Manny Ramirez and the rumor mill

This looks like the obvious premeditated try to keep Manny, but losing out in the end. I think everyone knows by now, Boras is trying to get Manny a contract with length, not this 2 yr offer from the Blue. Its still early in this Manny saga, I'm sure we will hear new things as time goes by. After seeing that TMZ clip and hearing some of Frank McCourt's radio interviews, I really do get the impression that Manny doesn't really want to stick around? As Manny likes to say "Anything can happen"? I'm kinda mixed on Kim Ng, unfortunately she didn't get the Mariners GM spot, but glad she is sticking around.

I would also agree that a 2-3 yr deal would be a good fit for the Dodgers. Sad part is that they could be his salary for at least the first year with what they are paying Jones & Pierre.
Next topic: How to unload Jones & Pierre. Pierre: probably requires eating a bunch of his salary to dump him on someone else. Pretty expensive pinch runner. I read on one of the articles that Jones does not want to come back and get booed. I don't suppose there is any way that he just walks from 18Mil for doing nothing. Talk about your bad signings.
Furcal: I do not think this is a no-brainer decision. As good as he is when he is healthy, he has trouble staying healthy. I doubt that he will be willing to sign an incentive contract. I guess some of this depends on whether or not the team believe that Hu will pick it back up or how close and how good DeJesus is/can be.
Starting Pitching: lot's of options, go expensive (CC), in-house (probably not the WS winner answer in the short term), or look for some #4 or #5 type guys. Medical question on what is going on with Penny, hopefully they can get better advice than they got with Schmidt. Sounds like Lowe wants to go and with the solid finish he is probably not worth the money/years that he is going to command.
Relief Pitching: I think we need a closer. I am still not convinced that Brox has the mental make up to be a closer. Talent: Absolutely! He dominates when the stakes are low and often stumbles when the stakes are the highest. Does anyone know if the plan for Elbert is to leave him in relief or to push him back to the starter's role? I don't think that Park will be worth the money he will command after this solid year of work especially with the late season fall off. Biemel: will be looking for more money and years. Depends on how much as to whether or not that will be good value.
3B: I still think that martin is our best choice for 3B. I will admit that I do not have a good handle on available catchers in or out of the organization. Benefit to having Martin at 3rd is you could actually use both catchers knowing your 3rd baseman could catch if one of them got injured in a game.
Enough from me.

Package,

I moved this up from a previous thread "We talk Manny and free agency", since it was buried there, and likely not to be seen. It was a response to remarks you made in that aforementioned thread. So here it is:

"You clearly don't understand that a lot of the young players turned a corner in 2008, and that with added experience and maturity we can expect more. Tampa Bay is in the World Series because their younger players had the luxury of developing on a losing team that gave them the playing time they needed to develop. Until this past year, young players like Loney and Kemp were unable to get in a full season of playing time. Now that they have it, you can expect greater production and power to follow. Same goes for the young pitchers.

As for Manny, he was absolutely wonderful. But he will be 37 in May, has two sore knees, and while he will probably still be productive, don't expect .396. The Dodgers simply need a solid hitter with power to replace him. Add to that the continued elevation in production from the younger players, and perhaps the addition of a player such as Orlando Hudson to replace Kent at 2B (assuming DeWitt moves back to 3B), and the offense will be just fine. Hudson at second and DeWitt at third would also represent a huge improvement in the defense.

Signing Manny at the numbers and years he will command would be insane for the Dodgers. The money saved by not signing him can be dedicated to signing a free agent pitcher, be it Sabathia or someone else. The last time the Dodgers signed a 37 year old free agent it was Jeff Kent, who gave us a nice year in 2005, and declined thereafter. If the same thing happens to Manny, the Dodgers will be hamstrung for years with the weight of his contract. Manny's a great hitter, but he's also human, and like all of us, subject to the ravages of aging. There's risk in signing any player to a long term deal no matter what their age, but the risks are greater with players approaching the winter of their careers. Manny is probably best suited to an AL team, where he can eventually transition into a DH role.

I refuse to get carried away with the emotion generated by Manny in the last couple of months, much like the Mets got carried away by Carlos Beltran's 2004 playoff performances, or like many of us were led to believe that Delwyn Young was a hitting machine based on his torrid September last year. And I'm not comparing Beltran and Young to Manny. I know they are nowhere near the players he is, but I also recognize that Manny's production with the Dodgers over the last couple of months is likely not going to be repeated over a full season. In short, for arguments sake, I would rather have Pat Burrell (they don't call him "Pat the bat" for nothing), or his equivalent, and a top of the line starter, than just Manny alone.

As for Ethier, I in no way suggested that I WANT to trade him. However, if the right deal came along (such as for Peavy) I would have no problem including him, since I believe he has less upside that Martin, Kemp and Loney. If you disagree, so be it.

And your comment that I "don't want the Dodgers to be happy and productive...", and that I "just want to continue down the same old path of 'Wait till next year'", that's simply ludicrous. I want a team that will win year after year, not just next year (which I want also). Consequently, I prefer not to mortgage the teams future by saddling it with contracts that could paralyze ownership for years to come. Obviously, I'm a greater proponent of player development than you are, and again, on that we will just have to disagree."

In addition (this wasn't in my original post), with all of the would be free agents they have, the Dodgers have the potential to reap a bonanza in draft picks this year. Although signing a free agent can cost a team one of its own draft picks; having a another team sign one your players can result in the acquisition of TWO draft picks (one from the signing team PLUS a supplemental first round pick). And those picks can be valuable (case in point is Blake DeWitt, a former supplemental first round pick acquired by the Dodgers when Paul Quantrill signed with the Yankees). Adding additional relatively high picks also creates a depth of talent within the organization that can be used in trades to acquire established major league players in trades. The Dodgers are more likely to trade a good prospect if they have other good prospects at the same position.

The risks are about even with the rewards unless you talk to BarAss. No one can tell me Manny will be as good 3 years from now as he is now. And if he will still be as good (as BarAss would contend) he can still sign a huge contract in 3 or 4 years. But everyone knows that won't be the case and that is why BorAss wants the 6 year bloated contract now.
Makes perfect sense if you are the agent.
Better look very carefully if you are the Dodgers....

THIS IS THE LEAST THE DODGERS COULD DO.... After JOE THE MANAGER(inside democratic joke) LOL, Threw away the chance of going to the world series WITH HIS TERRIBLE DECISIONS!!!!!... Great Guy, TERRIBLE MANAGER!!!!..... SIGNING MANNY IS THE LEAST THEY COULD DO TO MAKE UP FOR THE BLUNDER.

David S,

I get what you're saying, but if you can figure out a way to avoid the hassle of eating a contract and only pay for Manny's best years (which I would figure are the younger ones), that would be the most ideal. Plus, if Manny wants to keeping playing in his 40's on a new deal, it would serve him better to keep the "Manny being Manny" nonsense to a minimum. If he knows the Dodger deal is his last one (he won't get another big one at 42), he's more likely to feel comfortable going nutty.

AK

I heard a deal that might work the Blue and Manny?? Listening to Mason & Ireland today, John came up with an idea how to sign Manny. Here it goes: sign Manny to a 4 year 90 mil deal, the first 2 years for 30 mil a piece. Now here comes the funny part: after the 2 years give Manny an opt-out clause and years 3 and 4 are 15 mil a piece? Knowing Boras, he will get Manny to opt-out after 2 years and try to find a new deal? The Blue are off the hook after 2 years and Manny can go his merry way. Its a bizarre deal that I don't really think would Boras go for? Manny will be 37 the start of next season, he would be 39 if he were to opt out and to shop himself again? Would he be able to get someone else to bite to give him a contract at the age of 39? Even at 39, I still think Manny will have good numbers especially in the NL west?

The one opinion I have about Manny is that I really think he could still be a productive player when he gets older? I think his power numbers will go down, but I think he will still be able to hit for average with a little pop due to his swing? Mattingly called Manny's early leg kick as "hovering"? Manny has mastered that unorthodox kick with his swing to the point where its made him so successful? It kind of reminds me of Japanese players in NPB? This is just my opinion? So what does everyone else think about this deal?

Benzo,
Sweet baby jeebus, I hope you're right!

Lizzieinsb,
"The man is a legend in is own time, but the image makeover, barely lasted the length of a pregancy trimester... " Ladies & Gentlemen, we have our first Grand Salami comment of the Blue Notes Offseason Blog! Way to hit one out of the park! Take a bow, fellow blogger!

Matsuda,
I think the "?" button on your keyboard might be broken...

It's called "COMMENTS" people...so please, no more novel responses! Sign him for the $$ he wants with 4 years and a 5th year option. He'll pay for himself, even if he under performs a bit because fans will pack the seats and eat up the merch if $$ is the problem here. This is not only a potential championship investment but an income investment for the org.

Yes a three year deal would be the best for both sides, but BorA$$ is the biggest problem. Why can't this guy just go away?

I look at how Manny might be in a couple 3 years like I do Griffey Jr.now after 600 HR in a certain sense. Bona Fide career #'s and still dangerous at the plate but somewhat diminished. The Dodgers could get a lot of $'s (they've already made $10-14 million) out of Manny's HR push to 600 (probably accomplished early-mid yr. 3). Sign him for 4yr/.$100 million and be done with it. Insert a trade clause that if he's traded before or during year 4, the acquiring team has to give him a 5th year at the same pay.

If the Dodgers get 100 HR's out of Manny in the next 3 years, filling seats along the way up the career HR list, become a legitmate play-off contender, rand considering they've already made $10-15 million in extra revenue attributed to him and can trade him while he's still productive and get some young prospects (or needed element) it would be a great win-win deal. Most BB contracts show nothing or very little on the other side of the equation, other than opt-outs, in so as far as leverage. In context, the one herein does.

Good to hear Kim Ng is not in the running for a GM position in seattle.

I hope she replaces Ned Colleti

Try to get Brain Roberts out of Baltimore to play 2B!!!