Ranma wrote:Quake Griffin wrote:We have proof this team can go for stretches without him and be fine.
Matter of perspective. We probably would have been within 0 games if he didn’t cough up game 5 tbh. I view it as a did you win or didn’t you? Not how many games away were you. Theo is going to improve his Cubs. Luhnow will have Houston ready to go again. Cashman has worked magic again
How many games away were Cleveland last year? You have the Royals example but how close were the Rangers in 2010 and 2011? You could be the 2015 Royals or you can be Dan Marino and never get back.
It’s not like this team didnt pick him up when he stunk this postseason:
- Offense gave him 7 runs in Game 1 while he served up HR after HR to the Dirt Bags.
- Bullpen and Offense save him from a 5 inning start where Almora took him deep.
Last year:
- Offense picked him up in Game 1 of the NLDS where he stunk against a Nats team that he DOMINATES in the regular season.
- Utley game winning AB late to save him from coughing up the lead in Game 4.
I don’t really like this topic being discussed as him needing more help or pieces around him. We have a fantastic group of position players. Good hitters. Good defense. Good pen. <— They need starters who don’t choke...not vice versa.
Other things:
- I never said bring Yu back.
- I’ve been very critical of Dave. I brought up Dave Martinez and how I didnt want him off the market because he was potential Dave replacement.
- As you have still maintained (as have most of us), you dont want Dee back but the Andrew Heaney portion of the deal still bugs you, I maintain 3 years and $48 million for an old pitcher who has lived on a trainer’s table is not a good idea. When you’ve financed Brett Anderson’s, Brandon McCarthy’s, and Scott Kazmir’s retirement to do nothing for you, quadrupling down on an oft-injured pitcher isn’t a bright idea.
This winter your tone was more faith based as you didn’t want Kershaw alone in the rotation but you understood my point. Richie survives year 1 and you’re talking a little tougher about that deal. Still not wise to me even if it works out in the end. Doesn’t mean I hate Rich Hill the person or the teammate or that I won’t pull him. Two separate things.
You say that we'll be fine for stretches without Kershaw. Well, the same was true without Chris Paul or Blake Griffin in the past. Does that mean the Clippers were better off without either of them? Again, you have not answered the question I'm going to pose to you for the 3rd time now. Who will be available that we can obtain who can replace Kershaw?
I'm not arguing whether you like Rich Hill or not. I'm stating as a fact that you did not think we should have signed him to the deal we did. Again, if we had applied such a short-sighted view towards Hill, we would have been worse off than before, just like we'd be worse off without Kershaw.
You're citing non-existent problems without providing realistic alternative solutions. Even your boy Chris Sale was rocked in the AL postseason, so he wouldn't be a better replacement for Kershaw, but he's not available, anyway, so you can scratch him off your list.
And I find this all-or-nothing argument to be beneath you and illogical. Saying that just because we didn't win it this year somehow puts us in the same position as everyone else and citing other teams not in the same position as us as examples is a bad argument,
which you should know better given your dealing with esqtvd.
Not acknowledging progress and what we have to look forward to makes no sense since you've acknowledged many times in the past how well positioned we are with respect to our developmental pipeline and our financial might along with upcoming freed salary commitments.
The Royals were built to only sustain a short run and they don't have the resources of the Dodgers, which is why they're blowing up their roster. The Indians still made the postseason and were considered a favorite at some point by many, so it is further perplexing why you would even cite Cleveland to begin with.
To paraphrase a point you've made previously about draft picks being used by other teams, why does it matter what other teams do with their resources when we have a proven front office that knows what to do with its own? Are you saying that we're the Giants?
Again, to repeat something that you've previously agreed with, the Dodgers are not only built to win now but for years to come. Missing to win the World Series by 1 game does not necessarily mean we're a long way from returning. Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but that does not mean we should stop trying to develop or build upon what we have. Or should we go ahead and deal Walker Buehler because he's not yet a major league starting pitcher?
If you seriously don't think that this team built as-is is good enough to compete in the immediate future, then I'm afraid you're setting yourself for never-ending disappointment with such unrealistically high standards.
You've mentioned multiple times how there are alternative ways to build a World Series team, so I again ask you to provide a realistic outline. If we're going to trade Kershaw, tell me what exactly are we supposed to get for him. Since our bullpen has been overburdened to the point of exhaustion, convince me how getting rid of a dependable horse like Kershaw helps matters instead of worsening it.
With the fake binary of with Blake/CP or without Blake/CP, it’s obvious we are worse without. Fortunately, it doesnt work that way and we made other accommodations for CP’s departure and the question is very much still in the air.
I’ve answered that question multiple times. I am not looking for Kershaw’s replacement. You will never trade Kershaw for Kershaw. You will never trade Kershaw for Position-Player-Kershaw. So I’m not interested in that. I’ve already told Neddy I’d take a step back to do this. Not sure why Sale came up. I HAVE NOT hidden the ball on how I feel about this situation.
Kershaw to Boston.
Back. Betts and Devers + a prospect.
I want to build around Corey and Cody with hopes Buehler and Urias arent chokes and put everything into making sure, Otani comes. With Betts and Devers, we can deal for an ace if need be.....if need be while holding onto favs like Kendall.
deGrom?
“Bleak” 2018 outlook?
deGrom
Hill
Wood
Ryu
Urias
Buehler
Otani
Strong 2019 outlook?
deGrom (who would be unseated in the coming years).
Otani with experience
Urias with experience
Buehler with experience
Hill (age 39 getting paid boku bucks)....yikes
Wood...
+ Jansen anchoring the pen and hoping we continue to find the Blantons and Morrows. More Morrow. Plus Maeda.
+ Seager, Cody, Taylor, and hopefully Harper/Machado.
I’m pretty sure I was against the years and money for Hill more than against Hill. Before the news of other suitors came out, I didn’t understand his deal and I thought (in the absence of news of other suitors) we bid against ourselves. No one ever objected to this line of thinking until Hill told reporters he had other suitors 2 weeks ago. Given that I wasnt aware of the other suitors, you can see how this contract looks dumb given his age, injury history, and our injured slew of pitchers. Plus, the optics looked bad to me given that we had just paid 3 prospects for him and Redick. None of this is short sighted AT ALL. It’s actually a full view and perspective of his deal starting from how he got here through all 3 years he is signed here. It’s also not like Hill is 200 IP pitcher that went over 5 innings at any point this October. He isn’t the strongest punch you have in this discussion tbh.
Question. If we weren’t paying him $16 million, would we have had room to take on Verlander’s deal at the deadline? (Note: I am not saying I was Team Verlander at the time).
Kershaw
Verlander
Wood/ Ryu
Ryu/ Wood
Yeah. In a world where the fake binary is Rich Hill or no Rich Hill, we are worse. In reality, we’d be looking for every way to get better if he wasn’t here.
The Dodgers are built to be good for a while but they have a perennial choke on the roster. You realize Stan built Atlanta - one ring. You realize he helped build Was. - no rings. Sustained success is great but if we aren’t going to have conviction on things other than the draft or int’l signings, then we might as well be robots and get comfortable with divisions and poor Octobers. You have conviction that guys like Utley help locker rooms but can’t see that all the twisting and turning we do from Kershaw keeps a LOSING element around. YOU and I both want these starts bad for Kershaw. Our guts sink when he fails. You think that type of thing is lost on Turner? Seager? Taylor?
Your perception of my all or nothing scenario is wrong. I never said we are in the same position as everyone. I mentioned BOTH ways that getting this close cuts - 2015 Royals who bounced back from a Game 7 loss and won it all and the Indians and Rangers who didn’t get back. I believe there’s more evidence that getting back is tougher. Hence, me saying all the teams I respect that I expect to get better.
My point is, I put no stock in being one game away. Teams get better. Injuries happen. One game away this year COULD BE 6 games away next year. So my approach to the Dodgers is to still get better in every way possible....les you want to stand pat and re-sign Yu Darvish because with him we were one game away. He was a part of our DS and CS success. Or should we evaluate him fairly and cut bait to get better?
_________
Nothing about his October resume or his back injuries is currently dependable.
Pretty wack to make a choking comparison of a 10 year vet to a rookie. Kershaw should be dragging Cody to a ring. Yet....we’re here...saying “nuh uh. It’s not Kershaw’s fault. The rookie messed up too.” We serious?
Sent from my iPhone using
RealGM mobile app
“I’ve always felt that drafting is the life blood of any organization.” - Jerome Alan West.