and will swap pyrite for value whenever he can get it.

SteelSD
07-27-2006, 11:48 AM
Mark Hendrickson and Toby Hall are as close to nothing as you can get. Hendrickson is 32 and his last good year was...well...never. Toby Hall's lifetime OPS is .681.

Yeah. I don't get that either. From 2004-2005, Sanchez produced 162 IP with an ERA around 3.50. Colletti swaps him for a smoke-and-mirrors guy (Seo), then swaps Seo and a promising young catcher for a Mark Hendrickson and Toby Hall.

That's diminishing returns in action.

lollipopcurve
07-27-2006, 11:53 AM
I don't think it's an open-and-shut case, for what it's worth.

Open and shut? How about "weak and transparent"?

The omission of the Ethier for Bradley swap is egregious.

I think BP is great, but this piece is hack.

M2
07-27-2006, 12:11 PM
I thought Coletti did well getting Baez for Jackson and Tiffany, neither of whom look to be in danger of making positive contributions in the majors during the 21st century.

Obviously Bradley for Ethier has turned out to be quite a steal for the Dodgers. Can't fault him for signing Nomar or Saito either.

He made that one dumb deal with the Mets and some pointless deals to pick up Hendrickson and Hall. Probably Coletti's biggest fault to date, though, is that he hasn't shown much of a feel for what his ballclub needs to get itself over the top. He's got a lot of prospects and cash to work with, but he seems devoid of ideas.

Falls City Beer
07-27-2006, 12:13 PM
Open and shut? How about "weak and transparent"?

The omission of the Ethier for Bradley swap is egregious.

I think BP is great, but this piece is hack.

One great move surrounded by a nest of awful ones. That's what it is. What do you want anyone to say? When do you judge a GM? When the awful moves outweigh the good ones 50 to 1? Is it then? 10 to 1? When?

REDREAD
07-27-2006, 12:15 PM
Oh Paul D.

The bruised ego of a certain subset of fans. The hero. The legend.

What did he do good again? Can anyone name more than two things the guy did right? And two important things.

Not defending or attacking DePosda, but I think he's working as an advisor in SD now.

flyer85
07-27-2006, 12:18 PM
The omission of the Ethier for Bradley swap is egregious.

I think BP is great, but this piece is hack.No ommission, the trade is listed in the piece as a deal and noted as outside the general pattern. There isn't any reason to believe the Dodgers would have done that trade in the first place if Bradley hadn't forced his way out of LA. Colletti has established a pattern which the Eithier/Bradley mold does not fit and that trade certainly had extenuating circumstances.

Falls City Beer
07-27-2006, 12:19 PM
I thought Coletti did well getting Baez for Jackson and Tiffany, neither of whom look to be in danger of making positive contributions in the majors during the 21st century.

Obviously Bradley for Ethier has turned out to be quite a steal for the Dodgers. Can't fault him for signing Nomar or Saito either.

He made that one dumb deal with the Mets and some pointless deals to pick up Hendrickson and Hall. Probably Coletti's biggest fault to date, though, is that he hasn't shown much of a feel for what his ballclub needs to get itself over the top. He's got a lot of prospects and cash to work with, but he seems devoid of ideas.

Coletti's season is strikingly similar to Krivsky's so far. Lots of interesting chips, bankrupt of big ideas.

IslandRed
07-27-2006, 12:22 PM
Open and shut? How about "weak and transparent"?

The omission of the Ethier for Bradley swap is egregious.

I think BP is great, but this piece is hack.

I think the conventional wisdom is that the Bradley deal was about dumping Bradley, and the fact that Ethier can actually play is a bonus... but yes, that was a good swap for the Dodgers. Really, there's not enough evidence to go on yet. I guess when we see what Colletti gets back when he chooses to trade one of the top-shelf prospects, we'll know more.

flyer85
07-27-2006, 12:24 PM
Coletti's season is strikingly similar to Krivsky's so far. Lots of interesting chips, bankrupt of big ideas.The difference is WK has a fair of good will to spend that he has acquired in the Arroyo/Ross/Phillips deals. Without the three players the Reds would be looking up from way down below. WKs more recent deals suggest he may have misdiagnosed the real problem and then prescribed the wrong treatment.

Falls City Beer
07-27-2006, 12:26 PM
The difference is WK has a fair of good will to spend that he has acquired in the Arroyo/Ross/Phillips deals. Without the three players the Reds would be looking up from way down below. WKs more recent deals suggest he may have misdiagnosed the real problem and then prescribed the wrong treatment.

I agree; I think the perceptions of each GM's season are different from the outside, but when you boil each GM's transactions down, you'll find that their methods and outlook for the future are remarkably alike.

M2
07-27-2006, 12:28 PM
The difference is WK has a fair of good will to spend that he has acquired in the Arroyo/Ross/Phillips deals. Without the three players the Reds would be looking up from way down below. WKs more recent deals suggest he may have misdiagnosed the real problem and then prescribed the wrong treatment.

Yeah, to borrow from "Harry Potter": Wayne's shown the ability to do great things. Terrible? Yes ... but great.

Johnny Footstool
07-27-2006, 12:51 PM
Other than Coletti totally fleecing Beane, you're unimpressed.

Ignoring about 35 games, I'm calling the Tigers a .500 ballclub.

Yes, other than one deal, I'm unimpressed. Why is that so hard to understand?

He made one good deal and several bad ones.

BTW - why didn't you also quote my comments about Hall and Hendrickson? ;)

lollipopcurve
07-27-2006, 01:27 PM
BTW - why didn't you also quote my comments about Hall and Hendrickson?

I tend to disagree with the comments about Hendrickson and Hall, too. Hendrickson had a 3.62 ERA with the Rays when he was acquired -- he was pitching very well. Hall has had a decent run as a starting catcher, so you have to assume he can give LA something of value behind Martin. Classifying them both as "nothing" seems grandiose to me.

Are all of the other trades bad? You can claim that, but I fail to see how enough time has passed for that judgment to be final. Unless, of course, the whole debate is about some ideology (trading youth for veterans = bad?)-- and I could see where loyalty to the charismatic leaders of that ideology would play a role there.

Johnny Footstool
07-27-2006, 02:47 PM
A 3.62 ERA sticks out like a sore thumb when you look at Hendrickson's career. Look how badly he's pitched in that cavern in LA. I don't know how you can look at his career numbers and classify him as anything but junk.

As far as Hall is concerned, I wouldn't call five straight years of sub-.700 OPS a good run. Not at all.

But I guess it's all about perception, huh?

lollipopcurve
07-27-2006, 03:08 PM
A 3.62 ERA sticks out like a sore thumb when you look at Hendrickson's career. Look how badly he's pitched in that cavern in LA. I don't know how you can look at his career numbers and classify him as anything but junk.

As far as Hall is concerned, I wouldn't call five straight years of sub-.700 OPS a good run. Not at all.

But I guess it's all about perception, huh?

Some very tall lefties get better on a later timetable, right? (Think Unit.) Not saying Hendrickson is a good pitcher, but check out the #5 starters throughout the league (Ponson in NY, Kason Gabbard in Boston, etc., etc.). If the main indictment against Colletti is that he has traded Duaner Sanchez and Dioner Navarro for Hendrickson and Hall, then I'm not buying he's done poorly, especially when you weigh it against the Ethier acquisition.

As far as what he's done to keep the Dodgers in the race -- 3 weeks ago, they were looking good, even with injuries to Kent and Mueller. The trade deadline is not here yet, so I'd wait and see what happens in the next few days before proclaiming he is as inert as, say, DePOdesta was at the deadline last year, when the division was equally mediocre.