It may not be wise to assume that the Dodgers will end up bringing back righty Zack Greinke, ESPNLos Angeles.com’s Mark Saxon writes. The team has shown indications that it is looking for younger, less expensive assets rather than huge veteran contracts. And Greinke himself may be less than thrilled with the clubhouse culture in L.A., leaving a “distaste” that “is believed to be a factor in his thinking.” Obviously, Greinke and the club thrived with his first contract, so it’s probably not worth writing off a return, but the report does suggest the interest may not be as clear as had generally been assumed.
Here’s the latest on some other free agent situations around the league:
- The Tigers have “picked up” talks with reliever Joakim Soria but haven’t yet made him an offer, MLB.com’s Jason Beck reports. Soria received one offer from an unknown team earlier in the offseason, says Beck, but the market has moved slowly as a potentially-active trade market for pen arms continues to sort itself out.
- Lefty Rich Hill is expected to sign a contract this week, WEEI.com’s Rob Bradford reports. It’s not clear which club, but Bradford says it isn’t the Red Sox. Hill’s out-of-nowhere late-season run in Boston has made him an interesting piece of the market picture. MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes predicted that Hill will be able to secure a one-year deal with a $5MM guarantee.
- The Mets have had contact with the representatives for free agent outfielder Gerardo Parra, Marc Carig of Newsday reports on Twitter. Parra would, presumably, take part in a platoon with Juan Lagares, though that would mean relying on him rather heavily in center. While he’s played there, Parra has spent far more time in the corner outfield. And it could well be hard to find enough playing time to woo the 28-year-old, given that the club is rather heavily invested in Lagares and has two left-handed hitters (Curtis Granderson and Michael Conforto) set to man the corners.
- Dodgers lefty Brett Anderson spoke with reporters today about his decision to accept the $15.8MM qualifying offer, as Saxon reports. He indicated that he was hoping to continue to build his stock in advance of next year’s market, a risky but tantalizing strategy. On the one hand, Anderson has a lengthy injury history and is finally coming off of a healthy season; on the other, he’s still young, has mostly dealt with a few fluke injuries in recent years, and can look forward to a seller-friendly market next winter. “There were some multi-year deals out there, but my situation was a little unique and I just wanted to better myself,” Anderson said. “That, and I liked being in L.A., I liked my teammates, I liked everything about it other than the ending of the season.” Anderson also noted that he and the Dodgers had discussed a multi-year arrangement at some point and could again pursue some kind of deal, as MLB.com’s Ken Gurnick tweets.
I don’t even get why people say the Dodgers have a clubhouse problem anymore. Hanley, Kemp, BWilson are all gone. All that is left is Puig and he’s not as big of a problem as he was.
Puig will be gone i´m pretty sure of that
That wasn’t the implication from what I read. I counted Grienke as gone the moment the Dodgers fired Don Mattingly. Both he and Kershaw publicly voiced their support for Mattingly. At this point we still don’t know who will be managing the team, or whether Honeycutt is remaining as pitching coach. For Grienke, situation seems to be a factor in where he decides to go — and this is a bad situation.
Bryce Harper also said he wanted Matt Williams to stay…
The clubhouse was the least of their problems this year. Greinke’s also said in the past that he’s going to the highest bidder.
I am saying this seems to be a reference to the clubhouse problem they have now, with the firings and the lack of progress towards reconstructing a coaching team. I am also not saying that Grienke will give up tens of millions for a situation, only that other things being approximately equal, situation could well be his deciding factor. Just as it was when he signed with the Dodgers in the first place.
Mattingly was let go just 3 weeks ago. Considering this is a pretty big decision, I like that they are being as pragmatic as possible. Why rush it?
Pragmatic means practical. I don’t see where firing the entire coaching staff and allowing rehiring linger on for weeks (none of the positions are filled) is practical. I would call it indecision.
Again, Mattingly was let go just 3 weeks ago. For comparisons sake, it took the Padres, Mariners, and Marlins nearly 2 months to interview and eventually hire a coach and staff. This is not indecision.. this is no different from a business like Apple, Microsoft, and in this case, the Dodgers, being practical and interviewing as many candidates as possible for an important position.
You can say this was their fault in 2010 when Mattingly was hired. They did no do the right thing and field a full coaching search.
Pointing out a worse case doesn’t make this a good one.
Looking at the 3 candidates, this sounds like a good situation. Either one of these guys would be a good hire.
Yeah, Kapler is inexperienced, but he talks the talk. Even then, they’d likely pair him with Black as his bench coach.
My problem with Kapler isn’t just his experience deficit but what he talks about when he talks the talk. Some of it is just plain weird. Sure doesn’t have anything to do with winning ballgames. As for the process, why take the time to interview so many people we all know they are never going to hire? Without having any special insights my guess is that the coaching decisions are on hold until the managerial situation is resolved. We’ve heard about ongoing contract talks with Honeycutt but without any further news I suspect he’s made it clear who he will work with or who he won’t. Meanwhile we have free agent pitchers out there who would also like to know if their coach is going to be one of the most respected in the game, or somebody else. They need to stop analyzing, and decide.
It’s just good business to interview as many people as possible. I know the Dodgers and baseball in general is completely different from corporate businesses, but similar principles should apply. It’s worth noting that Freidman and Kasten have financial backgrounds and all of the owners, including Magic, are successful businessmen. The Dodgers are more likely to employ business ethics as an organization going forward because of that.
In terms of the off-season, there is little activity right now. Considering where the Dodgers stand as a financial power in baseball today, free agents are likely willing to wait until they’ve figured who’s coaching, if that’s an issue for free agents
Yeah, and in business it’s called “paralysis of analysis.” An organization spends all the time they think they need to make a decision while ignoring the fact that other eat their lunch because they are able to make decisions quickly.
Zach Grienkie has said publicly that he liked the clubhouse this year. This is an old narrative that shouldn’t be brought up anymore.
I could be wrong, but I think he intentionally made it known that he enjoyed this year more than the others because he was taking a jab at Puig. His lack of a presence/impact due to being DL’d made Greinke’s year more enjoyable.
But that’s speculation.
What’s said publicly is often different than the reality. It’s PR to get the media to look in a different direction.
Not really with Greinke. He’s about the most up-front, honest player in baseball.
And you know this how?
We could see all season long how he and Kershaw were practically joined at the hip in the dugout when they weren’t pitching.
If the Dodgers don’t sign Greinke, they learned nothing from this year. They faced three aces with only two and won’t win 90 games without three next year They need two of the big 4 or 5 : Greinke, Cueto, Price, Zimmerman. Lackey. The problem with Greinke is no 8th inning certainty: the Dodgers need an O’Day or Miller to link to Jansenn. He wants to know that his relief will hold his lead. The LA front office already has an F for last year; more spaces rather than aces will give them an F for 2016. They tried value in the bullpen last year and it cost them.
You’re funny, obviously you have learned nothing on what it takes to win the WS and this front office are 100X smarter than you.
Is smarter; so smarter, that they turned a 94 win season into a 92 win season
It takes a much better bullpen and three stud starters, and the Dodgers had neither. I don’t believe the kids on the farm are ready just yet. At least a year off.
dodgers will have 3 stud starters if dodgers can sign a solid number 2 if not zack and if ryu can come back healthy he was a very good 3rd pitcher
And if they Don’t. What then !
the dodgers will still have their pretty good bats. but the rotation is the least of the worries. dodgers need to improve the pen
So you are just saying that the Dodgers need to sign or trade for some of the best players in the league to win?
how many pitchers do the dodgers need. if they sign 2 free agents that will leave them with 6th starters and they would have to trade one. dodgers should be fine if the 2 injury pitchers come back healthy. mccarthy could be a solid 4th and ryu is a solid 3rd pitcher. they need more help in the pen more then anything
I liked Hill this year, but he could certainly benefit from finding a team that could at least give him a chance to earn a spot in the starting rotation out of Spring Training. There are a ton of smaller market teams or rebuilding teams looking for inexpensive rotation options. He’ll likely latch on with someone like the Marlins, Pirates, Twins, Phillies, or even the Orioles. Best of luck to him. He could potentially be a big bargain.
Well at 5m he better be getting a chance at a starting job, although i dont think he will get 5m . Id say more like 1 year at 3m maybeee 4m. I think a team like the rockies should take a chance on him.
The difference between three million and five million in baseball is pretty inconsequential. I can honestly see him getting five and some incentives for innings pitched. All he would have to have is more than one team interested and he could probably get up to five. I probably didn’t complete my though either. I’d love to see him back with the Red Sox, but it won’t happen because he’ll likely see a guarantee of at least competing for a starting job somewhere else. And he won’t get that with the Red Sox. The one thing they don’t lack for is back of the rotation starters.
He ended up getting 1 year $6 million with the A’s. Great signing. The spin rate on his curve was up 20% and he exhibited much better command and control on his 4 seam.
Hill is a flip candidate. At $3 or 5 million anybody could take a shot at him. I’m looking at you Philadelphia.
I’m with you, it’s just that every exec that watches him knows what is coming.. That left elbow of his will blow up yet again from throwing all those curve balls, the only thing he has. I’d think some team would be willing the give him 5m on the hope alone that thing would last even half a dozen to 10 starts before it blows up yet again, or gets to the point he has to shut it down for a long period once again.. It’s been his history for years.
Boston already has oh-so many people in the mid to back end, understand he’s out, but like story mentions? Teams around the league could use him badly to cover the 1st couple of months of 2016.
I was under the impression it was Kemp’s more “hollywood” attitude that turned a few people off and that was gone this year. I dunno why, but baseball gossip always seems way more interesting.
Greinke will not be back. The Dodgers discussed an extension with him during the season and he wasn’t interested. Had he wanted to stay they would have undoubtedly agreed to a contract. Greinke is all about getting as much as possible and someone will outbid the Dodgers. At his age I wouldn’t go 5 years and I doubt the Dodgers will. I could see Boston or New York doing 5/150.
They never discussed an extension. Grienke let it be known before the season started that he would not discuss one during the season. Grienke is a lot more about situation than most seem to assume, at least those who don’t remember how he was signed by the Dodgers in the first place.
I think the giants give him 5-6 years between 155 or 160
Greinke seemed disappointed after Kemp was traded stating he didn’t see how the Dodgers improved on the offensive side prior to the season.
Dude wants to get paid and wants to win. Those are two things LA can offer as well as anyone else.
I’d prefer to see the Mets target Span over Parra. He could be a real under the radar, solid pickup for them.
Same here. He’s not bad against righties, but I still want no part of Parra.
Since the Tigers are playing for this year, and are looking for two starters, I wouldn’t mind seeing them sign Hill. It would save them money for the other starter, or a bullpen piece. If he can’t hold the rotation spot, they can use another lefty in the pen. For Hill, they are providing a spacious ballpark with good defense behind him, and a solid offense to support him. Plus, they should be able to contend if things fall right. Hopefully another young starter will be ready to take his spot when his contract is over. His age should not be a factor. Seems like a decent fit.
Don’t sleep on the Angels signing Grienke. Dipoto isn’t there to screw it up this time. And the Angels might sign a second top pitching free agent. Maybe Cueto. Before anyone says I’m crazy for saying that. Third base and catching positions are really thin in the free agent market. If they sign a Grienke and Cueto, that would allow them a better opportunity to trade for a veteran catcher and third baseman.
They have said they want to try to stay away from the luxury tax and on top of that they have nothing left to trade. I doubt they sign a Grienke or Cueto type let a lone two
Arte said that this year he is willing to go over the luxury tax for the right players
I’m surprised the Cubs aren’t mentioned as a possible landing spot. Doesn’t he have some history with them?
To which “he” are you referring?
I was referring to Hill. Sorry.
Not sure the Tigers should overpay for Soria. I would rather they seriously consider Fulmer as their closer in 2016 (go back to starting after that). Follow the St. Louis model and keep his innings down. He could be dominant in 1 inning doses.
Tigers need to use their money wisely since there are so many needs.With many closers on the trade market they need to exhaust all options there first.
Philly writer Jake Kaplan has said if a team would “include in a package for Giles at least one prospect the Phillies project to be a productive everyday position player or a front-to-middle-of-the-rotation starter, that is a move worth making.” The Tigers could give them a list of Ryan, Farmer, Lobstein,Moya or maybe Boyd. They could pick one of these pitchers who could very well be in the Phillies rotation for 2016. Moya a starter in 2017. Then they could also get 1 or 2 lower level players from a list provided.
Tigers get a closer that is not Arb. eligible till 2018, and save $$$’s to be used for SP and LF.
Teams do not take their top starting prospect and “temporarily” move them to the pen, when they are short on starting pitching. They only do it after a September call up, or when there is no room in the rotation, because it is so strong. This is not the case with Detroit. Fuller will stay in the rotation, in the minors, until he is ready to start in the majors. You can consider whatever you like, just don’t expect the Tigers to do so.
I hate that idea. Just from seeing what happened to Joba and Feliz going from role to role and never recovering. Not worth it in my opinion.
Greinke is the exact same age as Verlander, just for some reference.
It took JV 2 full years of injury recovery to finally return to form, even with a near perfect delivery and 4 “plus pitches”.
Does it really make sense to pay Greinke $30MM/year into his late 30s?
No it doesn’t but when a GM wants to win at no cost they will throw money at players. Very rare does a pitcher is at top of his game past 36. So paying him Ace money past 36 make no sense.
I would substitute GM for ownership. No GM makes the ultimate decision when approving a contract of this magnitude. Your second “no” should also be an “any”. (lol)
Not the best of analogies. Justin Verlander and Zack Greinke are different types of ‘ace’ pitchers.
For teams with a lot of resources, it can. They can afford to burn the out years of a contract to lock down the player’s prime performance years. Everybody knows this is what it will take to sign Grienke, so why are we even talking about whether it makes sense?
Greinke will be playing in SF next year, with Price going to the Cubs !
Honestly, they say price is the perfect fit for the cubs, but I think they should target jordan zimmermann and john lackey
Greinke will be with the giants, if he wants a ring thats where he will go.
I would tend to agree with Saxon. I believe that the Nationals will be the front runners for Greinke and will trade Strasburg once they are able to get Greinke signed to a deal.