The stove, she is hot!

If we assume that McCourt will again refuse to go over the luxury tax threshold of $119 million (which is not a concern for the Yankees, I might add), exactly how much payroll do we have to play around with for next year? In other words, how much of the '09 payroll is already committed? And thereby, how much do we have to spend on a SP, 3B, SS, maybe another SP, maybe a 2B.. and of course a certain LF whose name escapes me at the moment...

The other thing I don't know right now--but would love if someone would tell me--is how our current free agents are classified in terms of compensatory draft picks? Obviously Manny is a Type A, but I don't know where Lowe, Blake, and Furcal would be rated. I am also not sure if there have been any changes as to what MLB awards the various categories. My current understanding is that a Type A results in 2 picks in between the 1st and 2nd rounds of the draft; is that still correct? What about a Type B? Is there a designation of Type C?

I know a lot of folks would say that draft picks are worthless, but I think we have a pretty solid scouting department (read: Logan White), and picks at that level are still something of a sure-thing in terms of at least having tradeable value for 2 or 3 years after they are drafted.

I suppose the main reason I am bringing this up is that if Manny costs us $30 mill next year (which I think is too much for any one player, especially one who turns 37-years-old in the first year of the deal), not only does that limit who else we can sign, but we then also pass up the bonus picks--which carry long-term value--if he signs elsewhere (read: NYY). Having a marquis player next year appears to be extraordinarily expensive...

anyhow, I know that's not a popular opinion at the moment, and I would love if anyone has answers to my questions above.

I'm not 100% certain, but I believe that a Type A player commands a regular draft pick (1st round or later, depending on various circumstances) plus a supplemental pick between the 1st and 2nd rounds. A Type B, I believe, only commands a supplemental pick. And to the best of my knowledge, Type C was done away with several years ago. Also, to be eligible for any draft picks, a major league team must offer arbitration to any free agents they lose. The risk of course, is that the player offered arbitration can accept it, and forgo free agency.

Because of the number of free agents they have, the Dodgers could pick up quite a few picks, minus some that they might lose if they sign players. The potential is for a sizable net gain of picks. If used well, those picks could significantly re-stock the Dodger system, which is beginning to get somewhat thinner. And if anyone doesn't think obtaining picks can be valuable, you don't have to look any farther than Blake DeWitt, who was a supplemental first round pick the Dodgers obtained from the Yankees for the loss of Paul Quantrill via free agency.

I agree that Billingsley, Kershaw, Kuroda and McDonald have the potential to provide a solid, if not exceptional rotation. But three of those guys are very young players, one of which would be a rookie, and another a 21 year old without even a full year in the big leagues. I love young players, but I also recognize that they perform best when they're surrounded by veteran (and veterans don't have to be old), who serve to take pressure and focus off the younger players, and who can be valuable as role models and advisors. Consequently, I believe that adding a starting pitcher, be it via free agency or a trade, should be on the Dodgers' to-do list. Adding a power bat in the outfield, and determining the configuration of their infield (other than first base) are other priorities.

As a fan without inside player and financial information, I realize that there is too much I don't know to begin suggesting player names. I prefer to let it play out, and then determine whether or not I approve (for whatever that's worth).

I would prefer to not resign Manny at the expense of CC. But both would be great. The Dodgers need to be thinking in terms of home field advantage next year if they make the post season again.
They have a much better chance of winning that way.

I understand that the Yankees will make an offer to CC that he can not refuse unless he intends on turning down the richest deal ever. Our bigger problem is with hitting, so signing Manny is my preference.

I lean toward Manny - the Dodgers have fine young pitching that's likely to improve - but Sabathia wouldn't upset me. Ideally, I'd like to see both.

The Dodgers have a history of being cheap, no matter who the owner is or was. In the 1940`s and 50`s they paid their best players Campy, Robinson and Snider about 50 grand apiece. Dimag, Mantle and Berra all made more by a long shot, ditto Williams and Musial. In the 60`s Koufax and Drysdale had to Strike the job in order to get full value. To keep Koufax today this skin flint would trade Drysdale. And he would spin by saying he offered full value, but Don wanted to test the market.In the 90`s the team completly mis handled Mike Piazza. He`ll over pay some broken down overweight outfielder or an over the hill pitcher or a left fielder(Pierre) who needs to be right handed so he can play second base.Get used to the spin game and remember it is always going to be wait til next year. If the Angels were in the N.L. West He would have a great team. h He`d have to.

I can't believe what I'm reading here. Sure, Manny is the premier hitter in the game. But outfielders are a dime a dozen. Aces are hard to come by. You always pick an ace if you have the chance.

Do you really want to start the season with CHad Billingsley as your ace?How's he goign to hold up in a series against Time Lincecum, Brandon Webb, Johan Santana, Cole Hamels, or, dare I say it, CC Sabathia? He's going to lose most of those matchups, that's how. I love Billz as much a s anyone, but he's not yet a #1 starter. In fact, the Dodgers haven't had a true #1 starter since Kevin Brown, and even he was an oft-injured misanthrope.

Manny is also older than Sabathia, and length of contract is a question. We're all in agreement that three years is the upper limit of what we'd accept for Manny. But you'd want to lock up Sabathia for at least that many years.

Manny is also a bad citizen. He loafs when he's not happy, he knocks over traveling secretaries when he wants to be traded, and he's horrendous on defense. We didn't see that because he was on good behavior here for all of TWO MONTHS.Being a good boy for two months is a whole lot different than doing the act for four years.

How about we make the questions more interesting: Manny and Derek Lowe for four years each vs. Sabathia and Adam Dunn for the same time period. That lets you fill both Dodger needs at the same titme. I prefer the look of Sabathia and Dunn to an aging Lowe and Ramirez collecting social security from the Dodgers in 2011.

Here's the master True Blue plan:

1. Sign CC. We need that legit ace that's been lacking since Fernando and Orel. Yes, Billz is a future ace, but that's still a year away. Colletti and Torre have already said getting a front-line starter is at the top of their priority list. Besides, I don't trust Con Man (a.k.a. Manny). Once he gets his money, he'll revert back to a 15-year-old kid only interested in himself.

2. Sign Furcal. Raffy is to the Dodgers what Pedroia is to the Red Sox. Besides, he's a gamer -- will do whatever it takes for the team.

3. Trade Pierre, Hu and Elbert to Mariners for Beltre. We add a 30-HR bat that will be needed while also getting top-notch glove at the corner.

I think it is a no brainer. The Dodgers had very good pitching last year and a horrible offense without Manny. That yielded a sub 500 club. With Manny the Dodgers were a very good team. He literally changes the whole line-up, as well as the club's confidence level. The Dodgers should resign Manny if they can get him to sign a 3 to 4 year deal.

That said, the Dodgers also need to get a #1 or #2 starter if Lowe and Penny go, if they want to go deep in the playoffs in 2008.

SAMO,
I'm not worried how Bills matches up against those other front line pitchers. If he holds the other team to 3.14 runs, then its up to the offense to win the game. If Manny propels us to the playoffs or Series for two years, then his five year contract would be well worth it no matter what happens those last few years. How much can he hurt us compared to the last 20 years? Building for the future sounds great. but I'd rather get the one big win. Those great Braves team won one world series. The Marlins had all those terrible years but won two series.
David

AK
I think it will cost 4years 120m to get Manny. The reason is after this contract Manny will not get much of anything and he and Boras will figure they have to go for it now. It seems it is always more than anticipated. Still I think the Dodgers should go for Manny. Maybe they can get him cheaper but I don't think so. If he signs in the American League he will get more years but less per year. I think he is more important than CC as he has been a proven leader in the clubhouse and that is worth something.

SaMo
Manny wasn't much of a bad citizen when he was leading the Dodgers to the playoffs. Also, Manny is not a dime a dozen outfielder. He will end up a HOFer with big numbers. I also do not understand where your thinking is that he is a horrendous outfielder. Compared to what?? As for your question of Manny and Lowe vs Dunn and CC. That's a no brainer. Lowe and Manny, easy. You'll never see CC and Dunn in the HOF.

Package

I'm making a stand. I vote for JASON REPKO: the canidate who will produce real change for Los Angeles in 2009!!!