I wasn't even in offseason mode yet, and look at the Dodgers, jumping in with a splash. (Small splash? Medium sized splash.)
The Dodgers re-upped with Ted Lilly, signing him to a three year deal. This news is a little bit bittersweet for me. Will Ted Lilly be good next year (definition of good being 25+ starts, about 4.00 ERA)? Yeah, probably.
But this deal immediately makes me thing of the Casey Blake deal: three years for a guy in his mid-30s who is beginning to show signs of decline. Sure, we got a decent offensive year out of Blake in 2009 (122 OPS+), but by the second year in the deal (2010, 99 OPS+), we were already starting to regret it. The third year (if Mattingly is smart) will have us paying Casey Blake $5.25 million to be a platoon(/bench?) player.
Which brings me back to Lilly. Obviously, there's no guarantee that Lilly will take the Casey Blake route of decline but it wouldn't shock me. Weird, but trends seem to show that players get worse, not better as they age.
I'm won't be surprised if we're regretting this deal by half-way through the second year.
We also don't know the monetary details of the contract yet. Ted Lilly was going to be one of the top pitchers on the free agent market this offseason. I'm worried about what the Dodgers offered him to not go into said market.
If it's too expensive, we might be looking at a guy who (in an ideal baseball world) is a 4th starter as our big free agent signing this offseason.
Still, our entire starting rotation at this point was comprised of Clayton Kershaw and Chad Billingsley, so being able to pencil in Ted Lilly for somewhere around 30 starts and 180-200 innings of about 4.00 ERA pitching is still a plus.
Just as long as you remember that pluses come in many sizes.
UPDATE: Lilly gets 3 years and $33 million. It's a lot, or, at least, more than I'd hoped. There's a couple ways to look at this. I'm sure on the open market, Lilly gets more than that (though I'm not sure too much more, I'm thinking maybe $12 million) so the Dodgers, in a way, got Lilly for cheap.
On the other hand, flash forward to a couple years from now, when Ted Lilly is still getting paid $11 million and possibly not producing as much. Suddenly, things aren't looking so cheap anymore.
Anyway, point is, next year we'll have Lilly in our rotation and be paying him $11 million. It's more than I hoped, but still better than I expected.
... so it's a plus.
Again, size of said plus to be determined.
...make it Garret Anderson!
The Dodgers added Anderson today on a minor league contract, and he'll supposedly compete with Brian Giles and Doug Mientkiewicz for the role of 5th outfielder/left handed batter off the bench.
Now, we can debate whether or not we really need a 5th outfielder1 or if we could fill the role of left handed batter with a better option than one of the aforementioned.2
1. We don't.
2. We could.
...however, we do have Joe Torre as a manager, so having an old busted up veteran to fill the unnecessary role is almost a guarantee.
So, who to pick out of the three? All three are pretty much question marks.
Mientkiewicz only had 18 at-bats last year, and wasn't bad, but that's such a small sample size, you can't draw anything from it. He still deserves a spot and a chance in Spring Training, but for the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to rule him out.
I mean, come on, this was the highlight of his season.
So that brings us to Brian Giles and Garret Anderson.
Brian Giles had a horrid season last year, splitting half the time being injured and the other half being a terrible hitter. I've said it before, but his numbers last year (.191, 2 HR, .548 OPS!) dipped into Andruw Jones-ian territory. And that's not 20 at-bats. That's 225 at-bats! That's a good 2/5th's of a season.
Garret Anderson, on the other hand, has been slowly melting, statistically speaking. Average, On-Base Percentage, Slugging, and Homeruns have been on a downward trend the last three years. So, now the question is, has he bottomed out, or does he still have room to slide more?
Between the last two, Giles has far bigger upside, in that, if he returns to form as the Brian Giles of old, he can make a huge impact on the team. However, I'm going to say there's only a 10% chance of that happening, whereas with Anderson, I feel like we know what we can get from him.
I'm going to go out on a limb here (so Anderson can screw me over) and say that I think Anderson has fallen to his lowest level. Anderson hit .268 (.705 OPS) with 13 HRs in a weak 2009 season and I feel that's probably similar to what he would do if we threw him out there everyday in 2010, which would be really terrible if he was going to be our starting left fielder, but not the worst thing if you are going to make him a left handed pinch hitter, a la Jim Thome.
Basically, what I'm saying is, if we absolutely, positively, gots-to have a 5th outfielder/left handed pinch hitter/old person, then I'm ok with Garret Anderson for the job.
"I'm your man!"
I know I haven't been posting a lot, but it's all part of the plan. You see, this is how I've been going about this offseason:
Picture the offseason as a glass. Every meaningless signing adds a few drops to the glass. Eventually, the glass starts to get full and overflows. And then, as all the non-roster invitees are spilling on the counter, I finally decide to do something about it.
Why am I doing it like this? Laziness? Busyness? The inability to bring myself to dedicate an entire post to Justin Knoedler? Pick one.
Who???
Either way, consider this post emptying out the glass.
Ok, let's take a look at what we've added since I last posted:
- Timo Perez - Outfielder. Hasn't been in the majors since 2007. Doesn't have much value. He's dead to me.
- John Koronka - Pitcher. 4 games since 2006. Never posted an ERA below 5.60. He's dead to me.
- Reed Johnson - He was signed to be out 4th outfielder. He's ok. His contract is cheap. There were probably better options, but I'm not going to go to war over a 4th outfielder.
- Justin Knoedler - Catcher. Hasn't played in the majors since 2006. I can't imagine using him at all in 2010 unless something horrible happens to the several catchers ahead of him in the depth chart. Dead to me.
- Alfredo Amezaga - Utility player. Much like Johnson, he's ok. Also, he's cheap. He can play a bunch of positions. He's coming off surgery so who knows how effective he'll be. Also, I don't know who's spot he's taking on the roster, so he might not even be relevant this year.
- Jeff Weaver - I actually like this signing! Wow! Weaver was effective as a swing man last year, he's coming back as a non-roster invitee. So, either Weaver will be good and find his way back to the roster, or he won't and will sit cheaply in AAA. Nice.
- Ramon Ortiz - Pitcher. 5 games for two teams in 2007. 5.45 combined ERA. Has had a below 4.00 ERA once in his career (2002). Here's a better question ... who has a better chance of being useful in 2010: Russ Ortiz or Ramon Ortiz? The answer? They're both dead to me.
Alright. That's it. The glass has been emptied and I feel better.Look, if something meaningful happens, I'll post about it.Otherwise, I'll be back in a week and a half to discuss the addition of another five players who are already dead to me.
So, I was out and about today, and I finally got around to checking the news, and what did I see?
Well, lookey here. The Dodgers resigned Ronnie Belliard and Brad Ausmus.
And like almost every thing we've done this offseason, I am just ... feeling ... blah ... about it.
Ausmus is fine. He did well enough as a backup catcher last year, and he'll be back this year relatively cheap. If he continues to play adequately and maybe impart some old catcher wisdom on some of the younger players, then he's a good guy to have around.
Plus, he's got connections.
Which I guess brings me to why I'm so unsure about Belliard. What is his point? Is he here to start or come off the bench? And if we have Belliard, what's the point of Jamey Carroll? They play the same positions. Both bat right handed. Carroll gets on base better. Belliard slugs better. Neither excels at both. It's just a little ... blah.
On the bright side, Yahoo! Sports reports that Belliard's contract comes with a stipulation that is both sad and funny:
"The infielder’s $825,000, one-year contract, which was announced Tuesday, will become guaranteed only if he reports to spring training at 209 pounds or less. If he reports at over 209 pounds, the Dodgers can release him and owe only termination pay."
Basically, show up fat and you lose everything!
I can only imagine the horribly depressing conversation that would take place between the coaches if Belliard doesn't show up in shape in Spring. The inevitable: "Is Ronnie looking sluggish?" question. The debate whether or not to bust out the scale. The decision on whether or not to cut him for being 215.
"Are we supposed to add the weight of dreadlocks, too?"
Say what you will about the signings, but at the very least they've added a little bit of suspense to Spring Training.
And really, isn't that all you can ask for in a blah offseason?
The Dodgers announced today that they have resigned Vicente Padilla to a one year contract worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $5 million.
Now, I'm having trouble deciding how I feel about this.For one, I don't care much for Vicente Padilla, the man. And that's not just me, lest we forget his Rangers teammates threw a small party when they learned he was let go from the team last year. But this is also the guy who mysteriously got shot in the leg this offseason. Seriously, did we ever get the straight story about what went down? The article on Dodgers.com said he did it, but until I just read that, I was pretty sure his bodyguard did it. Look, this has obviously nothing to do with his pitching skills. I'm just saying that this guy seems to have trouble follow him around wherever he goes.
Also, is it Vincente or Vicente? That always messes me up.
Which Padilla is going to show up for us in 2010? Is it going to be the one who posted a 4.92 ERA in Texas for the good part of 2009, or the one who showed up in Los Angeles and had a 3.20 ERA over seven starts and made two excellent starts in the playoffs?
Also, how many innings can we get out of Padilla? In his last six seasons, Padilla only made over 30 starts and cracked 200 innings just once, in 2006.
To be honest, I was hoping to fill the #4 starter spot with Jon Garland (or someone like him, though, really, I'm too lazy to think of a comparable name on the Free Agent market). Garland is someone who has made 30+ starts in each of his last eight seasons and has gone 200+ innings in five of those (the other three ending with him in the 190 inning range). Garland's ERA, though similar to Padilla's over that stretch, seems to be slightly lower. Oh, and, in each of those eight seasons, Garland was never run out of a city, nor has he been shot or shot somebody (or both, at the same time).
But, I guess you go into the 2010 season with the team you have, not the team you want. Look, Padilla isn't horrible. He isn't good, but he'll probably give us 20 something starts and a 4.00 ERA, which for a #4 starter at $5 million isn't horrendous.
It's just, after Milton Bradley, Jeff Kent, and Manny, you start to get a little tired of the headcases.
The Dodgers signed Will Ohman to a one year deal, with an option for 2010, reports Dodgers.com.
This is odd to me because we just watched him try out for us yesterday, and Joe Torre made some odd, somewhat disparaging comments about him:
"But there's a certain element of sharpness you'd like to have. Where we are, how many times can he pitch [in a game]? We saw today the quality of his stuff. You can see he hasn't been pitching in a game as far as command. Not that he's been pinpoint [in his career]."
Wow, bit of a shot at Ohman's career there, Joe.
Anyway, point is, we went from that yesterday, to signing him today. Quick turnaround.
It's a good signing, cheap enough, and gives us another arm in the bullpen.
And it allows me to begin preparing "Oh man!" jokes for the upcoming season.
I can't wait...
The Dodgers continued their trend of bringing back local boys who once pitched for the Dodgers by signing Jeff Weaver to a minor league deal.
Weaver made 34 starts for the Dodgers in both 2004 and 2005 and went 27-24 over that span and posting ERAs of 4.01 and 4.22 respectively.
Since then, however, not so good. He's only posted a sub-6.00 ERA once since then (15 games in 2006 with St. Louis).
Here's the worst part. He didn't even pitch in the majors in 2008. Not a good sign. What's worse? In nine games for Milwaukee's AAA team, he posted a 6.22 ERA. He was released by Milwaukee and ended up on Cleveland's AAA team. He posted a 6.07 ERA in 13 games there.
When you are getting lit up in AAA, your future in the majors doesn't look good.
So... uh... welcome back Jeff!(?)
EDIT: The Dodgers also signed Eric Milton to a minor league deal. Milton also didn't pitch in the majors in 2008, partly because he was recovering from Tommy John surgery and partly because he's not good. In any case, he's cheap enough, might as well give it a shot.
Just a quick post to say Happy Trails to Andruw Jones. He was, of course, released by the Dodgers earlier in the off-season, however, he's now found a home in Texas.
On a side note, good luck to the Texas Rangers.
The Dodgers added an arm to their rotation Thursday, by signing Randy Wolf to a one year deal worth $5 million.
This is Wolf's second stint with the Dodgers. He went 9-6 in 18 starts in 2007 for the Dodgers.
I'm all for this signing for a few reasons. For one, it ends the constant speculation that we will sign Randy Wolf. We signed him, now the speculation can end. That works well...
Also, it gives us a good set of arms at the top of our rotation. It means (at least as long as Wolf is healthy) that we have four bona fide starters in the rotation and we won't have to rely on Shawn Estes or Claudio Vargas that much.
Finally, it's a cheap and short term contract. If Wolf pans out, good, we can resign him next offseason. If he gets hurt though, or pitches badly, we aren't paying him that much, and his contract will be done by the end of the season.
Either way, it's a pretty good signing.
The Dodgers reportedly signed Brad Ausmus to a one year, $1 million contract for the 2009 season.
Ausmus will back-up Russell Martin, and isn't a bad choice. He's not a great hitter, but he's still good enough defensively, and hopefully he'll be able to give Martin a few more days off and keep him fresh through the year.
I guess we'll see, but it's a good enough signing for now.
The Dodgers added to their bullpen today, finalizing a deal with reliever Guillermo Mota, a former Dodger who was traded away in 2004.
Meanwhile, Andruw Jones will be reportedly released tomorrow.
The Mota move is currently a "Meh" for me, with the possibility of becoming "Good", while the Jones move is currently a "Good" for me, with the possibility of becoming an "AHHHH!". Let me explain.
One the Mota side, he has the potential to be good. Mota was, at one point, a fantastic set-up man for the Dodgers. That was 2003 and the first half of 2004. However, since then, not so much. He only posted a below 4.00 ERA once, 18 games for the New York Mets in 2006. In any case, his contract will only be for one year, at a guaranteed $2.35 million (with a possible $300,000 in incentives), so he comes relatively cheap. Might as well give it a shot, he could be helpful. Again, "Meh" with the possibility of "Good".
One the Andruw Jones side, I'm glad he's gone. He won't be able to take up a roster spot, which makes me happy and makes this move "Good". However, we are now going to be paying him for another several years, which makes me sad. That also means, now that he's gone from our team, he has the chance to sign with another team and come back to haunt us. Which means, knowing our history with similar situations, he will. Which leaves this move, "Good" with the possibility of becoming an "AHHHH!".
EDIT: Oh yeah, totally forgot. Happy trails to Derek Lowe who signed a four year deal with the Atlanta Braves, further adding to the drama of the Dodgers/Braves matchups next season, what with the Rafael Furcal drama and everything.
2ND EDIT: Pablo Ozuna signed a minor league contract with the Philadelphia Phillies. Happy Trails!
So, a couple more odds and ends for the Dodgers these past few days.
Happy trails to Takashi Saito, who signed a contract with the Boston Red Sox for one year and an option. Saito was a good closer, with one of the nastiest sliders I've ever seen, so it is a bit sad to see him go. At the same time, he might not be able to pitch anymore, which would make the blow a little easier to take. I honestly do hope that he can still pitch, because I like the guy, and I would like to see him succeed again.
Secondly, the Dodgers added another pitcher in Shawn Estes. I'm not too excited about this one. Estes was a name that when you saw him coming up for a start against us, you thought to yourself: "Well, that's at least one win guaranteed in the series." He's going to make $550,000, and could earn up to $1 million in incentives if he pitches up to 30 starts. Side note: if Shawn Estes makes 30 starts for us next year, we are going to be in some serious trouble.
On a light side note: Estes now joins Steve Finley and Matt Herges in the "I've Played For Every Team In The NL West Club."
So, I've been a little busy the last week, and as such, wasn't able to write about a couple of things that happened.
First, happy trails to Scott Proctor, who signed a one-year deal with the Florida Marlins. At least now he gets to avoid Joe Torre for a little while.
Second, happy trails to both Ángel Berroa and Jason Johnson. Though I don't believe anything has been made official yet, both are heading to the New York Yankees. Um... they will be missed? I don't have much else.
Finally, the Dodgers added a pitcher, by signing Claudio Vargas. He's ok... He recorded double digit wins in 2006 and 2007, but has never had a sub-4.00 ERA. I'm not thrilled about the acquisition, but I guess it couldn't hurt to have an extra pitcher around.
So I've been watching all the drama that's come from the Rafael Furcal signing and trying to figure it all out.
It's a lot of he said/he said, but from what I gather, there's probably going to be more than a few boos for Furcal when the Dodgers travel to Atlanta in 2009.
In any case, whether or not there was some shady business going on in the deal, I really like the signing, as it solves a lot of problems.
Well, first things first, I'm not crazy about the amount of years. However, it really became obvious that we would need to offer Furcal at least three years to get him. So, even though I don't like it, I understand it had to be done.
That's what I didn't like. Here's what I like about the signing:
1. It shores up our infield. With the earlier signing of Casey Blake and now with the Furcal signing, plus having the right side of the infield pretty much penciled in as James Loney at 1st and Blake DeWitt at 2nd, we don't need to think about our infield anymore. We also got our utility infielder in Mark Loretta. Sure, maybe you add a defensive replacement here and there or a pinch hitter, but for the most part, any questions about the infield in 2009 should be solved. That's pretty good considering that coming into the offseason, three spots on the infield were, for the most part, question marks. Furcal, when healthy, is a name you can put on the lineup card every day.
2. We don't need to look for another shortstop. This includes having to trade away prospects to try and bring in a player to play short. Trading away the kids should be the last option. However, this also means we won't be signing a player like Orlando Cabrera. Not to say he's a horrible player, but Furcal is younger, and when he's healthy, he easily outhits Cabrera. Plus, signing Cabrera would mean surrendering a draft pick, as he declined arbitration earlier in the offseason.
3. ...and most important: we have a leadoff hitter. I guess this correlates with #1, but it's important. Sure, Furcal is a name you can put on the lineup card every day, but more importantly, he's a name you can put at the top of the lineup card. Without Furcal, the question of who would end up leading off for us in 2009 would be a pretty daunting one. With Juan Pierre asking for a trade, we really wouldn't have an established lead off hitter on the team. We could put Matt Kemp back in the role, possibly, but I'd still like to have his bat more in the middle of the lineup. Now, with Furcal back, that really becomes a moot point because we, once again, have an excellent leadoff hitter on the team.
Then again, this is all good if Furcal can stay healthy. The back issue is a bit scary, but if he can make it through the year, our team is going to be that much better.
Let's keep those fingers crossed...
In an attempt to make my player profile of Terry Tiffee a moot point, the Philadelphia Phillies signed Tiffee to a minor league contract.
He's now the second Dodger to join the Phillies this offseason.
Here's to hoping he gets more than four at-bats for them.
Happy Trails!
Reports are saying that just a day after Rafael Furcal and the Atlanta Braves agreed to a three year contract, Furcal has decided to remain with the Dodgers, who signed him to a similar contract. Nothing has been made official yet, but currently, it looks as though Furcal will be back in Dodger blue for the next several years.
More when it becomes official.
Matt Kemp's Player Profile will be up within the next hour.
Chan Ho Park has decided to leave the Dodgers for a second time, agreeing to a one year, $2.5 million deal with the Philadelphia Phillies. 
The contract has the possibilty of going up to $5 million with incentives.
We here at J's Dodger Blog wish Chan Ho Park luck in leaving the only team he's ever really had success with and establishing a new home in one of the most hitter friendly stadiums in the league.
Happy Trails!
Dodger GM Ned Colletti completed two deals during the Winter GM Meetings, signing Casey Blake and Mark Loretta to contracts.
Remember what I said about Casey Blake in my player profile of him?
I'll remind you:
"The free agent market for 3rd basemen is not strong at all... I guess I wouldn't mind seeing Blake back for the 2009 season. Maybe..."
Yeah, that's how enthusiastic I was about it. Still though, it's good to have a third baseman. 
There's nothing exciting about Casey Blake. We know what he's done in the past, and what he's likely to do in the future. But at least he provides us a solution to the 3rd base problem. He should be a solid 3rd baseman for at least the next two years. The third year, who knows? The fourth option year? Probably not.
But at least, in the present, he's our 3rd baseman. I guess it'll be nice to have a solid player there, if only for a little while. It's not a great signing, but it's good enough.
As for Mark Loretta, I do really like this signing, with a small caveat. The contract is good, one year, small amount of money. That's fine.
My issue is usage. This is a good signing if Joe Torre let's the infield be. What I mean by that is, this signing turns sour for me if Torre shoves Loretta into a starting role, benching a younger player in the process.
Loretta can player 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and even a little shortstop. He's pretty good against left handed pitchers. That's perfect for us. He'll be a good backup infielder and possible spot starter here and there, maybe against a lefty.
That would make this signing perfect for me. I'm sad to see Nomar go, as Loretta is almost certainly taking his spot on the team, but Loretta is a suitable replacement, as long as he's used right.
The Dodgers solidified third base and added some depth to the rest of the infield in the last few days by signing veterans Casey Blake and Mark Loretta to deals.
Loretta's deal, pending a physical, is a one-year deal believed to be about $1.4 million.
Blake's deal is a three year deal worth $17.5 million, with a team option for a fourth year (the fourth year would be worth $6 million and comes with a $1.25 million buyout).
I'll have analysis on the deals shortly.
Update: Loretta's deal is official, 1 year, $1.25 million.
