The Dodgers And “Too Many Outfielders”

If there’s any baseball story that’s just never going to end this winter — other than, “Jack Morris should/shouldn’t be in the Hall!” and “Alex Rodriguez fights with MLB!” — it’s almost certainly going to be “the Dodgers have too many outfielders, who will they trade?”

It’s been a slowly building narrative for more than a year now, and now that Yasiel Puig has proven himself to be a quality major league player and top prospect Joc Pederson is just about ready to join him, it’s deafening. That means Matt Kemp is going to the Blue Jays… or the Rangers… or the Mariners… or the Red Sox… unless Andre Ethier goes to the Mets or an unlikely Puig trade blows up the baseball world else first. It’s both a fun and frustrating time of year, where every report that one team may possibly have communicated with another about some player sends fans into a frenzy.

Having too many good players at a particular position is rarely a bad problem, but because of the salaries and often questionable health histories here, this is something of a complicated situation for the Dodgers. Let’s first look at what they actually have:

Player
2014 age
Contract
2013 PA
2013 WAR
2013 wOBA
2014 Steamer WAR
Crawford
32
4/82.5
469
2.9
.322
2.2
Ethier
32
4/69**
553
2.9
.340
2.3
Kemp
29
6/128
290
-0.4
.316
2.5
Pederson*
22
n/a
519
n/a
.398
n/a
Puig
23
5/26***
432
4.0
.398
4.6

*Double-A stats
**plus 2018 vesting option for $17.5m ($2.5m buyout) with 550 PA in 2017
***may opt into arbitration process after three years service time, likely after 2016

There’s a lot of talent there, but also a lot of committed dollars, north of $60 million for 2014 alone. So when attempting to figure out what the Dodgers ought to do, it’s the ultimate balancing act of finances vs. talent vs. return vs. risk.

Really, there’s six different options here, from trading any of them to trading none of them. Let’s look at the possible futures that Ned Colletti might create, counting down from least likely to most likely.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

6. Trade Yasiel Puig.

I’m tempted to do the internet smart guy thing of “No.” and just stop there, but let’s actually dive into this. There’s no question that Puig is rough around the edges, and the reason you hear so much about his base-running gaffes and defensive miscues is because they’re true. Those are real things that happened, and they occasionally hurt his team. We can even see it in the stats; Puig is arguably one of the fastest men in the majors, yet he somehow compiled a lousy -4.2 BsR in two-thirds of a season.

So he’s clearly got a lot to work on (including some of the headaches his off-the-field behavior can bring — though he’s certainly attempting to rehab that image this winter), but even when you admit the negatives, it’s impossible to see them outweighing the positives. In four months, Puig was worth 4.0 WAR; if he’d played the full year at that pace and had 6.0 WAR, we’d be talking about a rookie season equaled by a very select few in the history of baseball.

Toss in the contract that looked questionable when no one had any idea who he was and now looks like an absolute steal, and Puig is suddenly one of the most valuable assets in baseball. When Dave Cameron ran the Trade Value Series over the summer, he ranked Puig #24, reasonably admitting that he wasn’t quite sure what to make of Puig after only six weeks. My guess is that if those rankings were done now, Puig’s combination of production and contract would rank him considerably higher.

Or, put another way, when Matt Vasgersian & Peter Gammons publicized the “trade Puig and more for Giancarlo Stanton” idea a few weeks ago, it was a non-starter in Los Angeles. Stanton’s great and nearly every team in baseball wants to pry him out of Miami; he’s also closer to free agency, more injury-prone, and coming off a less productive season. After the splash Puig made, it’s difficult to see the Dodgers antagonizing their fan base or finding a realistic return.

5. Trade Matt Kemp.

Speaking of antagonizing your fan base, Kemp remains extremely popular among the Dodger faithful, but his increasingly fragile nature might make it easier for them to swallow such a move. It couldn’t be simply a salary dump, however, and that’s what makes any Kemp move unlikely.

When Kemp’s 8/$160m extension was announced in the wake of his 2011 MVP quality season, it seemed like a good deal as others like Prince Fielder & Joey Votto were getting north of $200m. Since, he’s played only 179 games in two seasons amid a never-ending litany of injuries to his shoulder, hamstrings, and ankle. After a brutal start to 2013, Kemp did hit .333/.400/.630 from July 1 on… except that he did it in only 60 plate appearances interrupted by two different injuries.

The good news is that Kemp is only headed into his age-29 season,  and while a .290/.352/.482 line in 2012-13 is less than you’d expect from him, it’s hardly been a Josh Hamilton-level disaster. Still, it’s that sweet spot between “too talented to dump” and “too expensive to get much return on” that makes him tough to move, unless the Dodgers ate an obscene amount of money or did so in exchange for another big contract, like an Elvis Andrus.

4. Trade Carl Crawford.

This may be the most palatable for the Dodgers, because he’s arguably likely to be the least productive in 2014, but that, along with the money remaining, is exactly why a trade is problematic. It’s important to remember that Crawford’s 2013 has to be considered a success, of course, simply because coming off of two terrible years in Boston and August 2012 Tommy John surgery, no one had any idea if he’d be either healthy or useful.

Crawford did make it back for Opening Day, and despite missing weeks with a hamstring pull and some severely up-and-down performance, did manage to contribute 2.9 WAR — plus four homers in the playoffs.  He’s no longer the excellent defensive outfielder and base-stealer he was in Tampa Bay; he’s also not nearly as atrocious as the stink his Boston time put on him. He’s now a reasonably productive player who just so happens to have a contract that pays him like an elite one.

That’s a tough combination, and again, would require the Dodgers to eat a good deal of money and expect little in return. Would some team take him at, say, 4/$40m? Perhaps. Would they also trade valuable players to do so? That’s less likely.

3. Trade Joc Pederson.

Due to the roadblock ahead of him, this may be the simplest solution. With wOBA marks of .400 (Hi-A, 2012) and .398 (Double-A, 2013) over the last two years, along with 22 homers and 31 steals this year, Pederson has improved his stock from “potential fourth outfielder” to “probable solid starter” in the eyes of many. While he hasn’t yet seen Triple-A, he’s arguably ready right now or in the very near term. Since the Dodgers seem extremely unlikely to move highly-regarded infield prospect Corey Seager, Pederson (along with pitcher Zach Lee) is the best prospect trade chip they have available.

While Pederson isn’t untouchable, there’s not an obvious trade fit. The big hole at the major league level is at third base, and few teams have a quality option available to offer there. Chase Headley remains possible, though coming off a down year and with only a single season remaining before free agency, the Dodgers may consider Pederson too high a price to give up.

2. Trade no one.

The easiest way to refute the “too many outfielders” narrative is by making the very legitimate point that this is a scenario which has never actually been true. If you had too many quality outfielders, then the 2013 Dodgers wouldn’t have had to give 99 starts to a group of Scott Van SlykeSkip SchumakerJerry HairstonChili BussAlex Castellanos, and Elian Herrera, along with five more to Schumaker in the playoffs when neither Ethier or Kemp could answer the bell.

With the obvious caveat that Puig didn’t arrive until June 3, there were exactly two games all season in which the Dodgers had all four non-Pederson outfielders active and healthy. Part of the reason Puig got the call in the first place is that Kemp & Crawford were both hurt, so the first time all four were available was on July 5, when Crawford returned from a hamstring injury. “Too many outfielders” lasted all the way until… the third inning, when Kemp injured his shoulder and landed on the disabled list.

Two weeks later, Kemp returned for a July 21 game in Washington, and finished off a fantastic game — a homer, double, and single — by mangling his ankle in the ninth inning. When he finally returned from that in September, Ether was on the shelf with his own ankle injury. At no point did all four manage to stay intact at the same time for even one complete single game.

That doesn’t mean it can’t happen in 2014, of course, but it’s easy to bet against it. Crawford & Kemp have built up considerable injury histories over the last few years, and while Puig stayed off the disabled list, his all-out style of play cost him some time in July after running full-speed into the Coors Field wall.

He also does things like this, which is like watching a semi hit a brick wall at full speed:

Much like Bryce Harper, there’s reason to worry that his intensity will either limit him or sideline him entirely, and so the odds of at least one of these guys being hurt at any given time seems high. Since Pederson hasn’t even seen Triple-A yet, it’s not unreasonable to let him tear up the PCL for a few months, then promote or trade him as needed.

Even if all four do remain healthy, it’s not as though Crawford & Kemp wouldn’t do well with some regular days off in an attempt to keep them whole, and since Crawford & Ethier are two of the absolute worst hitters in baseball against lefties, there’s some obvious platoon opportunities here. The fact that (in theory, at least), all three non-Crawford outfielders can fake it at all three spots gives added flexibility.

1. Trade Andre Ethier.

The most likely, and also the most discussed; Ethier reportedly came very close to being sent to Seattle last winter. The longtime Dodger had a very weird 2013, putting up only a .317 wOBA in the first half around getting benched by Don Mattingly, then busting out in the second half with a very good .381 mark while playing a surprisingly not-terrible center field. (And then, of course, missing most of September and October with the ankle injury.)

Ethier is an extremely flawed player, but a useful one if deployed correctly. First off, he absolutely, positively cannot hit lefty pitching; in more than 1200 career plate appearances, his line is .235/.294/.351. He makes up for that with a very good career line against righties, hitting .309/.388/.518. While the Dodgers have never been able to find him an appropriate platoon partner, the right team could easily accentuate his value — and while his 2011 Gold Glove was a joke, he has worked hard to improve his defense from “awful” to “acceptably decent”.

For many teams, the idea of paying Ethier approximately $17.5m per year for each of the next four seasons is a turnoff, though as a reliable two-to-three win player, the Dodgers shouldn’t have to eat an obnoxious amount of cash to make this reasonable. If they turned Ethier into, say, a 4/40 player, that’s valuable. That’s a range in which the Dodgers could get something good — not great, mind you, but usable — back. And that’s what makes him the most likely to go.





Mike Petriello used to write here, and now he does not. Find him at @mike_petriello or MLB.com.

101 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
tz
12 years ago

Puig, Pederson and Corey Seager for Longoria and Price.

If only to see if the Rays have any fan base to antagonize.

makeitrayn
12 years ago
Reply to  tz

Carlos Santana for Casey Blake.

Kirk Davenport
12 years ago
Reply to  tz

have to add Zach Lee and Onelki Garcia from the Dodgers thus giving away essentially every Dodger minor leaguer projected to start a significant number of games in the majors. LOL
moving back to reality, Price and Longoria are nice quick fixes, but the Dodgers still are incredibly weak in prospects in the minors and cannot consider losing any.
The Dodgers may be well off in terms of minor league pitching, but other than Seager in the infield (maybe 3B) and Pederson at a corner OF position, they do not have a minor leaguer projected to perform well in the majors at catcher, infielder or CF.
Dodgers cannot deal from an almost bare cupboard nor be expected to contend in the future if the cupboard is bare

Dave
12 years ago
Reply to  Kirk Davenport

As far as I know, Pederson is still playing mostly CF in the minors. He’s always been projected as a corner outfielder, but as he continues to move up, is it becoming any more likely he sticks in center?

Goat Fondler
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave

yes, probably because the Dodgers don’t have anyone who they want to play in center right now. Kemp is not great with the glove and is going to start slowing down as he ages with all the injuries he’s had. Puig is too wild to play in center and his arm plays best in right. Ethier can play center, but he too will slow down and the Dodgers definitely view Ethier as a backup option. Crawford does not have the glove or the arm for center.

mattb2485
12 years ago

4yr/$40M for Ethier…still a bit steep for most teams I’d reckon. Can’t see them getting much back even if they ate that much either. Though he would be a solid fit in NY.

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  mattb2485

prob both NYs.

attgig
12 years ago
Reply to  mattb2485

I could imagine a lot of teams having interest in a 4/40 Ethier. The question is, what would the Dodgers get back for that.

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  attgig

yeah,I think a lot of teams would jump in at 4/40M esp if the talent cost were not severe.

chuckB
12 years ago
Reply to  attgig

Trade with Mariners :pitchers Furbush and Wilhelmson for outfielders Buss, VanSlyke and Eithier Dodgers give up Cash

That Guy
12 years ago
Reply to  mattb2485

I also couldn’t see them getting much back if they ate that much Ethier.

LaLoosh
12 years ago

what would that “good, not great” cost really be in order to get the contract down by 30M for Ethier?

Eric R
12 years ago

“The big hole at the major league level is at third base, and few teams have a quality option available to offer there. Chase Headley remains possible, though coming off a down year and with only a single season remaining before free agency, the Dodgers may consider Pederson too high a price to give up.”

Would you think Daniel Murphy and Dillon Gee [two and three years of control remaining respectively] would be enough for Pederson?

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  Mike Petriello

Gee’s last 21 starts in ’13 were pretty special in fact. He’s way underrated. I don’t think he’s a fit in LA, but he prob has solid market value nevertheless.

Regardless, the Dodgers have no need to deal Pederson.

Za
12 years ago
Reply to  Eric R

Wilmer Flores is also a 3B and also reasonably ranked. Dillon Gee is one of only three “definite” starters the Mets have going into 2014, along with Wheeler and Niese. Montero, Flores, and a pitcher (Luis Cessa?) for Ethier, Van Slyke, and cash would make the Mets a much better team and get the Dodgers a few solid prospects.

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  Za

I don’t think Montero is going anywhere. Thankfully. Gee is prob the only one who could be traded but that would prob only come if the Mets sign a SP (or two). Gee, tho very solid, is prob the most replaceable (Montero, Noah).

Shankbone
12 years ago

Ethier’s contract is a good warning sign for Choo Choo this year. Cannot hit lefties.

William
12 years ago

Andre Eithier and Brandon League for Alex Rodriguez. Who says no? You would have to think the Yankees would pull the trigger on that one, and the dodgers already have so many stars that Arod wouldn’t dominate the team publicity. If Arod gets a huge suspension, make it Arod for Eithier straight up. The beauty is that Arod and Eithier have been very similar offensively over the past couple years, and both teams would fill black holes simultaneously (3B for Dodgers) and the Yankees could platoon Wells and Eithier to have a good platoon for 2014 at DH, then move Eithier to RF when Wells, Soriano, and Ichiro become free agents.

Sean
12 years ago
Reply to  William

What?

Corrected
12 years ago
Reply to  Sean

I think you meant, “lolwut”

Justin J
12 years ago
Reply to  Sean

Say ‘what’ again. Say ‘what’ again, I dare you, I double dare you!

Billy
12 years ago
Reply to  William

I admire your desire to get people to forget about Alex Rodriguez, but sadly, A-Rod would still dominate the spotlight in the mainstream media (and I include the non-sports media) no matter who is on the team. It’s not like the Yankees have lacked stars to try and draw away attention.

You could put A-Rod on a team with Mike Trout and you know who would get way more coverage in the media? A-Rod. Why? Because non-baseball fans enjoy hearing about A-Rod’s scandals way more than Mike Trout’s abilities on a baseball field.

It gets me really depressed that if you asked average Americans (and definitely people outside the country) who Mike Trout is, most still couldn’t answer but they all could tell you about Alex Rodriguez. The fact that A-Rod is the worldwide face of my favorite sport makes me realize what a cruel mistress fame is.

bawfuls
12 years ago
Reply to  Billy

ARod is a highly visible figure at least in part because he’s the second best shortstop in baseball history, and he’s nearing the end of his career.

Mike Trout has only played two years, of course fewer people have heard of him.

Damn my torpedo
12 years ago
Reply to  William

Don’t listen to these jackasses William, yours is an original and intriguing thought.

Let us first get this out of the way: NY primarily signed ARod to boost its ego (hence the HR bonuses). LA has a similar ego, and ARod, at 39 and 100 to go, has a decent shot. I think LA would want that.

As Petriello explained, LA is likely motivated to trade either Kemp, Ethier or Crawford. And they need a 3B badly. So why not?

League is a waste of time but so are many other relievers on given years. But NY knows he’s only 30 and was a force against them not too long ago. $7.5m is a lot for him, as is $17.5m for Ethier, but if you want ARod gone, you gotta get to give.

It should go without saying that Ethier would rake at NYS, something the other two are unlikely to do, although you never know with ARod and his ability to crack MLB’s steroid policy, but make this trade ARod+another and I think your idea has merit.

LA loses two bad contracts and gains fame. NY loses ARod.

William
12 years ago

Thank You. I think it would be foolish for LA to at least entertain the idea. They would have the opportunity to get out of two bad contracts and could be the team on which Arod plays when he could hit 700 hrs

LaLoosh
12 years ago

Daniel Murphy for Ethier plus 24M? Murphy is a decent hedge for Guerrero at 2B and the Dodgers have a pretty RHed lineup w/o Ethier (just AGone and CC if I’m not mistaken). Murphy can also play some 3B/1B. Solid piece for a contending team like LAD and controllable 2 more yrs.

vivalajeter
12 years ago
Reply to  LaLoosh

Do the Mets have a 2B then? They’d be giving up a cheaper ~3WAR 2B for a more expensive ~3WAR OF. If Murphy was blocking a good 2B prospect, it would have more merit. Since he’s the likely starter next year, I don’t know that it helps much.

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  vivalajeter

It’s somewhat easier to get a 2Bman, and also many Met fans feel that Murphy had a career year and his value will never be higher than now.

Eric R
12 years ago
Reply to  vivalajeter

I’d suppose Eric Young Jr or Wilmer Flores would become the secondbaseman?

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  Eric R

prob go FA at 2B with either of Roberts, Ellis or KellyJohnson ?

Purps McGurps
12 years ago
Reply to  LaLoosh

NO LALOOSH THE DODGERS DO NOT WANT DANIEL MURPHY

Kirk Davenport
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

Ned Colletti was actually in talks with the Mets on Murphy a couple of years ago, but that may have been at a point when Murphy had more upside projected and Colletti was still bootstrapped by the previous owner. Murphy now could only be a bench utility guy for the Dodgers now and in a trade that only warrants sending a grade B minor league pitcher to the Mets. I like Murphy, but he is not worth a “prospect” from the Dodgers

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  Kirk Davenport

“could only be a bench utility guy”? why? He was a top 10 2Bman this past yr and a 3 win player. You guys have no idea how Guerrero is going to actually perform and Murphy would be a very good hedge there. If Guerrero does win the 2B job then Murphy could easily still get 400 PAs floating around the IF since he can play both corners.

Antonio Bananas
12 years ago

Pederson, Seager, and Lee for Wright. Mets won’t contend in 2014 but have a huge window opening up 2015-2020, wright has few high quality years left.

LaLoosh
12 years ago

Not a huge Pederson fan but that’s a decent start.

Purps McGurps
12 years ago

The Dodgers aren’t trading their top 3 prospects for David Wright. Especially not Seager. If they were going to trade all 3, they might as well go all in and try to pry Longoria and Price.

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

Longoria is clearly not available. The Dodgers cannot just snap their fingers and get other GMs to cough up top talent.

Purps McGurps
12 years ago
Reply to  LaLoosh

Yet, apparently the Mets can.
Why get Wright when the Dodgers could trade the whole farm and go after better players? Wright is worth Pederson and Lee. Not Seager.

Antonio Bananas
12 years ago
Reply to  LaLoosh

So the two teams settle on pederson then one of Lee/seager? It makes sense to me. Wright has what? 2 more really good years then decline. The 2015-2020 Mets would be dangerous. The dodgers can pay wrights salary. Or maybe the mets pay more of wrights salary and get all 3?

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  LaLoosh

Purps:
I thought the article was about Ethier being available. Isn;t that the discussion? When Longoria becomes available, let us know.

The Rays are in a far different place then the Mets. The Mets should (but won’t) consider a Wright deal. And there is no way Seager & Lee or Pederson gets Wright. No way.

Purps McGurps
12 years ago
Reply to  LaLoosh

The article, if you read it Laloosh, is also about Joc Pederson being available. You made a rather laughable trade offer of Seager, Lee, and Pederson for him. That is just dumb. LA will not do that. If LA were to do something of that magnitude, there are plenty of other guys that they should go after. Not for somebody on the other side of 30.

Purps McGurps
12 years ago
Reply to  LaLoosh

So, with that in mind, LA won’t get David Wright. They don’t need David Wright like the Mets need farm prospects. LA’s goal is to build the farm at this point. These aren’t the days where Colletti would throw in a top prospect to save $5 mil in cash. Those days are gone.

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  LaLoosh

I made no such proposal. Sorry, re-read.

However ftr, David Wright is in the top 2 or 3 3Bmen in baseball on a very fair contract and the Dodgers are clearly a win-now team. To suggest the Dodgers wouldn’t go all-in to try and get Wright seems to ignore the Dodger situation entirely.

Purps McGurps
12 years ago
Reply to  LaLoosh

Laloosh, to say that the Dodgers are ignoring winning in the long term is stupid, as well. Check how much LA has spent on the farm these last 2 years. So why give them up for a 3rd baseman that figures to decline in 2 years?

Antonio Bananas
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

Also, those 3 won’t get longoria and price. That’s a joke. The rays are still a contender. Maybe Price, but not price and longo. The proposed prospect package isn’t close to what teixeira got and is arguably not even as good as what shields got.

Purps McGurps
12 years ago

I didn’t say those 3, Antonio. I said they might as well use those 3 and go all in. As in, trade the whole farm to get them.
If you’re going to suggest LA trade their top 3 prospects for Wright, then just upgrade from there and give the Rays what they want to get the best 3rd baseman in baseball and a top pitcher.

Purps McGurps
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

LOL my mistake. I got you and Bananas mistaken.

Still, your point about the Dodgers winning now is true, but they’re also spending money to win later. Their farm system is stronger than it has been at any point over the last decade, and that’s even when Puig and Ryu quickly graduated to the major league roster.
So, to trade two top prospects for an injury-prone 31 year old is pretty dumb. They will not do that. Sorry to ruin your dreams.

Antonio Bananas
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

Maybe I’m just under rating their prospects. I saw what Shields pulled back for the Rays and equated that. Of course, Dayton Moore was the dipshit on the other end of that trade. A competent GM probably doesn’t do the shields trade.

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

you’re clearly underrating Wright’s value.

and again, not “my dreams.”

Purps McGurps
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

It’s my right as a fan to underrate Wright’s value.
I’m not going to give up my top 3 prospects for a player who will be 31 at the start of next year.

And yes, it is in your dreams. Keep ignoring the Dodgers’ emphasis on the farm system.

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

“not my dreams” = not my proposal. Not sure why you insist on attributing that to me.

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

not to mention that I never said the Dodgers would do that deal. I said *the Mets* wouldn’t.

Antonio Bananas
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

So I proposed a trade honestly without a ton of research. One guy thinks it’s laughable because the Dodgers would give up too much, the other thinks the Mets would…

BipMember since 2016
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

David Wright has played at a 7+ WAR/650 rate for the past two seasons, putting up 13.5 WAR altogether. That is insanely good.

The Dodgers farm system is definitely not the strongest it has been in the past decade. Try 2005, where the Dodgers had nine prospect’s on Baseball America’s top 100 prospect list, including Billingsley, Russell Martin, Elbert, Broxton, Ethier and Kemp, as well as other decently regarded guys like Loney, Carlos Santana, Cody Ross, Edwin Jackson, etc. Just look at the Dodgers minor league affiliates in 2005, you’ll be shocked.

Kirk Davenport
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

Bip – take Ethier off that list of Dodger prospects from 2005. Ethier was never a Dodger prospect as you infer, he first arrived in LA in 2006 after a trade with Oakland for Milton Bradley.

Za
12 years ago

Pederson, Puig, and Seager and you’re getting closer.

olethros
12 years ago

I find it amusing that a straight up Kemp/Andrus exchange is deemed equitable here, yet two weeks ago the entire baseballing internet was certain that Andrus was worth Shelby Miller, Matt Adams, and Trevor Rosenthal.

Antonio Bananas
12 years ago
Reply to  olethros

Yes, the WHOLE internet. More like rosenthal proposed that trade (for Tulo) and most people laughed it off as ridiculous.

olethros
12 years ago

I may have been a bit hyperbolic, but I was roundly mocked on this very site for saying that was an unreasonable expectation. And that’s obviously what the Rangers/Rockies/Orioles were looking for in trade, since the Cardinals went 4/52 on Peralta.

Ivdown
12 years ago
Reply to  olethros

It’s not acceptable, Kemp shouldn’t be traded for Andrus, when Kemp starts getting healthier (he’s been doing that since late August) he is going to show that he’s got his power back and he’s going to be worth more than Andrus.

Damn my torpedo
12 years ago
Reply to  Ivdown

Either that or he’s a complete zero for 6/130. I’m sure LA appreciates your optimism though.

Purps McGurps
12 years ago

On second thought, Laloosh, I went back and checked Wright’s injury history…. since that was the deterring factor. Not bad. I can certainly understand why the Mets would want a high-end package for him. I still think LA says no.

Za
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

LA would say yes in a heartbeat. NY would reject the trade. Unless LA includes Puig, Pederson, and Seager, there wouldn’t even be a conversation. Wright’s been the best 3B in baseball over the time since he came up while being healthier and more consistent than Longoria or Zimmerman. Wright’s career wRC+ is higher than Longoria’s, he’s showed he’s much better staying healthy, and since 2005, only Pujols, Utley, and Cabrera have put up more fWAR.

Wright’s criminally underrated and while it’s definitely arguable that Longoria’s the better all-around 3B, Wright’s much more likely to stay healthy over the course of a full (or multiple full) seasons.

Puig and Pederson wouldn’t get it done.

Goat Fondler
12 years ago
Reply to  Za

And LA wouldn’t even trade Puig and Pederson for him, so there’s no way this trade would ever happen.

Antonio Bananas
12 years ago
Reply to  Purps McGurps

Stop giving LaLoosh credit for my trade!

Dan Farnsworth
12 years ago

I don’t think Puig makes the adjustments to keep up the pace. His stock will never be higher than right now. Pederson and more immediately Buss and Van Slyke offer protection from injuries and ineffectiveness, plus they could pick up a guy like JD Martinez in the Rule 5 draft in a couple weeks. Trade Puig for any pitcher you want.

Jason B
12 years ago
Reply to  Dan Farnsworth

I think you may be right re: Puig. It reminds me a bit of Stanton, there was a lot of “to get Stanton you need to start with your best three prospects, then add two more good ones, etc” type stuff essentially saying teams would need to throw their farm system to FLA to get him. It just takes a year or two of injury, ineffectiveness, or subpar performance to take the bloom off the rose a bit.

Which is not at all to say that Stanton isn’t still a fantastic value; just that his trade value peaked a year or two ago, and then has dipped somewhat as his performance has declined and the length of time under cost control also diminishes.

People just have a hard time conceptually with trading someone on the heels of a likely peak performance; they tend to expect it to be even better going forward almost without fail, and we all tend to overvalue what we already have anyway.

Not exploring a trade for Puig or Stanton at peak doesn’t make a GM stupid or short-sighted, just…human.

BipMember since 2016
12 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Good thing for the Dodgers they didn’t do that with Kershaw in 2009 or 2010…

Goat Fondler
12 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Do you have any actual facts about Puig to support your opinion or just an unfounded comparison to a completely unrelated player?

BipMember since 2016
12 years ago
Reply to  Dan Farnsworth

Puig K rates by month:
Jun: 18.7 %
Jul: 29.5 %
Aug: 19.8 %
Sept/Oct: 22.2 %

Puig BB rates by month:
Jun: 3.7 %
Jul: 7.6 %
Aug: 11.6 %
Sept/Oct: 10.1 %

Both started bad but improved notably over the course of the season.

Bob M
12 years ago
Reply to  Bip

That K rate doesn’t look improved. 18.7% in the first month to 22.2% in the last month is not improvement.

Dave
12 years ago
Reply to  Bob M

I think it’s pretty obvious he’s talking about the spike to 29% in Puig’s first full month down to 22%.

Goat Fondler
12 years ago
Reply to  Dan Farnsworth

The Dodgers don’t need pitchers. If they were to trade Puig, they would want to try to get a 3B or SS.

Ruki Motomiya
12 years ago

I’d say that the right option is to not trade any of them, unless you get a “can’t say no” kinda deal. Kemp has played a total of 179 games the last 2 years, Crawford still went through injuries last year coming off a major one and Ethier actually makes a good guy to start vs. righties and give people a rest (Particularly Kemp, who has been merely human vs. righties in his career). I think keeping Pederson at AAA would also be helpful, especially considering his large K% at AA. See how he does against AAA pitching first.

(The Dodgers had both too many outfielders and too many pitchers last year and ended up needing both. You only have too many people at one position if you get more value from what you get back (Or from who you can sign with the salary) compared to their value as depth, after all.)

Nate
12 years ago

Pederson to Philadelphia for Mikael Franco and Darin Ruf. Phillies get a marquee, cost-controlled outfielder who pushes Byrd back to 4th OF, where he belongs, Dodgers get a lefty-masher for league minimum to platoon with Ethier and Crawford, and the Dodgers fill their hole at 3rd with Franco, who is blocked by Cody Asche anyway.

Ivan Grushenko
12 years ago
Reply to  Nate

I doubt Asche is much of an obstacle for Franco

Sean
12 years ago
Reply to  Ivan Grushenko

Fielding ability is the more likely obstacle for Franco.

Ben HallMember since 2016
12 years ago

“[Crawford]’s no longer the excellent defensive outfielder…he was in Tampa Bay.” I’m not sure why you say this. He posted a 14.2 UZR/150 games last year. It doesn’t change your point much, but at a minimum it’s debatable whether he’s still an excellent defender.

Kirk Davenport
12 years ago
Reply to  Ben Hall

Crawford is certainly better than most left fielders that teams put out there – sometimes trying to hide a weak or inexperienced fielder. I consider Carl a very good fielder having seen almost every game he played as a Dodger but none of the games he played previously. He does seem to cover the ground and generally make the catches, but his arm is very limited and in most cases he could not make a critical throw or did not try to make them and often the other teams could take advantage of this. I still want him as the regular LF of the Dodgers and batting #1 or #2 in the lineup

Ben HallMember since 2016
12 years ago

Calling Crawford “one of the absolute worst hitters in baseball against lefties” is, I think, an overreaction to his recent performance. You did use a three year window, but that seems to ignore the fact that for his career his line against lefties is an 82 wRC+. That’s still noticeably worse than his 114 wRC+ against righties, but it’s nowhere near the 67 to 110 split over the last three years. Furthermore, (even though it’s no longer at his previous elite levels) his baserunning and fielding contribute a significant amount of his value: this past year he added 4.2 runs in batting, 5.0 in baserunning, and 8.6 in fielding. As such, he’s not an ideal platoon option.

Cody
12 years ago

How about Puig for Machado + Wieters. I think that’s more or less fair. Puig is under contract for 5/$28. No arbitration uncertainty, just for sure going to get only that much money. Meanwhile likely to put up $170M of value during that period (imagining 5% annual inflation in WAR prices, and 5 or 6 WAR/yr). Discounting for caring less about future years, his contract is an amazing net $115M asset.
Wieters you’re going to pay for about 2/$17.5M and get ~$45M of value. A net $25M asset. (4 WAR / yr)
Machado maybe something like 5/$36M and get $150M of value, a net $90M asset. (4-5 WAR / yr)

Cody
12 years ago
Reply to  Mike Petriello

Looked it up, and you’re right. The contract pays that much if he was in the minors. But since he’ll be in the majors, he gets arbitration eligible after 2016. So straight up for Machado then.

Sean
12 years ago
Reply to  Cody

Machado alone is worth more than Puig.

Goat Fondler
12 years ago
Reply to  Cody

I don’t see the Orioles trading Machado.

harmony55
12 years ago

Does Dodger outfielder Scott Van Slyke have a future anywhere?

JR
12 years ago
Reply to  Mike Petriello

Hey Guys, Okay so Headley had a down year but we have to remember he had a really ugly thumb injury that put him out a while and also really gave him a hard time hitting. Not to mention a knee injury he was playing through. Headley is much better than that. Not as good as the line he put up in 2012 better but I think he can give us a .275/.360/.420 slash with an OPS around .770 and about 15-20 HR. With his plus glove and great throwing arm, I would say that it a great tool to have. Better than Uribe, who is asking 3 yrs.

I reall don’t think Corey is going to play 3B and the club has not made any plans to move him. To be honest, why move him? Is he a big guy, Yes, is he more suitable to be a MLB 3B, probably. But, we can also put him along the line of a SS in the class of Tulo. Tulo is a big guy at 6’3 but plays SS flawlessly. I don’t buy the idea you move a guy because of size. Corey is an above avg to plus SS already and is only 19. Corey will most likely start in 2016 and too be honest with you Hanley might be long gone by then. Even if the club keeps Hanley, Hanley will not be a lock at short stop with his declining age. He’ll probably move to 3B where he can save his legs causing SS to be open for Corey when he gets here. I can’t wait for Corey to move up.

Here is the winning deal for the Dodgers which could be a boom or bust. I would trade for Aramis Ramirez that would require less talent and about the same money. He is locked for next year and has a mutual for 2015. Say we pick up 2015 that means 3B is open for 2016 just in time for Corey to make his debut and whether he stays at 3B or SS it is still open for Hanley, if he is still with the team, to move there.

Aramis does provide us with all the essentials that Headley provides, the only difference is that he has no legs. But compared to Uribe it’s still an upgrade.

Sean
12 years ago
Reply to  JR

Seager will not play SS at the major league level.

The Dude Abides
12 years ago
Reply to  JR

Seager would be the tallest SS in MLB history. The kid is 6-5. He’ll have to move to 3B sometime soon.

Dave
12 years ago
Reply to  JR

Tallest AND heaviest, I believe. There’s just no way he can stick.

LaLoosh
12 years ago
Reply to  JR

Cal Ripken wants to have a word.

Ivan Grushenko
12 years ago

Joc Pederson for Rougned Odor?

pft
12 years ago

You can say too many OF’ers, but Ethier, Kemp and Crawford have all had injury problems the past couple of years. They might get more in a trade by waiting until June, or find that injuries to one or more of the 3 meant they did not have too many

Sean
12 years ago

If I were them I’d go with “trade none” until Pederson forces the issue. Surpluses in November have a way of working themselves out by season-start. Look at the “too many starters” the Dodgers went into last year with.

Andy
12 years ago

If I were Theo and the cubs braintrust, I think going after Crawford makes some sense. Obviously LA would have to eat enough of his contract to make him a player in the $10-12 mil annually range. With Castro’s inability to walk he’s not a good fit in the lead off spot. Additionally, while Crawford isn’t a 60 SB guy anymore he could possibly yield you 25-30 if he were healthy for a full year and the cubs have really been lacking in that area. The question would then become cost. If it’s a 10-15 prospect why not? If Crawford play well next year he might even be able to net you something decent at next year’s trade deadline if the dodgers had already at that sizable chunk of his contract.

LaLoosh
12 years ago

Can we also get some clarity over the idea about Ethier that “he absolutely, positively cannot hit lefty pitching.” That is really a gross exaggeration. The past 4 yrs, these are Ethier’s OPS+ splits:
2013: 131/90
2012: 151/87
2011: 138/72
2010: 154/83

Aside from 2011, that’s not at all bad for same side results and the 4 yr average is roughly 143/83.

Dave
12 years ago
Reply to  LaLoosh

I think what makes it look so bad is the comparison to what he does against righties… where he’s in the top 10 of all MLB players by wRC+ (at 151) since 2010.

BobbyWestside
12 years ago

When do you think Joc Pederson will get a shot in the bigs and how will he perform?