Printable View
Not sure if I would be dead set with Loney at first, but I agree the Dodgers have a lot of young talent and shouldn't give up Bills or Kershaw for Halladay. One could argue that Kershaw & Bills provide more value than Halladay alone and cheaper over the next 6 years allowing you to use the money saved (not a ton, but a bit) to upgrade other parts of the club.
Originally Posted by haveacigar
The marginal benefit of Halladay over Billingsley simply isn't worth the massive increase in cost and loss of team control.
I don't think the Dodgers should avoid trading for Halladay, I just think that offering Kershaw or Billingsley would defeat the purpose.
Marginal benefit of Hallady over Billingsley???????
Halladay was a top 3 pitcher this year, according to ESPN rankings Billinglsey was 89 . . . and Billingsley played in a much friendlier park and a vastly easier division.
I don't understand the loss of control comment?
Sure it would add more payroll, probably about 20mm per year....but they would also put more fans in the seats, get more advertising and in that division would almost be guaranteed a playoff spot which equals quite a bit of extra money as well. I don't think it would cost as much as you think.
http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showpos...3&postcount=20Quote:
Originally Posted by kellys11
Team control. They have Billingsley and Kershaw under their control for 4 or so years each. Halladay would be for one if they don't spend the money to sign him to a long-term deal - and that significantly large monetary cost is part of the marginal benefit evaluation.Quote:
Originally Posted by kellys11
Quote:
Originally Posted by 200tang
Other than a Dodger fan, I don't think anybody can possibly argue that Billingley or Kershaw has more value than Halladay????
Kershaw I can definately see not wanting to give up though.
Halladay is undervalued by most because of being in Toronto, if he played in New York he would be valued higher (and have a couple more cy youngs).
I meant added together since they'd cost less per year than Halladay and are for sure under control for the next few years where as Halladay isn't. Halladay is better than each, but not together and when we're talking about value & control time.Quote:
Originally Posted by kellys11
I don't think he's undervalued at all. He'd probably have more Cy's in NY though because of the W stat and getting to pitch against Toronto rather than the Yankees.Quote:
Halladay is undervalued by most because of being in Toronto, if he played in New York he would be valued higher (and have a couple more cy youngs).
good points.Quote:
Originally Posted by 200tang
But isn't he going to arbitration next year, which would mean he will be getting a big pay increase too? and it's really only 3 years of salary savings as he's a free agent in 2013.
Billingsley? Yeah, but it won't be close to the amount Halladay will command....and the fact that the Dodgers have multiple young good players like Billingsley that are due for arbitration soon is more of a reason not to unload some of said players and invest a ton of money in Halladay - the money will be needed to lock up their young players.Quote:
Originally Posted by kellys11
I guess this is what I get for using a word with 2 meanings....
You should know better. You're the reason Scott Sizemore is coming to Seattle next year >:|Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
I was actually going to add that I would like to trade Loney, but I felt like the Mets would provide too much competition in any bid for a better first basemen. The only feasible deal I could think of would be to trade Loney, Billingsley, and some spare minor leaguers for Adrian Gonzalez, but I don't think the Pads would go for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by 200tang
And as a Jays fan, I'm not sure I'd expect you to give up any big pieces on the big league roster to get Halladay. Getting Halladay says: "We're going for it". Giving up Billingsley, Kemp, Kershaw, Ethier, Martin, Broxton etc chops the legs right out from under that statement to your fans. If the Jays target key, young major league pieces on contending teams they're going to find themselves out in the cold with two draft picks, another wasted season and daily hand wringing and speculation sessions on whether or not this is the day Doc gets traded. They have to look at prospects who are close to the big leagues and stud prospects at any level, sift through the offers and find the best one and hold their noses and pull the trigger.Quote:
Originally Posted by NYDodgers
@gosensgo: Beeston's comments to the New York Post (and until I see them showing up in a more reputable source I won't take them too seriously), while ill-advised in terms of what AA is trying to do are pure damage control. He's communicating with the dwindling season ticket base, saying: "What do you want us to do, he wants to go." Poorly timed and considering all the gaffes of the past 5 months or so, you would think they'd learn to keep their mouths shut. Stop making moves to please the fans and start making moves to build this team back up from the bottom up. Gad! :mad: :(
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dodg...llingsley.html
Quote:
But I ask you, which of the following is most logical?
1) Billingsley's six sub-par starts in the final three months of the 2009 season -- plus, if you must, his two poor starts in the 2008 National League Championship Series -- represent his true ability, a distance so far from Halladay that the Dodgers must make it a mission to acquire the Toronto star.
2) Billingsley's body of work outside of those six starts better represents his true ability, and he remains a bona fide asset who, at age 25 compared with Halladay's 32, is much more likely to get better -- while allowing the Dodgers to avoid a trade that would be costly in both players and salary.
Trading Billingsley and others for Halladay doesn't solve the Dodger pitching depth problem -- in fact, the trade might worsen it if another pitcher is included in the deal, or if Halladay's $15.75-million 2010 salary in the final year of his contract prevents the Dodgers from signing a free-agent arm.
Chad Bil for Roy Halladay is a fair deal, just straight up. If the Jays wouldn't take that deal they are idiots. Kershaw has more value than Halladay alone right now so that would be stupid.
No way in hell I take that straight up.Quote:
Originally Posted by jpz17
Again, I don't get why a contending team would strengthen and weaken itself with the same move. :confused: You see it all the time, but it doesn't make it make sense. If you want to talk prospects fine, but pieces off the major league roster don't make much sense, even moreso in today's down market. The Jays would be wise to look for multiple pieces to build up a minor league system that is drowning in J.P.'s inability to make one significant deadline deal for stud prospects at any one of the eight deadlines he presided over as GM, when it was clear to anyone with half a brain that the Jays would not be playing meaningful games in August, let alone October. If he and Rogers could've read that correctly and been able to weather the public relations storm from Joe Average Idiot Fan, this team would not be in the mess they are now. Throw in the fact that at the moment teams are placing a premium on their prospects, whereas at the 2002-2008 deadlines he could've done a lot better than the 2009 one and this offseason, and AA has a long, arduous task ahead of him. F**king J.P. :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by jpz17
Here's J.P.'s July/August "haul" from 2002-2009: Scott Wiggins, John "Way Back" Wasdin, Bobby Kielty, John Hattig, Eric Crozier, Tim Olson, Jeremy Accardo (for Shea Hillenbrand and Vinnie Chulk: win, but then again Accardo is only a reliever), Trevor Lawhorn, Jose Bautista, Fabio Castro, Chad Beck, and most recently Edwin Encarnacion, Zach Stewart, and Josh Roenicke (win: simply because Rolen did not want to be here). It's interesting that both trades he won involved players who didn't want to be here. Stunningly, despite his incredible ability to put his foot in his mouth, he managed to keep Rolen's discontent quiet and snuck the trade in at the waiver wire. Of course he profited from Jocketty's huge boner for Scott Rolen in that deal, but it was still most un-J.P.-like. If he makes one bold deadline deal every two years of his term for prospects, he might still have the job and us Jays fans wouldn't be staring at 2 or 3 years of "Live from the Cable Box, Welcome to the S**tshow" (starting with the hoof in the nuts that will be dealing the best player to ever wear a Jays uniform in terms of length and quality of service: it's between him and Carlos Delgado anyway) while the system undergoes an overhaul. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to throw up after looking at that "haul" of uber-s**t.
Bautista is an RBI guy though! He's a great haul!
Don't worry GSG, no way in hell the Dodgers offer that straight up. Think prospects, stop looking at the big league roster. Look at the prospects of the teams that are in "win now" mode and take the best offer. It's not like the Jays will win in the next 2 or 3 years anyway, so sit back and let the kid and his revamped scouting staff go to work at showing J.P. how it's done. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by gosensgo101
Bills for Roy straight up isn't really good for either team.
Nothing says RBI guy like 50 RBIs 135 games since he got to Toronto.
sss ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by gosensgo101
I wish we had've got something done at the deadline, especially if some of the rumoured offers were true.Quote:
Originally Posted by actionjackson
Thankyou for mocking my pain. :( Might I point out though that last season at the ripe old age 28, he finally broke through the 100 OPS+ barrier (101, congratulations Jose!). Seriously though he is a very solid platoon player who hits lefties very well (.265/.360/.478 on the career), but for the love of god, he should be stapled to the bench against righties (.227/.316/.366). He's had his 1415 PA against them, he's not changing his spots now. Of course, our manager...oh, never mind...I was going to say something cheery about putting people in positions where they can be successful, but then I remembered the nightmare of 2009 and realized that if he stays healthy he'll get 650 PA due to the um guy who managed the 1992 and 1993 teams and is revered by most who played on those teams. *sniffle* :( ...Think happy thoughts, it'll get better eventually...I hope...I mean it has to right? Right? :(Quote:
Originally Posted by 200tang
Thankyou, oh voice of reason. Thankyou. :D :pQuote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
Given J.P.'s reputation for being a cocktease and never having the balls to make a major trade that would benefit both teams, I'm kind of glad we didn't. As for that rumoured 6 for 1 trade with Boston, I highly doubt that A) Theo Epstein is that much of an idiot for offering it and B) J.P. is that stupid (though I am less sure of this doubt) to turn it down. I think that's just a frustrated columnist with not much to write about taking a rumour and fantasizing that he's a GM, or he has an axe to grind with J.P. No shortage of those around here, maybe there are some New England scribes that he managed to piss off. It's possible despite the fact that he kissed up to them and refused to talk to the writers up here, who whether or not they're a pack of morons (Jeff Blair excepted ;) ) are the conduit between fans and the team. It's a good idea, no matter how stupid they are to at least be civil towards them. J.P. should never, ever go into politics. AA, on the other hand can hold 35 minute teleconferences in a respectful tone and keep them interested, but at the same time give them nothing. I like this guy. Then again, I also liked/defended J.P. at one time too. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by gosensgo101
JP is a horrible GM. A good assistant GM, he is a good pitching scout too.
I hear that the Angels, Red Sox, Yankees and Dodgers are all in the sweepstakes......awesome the more big value teams wanting him the more the Jays will get!!!! :D
I seem to recall hearing that about Johan Santana in the 2007-2008 offseason and that didn't work out too well for the Twins (so far), and then there was Cliff Lee at the 2009 deadline. The trend of the big money teams now seems to be: "Take our B list, or we'll just wait for the offseason and sign him and you'll get your two picks." It's a disturbing trend for teams in a position like the Blue Jays find themselves in now. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by kellys11
J.P. wasn't a horrible GM for some of the reasons I've stated before. I'd put him somewhere between #15 and #20 if you look at the entire 2002-2009 period. That just isn't good enough for the AL East. The prevailing reason he should never be a GM again is that you would have to hire a PR shadow to follow him around 24-7 and crazy glue his lips shut around the scribes and other media folk. Very good dumpster diver though and that would make him valuable as an assistant somewhere, provided there was a clause in his contract that he never ever talks to the media. ;) :D
I think he is actually pretty good at evaluating talent, his problem is the GM side like contract negotiation. I would say that he gave out 5 out of the top 10 worst contracts during that time period.Quote:
Originally Posted by actionjackson
A player like Rios you couldn't really expect the sudden drop off, but Wells, F.Thomas, E.Hinske, BJ Ryan, C.Koskie were what really killed him.