Dodgers Sign Casey Blake

No, because the ken Rosenthal article does not mention it and sicne this is a site of a collection of articles, we don't know.

I would best bet that you're get your information quicker here;
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8912072?MSNHPHMA

Since by the time this story breaks and is posted, this website is just getting the story to copy onto their site.

Chances are it has a 3rd yr guarantee

Colletti didn't guarantee a 3rd year when the Twins were negotiating with Blake. Why would he guarantee one now that the Twins have dropped out? That would make no sense.

Solid move if it's around 18 million or less.

Well, Stat Man, maybe you can get a refund then. Oh wait, this site's free. And you're also free to go elsewhere. It amazes me how much people complain about the free content they get on blogs...

Stat Man, why are you attacking this website for being the exact thing it proclaims itself to be, a clearinghouse for legitimate rumors? We know we could look at the Fox Sports website and get any Ken Rosenthal rumors faster than we could here, but I, along with probably 99% of the other readers on this site, don't have time to go carousing through 200+ sites to try and see if anything has been updated in the last half hour. This website takes that step out of the equation and in turn, saves time so you see a wealth of articles in virtually real time. However, If you're only interested in Ken Rosenthal's column anyway, what are you doing on this site in the first place? This website is for people interested in trades encompassing the entire MLB from all legitimate sportswriters. If that's not for you, so be it, but don't come over here and try to pimp Ken Rosenthal's column and simultaneously attack the website. That's just rude.

this is good news...he's a gamer and veteran that helped balance out the lineup...even if his thirdbase skills decline, we can always use him at 1st or the outfield in coming seasons...glad to see Colletti got this one right...I really like Dewitt at 2nd too, so that's an added bonus...let's get Furcal back here at SS and the infield is set...

And Blake has averaged, in his career, 264/334/447 with 23 HR and 79 RBI (I don't know why people keep looking at RBI's when evaluating players, but that's his average for those interested). Something similar to that could probably be expected.

Leave it to Ned Collettii in a depressed market to give an average player in his mid-30s three years with few if any teams bidding against him.

There is no rush to add a mediocre player like Blake just to plug a hole.

What is the worst that can happen?

You can stuck with Joe Crede or some other stopgap option.

Now you are stuck with Blake for three years who is a career .264 hitter with a .335 OBP.

I seriously doubt that he is going to improve or breakout in his late 30s...

Ned is 0 for 1 this off season if it is true!

If its for no more than $24 million over 3 years, this isn't a bad deal at all. Blake will give us solid production - nothing special, but solid. And at less than $10 million it gives us payroll flexibility. It's nothing special, but at least it provides stability at 3rd.

Personally I would have liked Colletti to sign Crede to an incentive laden contract, but this will do.

Colletti learned from Brian Sabean. 'nuff said.

"Twins fail again."

You mean, not committing to an aging player who's probably going to have to join the Twins' OF logjam in a year?

Oh yeah, massive failure.

dusto-

Billingsley gets 46.2% groundballs and has a 1.33 GB/FB ratio. That's not Lowe/Webb/Hudson extreme groundballer, but Billingsley is still heavily affected by infield defense as he gets considerably more GBs than FBs.

If the Dodgers get Varitek AND Blake, that pretty much means Martin will be traded for a huge package, for he will have nowhere to play. And, trading Martin is a fireable offense IMO.

Blake is old. Blake is bad defensively. Blake is a Dodger for 3 years? Awesome. I didn't like the fact that we made it to the NLCS. We need a team full of players that won't let us get to the playoffs. It's much better.

"Repeat after me: Ned Colletti should be fired.

Can they hurry up and announce the deal already? It's stupid, what else can be said."

ehh yeah kinda true..

but im okay with this deal, because better have somebody(anybody) signed to play third.. noe dewitt will be a above average second baseman, that is the only reason why i like this deal.

no manny? eff it(painful eff it)

pierre
kemp
martin
loney
with the possibility of manram
ethier
blake
dewitt
hu

its not the greatest but if we do get manny its all good

I think whomever signs Blake, for the $6-8 mil per and 3 years he's asking for will be getting one of the better free agent deals. Thirdbasemen who hit 20+ hr's, 80+ rbi, an acceptable average, and passable defense don't grow on trees. I'm shocked nobody else has been willing to meet his demands more quickly.

"With all the dumb Dodger moves made by Ned, I hardly consider this one to be up there. Blake's versatile and you can't find a 3B to hit like that just anywhere. I'm not sure investing in Crede is what you want to do as a contender at this point."

Blake had a 100 OPS+ as a Dodger. He had a .313 OBP as a Dodger. You're telling me the Dodgers can't find someone to hit league average for less than $6-8M a year?? Really? And someone who isn't 35 and declining?
Blake DeWitt had a 91 OPS+ last year and played great defense at 3B. He'll probably be very close to Blake's stats next season.
The Dodgers would be better off signing Ray Durham and platooning him with Berroa or Hu or Grudzielanek and letting DeWitt play 3B. It'd be cheaper and better both offensively and defensively.

"3 years for Blake at 35, but not 3 years for Manny at 37?"

Blake's entire contract would also be significantly less than what 1 year of Manny's would cost.

"I guarantee that the deal is much closer to 18 than to 24."

Hmmmm.

I'm not crazy about the deal, but the price tag seems decent.

See. This is why the Dodgers are mediocre. Be cheap with your role players. Go sign Ray Durham to play at 2B, and stick DeWitt at 3B. Then spend on your studs.

3/17 is way too high for a declining 3B. Way, way too high. He's going to be so intolerable defensively that he has to move to the outfield (where he should be playing anyways). I mean, its stupid enough that the Dodgers traded Santana and Meloan for him, but at least get the draft pick and call it a day, instead of throwing money at him.

Better hurry up and trade Ethier, because his ABs will be diminishing even further when Blake has to be moved to the OF.

Scott Boras- Unless Blake KNOWS that he won't be in the shape after Year 2 for the Twins to pick up his option, and that this would be his last big contract. And thus, he would want to go for the most guaranteed years/ money possible now.

Which isn't a good sign for the Dodgers.

Yeah Dodgers! Progress I like it! One spot filled

There's a good chance DeWitt will be better than Blake next season. DeWitt isn't that good of a defender at 2B, but he's a great defender at 3B. You bring in Durham and a righty for the same amount you're spending on Blake this season and you've got a better offensive and defensive team. Not to mention an extra draft pick when Blake signs with another team.

But hey, I'm all for shortsighted thinking. It's the Dodger way.

DodgersBruin- If you take into account defense, DeWitt and Blake were even at 3B on the season overall factoring in offense and defense (and this is taking into account Blake's time in Cleveland). DeWitt is awesome defensively at 3B, and Blake needs to be in the OF.

Both Durham and Blake are below average defensive players. Using Chone predictions:

DeWitt 3B: +7. Durham 2B: -11. Total IF defense: -4 runs above replacement.

Blake 3B: -8. DeWitt 2B: +1 total -7 runs above replacement.

And, Blake's offensive season of 2008 was definitely flukish.

If Durham was to sign with the Dodgers, then you'd have a bunch of Dodger fans complaining about Colletti signing more ex-giants. Either way Colletti always comes out looking like a baffoon.

"If Durham was to sign with the Dodgers, then you'd have a bunch of Dodger fans complaining about Colletti signing more ex-giants. Either way Colletti always comes out looking like a baffoon."

Yeah but at least it'd be Colletti making a smart move and bettering the team and looking like a baffoon as opposed to Colletti looking like a baffoon making a dumb move that supplants the case for his dismissal.

Winning makes fans shut up.

UCLA Alum

This is a comment from a definite outsider from the Dodgers organization, but I've always wondered this. How is it that Ned Colletti could continue to make stupid moves like this but someone like Paul DePodesta was let go so quickly by Frank McCourt? Both made the playoffs, both signed players to big contracts, but Colletti has really become the village idiot and has pretty much made McCourt unwilling to dip extensively into the free agent market this year. To be honest, I never understood why he was fired in the first place. Anyone willing to take a stroll down memory lane as to explain it to me?

Fair enough, but I look at articles in retrospect and it says that the media had something to do with it. Is that true? I don't understand how Colletti gets a pass (if he does) but this guy got hammered.

Colletti doesn't really get a pass. Colletti was getting fired if Manny doesn't land in the Dodgers laps. If Colletti isn't allowed to leave after his contract expires and Logan White named GM at the end of the season I'll be depressed. Logan White has save the Dodgers from losing all their talent.

what was mentioned about Loretta's deal? didnt see with who it was for?

Ned Colletti sucks, but not for these deals. Blake is a steal at that average annual salary. Don't look at the years, look at the average pay of less than $6 million a year. It is obvious that the economic reality for the Dodgers is a short term cash flow problem that goes away next year when the Jones/Schmidt monster goes away. Shaving $2 million off what he was slated to make per year is a great deal.

As for Loretta, I think the crickets suggest that $1.25 million for a super-utility guy who can still get on base is a good thing. I do think that such a deal, sadly, spells an end for Nomar.

"And, Blake's offensive season of 2008 was definitely flukish."

No it wasn't. It was slightly above his career average, which are heavily weighed down by two outlier seasons and years of lousy playing time. There is no reason to doubt that Blake wont match last year for at least the next 2 years, as he stays in good physical shape and has only really had injuries in 1 year. The key with Blake is to rest him a bit to keep his energy levels up toward the end of the year.

"Blake is bad defensively."

If he were playing 2B, I would agree with you. However, at 3B, he is just about average. In the OF, he is actually a defensive stud.

"Bills is harldy a groundballer. Kuroda definitely is a gb'er, but no one else on the staff is anymore. I'd rather have a great defensive tandem up the middle and Manny before we decided that we needed Blake."

Bills is actually a big time GBer and only figures to grow that number as his control settles in. Kuroda is a GBer and Kershaw has shown GB tendencies as well.

"I'm not sure investing in Crede is what you want to do as a contender at this point."

I think this is the best point made. At least Blake is a known commodity. He can play all over the field, hit well in spurts and play defense. He may not be a stud at 3B, but he isn't exactly a detriment either. He is actually ideally an OFer, because he is a very good defender there, but putting him at 3B is hardly an embarrassment. Crede is a huge question mark health-wise and probably wouldn't take what Blake is getting annually on a 1 year deal.

"Surprised he took the Dodgers deal when year three is really only worth $3m or so.

Seems like he could have worked Minnesota over for some kind of an option year that would pay him more than $3m in year 3 (assuming he stayed healthy)."

He seemed to like L.A. when he was here, so perhaps that was part of it.

"Bill Plaschke. He ruined the Dodgers. He wrote article after article talking about how horrible DePo was. McCourt was firing everyone at the first sign of public discontent over the first 3 years he owned the team. Sadly Plaschke convinced McCourt that the public had turned on DePo after the 2005 season when the Dodgers had injuries which gave them a sub .500 record. Granted DePo wasn't the most personal person, but almost all his moves paid off. Given 4 years as the Dodgers GM he'd have been just as good as Theo. He just had to learn to take him method to a big market team."

Plaschke knows f'all about baseball and definitely has been a problem in the Dodgers' development, but I don't think DePo was the solution either. DePo doesn't have the right demeanor to be an effective GM. He is perfect to have as the GM's right-hand, because he can chase stats all day and pull countless diamonds out of the rough. The problem is that he came to the Dodgers with no clue how to use the kind of resources he was handed and no ability to connect with the fan base, because of his personality. The difference between DePo and Theo is that Theo has personality and hires other people to handle his sabermetrics for him.

The Twins offered 2/14 but wouldn't do 3/18?

Yeah....no more talks of a Cano for Kemp trade!!

If this ends any speculation of the Dodgers having any interest in Cano it's worth the $5M for this season alone. Now let's hope Blake can at least be a league average 3B over the next 2 years and the Dodgers can find a way to draft or trade for a minor league 3B over the next 2 years.