Dodgers ready to make their pitch to CC
Programming note: On today's "Purple, Gold and Blue," we'll be joined by Will Carroll of Baseball Prospectus, who will talk Hot Stove and the recent MVP vote in the National League. Click here to go straight to the show window, or feel free to watch on the side of the page! 11 a.m. Be there!
Saw this nugget today from Buster Olney at ESPN.com:
Heard this: The Dodgers are preparing to make their offer to CC Sabathia -- and logic tells you that it will be a very large offer because the gauntlet has been thrown down. The Brewers have a five-year, $100 million on the table and might be willing to take their offer beyond that. The Yankees threw out $140 million over six years and definitely have more to offer. So if the Dodgers jump into this thing, you'd have to assume that, at the very least, they'll be in the $110 million range -- and if it is at that level, there would be the built-in hope that CC would give the Dodgers a home-state discount. Anything less than $100 million probably would not be competitive.
He then asks/answers the big Manny vs. CC question on the minds of many fans:
If you were the Dodgers and you were prepared to offer $100 million-plus to some player, would you rather invest the money in:
(A) A 36-year-old historically great, high-impact hitter who is a poor outfielder and bears a reputation for quitting on his team. Or,
(B) A 28-year-old left-handed pitcher coming off a season in which he went 11-2 with a 1.65 ERA -- a player who has a sterling reputation as a person and a teammate, and who demonstrated staggering competitive integrity in how he took the ball for the Brewers down the stretch.
The choice is not even worthy of debate. If the Dodgers have $100 million-plus to spend -- and there are some in the industry who doubt whether that's actually the case -- then Sabathia makes all the sense in the world for them.
I'm on the other side of this issue, in part because I can't quite figure out how the Dodgers can replicate the type of offense they had/needed near the end of last season without Manny, or something very close, and the potential replacements (Adam Dunn?) aren't nearly as dynamic (nor, it should be said, as flaky or old). With the pitching staff, however, I think there are ways for the Blue to put together a very competitive staff without bringing in Sabathia.
Don't get me wrong -- CC would be a great addition, and while precious memories of Darren Dreifort and (to a lesser extent) Kevin Brown mean many Dodger fans can't say the words "long-term deal" in the same sentence as "pitcher" without triggering a gag reflex, Sabathia is as good a risk as any. While there are worries, especially about weight and workload, he doesn't have the declining numbers that scream "Bad Idea!" like Barry Zito did before signing with San Francisco.
Either way, for the Dodgers to build a highly competitive team for the '09 season won't be easy. I've said it before, I'll say it again: This is not the winter I'd want to be Ned Colletti. And not simply because I don't wear snakeskin boots.
BK
Subscribe to this Blog | What is RSS?
SaMo,
Good points. I agree, I think most on here are more confident in the young pitching than in our young hitters... I don't know why either b/c if you think about it, the young hitters have shown everyone that they have all progressed accordingly. Maybe because we feel the hitters are almost at full potential whereas the pitchers are solid now and have the potential to be really special.
That being said, I still want Manny over CC. I think if all things being equal, the smart move is CC BUT given the Dodgers past history w/ "supposed" star pitchers (Dreifert, Brown, and Schmidt) w/ big contracts I always worry about paying any pitcher top money. I'd rather of paid Penny $7 million more, Randy Johnson or take a shot at Ben Sheets for injury discount (incentive laden contract).
Plus, I think most on here want Manny b/c of STAR POWER. Manny is a shoe in Hall of Famer NOW and CC might be but up to this point is not nearly enough. This Dodger team has no Star Power and CC won't bring that here.... and we are in LaLa Land.
Posted by: Rob | November 20, 2008 at 09:06 AM
CC is THE must "get" and 4"get" 'bout pouting man-ram; dods made very reasonable offer to aging/defensive liability.......remember, pitching & defense wins baseball games/championships, while offense merely "steals" headlines..........team did fairly well in '60s w/sandy&big D at top of rotation, w/lineup absent any huge slugger.......indeed, those "daze" team traded its one huge slugger (frank howard) for another very talented starting lefty, claude osteen.......so again, need for top-flight, quality pitching cannot be overstated!!!
Posted by: PitchAdeal | November 20, 2008 at 09:38 AM
I love C.C. as much as the next guy (since I AM an Indians fan), but the Dodgers line-up lacks a serious hitting threat, a guy like Manny that makes teams nervous every time he steps into the on-deck circle.
Pitching and defense ONLY win championships? Then explain how the Red Sox managed to win TWO of them with Manny in the line-up? Or how the Phillies managed to win this year with just ONE good starter (well 1.5 if you count Jamie Moyer)? It takes more than just a guy who can win for you every 5 games.
Sign Manny, shore up the bullpen, get a vet to fill the #3 spot (takes pressure off Kershaw and McDonald) in the rotation, and the Dodgers will be back in the NLCS again next year.
Posted by: Edward H | November 20, 2008 at 10:29 AM
Sorry guys, totally forgot about Kershaw. Burnett's second half was good but the DL history is there. My apologies, I usually make better sense that that think before I write.
Jack
Posted by: Jack in DC | November 20, 2008 at 10:38 AM
Well i'm about as tired of this whole Manny situation as much as anybdy. Yes, he carried us for two and a half months and theres no doubt we made it to the NLCS mainly because of him but I can't stand it when i keep hearing that we won't be a good team without him in the lineup next year. DOES ANYONE HAVE FAITH IN OUR YOUNG CORE GROUP ANYMORE? With them getting older and having a season under their belt where Kemp hit nearly .300 with 18 HRs, Ethier hitting .305 with 20 HRs, and Loney leading our team with 90 RBIs i don't see how we can't be a contender without Manny. Don't get me wrong I would LOVE to have Manny back because of all the positivity he brought to our team but he's also known to bring negativity and that could have a big effect on any team. We also got to do what's best for our team. I think our main priorities should be pitching and bringing Raffy back. I think we should sign Sabathia and Randy Johnson, Yes he's aged but he can also have a big impact on a team just like Maddux. I know i'm just one opinion so i would like to hear what other Dodger fans think.
Posted by: jayhaze | November 20, 2008 at 10:48 AM
Edward:
Pitching and defense do win championships. The Phillies had average starting pitching, but the best bullpen in baseball. And Hamels was a STUD. Their infield defense of Rollins, Utley, and Feliz (never mind Howard) was pretty damn good too.
The Red Sox also won with pitching: Schilling in '04; Beckett in '07. When those guys faltered, they fell to the Rays. Their infield defense of Pedroia, Youkilis, Lowell, and Lowrie wasn't too shabby either.
The Rays infield defense was even betterr. Their young pitchers get a lot of the credit, but You don't carry Jason Bartlettt's bat unless he's got great leather. He does.
The Dodgers have an above average catcher, a good defensive first baseman, and two slightly above average outfielders. To win consistently, they'll need a shut-down shortstop and some more pitching. Hard hitting outfielders are easier to find than ace starting pitchers.
Posted by: SaMo | November 20, 2008 at 11:07 AM
I love Manny as much as the next guy, but I don't think anybody is getting him for less than 5 or 6 years. At his age that is just not gonna cut it in the National League. Even with all his baggage, if Manny were 34 or 35 I would be all over him. BUT HE AIN'T. He is old and getting older. Any Dodgers / Manny contract beyond 3 years is a bad idea. Mannywood was fun while it lasted. Sadly Manny's contract demands place his future firmly in the American League, holding down the DH.
I would love to be wrong...but just ask my wife, I am never wrong. HAHA! Geaux Blue!
Posted by: gus2327 | November 20, 2008 at 11:13 AM
The Yankees will not be out bid for CC and will pay whatever it takes.... they will approach $200 m if necessary. CC will have to leave a ton of money on the table to come to LA.
Posted by: Joe the Plumber | November 20, 2008 at 02:02 PM
Refinance Dodger stadium, pull out $210 million and sign CC for 6/126 and Manny 4/84. If that doesn't work for McCourt, sell the Dodgers and make a ton of money.
Posted by: A Scanner Darkly | November 20, 2008 at 03:05 PM
Joe the Plumber,
That is probably true. When a Steinbrenner picks his man, money becomes no object.
dalegabriel, you said, "If there is money, I'd rather sign Manny and RJ than Dunn and CC. "
Really!?!? I mean... REALLY!?!?!?!?!?
I can give you that next year, and maybe even the year after, Dunn's EqA will be lower than Manny's. But not by much, and 3, 4, 5 years from now, Dunn will in fact be a better hitter (simply due to their respective ages then). Meanwhile, CC is MUCH better--I mean like, apples and oranges, not even in the same zip code, like astronomically better--than Johnson is now. And Johnson is already old. CC is in his prime.
In summation, I think your preference here is, ummm, unique.
Posted by: VA Blueblood | November 20, 2008 at 03:12 PM
Gus,
I'm never wrong also... just ask my wife.... wait, don't ask her.. she tell you I'm always wrong. Anyway, I'm NEVER wrong and I KNOW Manny will be a Dodger for the next 3 w/ a 4th year option.... it will be 3 years $70 million w/ 4th year club option at $20 million or 5 million buyout.
Posted by: Rob | November 20, 2008 at 04:14 PM
VA,
I've never been a Dunn fan. Strikeouts north of 160, to me, offset the 40+ homer potential that would likely go down in Dodger stadium. The .247 lifetime average is not joy either. This is a guy that can be pitched around.
The length of contract that CC will get is what scares me most. One bad elbow ligament and the franchise is screwed for at least three years. If they can get him to sign for 3 years,sure, but he's going to end up with a 6 year deal. Get hurt in NY early in a 6 year deal and Yankee fans will forget all about Carl Pavano. Ask the Giants how long term pitching contracts are working out. Its the number of years, not the player and he's going to get a long term deal.
Johnson is a one year rental that, if he puts up numbers and has desire, could become two. I really believe that Manny can be happy and productive for 5 more years in LA. We'll never know exactly what happened in Boston, but Mattingly and Torre both praised his work ethic and that's good enough for me.
But most of all, the Dodgers need to resign Furcal. His presence at the top of the lineup changes the whole dynamics of the offense. If we believe in the young pitchers, re-sign Furcal and Manny, let DeWitt play 3rd and sign Orlando Hudson.
Posted by: dalegribel | November 20, 2008 at 04:33 PM
What if Dodgers sign CC and Manny and CC goes 22-10 w250+ Ks & 5 SHO (wins Cy Young) and Manny hits 40 HRS, drives in 125 and bats .330 (wins MVP) but the rest of the team stinks? The Dodgers will still pack the stadium. It's about entertainment and excitement and those 2, alone, can carry the team to the post-season
Posted by: A Scanner Darkly | November 20, 2008 at 06:55 PM
Ok... so if we don't sign Manny.
We wind up with CC, Burnett, freakin Cy Young...
What do we have? 5 Lowe's.
Guys who pitch great but don't get run support
Offensive offense is our issue, and I don't think there is enough hair gel in the clubhouse for 5 Lowes.
Posted by: benzojones | November 20, 2008 at 07:50 PM
Don't be surprised if you see an outfield next year of Ethier in left, Jones in center and Kemp in right. Everything I read points to that. The Dodgers owe AJ $21.1 million in 2009, he's been working out with a personal trainer hired by the Dodgers, and he's reporting to the Domincan Republic on December 10 to begin playing winter ball. I suspect that the Dodgers are going to concentrate on pitching and their infield, and gamble that Jones will be healthier and in far better shape than last year.
It's a gamble, but not a totally outrageous solution. I suspect that the two bad years that Jones had were largely the result of a bum knee, and that he might be primed for a comeback. Good year or not, 2009 will very likely be his last with the Dodgers, who can then reach into their own farm system in 2010 (maybe Andrew Lambo) or seek a veteran power hitter next year, either via free agency or trade.
Also, if the Dodgers are going to win, it will be the continued growth of their young players that will provide the bulk of the offense and pitching. If the kids don't grow, then this team won't win with or without Manny/Dunn, or anybody else. Pitching and infield help are the primary needs, and that should be the focus.
Also, no matter what they do, the Dodgers will probably be in contention at the trading deadline in July. If a bat is needed at that time, they will probably be in the market.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | November 20, 2008 at 10:38 PM
Has everyone forgotten how bad the Dodgers offense was last year without Manny? The Dodgers had great pitching last year, and a poor offense which led to a sub 500 team. The Dodgers should make a major play to resign Manny, and I think they could get him for 3 yrs $75-80M. I don't see any team giving Manny a 5 or 6 year deal.
6 year or 7 year contracts for pitchers are generally bad decisions. Can anyone name a stud pitcher who signed a 6 year or 7 year contract that worked out well for the club for the duration of the contract? The list of long contracts for pitchers which have worked out poorly is very long (Kevin Brown, Mike Hampton, Barry Zito, Darren Dreifort, etc). I like CC, and wouldn't mind if the Dodgers could sign him to a 4 or 5 year deal. The problem is the Yankees will go 7 years and will likely spend whatever it takes to get CC.
I think the Dodgers can add a veteran pitcher to their staff (a Randy Johnson for 1 year, or a Ben Sheets for 2 -3 years) and be very competitive. I have faith in Bills being a solid #1 next year, and I like the prospect of having Kuroda, Kershaw, and McDonald in the rotation.
Resigning Raffy and Blake would also be very good moves for the Dodgers.
Posted by: Santa Rosa Dodger | November 20, 2008 at 11:40 PM
I keep reading and speculating and wondering and hoping and praying BUT then I see it is only Novemeber 21st. We probably don't get anything, good or bad, until after Thanksgiving at the earliest.
That being said I want CC, Furcal, Beltre and a healthy, determined Andruw Jones. We can win with that and the youngsters. I know those four represent a Long Term contract risk, Injury risk, Trading away too much risk and a another crap season risk, BUT you can't tell me that Randy Johnson, Orlando Hudson, Casey Blake and Manny don't represent huge risks also.
I know the big question is CC or Manny. I say that in a perfect world CC has more upside than Manny.
Perfect World CC = 6 years of steller ace pitching. Perfect World Manny = Maybe 2 years of HOF level best in baseball hitting, subpar Defense and then another 3 or 4 years of Manny being old and average.
Martin, Loney, DeWitt, FURCAL, BELTRE, Ethier, Jones, Kemp. CC, Bills, Kuroda, Kershaw, McDonald. Shore up the pen, Fill out the bench. We can win with that.
DO IT NED and just like FAJs "Three Little Birds" reminds us, Don't worry about a thing, cause every little thing is gonna be alright.
Posted by: gus2327 | November 21, 2008 at 06:55 AM
Really concerned with some peoples' blind obsession with Manny. This is really an easy call. The money would be better spent on CC Sabathia, Orlando Hudson, John Smoltz, Rafael Furcal, Trevor Hoffman, and then making a deal for a quality outfielder.
Andruw Jones should never see the field at Dodger stadium again, unless it is with a different team. He knew the investment that the Dodgers made in him, and then failed to deliver in every single way. The most troubling being his attitude. If I were Ned, I'd consider a trade...and, even a "buy-out" just to have him gone. I know they have insurance on those contracts. He represents bad energy...and, would be "boo-ed" by the fans again from day one. I'd rather them try to acquire some power at the third base position via trade or free agency.....Don't underestimate the power to trade. The team doesn't have to be built via free agency alone. As a GM, limiting your efforts to this particular pool of players is foolish. Trades....Ugla (2b), Ramirez (ss), Reyes (ss), Wright (3b), Cano (2b), Cabrera (cf), You never know.
Also, you cannot worry about making another team better....A good trade is where both teams feel just a bit uncomfortable with what they had to give up, but are excited with whom they received. It's about talent and chemistry, not just the sum total of the talent alone.
Can't be afraid of the players you trade away being successful.......You just have to believe in your powers of evaluation and that your investment will pay off as well.
Posted by: Jon | November 21, 2008 at 09:32 AM
Some things that have been Missed:
Does anybody remember the BOMB that CC hit in one of his first games in the NL into the Visitor's Bullpen at Dodger Stadium? He wants to hit, wants to come back to Cali, and that'll get us a Yankee Discount. 6/120mil, if Colletti wants him.
Who leads off? Seriously. If we let Furcal walk, we are stuck again with Kemp/ Martin/ ? I think that makes taking a chance with Furcal even more important.
What are the REAL trade possibilities involving Pierre? Assuming we eat 75% of his salary, what do we get in return?
Lots of talk about how many other options there are out there if Manny/ CC aren't signed, but can any be trusted to fill out the Middle Infield, Middle of Lineup, and Top of Rotation? I see a lot more risky arms down the line (folks are scared of CC risks, what about Burnett and Sheets?!?!) , Where's the Power beyond K King Dunn? Unfortunately for the Dodger Brass, there really aren't as many options as it would seem, which makes their job that much harder.
#1 Truth, we will not go anywhere without a true #1 Starter, so that has to be addressed.
Posted by: Jeremy | November 21, 2008 at 10:06 AM
I can't believe teams are willing to give Rafael Furcal three years. The guy is constantly injured.
At this point, I have to consider the Dodgers out of the Furcal sweepstakes. No way they're going to give him 3 years, much less 4. he was a terrific player when he was in the lineup, but that wasn't very often.
Why are the Braves so willing to dump Yunel Escobar? To me, he seems a younger version of Furcal. If the Dodgers can pick him up in a trade, he could be the best solution of all. IF not, Rent Renteria for a year until DeJesus is ready.
Posted by: SaMo | November 21, 2008 at 10:17 AM
SaMo
I pointed out in my post that I thought that it was important to shore up the bullpen dramatically. And yes, Hamels was "lights out". But ONLY he was (and Moyer was effective in post-season; just don't count on him for much in 2009). Having a "lights out" pitcher is important, but you can win without one. The Chisox did in 2005. So did the Cards in 2006.
And Manny isn't just ANY hitter. Ask the Bosox AND their opponents how much they were feared with Jason Bay in the line-up vs. Manny.
I just think the Dodgers line-up isn't anywhere CLOSE to potent enough if you put anyone else in Manny's slot: Texeira, Dunn, Beltre, Matt Holliday or any of the other names mentioned. If you think that's a slam at the rest of the line-up: it kinda is. IMO, Manny over replacement player > CC over replacement pitcher.
And FWIW: I will be quite surprised if CC ends up in New York. He will be either a Giant, a Dodger or an Angel.
Posted by: Edward H | November 21, 2008 at 12:35 PM
I agree with Edward H. Manny is more valuable over a replacement bat than CC over a replacement pitcher. I think we can sign Manny at 4 yrs 90 mil which would have a larger impact on wins and getting to the postseason than a 6 yr commitment to a pitcher.
Pitchers are VERY risky and Sabathia reminds me of another "big" lefty that dominated and then flamed out early due to injuries - hello, Mr. Valenzuela. We can find sufficient pitching on the relative cheap but there are no cheap power hitters out there. It's called the LIMA plan and the Dodgers should know better than anyone. Top shelf pitchers are the most valuable once you are in the postseason but we may never get there without Manny's bat.
Sign Manny, it's the move with much less risk and it's the CHEAPER move. We KNOW that the Dodgers will be competitive with Manny but we can only ASSUME that we will be just as good with CC and there's a big difference there. The fact that CC plays only once every five games vs. an everyday Manny drives home the uncertainty factor further than a 99 longball.
Sign Manny at 90 mil, take the remaining 50 mil of CC's 140 and put 36 mil into keeping Furcal, use the other 14 for Sheets. Sheets will require 2 yrs at around 14 mil per but we will have a windfall after fat ass AJ rolls out of town the year after.
Posted by: kwony | November 21, 2008 at 02:43 PM
Kwony:
Do you own stock in Kaiser? Kerlan Jobe?
Seriously, signing Furcal and Sheets is like asking to visit the hospital every other day. Yet you're worried about Sabathia breaking down? A guy with no history of arm troubles?
Throw in Manny, a guy who will be 41 in the last year of a four-year deal (if you can get him for that) and you've got huge injury potential in the outfield too.
Keep CC in the National League and you'll limit his innings and keep his arm healthy. Keep Manny in the NL and he has to play every day with no DH and will get hurt.
As for Jason Bay, he put up numbers quite similar to Manny's in Boston. It's David Ortiz who stunk in the playoffs. The team with Manny went no farther in the playoffs than the team that gave him up. So in my opinion, it's a moot point.
Posted by: SaMo | November 21, 2008 at 04:06 PM
kwony - 4yrs/$90M for Manny Ramirez??? You have been drinking that Scott Boras kool-aid haven't you? I still would like to see where in the MLB rule book it says a player must receive a raise from his previous contract.
Now that the Dodgers have pulled the original offer off the table, I would like to see them come back with a 2-3 year offer for a LOWER annual salary and make him prove he can get more elsewhere. I just don't see a market for his services out there, not at the money he is demanding. I would like to see teams stick it to Manny/Boras for playing their way out of the previous contract to look for a more lucrative offer, that would teach them.
Even though I would like to see Manny back, I won't shed a tear if he leaves, the Dodgers money would be better spent on either Texeira or Sabathia.
Posted by: HardHittin25 | November 21, 2008 at 04:12 PM
SaMo,
Ditto.
Kwony,
Manny 4/90, Furcal 36, Sheets 2/14. Clearly you must have inside information which enables you to throw around these numbers. I'm amazed when bloggers throw out numbers indiscriminately as if they were intimately involved negotiating the contracts for the players they name. None of us knows what's going on behind the scenes, and consequently none of us has a clue as to what numbers might or might not work. And certainly none of us are privy to the subtleties that come into play in each and every negotiation. All we know are the published numbers we read, with no clue as to their accuracy.
If you have fun throwing around numbers for the purpose of enlivening the discussion, that's fine. But don't for a minute think you actually have a clue as to what will work. None of us does. The process will simply play out over time, and probably by sometime in January we'll have a clearer picture. And even then there will likely be variables (e.g., trades) with the power to change the landscape.
Posted by: Brooklyn Dodger | November 21, 2008 at 08:49 PM