Email a copy of 'Offseason In Review: Los Angeles Dodgers' to a friend
Loading ...
By Jeff Todd | at
Email a copy of 'Offseason In Review: Los Angeles Dodgers' to a friend
MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com
hide arrows scroll to top
Rally Weimaraner
Still trying to buy that WS title
BlueSkyLA
Everybody is trying to buy a title. Some are simply spending more on it than others.
WashingtonRancors
Some franchises try to develop WS titles, for example the Rays, Cardinals and Pirates, other franchises, for example the Dodgers and Yankees, try to buy WS titles.
Knockdown
So spending on the draft isn’t buying a title? Everyone buys titles. Whether you do it in FA or the draft you are still spending money.
WashingtonRancors
Draft signing are totally different from FA signing. It is true that drafted player demand signing bonuses but they are only allowed to negotiate with one team, the team that drafted them. Also draft signing bonuses are much much smaller than FA contracts. It a totally different approach.
grabarkewitz
Who is to say that the Dodgers are not also trying to build from within? They spent big to guarantee a money flow, made sure to buy some time while the front office rebuilds the farm and it is very likely the will now spend heavily on draft picks and international players. Seems to me with the Kershaw extension they intend to keep the best.
WashingtonRancors
Guaranteeing Cuban players 25+ MM certainly isn’t an approach to building a farm system any other team is taking…. Its a whole new approach to buying a title
BlueSkyLA
Funny, but that’s just the opposite of true.
WashingtonRancors
Care to cite precedent?
BlueSkyLA
Nope, because no “precedent” is required. These players are being paid as advanced prospects, which makes perfect sense since none of them are 19 years old.
WashingtonRancors
So your saying the dodgers are the first team to spend this much on “advanced prospects?”
BlueSkyLA
I’m not saying that at all. I am saying that I don’t have to cite a precedent, because it’s a fundamentally meaningless question.
fred-3
20-25mm over 5-6 years is basically less than what they’ll receive through pre-arbitration and arbitration, if they are of any worth
WashingtonRancors
Pre-arbitration and arbitration contracts are not guarantied 5-6 years in advance 70-80% of draft picks will never reach arbitration or stick in the MLB
fred-3
That’s the thing, though… these players aren’t draft picks/amateurs. They’ve played at the highest level in Cuban and International tournaments. Guerrero and Arruebuena were free agents and should be treated as such. Both will most likely spend no less than a year in the minors.
WashingtonRancors
Sure…. The dodgers though Guerrero would be their starting 2B this year, doesn’t look like that’s going so well.
BlueSkyLA
Right, they should be understood as advanced prospects in the sense that they are a year or so away from being MLB ready, for various reasons.
grabarkewitz
So, the Cubs, Rangers and Jays spending over limit for sixteen year olds is less reprehensible than the Dodgers filling a massive depth issue on their farm with a ML-ready glove at shortstop. I won’t argue they very likely overpaid but I will argue that the aforementioned teams also overpaid for sixteen year olds whole very likely won’t return the investment. Whether you spend on sixteen year old or over twenty year old Cubans it is still player development.
BlueSkyLA
None of which is free, despite the implications to the contrary. The reality is, most teams spend as much as they are able to spend on “buying a title” given their revenue limitations (with some obvious exceptions). The other factoid worth mentioning in this context is that the new ownership is also in the process of rebuilding a farm and scouting system that was once one of the best in baseball, but was badly neglected under the two previous owners.
Rickey O'Sunnyvale
>>Does this signal an end to the organization’s seemingly limitless dispensing of cash? A change in strategy?<<
Anyone who cared to listen to Dodger ownership would see that they are carrying out the strategy they announced on day one. Their first stated objective was to put a winning team on the field, regardless of cost. That they did by securing Hanley, pulling off the big trade with Boston and signing a few free agents like Hyu and Grienke. They made it to the NL championship game, so mission accomplished.
They also announced their long term strategy was to rebuild the farm and re-establish their former position of dominance in Latin America. They start by signing Puig, Guerrero and Arruebarrena. Overpays? We'll see. But rest assured Latin American players and their agents are sure to be inviting the Dodgers to all of their parties in the future.
Going forward, I think we'll see the Dodgers being more selective but never afraid to make a monetary commitment to keep a player in LA, ala Kershaw, or acquire a star that fills a hole in the organization.
All and all, it's a good time to be a Dodger fan.
denz
Those players being developed will want their money at some point.
Kershaw is an example.
fred-3
*Still trying to improve their team
Guest 3731
You either pay now or later. How long will that rookie helping you win play for nothing?
denz
You pay now or later. How long will that rookie helping you win play for nothing?
BlueSkyLA
Good article. One small correction: I believe Young officially retired. Also, I’m not sure if you meant to imply that the Dodgers take on risk with the media deal. If so, that impression should be corrected. The team’s money is guaranteed. TWC has the burden of figuring out how to make money on it, including the thorny problem of selling it to other providers.
Jeff Todd
Thanks. I meant to note that Young had retired. As for the TV deal, that is interesting. Reports definitely suggest some kind of guarantee is in place. Of course, that does not mean there is no risk. Would need to see the precise terms — which are left pretty vague from what I’ve read — to assess (e.g., does the guarantee flow from the network to the Dodgers, from Time Warner to the Dodgers, for how long, are there caps/out clauses/etc?).
BlueSkyLA
Some of this we’re probably never going to know, but according to the LA Times (from an article I read about two weeks ago), the media revenues to the team are guaranteed. This issue comes up pretty regularly in the local media now and will probably generate even more press as the season gets underway, since TWC has so far failed to sell the broadcast rights to any other major provider.
Jeff Todd
I tracked down an early article on the subject and added reference to the post. Thanks very much for raising, it is good to be aware of.
BlueSkyLA
Yes, that covers it. I’m not sure if the revenue sharing issue has ever been resolved.
grabarkewitz
I think the lack of huge signings, in comparison to the Yankees, Rangers and others, is that the Dodgers could follow the Yankee lead and say to heck with the penalties and spend the dividend in the International Market. It is still the most team-friendly to build a farm system as you don’t have as stringent penalties for overspending and the allure of college baseball is nearly non-existent.
DarthMurph
Declining Ellis’ option remains the Dodgers’ most puzzling move of the offseason. I like what they’ve done but their infield depth could be a problem.
Rally Weimaraner
They were overly confident in Guerrero’s ability to shift from SS to 2B. Not the worst bet to make but it didn’t turn out well.
DarthMurph
The option wasn’t that expensive though and they could have trade him if Guerrero was ready. A 5 million dollar bench piece on that team is hardly that big of an overpay.
Sky14
That’s a bold statement, considering this off-season included the Fister deal.
DarthMurph
What does Fister have to do with the Dodgers?
BlueSkyLA
Better yet, what does he have to do with second base?
DarthMurph
I assume the poster thought I was referring to the entire offseason, not just the Dodgers.
Sky14
Could of swore it said “the most puzzling move of this offseason” but perhaps I was mistaken.
As for Ellis and the Dodgers, my assumption is they didn’t want to commit to Ellis thinking they could possible get an upgrade. If they didn’t they could resign Ellis.
BlueSkyLA
We could have sworn the story was about the Dodgers.
Anyhow, the Dodgers signed Guerrero before declining the option on Ellis. Yet, Guerrero was in many respects an unknown, especially given that he was being asked to switch positions. In those circumstances picking up the option on Ellis would have been relatively cheap insurance. If and when Guerrero is ready to take over, Ellis is marketable. The question is why the Dodgers didn’t play it that way.
Thizzie
Will Sam Demel make the team?
thegrayrace
No. He’s probably 10th or 11th on the bullpen depth chart. Seth Rosin, Chris Withrow and Jose Dominguez are among the pitchers fighting for a spot that are probably ahead of Demel.
Curt Green
Teams like the Dodgers, Yankees, and Angels will always be vilified for out bidding for the best players. When they lose, it shows that all their money did not matter. Teams like the Cardinals and Rays, that develop talent from within, receives my respect since they have to work harder to produce a solid team. A salary cap would really show who has the best front office.
mrshyguy99
Well if you notices dodgers kind of have to spend. Since the former ownership failed to to get good prospects. But the new owners have nicely started to get good prospects. So down the road dodgers prospects will start to come
Anthony Hughes
What concerns me about this Dodger team is the defense. Bad defensive teams almost never win the World Series, especially if it’s their up-the-middle defense that is the problem. The only passable defensive center fielder the Dodgers have is Joc Pederson, and he isn’t going to be playing. Hanley is below-average at SS, to put it nicely, and they figure to be playing an out-of-position Dee Gordon or an out-of-position Alex Guerrero at second base for most of the season (and Justin Turner, who will probably start against most lefties, isn’t good on defense either). I feel fine with A.J. Ellis catching, but I’m very concerned about the defense.
thegrayrace
Hanley was actually above average defensively last season (0.7 dWAR), though whether he can keep that up is certainly questionable.
Defensively, Uribe is one of the best 3B in baseball (1.8 dWAR last season, second only to Nolan Arenado among third basemen). Adrian Gonzalez is widely regarded as an above average defensive 1B.
2B is the only real concern for me defensively. Dee Gordon could do very well there, because his main issue defensively has tended to be his wild throws from SS, and moving to 2B should cut down those considerably. He obviously has spectacular range. I’m fairly optimistic about him on defense (more pessimistic about him providing anything of value on offense). Guerrero didn’t look too terrible out there, either.