Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti looked ahead to the 2012 season and discussed some of his winter priorities with MLB.com's Ken Gurnick. The highlights….
- Colletti said the team won't undergo any major changes, noting that the Dodgers can contend as long as the offense is consistent. Indeed, L.A. is 30-21 since the All-Star break, with Juan Rivera providing the club with an offensive spark.
- Colletti hasn't yet discussed next year's payroll with owner Frank McCourt, which the GM noted is "not unusual" given that it's still in early September.
- "Up there in the top echelon of priorities" is signing Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier to multiyear extensions. We heard earlier today from Dave Stewart, Kemp's agent, that the Dodgers hadn't yet broached the subject of a long-term deal with his client.
- Clayton Kershaw could also be an extension candidate but, as Colletti said, "it's less a priority for somebody with three years of arbitration." Kershaw is due for a big pay raise this winter as he enters the arbitration process for the first time.
- If Hiroki Kuroda doesn't return to Japan, Colletti said the Dodgers would be interested in bringing the right-hander back to Los Angeles.
- James Loney's recent hot streak is "more indicative of him and how he's hit the rest of his career," said Colletti. Loney has long been considered a non-tender candidate this winter since he's due a raise to around $6MM through arbitration and has a .711 OPS on the season, though he has a .382/.450/.629 line over his last 27 games.
- "It's never been easy to build through free agency and I really don't like to do it," Colletti said. "We do it when pressed, when we don't have a player coming through the system or on the Major League roster, but it's always more precarious than developing or trading." That said, the GM didn't totally rule out the prospect of signing a big-hitting free agent like Albert Pujols or Prince Fielder.
Question: Is Kershaw the best young starter of all time?
Walter Johnson, Christy Mathewson, Greg Maddux, Pedro Martinez… I’d say it’s a long debate.
Heh…Johnson had a 1.36 ERA in 370 innings as a 22 year-old.
…..in 1910.
Johnson was from a completely different Era, I should have said modern day.
Maddux was good at a young age, pedro didn’t really hit his stride until he was 25.
Doc Gooden’s 2nd year in the bigs was pretty remarkable, but Kershaw isn’t that far off.
Uh what? Kershaw is not that far off? By the stats I’ve seen Kershaw isn’t even close to how dominating Gooden was in his 2nd season. Gooden’s WAR was nearly double what Kershaw’s is, and Gooden put up 276 IP a number Kershaw won’t come close to touching this year. Also Gooden’s ERA+ was 70 points higher.
it’s called context. try applying some.
Ok then, give me the context you’re using because I gave you stats to back up my stance on Gooden vs Kershaw. Look I’m not saying The Claw is not great, he is. I’m making the point that Gooden’s sophmore season isn’t exactly a good comp.
Part of ‘context’ is how a player is doing in his time, not someone else’s. Kershaw might have had the makeup TO be as overwhelming as Walter Johnson was in HIS day. But it’s just babbling, no one knows and no one can decide. The context of the time is the only real yardstick. For example, Ruth is denounced in some quarters because he faced blacks only while barnstorming—and they got him out then more than he was gotten out in the AL. But in context, he led the league in HR while he was PITCHING, i kid you not. Barry Bonds and Willie Mays think that’s nothing, but i’ve never seen Mays’ World Series PITCHING records which stood for decades. In context, vs his peers, he was the most unusually gifted player of all time.
The context of time makes sense when comparing as you said Bonds vs Ruth or Walter vs Kershaw because just about everything from the gloves, balls and bats down to even that some rules are different now. But in the 26 years between Gooden’s season and Kershaw’s there hasn’t been those types of changes in the enviroment to account for the vast gap between the numbers. Even the league offensive and pitching numbers are very close to each other. My point is Kershaw’s numbers for his sophmore season are very close to those of Lincecum or Lester, but while its a great season, it is not a legendary season.
You don’t get what i meant. They cannot be compared BECAUSE THEY CAN’T PLAY AGAINST EACH OTHER. The results of even 5 yrs ago, steeped as it was in the final throes of steroids, cannot be compared to now. Gooden’s time was steeped in AMPHETAMINES, which keep everyone, pitchers included, in crackerjack condition. Kershaw is playing today in different conditions. he can’t play against anyone other than he can play against. He is one of the best OF HIS TIME. That’s all anyone CAN be measured against: Those he played. And, like the greats of the past, he passes that ‘greatness’ test. Any other discussion is literally fantasy.
Perhaps you’re not understanding what I’m saying, in my initial argument the numbers I used compared their stats against the players of their time. Gooden put up numbers against the players of his time that were light years ahead of the avergage while he was 8 years younger than the league. Kershaw’s a merely miles ahead of his competition and he is 3 years older than Gooden was. Comparing the offensive eras they played in is merely to show that the offensive number of their respective leagues are very similar. Yes I know Gooden’s time was full of amphetamines but Kershaw also has trainers and doctors that outclass those of of Gooden’s time. This isn’t comparing 2 seasons that the pitchers were nearly as dominant against their respective leagues, this is comparing 2 seasons that there is a vast divide between the two.
I don’t talk fantasy baseball; you like to. These comparisons are meaningless, for the reason mentioned. But add to it the fact that Koufax was no Gooden during his first 5 years; but Gooden was no Koufax over his career. Comparing pitchers at a certain point, and then extrapolating that into something meaningful, is fanciful, and meaning-less.
Asked and answered three times now. Enough already. You have your opinion, which is all it is, and i have mine. The only difference is yours is wrong.
Says the guy who is ready to crown a 2nd year player a great player, one of the best of his time. No matter how good this season is for Kershaw, one season doesn’t make a career. Come back to me in 15 years when he is in the final years of his career and then we’ll decide if he is one of the best of his time. Maybe by then your disease will be cured so you can understand another persons’ opinion and how wrong yours is.
i wasn’t aware WAR and ERA+ didn’t account for context. blanket statement
It’s definitely a long debate. The other thing that you could argue is that no one was concerned with pitch counts really up until the last ten years. Also 5 man rotations weren’t common in the early days. But if you’re talking about greatest young pitchers of all time, it’s really hard not to include Babe Ruth. When he was 20, he was 18-8 with a 2.44 era. He made $3500 that year. He also had 92 ab’s and hit for a .315 clip. with 4 dingers. At 21 he was 23-12 with a 1.75 era and at 22 he was 24-13 with a 2.01 era. That is an era average in those 3 years of 2.066. Now that is impressive. In the 3rd year I speak of, 1917, he made $5000. He also hit .325 that year. You can argue that he was truly the greatest player of all time. His pitching stats often get over-looked because he was such a good hitter. He was an amazing pitcher as well.
At age 23 you’d have to say he should be considered the “Pitcher You Would Most Like To Have” on your roster. Three more years under club control, Cy Young candidate who still hasn’t reached his potential. I’d take Kershaw over just about anybody.
No major changes.
Extension not a priority for Kershaw.
No talk about a Kemp extension with his agent.
Great.
I would actually prefer these talks to be delayed for as long as possible, the reason being pretty freaking obvious.
“That said, the GM didn’t totally rule out the prospect of signing a big-hitting free agent like Albert Pujols or Prince Fielder.” LMFAO!!!! Somebody please slap this bit*h!!!!! Can’t take it any more!!!!
“We do it when pressed, when we don’t have a player coming through the system…”
Ned, you never have a player coming through the system because you trade them all for nothing. I hate you.
The Dodgers make a little bit of sense for Fielder:
He won’t go to the Yankees, Red Sox, or Phillies as they are all set 1B. The Mets will likely give Ike a shot to keep getting better. The Angels have a 1B who will win ROY this year. The Giants have zero offense, even with Beltran and Posey, Fielder still comes in with the pressure of being the best hitter on the team. The only other teams that I see contending money wise are the Cards (if they don’t get Pujols back) or the Cubs, and I don’t think the Cubs can contend next year.
I know there is that whole thing about actually finding money to pay him, but I can dream of this line up, which to me is pretty damn solid.
1B Fielder
2B Uribe
SS Gordon
3B TBD
C Ellis/Frederwitz
LF Rivera/Sands
CF Kemp
RF Ethier
a 3-6 of Kemp, Fielder, Ethier, Rivera is pretty solid.
Besides, is there a better place in the world for a famous millionaire vegan to live than Los Angeles?