Remove this ad

#561 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:15 PM

I'm on mobile, so I can't type too much, but the front office gets a big, fat F for this trading deadline. We basically traded some higher end prospects for another version of Brett Anderson (who's supposed to be back soon, anyways) and a guy who doesn't help the team's inability to hit LHP. 

I could live with the trade if it were to compliment another, bigger deal, but on its own?  How exactly did this team get better?  This trade hinges, once again, on an injury prone pitcher staying healthy.

I'm all for improving on the fringes, but you can't only do that. 

Remove this ad

#562 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:15 PM

beefchopper wrote:
So much for the bullshit reports that the Dodgers were in win now mode. I don't think they've even increased their chances against the Giants much less the playoff teams they'd have to face.

Agree. Giants win. They certainly go whole hog in plugging their holes w/very fine players. 

#563 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:15 PM

Looks to me like we got the new worst guy in our bullpen and two rentals while all the competitors got stronger relatively. Frankly, I wish we kept the three pitcher prospects and stayed pat.

#565 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:16 PM

Jeff PassanVerified account
[email protected]
Matt Duffy, Lucius Fox and Chris Shaw is a nice return for Matt Moore. All three have struggled this year. Tampa always looking to buy low.

#566 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:23 PM

UCSB07 wrote:
Marc Topkin [email protected]_Rays 36s36 seconds ago
Hearing #Rays also get Fox from #Giants with Duffy in Moore deal

Fox was their #4 prospect.  Shaw was their #3 so there was some meat in there.  My guess is that it probably would have cost us DeLeon and Verdugo and one other and I'm not doing that for Matt Moore.  Archer is a different story.  

#567 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:23 PM

With the way Kersh looked up his back injury I am very disappointed with the way the rest of the year looks, no real excitement other than hope Seagers chances for Rookie of the year aren't hampered by a non-playoff team

#569 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:28 PM

If Kershaw is done for the year, I would expect it to come out fairly soon. I could see hiding it up to the deadline because it would have been obvious what we needed. This deal basically keeps us in the conversation this year but I think even the most ardent supporter would agree that we came up significantly short if we were looking to be a WS contender. The Giants are tougher so we are going to have our hands full there just to win the West.

The FO is going to get slaughtered in the papers tomorrow. Doubt they care though. This FO and the ownership have a plan and they obviously couldn't care less how it resonates with anyone.

#570 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:28 PM

Matthew wrote:
I'm on mobile, so I can't type too much, but the front office gets a big, fat F for this trading deadline. We basically traded some higher end prospects for another version of Brett Anderson (who's supposed to be back soon, anyways) and a guy who doesn't help the team's inability to hit LHP. 

I could live with the trade if it were to compliment another, bigger deal, but on its own?  How exactly did this team get better?  This trade hinges, once again, on an injury prone pitcher staying healthy.

I'm all for improving on the fringes, but you can't only do that. 

Living in Ranger land I'll get to hear the rest of the week at what a genius John Daniels is and how great this team is and that is the greatness of a stocked farm system.... The only think worse would be living in Gint land. 

Remove this ad

#571 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:31 PM

UCSB07 wrote:
No Shaw in the Moore trade

So Lucius Fox and Matt Duffy for Matt Moore and the Dodgers couldn't beat that?!?!

Lol, the Dodgers should've just dealt Micah Johnson, Frankie Montas and Grant Holmes to the Rays for Matt Moore then. Wouldn't that have been a better package?

I'd rather have Matt Moore than Hill and Reddick. 

#572 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:31 PM

Blah is my opinion of these two deals we made. Especially when Friedman actually came out and said that "we're in the position to acquire elite talent" and only added two expiring contracts (one being on the DL and hopefully will be able to pitch effectively with his blister issues). And, getting a journeyman reliever doesn't stoke confidence IMHO.

For all the optimism that was rumored in the way of potential additions and coming away with Reddick, Hill and Chavez just seems like a buzzkill. Anyway, hope the new Dodgers produce and help us get to the playoffs.

#573 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:32 PM

Tx Dodger wrote:
Matthew wrote:
I'm on mobile, so I can't type too much, but the front office gets a big, fat F for this trading deadline. We basically traded some higher end prospects for another version of Brett Anderson (who's supposed to be back soon, anyways) and a guy who doesn't help the team's inability to hit LHP. 

I could live with the trade if it were to compliment another, bigger deal, but on its own?  How exactly did this team get better?  This trade hinges, once again, on an injury prone pitcher staying healthy.

I'm all for improving on the fringes, but you can't only do that. 

Living in Ranger land I'll get to hear the rest of the week at what a genius John Daniels is and how great this team is and that is the greatness of a stocked farm system.... The only think worse would be living in Gint land. 

I've got Gint land covered :(

#575 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:33 PM

The one thing that is key to note is that Friedman is gambling heavy here on the farm system. He is going all in with this chips because the MLB product is not there at this time. It could be that he has a mandate to stay cost-controlled and has his hands tied. It could be that he gets paralysis by analysis and just can't pull the trigger on the big names. Zaidi has to have value there somewhere as well in this process. If it pans out and we have two aces is Urias and DeLeon plus Verdugo and Bellinger form a core with Seager in the future then it's a great plan. If it falls short, Friedman is looking for another job.


If Kershaw is done though, it wouldn't have mattered who we picked up.  

#576 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:40 PM

NewportDodger wrote:
The one thing that is key to note is that Friedman is gambling heavy here on the farm system. He is going all in with this chips because the MLB product is not there at this time. It could be that he has a mandate to stay cost-controlled and has his hands tied. It could be that he gets paralysis by analysis and just can't pull the trigger on the big names. Zaidi has to have value there somewhere as well in this process. If it pans out and we have two aces is Urias and DeLeon plus Verdugo and Bellinger form a core with Seager in the future then it's a great plan. If it falls short, Friedman is looking for another job.

If Kershaw is done though, it wouldn't have mattered who we picked up.  

Yeah, I'm wondering if the uncertainty of Kershaw's back made the front office be more conservative in the trades they made.

Still, they could have probably gotten Matt Moore from the Rays, picked up Chavez from Toronto and called it a day. I would have been okay with that.

Of course, I'm assuming the Dodgers could've traded for Moore without giving up Urias or Bellinger, but maybe the Rays were asking for a king's ransom from the Dodgers. 

#577 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:47 PM

Listening to that whiny, worthless suck up David Vassegh talk about how the Dodgers' trades showed they are going for it all this year makes me want to slap him. Come on, can you make it anymore obvious how much bootlicking you do because they pay your salary. No objectivity at all. I can buy that the moves help the team but don't try and sell it that these are World Series level acquisitions.

#578 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:52 PM

Somebody help here, please. Tell me how any of this makes sense.

Our biggest problem areas were:
A.) Multiple disabled starting pitchers. So, we acquired a pitcher, Hill, currently on the DL. Yeah, I know it's a blister but his 76 IP is the MOST he's thrown since 2007! His history screams OUCH!

B.) Hitting against left handed pitchers. So, we acquired a lefty hitter, Reddick, with the most amazingly awful splits. OPS .955 vs. righties, .425 vs. lefties. (25% of his PA's vs. lefties, so it's not a terribly sss.)

C.) Additional bullpen depth, preferably a solid eighth inning setup man. So, we get a reliever, Jesse Chavez, who has allowed 8 earned runs in his last 5.1 innings and isn't better than any of our current relievers.

All have the stench of Oakland and are free agents at the end of 2016. We lose three prospects some of whom I prize more than two months of these three.

We have, seven, count 'em, seven former and current GM's in the front office, and this is the best they can do. Did they help negotiate the Iran nuke deal???

#579 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:56 PM

True2DaBlue wrote:
Blah is my opinion of these two deals we made. Especially when Friedman actually came out and said that "we're in the position to acquire elite talent" and only added two expiring contracts (one being on the DL and hopefully will be able to pitch effectively with his blister issues). And, getting a journeyman reliever doesn't stoke confidence IMHO.

p For all the optimism that was rumored in the way of potential additions and coming away with Reddick, Hill and Chavez just seems like a buzzkill. Anyway, hope the new Dodgers produce and help us get to the playoffs.


I think blah is way too high a rating. Why do either of these trades? Do you think the Dodgers improved their chances this year? I sure don't and think at least one of Holmes, Cotton and Montag will prove to be a worthwhile MLB player. I'm pissed off, frankly.

#580 [url]

Aug 1 16 12:57 PM

WildHare wrote:
Somebody help here, please. Tell me how any of this makes sense.

Our biggest problem areas were:
A.) Multiple disabled starting pitchers. So, we acquired a pitcher, Hill, currently on the DL. Yeah, I know it's a blister but his 76 IP is the MOST he's thrown since 2007! His history screams OUCH!

B.) Hitting against left handed pitchers. So, we acquired a lefty hitter, Reddick, with the most amazingly awful splits. OPS .955 vs. righties, .425 vs. lefties. (25% of his PA's vs. lefties, so it's not a terribly sss.)

C.) Additional bullpen depth, preferably a solid eighth inning setup man. So, we get a reliever, Jesse Chavez, who has allowed 8 earned runs in his last 5.1 innings and isn't better than any of our current relievers.

All have the stench of Oakland and are free agents at the end of 2016. We lose three prospects some of whom I prize more than two months of these three.

We have, seven, count 'em, seven former and current GM's in the front office, and this is the best they can do. Did they help negotiate the Iran nuke deal???

I can see where this trade COULD help the Dodgers, but it could also flame out like the deals they pulled at the deadline last year.

Difference this year is that Frankie Montas and/or Grant Holmes could end up useful contributors to the A's down the road. Or good trade chips.

I'm guessing Zaidi had a lot of influence on these two trades.

Remove this ad

Quick Reply

bbcode help