The Dodgers Are My Trading Partner

[Benihana]

The Dodgers just make so much sense as a trading partner.

Billingsley, Furcal, Kemp and Ethier are all guys the Reds should have some interest in. Billingsley is a local product and the Reds starting pitching depth has suddenly disappeared. Furcal is a FA-to-be on a team going nowhere, and would provide a leadoff hitter and SS with playoff experience to a team that desperately needs all three of those things. Kemp and Ethier would fill the LF and cleanup hitter void, and provide the Reds with arguably the best OF in the game.

The Dodgers' ownership situation is well known, and they are probably looking at a firesale reminiscent of the 2003 Reds (ironically John Allen is now running their team.) In all likelihood, they'll need to completely tear it down and start from scratch. They also have a big hole at 1B (Loney will be non-tendered after this year).

I would offer Alonso, Grandal, and Sappelt for one of their OFs and either Billingsley or Furcal. That should at least get things going. If they're serious and the terms are right, I'd add Leake to the deal as well.

[Plus Plus]

I'm a bit surprised that no discussion of parts that the Dodgers have has included Clayton Kershaw yet. He would be a nice player to see in Cincinnati Red...

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by Plus Plus

I'm a bit surprised that no discussion of parts that the Dodgers have has included Clayton Kershaw yet. He would be a nice player to see in Cincinnati Red...

Funny you mention Kershaw, I used to advocate on this board trading Dunn for Kershaw back in '07 when he was a rising star in their system, although he was probably as unavailable then as he likely is now.

Kershaw is probably one of the few guys they won't deal. He's still very young and inexpensive, not to mention effective. The guys I mentioned, with the possible exception of Billingsley, will likely not be a part of the Dodgers by the time they get to be competitive again, and thus should be more available.

[Plus Plus]

I wouldn't assume any player to be off limits when discussing the Dodgers as a potential trading partner. One needs to look no further than the Casey Blake trade with Cleveland, which included Carlos Santana.

[Puffy]

Originally Posted by Plus Plus

I wouldn't assume any player to be off limits when discussing the Dodgers as a potential trading partner. One needs to look no further than the Casey Blake trade with Cleveland, which included Carlos Santana.

The Dodgers can't make payroll. They aren't trading cheap pieces. They will be trading expensive ones. Kershaw is cheap piece.

Once Winter rolls around and they get new owner, being the LA market they will probably be able to beef back up payroll. But for now, anything expensive will be going on sale soon!

Hello Matt Kemp!

[Plus Plus]

My statement is made more to illustrate the fact that the Dodgers have a history of making trades that seem to be more favorable to the other team, and that their own valuation of prospects and players is a little bit less than what is the true value of these players. Also, while I completely agree with what you are saying and have been drooling over the idea of having Ethier in left field for about a year now, Kershaw will be arbitration eligible next season and will start to become expensive in a hurry, so maybe the team in the midst of a financial strain will decide to unload more rather than less.

The Kershaw idea is definitely a pipe dream. However, it could be a pipe dream worth looking into, given the circumstances.

Just to lay it out there (I am not going to speculate on how these players will fit due to dollar amounts; I don't like playing faux-MLB accountant), Kemp is making 7.1m this year and has another year of arbitration before free agency. Ethier is making 9.5 and has another year of arbitration as well. Billingsley is under contract for at least 4 more years with an option for a 5th, with the dollar amounts as follows: 6.275m this year, then 9m, 11m, 12m, and a 14m club option with a 1m buyout. Kershaw is making the minimum (or close to it) this year and then is eligible for arbitration for the first time this offseason.

[Reds/Flyers Fan]

Originally Posted by Puffy

The Dodgers can't make payroll. They aren't trading cheap pieces. They will be trading expensive ones. Kershaw is cheap piece.

Once Winter rolls around and they get new owner, being the LA market they will probably be able to beef back up payroll. But for now, anything expensive will be going on sale soon!

Hello Matt Kemp!

This needed to happen in the offseason. I remember sitting at Game 3 of the NLDS last year and we were all talking about how the next time we step inside GABP hopefully Matt Kemp is in LF.

I would bend over backward to get him to Cincinnati.

[schroomytunes]

I like the idea of trading with the Dodger's but I think we will have to give up the farm for Kemp, although I would offer them this deal:

reds trade: Yonder Alonzo, Chris Valaika, and Jordan Smith

Dodgers trade: Chad Billingsley

or

I call up Oakland and inquire about Coco Crisp, hear me out.... he can play LF and bat leadoff, giving us a more balanced lineup thoughts?

[OldXOhio]

Originally Posted by Puffy

Hello Matt Kemp!

Would be a solid addition to Dusty's LF by committee platoon.

[Benihana]

Originally Posted by Plus Plus

Just to lay it out there (I am not going to speculate on how these players will fit due to dollar amounts; I don't like playing faux-MLB accountant), Kemp is making 7.1m this year and has another year of arbitration before free agency. Ethier is making 9.5 and has another year of arbitration as well. Billingsley is under contract for at least 4 more years with an option for a 5th, with the dollar amounts as follows: 6.275m this year, then 9m, 11m, 12m, and a 14m club option with a 1m buyout. Kershaw is making the minimum (or close to it) this year and then is eligible for arbitration for the first time this offseason.

The dollars are certainly interesting. Furcal is clearly the cheapest and would come off the books at the end of the year. If we could get Draft Pick Comp for him, that would make it much more attractive.

Meanwhile, my guess is Billingsley and his contract could take the place of what we thought (this offseason) we were offering/getting from Volquez. Volquez would then just become almost a free call option. Along with Cueto, Bailey and Arroyo, Billingsley would provide stability to the rotation for the next several years, making Leake and Volquez (if he recovers) all the more expendable.

Kemp at $7.1 this year is one of the best deals in the game, although he'll likely get 11 or 12 next year which does complicate things. The way I see it, if the Reds can't afford whatever he would get in arb next year, they can trade him in the offseason. Meanwhile, he could help bring home a pennant this year. Ditto for Ethier, who is supposed to be a great character guy.

[cumberlandreds]

I advocated this in another thread the other day. Kemp and Ethier should be prime targets. Especially Kemp. He would look mighty good in LF.

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by Reds/Flyers Fan

This needed to happen in the offseason. I remember sitting at Game 3 of the NLDS last year and we were all talking about how the next time we step inside GABP hopefully Matt Kemp is in LF.

I would bend over backward to get him to Cincinnati.

I would bend over backwards to get Either in LF for the Reds. I like Kemp but I think Either is the more consistent offensive player, something the Reds are in need of. They could use a more professional, good at bat type hitter. A guy who can hit behind Votto to give him some serious protection. I don't think you will see teams walk Votto to get to Either. And with Votto's success against LHP I don't see much of an issue going L-L 3-4.

[Far East]

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

... And with Votto's success against LHP I don't see much of an issue going L-L 3-4.

Except that Votto and Ethier back-to-back would either "demote" Bruce to #6 or leave him at #5 with 3 consecutive LHH.

[Plus Plus]

Originally Posted by Far East

Except that Votto and Ethier back-to-back would either "demote" Bruce to #6 or leave him at #5 with 3 consecutive LHH.

IMO the upgrade from the current LF debacle to Ethier would greatly outweigh the potential lineup implications of acquiring Ethier.

Ethier is an extremely good bat.

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by Far East

Except that Votto and Ethier back-to-back would either "demote" Bruce to #6 or leave him at #5 with 3 consecutive LHH.

Seriously?!?! You add an MVP caliber bat to the lineup and your worried about dropping Bruce to 6th?