Question of the day: tick, tock, tick, tock (gimme gimme gimme)
It is definitely one of the biggies on the baseball sports calendar- today's non-waiver trade deadline (1 pm PST). Lots of sound, lots of fury, sometimes signifying something, often amounting to nothing. Most of the big pieces have already been moved- Mark Teixeira, CC Sabathia, Pudge Rodriguez, Ken Griffey Jr., Casey Blake (yes, in this context, he qualifies)- a few, like Greg Maddux, haven't but could. Adam Dunn, Jason Bay, and Houston Street are among the other high profile guys still out there, and typically contending teams will look to make smaller trades to add bench or bullpen help.
So here's the QOTD, and it's a simple one: Who do you want the Dodgers to get, if anyone? What do they need, and how much should they give up to get it?
Personally, I'm lukewarm on Maddux, because despite the fact it worked once before in LA and he seems to have the ability to bend the brainwaves of other Dodgers pitchers like Obi-Wan Kenobi, Maddux hasn't pitched all that well lately. On the other hand, with Hiroki Kuroda reeling, reinforcements can't be a bad thing, but Ned Colletti should resist the urge to give up any value for the HOFer. Smaller additions- bullpen help, another bat to bolster the bench- these are things that could really help the Dodgers. Given the fragility of Nomar, another option at short can't hurt.
We'll see how it goes- about four hours to go.
BK
Subscribe to this Blog | What is RSS?
Huh?
We just pitched four shutouts in the last 5 games. So why do we want a washed up 42 year old Maddux who even if he could pitch would probably go only 5 innings? Don't we need hitters?
David
Posted by: DavidS | July 31, 2008 at 09:17 AM
Sorry I meant to add--I'd rather promote Stults or Park to starters and let them take Kuroda's place and that won't cost us anything.
David
Posted by: DavidS | July 31, 2008 at 09:18 AM
I think I agree with you DavidS. I don't like the idea of making a move just to make a move. Maddux has really been struggling lately, and it seems our pitching is very deep. As you mentioned, in addition to the guys getting the job done (Bills, Lowe, etc), we have help in players like Park, Stults, Kuo, etc. who can make a spot start if need be. Plus, Brad Penny is coming back this weekend, and ...uh... maybe.... there's that Schmidt guy. Ugh. Maybe I went too far with that one.
Still, I don't think adding Maddux would necessarily be a bad thing. But I agree with BK: only if it doesn't cost too much player-wise.
Posted by: Higgins | July 31, 2008 at 09:35 AM
I'm not entirely sold on adding Maddux to the current rotation, since he has obviously not been the same old Maddux this year. Kuroda seems to be the only truly weak link for the Blue right now, but it seems like they have better in-house options to replace them if need be.
That said, if they were willing to fire Honeycutt and make Maddux the new pitching coach, I'd say do that in a heartbeat. He first stint with the Dodgers obviously had a lasting positive effect on Billingsley. Maybe he could do the same for Kershaw.
Posted by: Eric B. | July 31, 2008 at 09:41 AM
I agree with David on Maddux. I think he's good, but he's not a definite upgrade over anything we've got right now. If Kuroda comes out of the rotation (something I think is a big bluff from Torre) and Jason Johnson can't hang, I'd rather see Stults or Park in there. I think I'd prefer Stults over Park just because Park has been so valuable in the 'pen.
I think that Chan Ho Park and Hong Chih Kuo have been the two biggest and most pleasant surprises this year. More often than not, you look for a 4-ish ERA and groundball stuff out of a long reliever, but we've got 2 of them, each capable of pitching 4-5 innings of relief, with strikout stuff and ERA's under 2.5. When your starter botches it big and your long relievers can actually come in and give you a chance to get back in it instead of just doing mop-up work, it changes the whole makeup of the game.
Posted by: Nils | July 31, 2008 at 09:51 AM
Yes on Maddux. He'll deliver his five, six, or seven innings, and Park, Blake, and/or Kuo can pick up the rest. He likes this park. He had a positive effect on other pitchers, like Lowe and Billingsley, when he was here the first time--they said so. He's only gone because Colletti blew a gasket over the Drew thing and petulantly eschewed all Boras clients the rest of that off-season. Mistake.
Johnson is not going to pitch any more shutouts. Stults pitched one his first time out, too, but that was it. Kershaw's not ready for a pennant drive, and Kuroda is as unreliable as a loose cannon. No one knows what sort of Penny we'll get. The Dodgers at present only have two real, reliable starting pitchers--Lowe and Billingsley--and both have been known to go, without warning, into dives.
Posted by: pl | July 31, 2008 at 10:07 AM
no Maddox, no...there has to be someone better, lower than a 4.2 ERA, give me a break!!
Posted by: ADRIAN | July 31, 2008 at 10:14 AM
Put me down in favor of a Madux acquisitin if it costs us little...dollas only preferably. Joe is right, you can't have too many pitchers. PL is robably wrong about Maddu going near or beyond six innings, but he's right about our other pitchers. If Lowe or Bills were to develop a hang nail that would put them on the DL we'd be in trouble...uh...bigger trouble. Like it or not, if this team is going anywhere is via their pitching and not via their offense, not this year. Yes to an SS that has any offense at all. Yes to a bat off the bench.
Posted by: Dan in Pasadena | July 31, 2008 at 10:43 AM
No on Maddux. I've seen Kevin Towers absolutely fleese teams before who thought they were only giving up marginal prospects to the Padres. I don't trust Ned enough to make a sensible trade with Towers.
I think that getting David Eckstein from the Blue Jays would be SUCH an excellent pickup for the Dodgers at this time. If Eckstein can't be had to play SS, then try to get Marco Scutaro from Toronto to play backup SS, instead...
Posted by: DodgerBlueBalls | July 31, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Get Maddux here just so he can talk to Clayton Kershaw everyday!
Posted by: adrian | July 31, 2008 at 11:35 AM
Yes on maddux only if they take AJ even up.
David S
Posted by: DavidS | July 31, 2008 at 12:06 PM
Executive Management ought to sit tight and do nothing for now and suck it up for what is bound to be their most competitive month coming up, August, followed by what could be their least competitive month, September. The GM has a solid track record of messing with the young players heads by bringing in under-performing and injury- prone veterans that I have zero confidence they have any idea what they're doing. Looking ahead, they need to find a replacement for Ned C and trade Andre Ethier so he can finally perform up to his potential (.320+ BA year after year) in a more supportive environment. This way I don't have to stress any longer over how they're going to play Andre in order to give Andruw undeserved playing time. This Hardboiled Blue is cooked.
Posted by: Hardboiled Blue | July 31, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Some people on this blog want the team to improve but don't want the team to make any moves. If they could get Maddux for cheap, why not?
David Eckstein? Another player with no pop, but I guess he'll be an improvement over the current players playing ss for the dodgers right now.
Where did Ken Griffey jr. get traded to, and why weren't the Dodgers involved?
Posted by: dcerros | July 31, 2008 at 12:48 PM
You guys should pay attention to something other than wins and losses. A few weeks ago, Maddux's ERA was 3.08, despite the fact that the Padres couldn't score a run for him or make a defensive play to save their collective lives. As for innings, after 20 starts, he was at 120--an even 6 per start--and in the top dozen in the league.
Yeah, he fell back a little with a couple clunkers. (I would, too, if I were playing with this bunch of morons in San Diego. Strike that: by this time, I'd probably have had an anyeurism.) In spite of those, he still had 7 quality starts in that 14-game winless streak.
I hope the whole Dodgers' rotation ends up on James Andrews' surgical table. And I give Kevin Towers and Ned Colletti the ancient Chinese curse: that they should lead interesting lives. I have no idea why Colletti didn't pursue Maddux after his 6-3, 3.30 August/September in 2006; and if any of you Maddux-haters had actually watched his games this year, you'd find that he's every bit the pitcher he was back then, if not better.
I have no idea how Maddux has kept his equanimity and not even betrayed a wince at the awful support he's had behind him. But since he's never called out a teammate publicly in 23 seasons, I really shouldn't be surprised. Another blessing/curse for all you Dodgers' fans: I hope you get what you paid for in Manny. You don't deserve Greg Maddux.
Posted by: madduxfan | July 31, 2008 at 05:55 PM