Dodgers getting serious?

youngLion · Post #1 » by **youngLion** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:49 pm

http://baseball.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ ... day_offer/

Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti is believed to be considering the inclusion of Chad Billingsley in an offer for Roy Halladay.

Colletti has made Clayton Kershaw untouchable, but the addition of Billingsley to an offer could convince Toronto to send Halladay to Los Angeles

_venom_ · Post #2 » by **_venom_** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:01 pm

I'd definitely prefer a Billingsley deal than a Bucholz deal...

-MetA4- · Post #3 » by **-MetA4-** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:03 pm

If you can get Billingsley plus a prospect or two you pretty much have to take it at this point, and in all honesty thats not even a bad deal as Billingsley is 25 and has put up three straight seasons of sub 4.00 ERA ball. He strikes out basically a batter per inning and gives up less hits than innings pitched.

RapsFanInVA · Post #4 » by **RapsFanInVA** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:34 pm

J.P. should pull the trigger. This is as good as it's gonna get. Billingsley is legit.

zilby · Post #5 » by **zilby** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:38 pm

Billingsley is a great arm in the rotation and if JP can snag two good prospects it seems like a really good deal.

Michael Bradley · Post #6 » by **Michael Bradley** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:40 pm

I would prefer Billingsley over the other names mentioned in the past few days (Drabek, Buchholz, etc) since he is young and already established. I am always a bit cautious about taking pitchers from the National League (especially LA, SD, SF, etc), but Billingsley looks like he could handle the transition given his K rates.

If Halladay has to be traded, then Bills is the type of pitcher I would want back. He won't put up Halladay numbers, but at least we can count on him being good (barring Arnsberg's curse playing a role). It depends on what would come in addition to him.

Mustard_Tiger · Post #7 » by **Mustard_Tiger** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:43 pm

-MetA4- wrote:If you can get Billingsley plus a prospect or two you pretty much have to take it at this point, and in all honesty thats not even a bad deal as Billingsley is 25 and has put up three straight seasons of sub 4.00 ERA ball. He strikes out basically a batter per inning and gives up less hits than innings pitched.

Billingsley by himself is more than fair value for Roy Halladay. I don't see the Dodgers being stupid enough to make this deal.

youngLion · Post #8 » by **youngLion** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:55 pm

Mustard_Tiger wrote:
-MetA4- wrote:If you can get Billingsley plus a prospect or two you pretty much have to take it at this point, and in all honesty thats not even a bad deal as Billingsley is 25 and has put up three straight seasons of sub 4.00 ERA ball. He strikes out basically a batter per inning and gives up less hits than innings pitched.

Billingsley by himself is more than fair value for Roy Halladay. I don't see the Dodgers being stupid enough to make this deal.

I think you've misread the market. It has always been suggested that it will take a package of players to get Doc, and the rumours involving LA have conformed to this assertion. If we were talking about Kershaw that might be different, but I do believe it would take Billingsley+ to get this deal done.

Mustard_Tiger · Post #9 » by **Mustard_Tiger** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:20 am

youngLion wrote:
Mustard_Tiger wrote:
-MetA4- wrote:If you can get Billingsley plus a prospect or two you pretty much have to take it at this point, and in all honesty thats not even a bad deal as Billingsley is 25 and has put up three straight seasons of sub 4.00 ERA ball. He strikes out basically a batter per inning and gives up less hits than innings pitched.

Billingsley by himself is more than fair value for Roy Halladay. I don't see the Dodgers being stupid enough to make this deal.

I think you've misread the market. It has always been suggested that it will take a package of players to get Doc, and the rumours involving LA have conformed to this assertion. If we were talking about Kershaw that might be different, but I do believe it would take Billingsley+ to get this deal done.

Billingsley is worth more than Doc by himself, so that doesn't make sense. The guy is a top 20 pitcher in the majors as it is.

Mustard_Tiger · Post #10 » by **Mustard_Tiger** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:21 am

Basically what I mean to say is....if the Jays got Billingsley, it would be a steal. But if they got Billingsley and prospects for Doc...well it would just be a ridiculously stupid trade for the Dodgers to make.

I don't see it happening.

Avenger · Post #11 » by **Avenger** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 2:55 am

Billingsley is not worth more than Doc. We've got Doc locked up for 1.5 years, Billingsley is eligible for Arbitration after this season, its not like we're getting a young stud you can control for 3-4 years or anything. I would rather not pay him the big money when we know we're not contending.

Post #12 » by **Schad** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 3:54 am

Billingsley's control makes him a touch frustrating, but give me Billingsley and a couple C+/C prospects and I'd be willing to call it a day. Give me Billingsley and Ivan DeJesus Jr. and I'll do unspeakable things to/with Ned Coletti.

Mustard_Tiger · Post #13 » by **Mustard_Tiger** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 5:26 am

Avenger wrote:Billingsley is not worth more than Doc. We've got Doc locked up for 1.5 years, Billingsley is eligible for Arbitration after this season, its not like we're getting a young stud you can control for 3-4 years or anything. I would rather not pay him the big money when we know we're not contending.

Uh...but Billingsley is a young stud starting pitcher. And they would have him under control far longer than the 1.5 years of Doc. I'm not convinced the Dodgers would give up somebody like this for a virtual rental player.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.ph ... alue-30-26

Bills goes ahead of Halladay on this list.

Ong_dynasty · Post #14 » by **Ong_dynasty** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 6:05 am

how is it a rental player?!?!
first off its pretty much 2 playoffs they get him..
and secondly they have the cash to resign him..

Mustard_Tiger · Post #15 » by **Mustard_Tiger** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 9:02 am

I'm beginning to get the sense that many of you don't realize how good Chad Billingsley actually is right now. This isn't some prospect here. He's been a legitimate #1 guy for the Dodgers for over a year and a half now, and he's still only 25 years old with a lot of room to improve. Trading him for 1.5 years of Roy Halladay (in a virtual rental...sorry I'm not about to get into a battle of semantics over the definition of that word) would be ridiculously stupid for Colletti to do. The difference between Halladay and Billingsley isn't enough to consider making it.

Of course, I'd love to see it happen, but it's wishful thinking to believe it will happen.

Michael Bradley · Post #16 » by **Michael Bradley** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:44 am

The difference between Billingsley and Halladay is pretty big, actually. Halladay is a *much* better pitcher. Factor the park, strength of schedule, and league, and I can't see how anyone can compare the two. Halladay in the AL up against the toughest teams in baseball is putting up ERA's in the mid-2.00's. It's not even close.

Just to give an example, Billingsley has started 7 games against the Padres and Giants this season in 22 starts (31% of his total starts). That isn't luck or happenstance, that is the unbalanced schedule. He might start 10 or more against those two alone by the end of the season. Those two teams rank 30th and 27th in runs scored respectively and play in notorious pitchers parks (Petco especially). In fact, if you look at the bottom half (16-30) of teams in the league by runs scored, 11 of them are from the NL. The only non-LA National League teams in the top 10 in runs scored this year are the Phillies and Rockies. In 2008, Halladay started 16 (16!!!) games against New York, Boston, and Tampa. If Billingsley had to do that, in park neutral locations, what would his numbers look like?

Based on his numbers now, I think Bills looks more like AJ Burnett than Halladay. That's still good, but it's not the best pitcher in baseball. Thing is, he is young enough (25) to still have upside if he improves his command, which is part of his appeal. But to suggest he and Halladay are on the same planet right now is off the mark, IMO. Billingsley is good, but he is not great.

LBJSeizedMyID · Post #17 » by **LBJSeizedMyID** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:16 pm

I think all this back and fourth of the Jays trading Halladay has gotten to most of your heads. All this American media salivating at finally covering the game's best pitcher telling us that the Jays are asking way too much...for the game's best pitcher. All of you that say Billingsley is worth Doc need to get your heads checked.

Billingsley is not as good as Doc. If he was, the Dodgers would be declaring him untouchable and not Kershaw. Billingsley is a good #2 starter, with the potential of being an ace. He showed improvement with his walks the last 2 years, but this year his walks are up slightly. Tack on the slight decrease in his strikeout rate and K/BB ratio.

I'd much rather have Kershaw who has much filthier stuff. If you want the game's best pitcher, you hold out for Kershaw + another legit prospect or 2.

Mr. Bradley explained it very well in his last paragraph. Bills looks like AJ right now more than Halladay.

Holmes · Post #18 » by **Holmes** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:26 pm

One also has to factor in the account of playoffs. The Dodgers are forever in the win now mode. Halladay's efficency and endurance increases his value exponentially when factoring in using him in the playoffs. Halladay has 4 complete games this season compared to none from Billingsley and has averaged more than 1 inning pitched per game than Billingsley. Halladay would have a Schilling/Johnson like effect, circa 2001, where he gives you automatic 7+ innings each start in the playoffs, saving your bullpen and closing the gap to Jonathan Broxton. You know you can easily get 3 starts from Halladay in a 7 game series based on his efficency.

Sure, Halladay would be a rental for a year and a half, but thats two potential playoffs that you could use Halladay who Dodgers would be much more comfortable using than a young up and coming pitcher in Billingsley who was shelled last year by the Phillies in the playoffs despite pitching the best year of his career. Also, it's L.A. who have money and is a desirable place to play. They have more chance and dollars of resigning Halladay then the Jays do.

LBJSeizedMyID · Post #19 » by **LBJSeizedMyID** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:32 pm

This is not a rental player, people! If his contract was expiring this year, fine. Doc is under contract for another season.

Last year's situation in which Milwaukee received Sabathia was a rental player.

Holmes · Post #20 » by **Holmes** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:44 pm

LBJSeizedMyID wrote:This is not a rental player, people! If his contract was expiring this year, fine. Doc is under contract for another season.

Last year's situation in which Milwaukee received Sabathia was a rental player.

He's stated that he will test free agency. That alone makes him a rental. A team will be trading top prospects that are under your control for the next half a decade in exchange for Halladay.

No different than everybody up in arms over Lebron in 2010 last year even though it was 2 years away.