Dodgers Sign Randy Wolf

horrible

Why is this horrible? You haven't even seen the terms yet. Unless you were hoping that the Yanks signed him, which I doubt.

My deepest sympathy to the fans of the teams that end up with Garland, Wolf and Looper.

They've "agreed to terms"? Like a term sheet? It's not settled then with Wolf's agents. They could still shop that term sheet around to get more money from another team. It is not like Tellem hasn't done that before.

Why did they decide on mcdonald going to the pen he looked solid in the playoffs.

Posted by: garriscp |

Who said they did? That #5 is still open. And he did well in the playoffs as a reliever.

Stupid yanks fan, Wolf will stay more healthy than Burnett this coming season.

Posted by: NedCollettiClueless | February 06, 2009 at 05:31 PM

----------------

I'll take that bet.....b/c Burnett was an over-paid piece of work...Should of signed Ben Sheets, Mark Mulder, and Chris Carpenter too....

Thanks for the correction.

why will he stay healthier...because hes on the Dodgers? Get over yourself. At least when healthy Burnett will get the job done. And I'm going on record now saying Burnett will be the Yankees best signing of this offseason (over CC and Tex...when it comes playoff time people will be heralding Burnett).

Wolf is a horrible signing because this is a playoff team (or was). Guy posted a 4.74 era with a 1.42 whip in the Coors field of pitching parks. If you are going to deal with a pitcher having a ERA near 5 why not let McDonald take a shot and worst come to worst, get some experience.

The Dodgers are one botched signing (Manny to the Giants) away from competing for 3rd. And before you rip me for being a Yankee know I like the Dodgers a lot and Torre especially.

"Guy posted a 4.74 era with a 1.42 whip in the Coors field of pitching parks."

And what did he post while with Houston?

cheba63....Wolf pitched 2 games for the Astros. I wouldn't get excited about his stats while he was wit them. If you want to figure out what his stats might look like in 09 go look at what he did while he pitched for the Dodgers.....4.73 era 1.45 whip and a .278 BAA

"Why did they decide on mcdonald going to the pen he looked solid in the playoffs."

McDonald is on the Billingsley plan from 2007. They want to limit his early innings and exposure by using him as a reliever, then have him start again later in the season.

Wolf pitched in 12 games for the Stros. His ERA fell over a run below where it was with the Pads.

Randy Wolf is a decent, back-end pitcher. He's not AJ Burnett by any stretch. And while I think AJ is way over-hyped, it's amazing to me that people love Wolf as much as they do. Last time the guy finished a season with an ERA under 4 was 2002. Since 2004 he has seasons of 56, 80, and 102 IP.

So, while Burnett is a decent 2/3 when healthy (which isn't often), Wolf is, at best, a 4/5 guy when healthy (which also isn't often).

5.5 million!!!!!! wow if the Dodgers were worried about signing Manny they should have just stuck that 5.5 mil on the 25 mil offer they made him.

At least they would have gotten a very happy Manny for a year instead of using it as toilet paper for that piece of crap Wolf.

Serious*

It was about money with CC. He may have wanted the Dodgers to get in a bidding war with the Yankees, but in the end the Yankees were determined to out bid everyone under the sun.

World Series here we come LOL! Why do my beloved Dodgers act like they aint got the cash for some real talent. McCourt and Coletti should go work for the Pirates if they wanna make small market team moves. I pay too much money to go see a game when the owner is not even trying to win a championship and could care less what kind of team he is fielding

"At least when healthy Burnett will get the job done. And I'm going on record now saying Burnett will be the Yankees best signing of this offseason (over CC and Tex...when it comes playoff time people will be heralding Burnett)."

Yanks09,
Stop telling us about your love fest with Burnett. Your statements are incorrect and not relevant to a discussion about Wolf. #1 Burnett was healthy this year. He put up a 105 ERA+, meaning he was a tick better than league average. Armando Galarraga, Matt Garza and James Shields are among the pitchers who had better seasons than Burnett last year. #2, do you know the number of post season innings Burnett has pitched? 0. So to say he's going to be "heralded" come the postseason is a statement with no basis.
I'm glad you like that Burnett struck out a bunch of hitters last year. He also had a high WHIP and is going to be 32. He's not that good.

As for Wolf, I'd rather have him than Garland. And they signed essentially the same contract, so for 1 year, with what was left, I'll take it. It's better than Estes I guess.

" Oh and where are all the Sheets bandwaggoners now?"

Hey, it's easy to understand the reluctance to sign the guy now that he's going to have surgery. Now that we have all the information, clearly not signing him was the right move right now. But Sheets is still the most talented pitcher on the market. I'd be clamoring for the Dodgers to sign him on June 2nd (or whatever day negates losing a draft pick) to a 2-3 year deal if the rehab is progressing nicely because his talent is just too much to let slide by.

"I gotta say this a terrible, unnecessary move considering their depth. Why not sign Hudson for 6 mil?"

Because 1)Hudson costs a draft pick 2) He has no position with Blake at 3B and DeWitt/Loretta at 2B and 3) The Dodgers don't really have pitching depth. Bills has a broken leg, Schmidt is an injury, Kershaw has an innings limit (or possibility of injury from the innings jump last year) and McDonald is beginning the year in the bullpen ala Bills circa 2006. And Vargas/Estes shouldn't leave AAA.

Not a good move.

Wolf is ok. Not good ok but we can maybe manage ok.I saw him strike out 12 batters at Dodger stadium. If he can win 10 games that would be great.

Here we go again another stupid move by Ned. If he messes this Manny thing up...

Some of you are making me appreciate having Ned Colletti as a GM, at least compared to the limited knowledge on display here.

1) Wolf is a solid #4-5 starter. The 1 year deal is low risk. The amount paid is the going rate. There is nothing wrong with that deal, period. He's not being paid to be a #1. He's better than Jon Garland imho, if unexciting. They need pitching depth. Schmidt/McDonald/Stults/whoever will fill in the other spot just fine.

They never had a shot at CC Sabathia so I don't even understand why that's being argued.

2) Orlando Hudson fills ZERO need with the Dodgers. They already signed Blake and Furcal (who will lead off and was a really important signing), have DeWitt at 2nd (and prospects DeJesus and Hu to back him up). Oh yeah, and Hudson would cost the Dodgers their first round pick. Other than that it makes total sense.

3) Or what Bruin said.

Art, this money for Wolf is small change and has ZERO to do with whether the Dodgers can sign Manny or not. It has nothing to do with that at all. They are more concerned with signing Manny to too many years and have him unable to play in the outfield 2-3 years into the long term contract Boras is begging for. How is offering Manny $25 million for one year a sign of cheapness?

I don't know about the rest of you, but this off-season is a total failure unless we sign Manny. Every penny we waste on some Joe Blow is money we should out towards manny. Without him, we have little shot. He's the best money player in the game.

YOu can say both the Giants and Dbacks have superior rotations. If they don't sign MANRAM they're in trouble. Maybe Torre can put that in his memoirs. Hope things work out for all those involved.

This signing is cheaper than the Garland deal, and Wolf should give us more quality starts overall. Granted incentives can take it higher, but that's what we would like right? A pretty decent year out of Wolf?

We are only expecting #4 or #5 numbers out of him. I'm not expecting a sub 3.50 ERA w/ 15+ wins, or 200+IP. If anything, I'd be pleased with a 12 win, 4.10 ERA, 185IP season out of him. That out of our #4 spot would be helpful.

And this in no way hampers the Dodgers' ability to sign Manny. They still have around $40 million (with this signing) give or take $5 million, to sign Manny. That $40 millionish is how much they can add to payroll for the rest of this offseason before equaling their payroll from 2008.

So just let it slide, and allow Colletti to finish it up. We'll get Manny, and I wouldn't be surprised if we netted Braden Looper on a 2-year deal. That would help our depth as well and solidify the back end of our rotation decently.

"If Jason Schmidt recovers he will be the #1 starter"

Uh, no.

Chad Billingsley is their #1. Kuroda and Kershaw are 2-3. If Schmidt recovers it will be a great blessing for the team, but he will not be an ace -- that is way too much to ask for, and he certainly won't be better than one of the better young pitchers in the game. Just being healthy and pretty decent would be nice.

**That $40 millionish is how much they can add to payroll for the rest of this offseason before equaling their payroll from 2008.***

Mrblake, its clear the Mccourts are taking the high road and blaming the lower payroll on the economy. If they planned on spending anywhere near as much as last season, we would of seen them sign better more expensive players early this offseason.

"Bills has a broken leg"

Billingsley's leg has healed.

Oh I agree NedCollettisClueless. I am fully aware that the McCourts are especially paranoid, but I'm allowing for about a $5-7.5 million differential.

Technically, with all the contracts that came off the books, and the ones we have taken on so far, we still have closer to $45 million left to spend, rather than $40 million. And that's if all the players we signed reach the max on their contracts via their performance incentive bonuses.

That's why I am low-balling the estimates. At the very least, the McCourts still have $30 million to "play with". And that's giving them about a $15 million "benefit of a doubt".

Wolf is a fine number 4. He was actually rather decent in 2007 before the injury, with an excellent K/BB rate. He was incredibly unlucky with his .329 BABIP, which likely cost him half a run in ERA. Even last year saw kind of a high BABIP of .311.

"Technically, with all the
contracts that came off the books, and the ones we have taken on so far, we still have closer to $45 million left to spend, rather than $40 million. And that's if all the players we signed reach the max on their contracts via their performance incentive bonuses."

Remember that Ethier still isn't under contract yet. Not a huge dent, but around $3 million unaccounted for.

And yeah, I remember Wolf pitched actually quite well for us before his shoulder started acting up. I'm not expecting much from him, but I am worried about him staying healthy. That's why I'd say we could/should sign Looper as a backup plan/safety net.

Anyone dissing this signing is crazy.

First off, he posted decent overall stats for '08 (12-12/4.30 ERA/1.38 WHIP/162 Ks/189 IP) but he was particularly effective for Houston in 12 starts (6-2/3.57 ERA/1.30 WHIP/57 Ks/70 IP). And they play in a band box of a stadium.

The fact that he pitched 180 innings in '08 and pitched better down the stretch is probably a testament to the fact that his arm and control was getting better as the year goes on. Next year he could conceivably maintain the effectiveness he showed with the Astros, especially pitching half his games in Dodger Stadium.

Secondly, he only signed for $5 mill and can make $8 mill max and that is if he pitches 200 innings, in which case the Dodgers will gladly pay him the $8 mill.

His contract is cheaper than Garland's who is guaranteed to make at least $8.75 mill ($6.25 in '09 w/$2.5 mill buyout if '10 option is not excercised) for '09. And, IMO, Wolf is a better pitcher than Garland.

I think Wolf should do a decent job holding down the No. 4 spot for the Dodgers.

I think the Dodgers should see if Pedro Martinez pitches well in the WBC and if he does, then offer Pedro a cheap deal (say $3 mill) to be the 5th starter. That would give the Dodgers nice depth for starting pitching. They would have guys like Vargas, Estes and Schmidt and Stults for possible insurance in case of injury.

Its always nice to have starting pitching depth just due to the fact that a lot of starters get injured.

i liked randy wolf and i think he will fill the back part of the rotation nicely. hopefully now that this is done, the manny situation will play itself out, and they can make a trade for a top of the line starter, something they really havent had in a while.

Sweet. After not getting Garland I was worried about our staff, now we can have Estes, vargas, Stults and Schmidt fight for 5th. Remember Dodger fans, the staff on March 1 will almost certainly not be the staff on September 1. Be patient, Ned has good people around him he will make the right decisions.

Ha, Rex when I saw that Odalis signed for the contract he did with the Nats, I thought to myself, "Hey, we could have brought him in for more than that and only slightly more than what we signed Estes for."

Oh well, sometimes you just don't notice things as much.

"Sorry, but Jim Hendry is worse than Ned Colletti."

Arguable, but I'd disagree. Colletti is worse IMO.