TUESDAY: A trade involving Ethier is "not happening," Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com reports.
MONDAY: The Dodgers made headlines this season when they signed Andre Ethier to a five-year, $85MM extension. ESPN's Buster Olney reports that now, just months later, the team is open to the concept of trading their slugging right fielder (Twitter link).
Trading a player recently signed to such a large contract would be virtually unprecedented, though it would make previous reports that the team could retain Shane Victorino more logical.
The 30-year-old Ethier hit .284/.351/.460 with 20 home runs in 2012. Despite that production, there would be many deterrents for teams that show interest. Ethier struggled mightily against left-handed pitching, triple-slashing just .222/.276/.330 against southpaws. He'll be 31 years old on April 10 next season, and he will be 35 years of age when his $85MM extension expires. Beyond that, defensive metrics such as UZR and the Fielding Bible have never been fans of his glovework (though he has one Gold Glove under his belt).
However, most believe that Ethier would have fetched a larger payday had he become a free agent this offseason rather than signing his extension. Teams that would have had interest in the longtime Dodger could look at this as an opportunity to get Ethier into their lineup while saving some money. He would also present an alternative for teams that miss out on Josh Hamilton in free agency.
Interesting. I can tell you one thing, count the Braves out, they need a righty bat, or someone who kills lefties and has power
thanks
sounds fake.
i sure hope it is
i don’t buy this… he jst signed an extension…. bull.
Yanks
I hate to be “that fan that wants every good player” but the red sox need some outfield help. And Ethier is already friends with a few other players on the team, so chemistry wouldn’t be a problem. I think it’s a good idea to reach out for him. Feel free to give me reasons why it would be bad.
Not worth it. They can sign a one year stop gap and pay Jackie Bradley Jr. peanuts to play the following season.
Given the trajectories of Bradley and Brentz I’d be inclined to agree, but the Sox will likely let Ellsbury walk after 2013. There would be room to add Ethier without blocking the future.
I’d rather them resign Ellsbury then take on Eithier. He cannot hit lefties at ALL.
He isn’t very good.
hahahha he had a 3.4 WAR last year. Yeah, he sucks.
A defensive liability who can’t hit left handed pitching, has never posted a WAR better than 3.5 in a single season, and is owed 85 million until he’s 36?
Doesn’t exactly suck…but he is vastly overrated.
He should play LF most likely, but you fail to realize that he is making below market value for an OF who has a very good WAR and has produced in a pitchers haven. He will be a better value than Swisher on his next contract
Since we’re going by WAR:
The standard rate is 5 million for each win. In that case, Ethier will have to put up 17 WAR in the next 5 years for the Dodgers to break even on their investment.
The problem is, in his entire 7 year career Ethier has been worth just 19.3 WAR. We also have to consider that those seasons were played in his prime and it would be reasonable to expect a drop off in production in the final two years of his deal, at which point he will be 35 and 36, respectively.
To put that in perspective, Ethier will have to replicate that 3.5 WAR season (which was his highest total ever) for every year of his 5 year contract for the Dodgers to break even. Could it happen? Anything is possible, but I would bet my life against it.
Andre has never hit in a lineup anything close to what it will be next season. For all of his career, he has been the 2nd best hitter in the lineup, with the exception of Kemp. Moving from that to being around Agon, Hanley and hopefully a healthy Crawford will help his numbers, and therefore, WAR. While it is hard to expect him to be a 3.5 WAR player every year, his best year was just last season. He has shown no signs of slowing down. Finally, and this seems to be overlooked, I said his contract is below market value. Which, if you look at the market for OFs this year, 85M will be lower than the top tier guys are going to get
It’ll be lower than the top tier guys, because Ethier clearly isn’t a top tier player. I think he could benefit from the improved lineup, but when we talk about his best season coming last year, it’s still only a marginal improvement from past seasons. We’re talking about a guy who has posted a 3+ WAR just twice. I just think he’s incredibly overrated.
Referencing a comment above, if the Sox traded Lester + prospects for Ethier, I would personally assassinate the front office with a staple gun. That would be insane.
I should have said 2nd tier. In line with Swisher. That’s where I consider Andre at if he had been a FA
I’d agree on him being in the Swisher range, but I think that 85M is just about the ceiling on what a guy like him can expect to get.
One never knows in a world where Werth is making 126M, but i’d be surprised if he surpasses Ethier’s deal.
not quite sure how other players will help ethier’s numbers. there is no scientific proof to back up lineup protection.
I think most players would say its easier to hit in a lineup of 5 good, established bats, instead of 2. Its just common sense. If you are in a lineup ahead of Kemp and Gonzalez, you will get pitches to hit, hoping you make an out. On the other hand, if you hit after them, you will theoretically have more guys on base and therefore they will need to pitch to you because there is no where to put you
He has to do more than not suck to be worth that contract. He’s good, but – like I just said – he’s not very good.
Don’t know why you are implying that he sucks. He was a very good hitter. He should play LF, but he can play RF without severely hurting the team
I literally just said he doesn’t suck and that he is good. Your bias is blinding you.
For the third time: he is paid like a very good player but he is not one.
You also said right before that “he has to not suck to be worth that contract” that can only be assumed to you saying that you think he sucks, because I have shown he’s a good hitter and productive player
No, i did not say that. Read it again.
At this point there is little reason to believe you will understand anything I write, so I’m going to move on.
I’ll put that 3.4 WAR in perspective for you, Denard Span had a 3.9 last year.
The same WAR as Ben Revere. Revere is like 6 years younger and I wouldn’t want him on Ethier’s contract.
Sounds like it was leaked intentionally to buster. Have teams chew on that before the winter meetings. When the offers are pathetic the team wont trade him.
Another example why the Giants are the class of the NL West. LA screwing with any semblance of team unity 20 hrs into the offseason. I hope they do trade Eithier. He’s a quality, well-rounded player and I wouldn’t mind him somewhere that he couldn’t own Matt Cain multiple times a year.
An overpaid platoon player? Yea, I’m sure they’d love to trade him.
15M for a 284/351/460 hitter is not overpayment, especially considering the market for OFs recently
Oh he hits pretty well? He must be a valuable overall player then.
Read the comment. He was complaining about his offense. I made a comment about his offense
He was complaining about his contract and his l/r split. Even though you are right that he is a good overall hitter, that fact doesn’t very well address either of those complaints.
He’s also a below average fielder and a below average baserunner, so there’s even more to overcome.
And he ignores that Ethier is making below market value. If he went to FA he was going to get over 100M. And if he plays LF, his defensive problems are gone. Bad base runner? So is 85% of the league
” If he went to FA he was going to get over 100M.”
No.
Not trying to start anything here.. But JD Drew was putting up numbers along those lines his 1st 4 years (hurt most of his 5th year) in Boston and I seem to recall most everybody here saying he was an overpaid bum and JD Drew was probably the best defensive RF at Fenway since Dwight Evans played there, while making 14m per.
JD Drew’s last season close to Andre last year was 2009. Since 2009, and before, the market for OFs has exploded. Like I said, its below market value. Thats for 2012, not 2009 and earlier
It’s no big deal. Just pointing out that the numbers are nearly the same.. Market or not and people were slamming both Boston for the sign and Drew in general, while nobody is saying anything negative at all about Ethier.
Think part of it is Andre is much more liked. Also, I think people expected more from Drew, maybe because it was Boston. But Andre, with the exception of hitting LHs, has done very little wrong in LA
Drew never wanting to talk to the media, sulking about and not showing emotion. Dicing Philly when he got drafted the 1st time, opting out of his deal with LAD didn’t help things either.
The guy just seemed like he asked for it many times will admit.
He’s a black hole in the lineup against left handers. He’s a glorified platoon player. You can’t fork over 15 mil to a platoon player.
Most at True Blue LA don’t think much of this. It really doesn’t make sense. Only reason to do it is to go after a FA, and of the major ones that fit the bill are only Swisher and Hamilton. I expect BJ and Bourn to want to play CF. And I don’t think Swisher would be worth the contract he’ll get. So only reason, IMO, is Hamilton. Don’t see it happening
Getting a guy who wants to and would play CF is a major part of the reason why it WOULD make sense.
“Beyond that, he has never been viewed as much of a defensive asset.” WHAT? he just won a gold glove last season, and is a finalist for one this season.
lols
That comment gave me cancer.
Hahahahaha, gold gloves.
Ethier for A-Rod HAHAHA, let me be the first to make up that idea
Maybe they work a deal with AZ to get Justin Upton? Ethier is from Phoenix…
doubt either will be traded in the division, especially in the same deal
how would that make any sense from AZ’s standpoint..?
if they move upton it will be to get cheaper
Red Sox
Wouldn’t this deter players from signing extensions if they know there’s a history of getting traded soon after?
being traded is a part of the game.. he’ll still get all his money.
I just assumed there was “good faith” involved and that the signing team wants the player to be there longer.
it’s just business
sure I’d rather live in LA than some small town in east coast if I had a choice, but if I was making 15 million a year, it would be hard to complain.
Make that 17 million a year. I just dont see how that is below market value for what he brings to a corner outfield spot.
Nope, in fact, if you think about it logically long-term contracts make players more valuable (assuming they are deemed worthy of the contracts). If you sign a productive player like Ethier to a long term deal, especially one that is considered somewhat below market value, it makes him more controllable and therefore easier to trade. That may not necessarily be the case with Ethier given his splits and the fact that he’ll be 35 at the end of the deal, but I’m sure someone would offer a decent prospect for him.
But that’s my point, Ethier may have signed this contract in good faith, having believed the LAD upper management wants him there long term. But if he gets traded before the extension even kicks in, then wouldn’t other players on his team feel that signing a long term extension for this team means they’re just trade bait rather than someone who’s wanted by the organization long term? That was a super long run-on question.
1. Just because it happens once doesn’t mean it will start happening often. This would be the exception to the rule. 2. Players like extensions because they make a lot more guaranteed money, and then they can just focus on baseball until the extension is up.
That’s fair. I like that point of view.
Why would you assume the Dodgers new management does things like plan further than a month or two into the future?
This is either fake or they officially have no idea what they’re doing over there.
Not saying Ethier is worth the money because he isn’t but they just signed him.
Doubt it.
Trade him for who? Why? To play who instead?
I expect this to be refuted tomorrow by Colletti
He’d refute it even if there was some truth to it. But the question is why there’d be any truth to it.
Guess they want to go after a FA OF and think they can do better in the FA market?
if they wanted to add Hamilton it would make sense.
its just very shortsighted given the blockbuster from last year
realistically they could probably have given josh the money they have to give Crawford
no its not. Who would have played 1B? Gonzalez has 100M LESS coming to him than Fielder, Albert or Votto, with 2 less years, minimum. Oh, and he was top 10 in the MVP just a year ago.
They could have just signed hamilton to play 1B.
Now you’re just making stuff up. No chance
well if we are assuming that trading andre is because of the desire to sign another free agent, hamilton would be a logical choice since it would have to be someone impactful for them to explore trading ethier
Its not MLB The Show. While the only reason to trade Andre is to sign another FA, there is no way you take the best OF out there and sign him for 1B unless its a video game
Or a fantasy league.
even in fantasy they don’t let you just get 9 guys and pray
you cant be serious
Hamilton is the best OF available because of his bat not his legs. Hes had a hard time staying healthy and it would be wise for a team to protect their investment by putting him in a less physically demanding position.
lots of sluggers move to 1B later in their careers, usually only ones with good offensive numbers. not exactly a new idea, and far from a video game idea.
You never see that happen for an OF about to sign his FA contract. You see it if he signs an 8 year deal and in year 5 they move him. Hamilton is not going to play 1B next year.
Because of his vast experience playing the infield, of course.
oh ya 1B is such a tough position to learn.
You tell him. When’s the last time a California team had any success playing guys at new positions? It’s preposterous.
I’m sure we’re all trying to figure out the point of this remark.
Next year Fielder will make about 1 million more than Gonzalez. From 2014-2018 Fielder will make about 2 million more per year than Gonzalez. Prince is signed for 2 extra years. Prince is 2 years younger.
Prince 2012: 153 wRC+ 4.9 WAR
Gonzalez’s 2012: 115 wRC+ 3.6 WAR
Prince’s career: 143 wRC+ 28.1 WAR over 7 seasons
Gonzalez’s career: 133 wRC+ 31.0 WAR over about 7.5 seasons
Similarly valuable players (Gonzalez with the big edge defensively, Prince offensively) similar money through 2018, the younger player has two extra years on his deal. Yea, give me the younger guy who didn’t have the red flag filled 2012.
They have plenty of money. That isn’t the issue.
And they’ve spent a ton of it, if they were interested in just adding more payroll (and could) they wouldn’t be interested in trading Ethier.
based if the rumour is true, which i doubt it is
I agree that the rumor probably isn’t credible, but I don’t think the argument is for adding salary just for the sake of spending.
If they wanted to get a better OF, they have to move one. Andre is only one who could be moved.
As I think you said already, the only possible logic is going after Hamilton, but they have to sign him first.
I’d at least want to talk to Hamilton first…
They can’t trade Eithier without signing someone better first. It wouldn’t make any sense.
Can you imagine a 3-4-5 of Hamilton-Kemp-A-gon WOW
If it is true.. Pedroia will be jumping and screaming at Cherrington to get his best buddy as a teammate.
Weird anyway.. They get CC at 20m a season over the next 5 years and this report comes out to move Eithier, who is owed 5m less annually?
Probably sports writers practicing fakery early before the winter meetings.. Just getting warmed up.
The reasons why it could make a fair amount of sense are 1. The back end of Ethier’s deal is probably gonna look pretty bad, so if they can get out of it now while he’s still got value AND get something they should at least consider it. 2. Kemp isn’t gonna be a full time centerfielder for more than a couple more years and with Crawford, Ethier and Gonzalez all signed to huge long term deals there’s nowhere else for him to play. Signing somebody who can at least split time with Kemp in center now would be pretty smart. It would upgrade two outfield spots defensively, softening the offensive blow. 3. Puig has been impressive in the little time the Dodgers have seen him. While they probably aren’t looking to pencil him into a starting role in 2013, they probably are thinking that one of Puig, Ethier or Crawford would have to be dealt in the next year. I can’t imagine how good Crawford would have to play to regain positive trade value, and while the Dodgers seem very high on Puig I doubt other teams that haven’t seen as much of him would be willing to meet their price on him. Which brings me back to the first point, that it might be best to trade Ethier now while he still has value. I think the damage trading a player 6 months after he signed an extension would do to their reputation as a management group and organization isn’t worth it, but it could be a smart baseball move.
1. If the back end of Ethier’s contract is probably going to look bad to the Dodgers, then it is probably going to look equally bad to another team. Since the risk is already factored into his future value, no added value is likely to be accrued by dealing him at the front end of his contract. 2. It’s way too soon to say that Kemp can’t continue to play centerfield. It would certainly be helpful to his longevity if he ran into fewer walls, but you could say the same about any outfielder. 3. You are right, Puig is not looking at a 2013 arrival, so it isn’t possible to know where he enters into the mix. He could flame out totally for all we and the Dodgers know at this point. With the Crawford question mark still looming, dealing Ethier only makes sense if the Dodgers sign another outfielder, and for it to be a definite upgrade, as far as I can see, the only real candidate is Hamilton.
1. Well the back end will look bad to other teams but if they can’t acquire Ethier’s age 30 and 31 season(s) along with his age 35 and 36 seasons then he starts to lose considerable trade value. My point was that Ethier’s trade value is very unlikely to get any higher ever again than it is right now. 2. Is it really too soon to say that? There are some concerns about his longevity, but thats not the biggest concern. The biggest problem is that he’s been a pretty terrible defensive centerfielder by all defensive metrics for 3 consecutive seasons now (3600+ innings) and really he’s been mostly bad in CF his entire career. I know he’s prone to highlight reel defensive plays, but I don’t really understand why those numbers get ignored when discussing Kemp. He just shouldn’t be playing center.
The same can really be said of Ethier in RF. With so many Dodger games being played in Dodger Stadium, Petco Park, and ATT Park Ethier should be playing LF or 1B almost exclusively. The problem is they have guys in those spots who either can’t, or in the past have been very reluctant to, play other positions. Trading Ethier and getting at least a semi useful prospect, putting most of that money towards a CF like Bourn or Upton and moving Kemp to RF improves the team so dramatically defensively that it would certainly be worth the offensive hit. A guy like Bourn also bring a much more natural fit for the leadoff spot than anyone they currently have on the roster. If they could really deal Ethier for Ellsbury as was suggested somewhere in these comments it would accomplish the same thing.
I have so many problems with this argument it’s hard to know where to begin. The value proposition of his contract won’t change significantly no matter who owns it. Whether it goes up or down depends on his future performance, which we won’t know until the future happens. Kemp has been injured exactly once in his career so I think it’s just a little soon to say that he is prone to injury. As for the so called defensive metrics, they are a total mess and completely useless as far as I am concerned. Before we get into a big argument over that, find me a GM who swears by them and we can talk about it. As for Ellsbury, he is not an upgrade over Ethier, plain and simple. The Dodgers are not looking for stopgap measures. They are not in rebuilding mode. They are in the win now mode and clearly money is not a factor in getting there, so it makes no sense for them to deal a starting position player for prospects. So unless some new information comes to light, I am sticking with my original thoughts about this rumor. Either it is not accurate, is some sort of head fake on Colletti’s part, or the Dodgers think they can sign Hamilton.
Wow, you had me right up until you devalued Ellsbury out of the blue. There isn’t a GM in MLB, aside from my poor Tribe’s Antonetti, who would swap Ellsbury for Ethier. Andre is a competent, above average player but he doesn’t bring the fast muscle twitch feel to the game Ellsbury does.
I couldn’t find a “fast muscle twitch feel” stat so I just went with the basic career batting line:
Ellsbury: .297/.349/.442/.791
Ethier: .290/.362/.476/.838
I’m not devaluing Ellsbury, just stating the obvious fact that on offense he is not an upgrade over Ethier, and if he isn’t an upgrade, there’s no point in making the trade.
I completely understand your use of statistical comparisons to try and make a bottom line. The influence of Bill James and the subsequent number crunching maestros has become so prevalent there has become a robotic feel to player comparisons.
While you mock the fast muscle twitch comment because it doesn’t show up on a fantasy league points awards category, it makes a huge difference in the actual way the player plays the game. Ellsbury is a dynamic baseball player who is a lot more fun to watch in the field defensively than Ethier, can wreak havoc on the basepaths, and legitimately bat anywhere from 1-3 in the order.
Stats are great, they add a ton of interest to the game during down time but during the 9+ innings fans are watching, an exciting player is a huge asset to a team.
Sent from my HTC Inspire™ 4G on AT&T
I’m the last person to defend fantasy league style stats. Gotten in lots of arguments around here about the excessive quoting of pointless numbers like WAR, UZR, etc. So notice I cited only the basic, classic offensive stats. Fun to watch is all well and good, but in the end a team is going to want the performance if winning is what they want to do, so my point remains the same: the Dodgers are not going to trade Ethier to get a player with similar production abilities. Only a clear upgrade makes any sense.
The dodgers can handle any contract now, they don’t care about the money. They will keep him unless they are moving Kemp to RF or Puig to the OF. Then again trading for him is a good idea for Maybe the Yankees,(Considering that they don’t resign Swisher,Ichiro, or Ibanez) PLUS it will be cheaper than Hamilton. Many reasons to trade for him, but not many to trade him away.
What might Sox have to give up in an Ethier trade? Money doesn’t really seem to be an issue for either side. Don’t think the Dodgers would want Jacoby unless they’re shooting for the most expensive outfield of all-time. So, Kalish + prospects? JB Jr.?
The Dodgers aren’t going to be playing prospects.
So Ellsbury + a few nice prospects not named Jackie Bradley Jr.? I’m down.
you’d be better off re signing ross and keeping ellsbury
I would be totally fine with Ross for another few years but I see Jacoby getting traded by this year’s deadline at the latest. I guess more likely it will be as part of a deal for a front-line starter tho..
Elsbury is a virtual rental and is not an upgrade.
Not necessarily a rental for a team like the Dodgers but yeah, I guess it wouldn’t really be a match for either side.
Jackie Bradley is not being dealt for him… Not at all.
Credibility, mostly.
Would trading for Lester be possible? Maybe. Chicken and beer!!!!
original and hilarious…
Bad year or not, Lester is made available only if an Ace is coming back as part of the deal.
you’re not getting an ace back for Lester at this point. It wouldn’t be Andre for Lester straight up, but if this is true, I could see him at least being part of the discussion
I’m not saying that Lester’s value is such that any team would be itching to deal an Ace-type pitcher in a trade for him. What I am saying is that the Red Sox current rotation needs (and Lester’s affordable contract) mean that he won’t be leaving the team unless an Ace-type pitcher is coming back in either the same deal or a simultaneous deal. What is the likely result of this situation? That Lester will not be traded.
remember, Webster and De La Rosa will be in the rotation for some, and all of the year, respectively
Um..that’s far from a sure thing. De La Rosa could likely be competing for a spot in ST for sure but I don’t believe Webster is supposed to be ready this year..
And still, even if Lester WERE to leave..the Sox would NOT be content with Buchholz/Doubront/Lackey/De La Rosa/Morales or filler. They’re looking to add a TOP starter to improve and stabilize a rotation that was horrible last year.
De La Rosa should be in the rotation. Webster was expected to be in the majors in 2013 when he was in LA. I’d expect him to start in AAA and be in the league by July. I understand your thought process though. I doubt Lester is dealt, but the Sox have more pitching than last season
I have to admit I do not know a ton about Webster and I did not realize he was viewed as that close to being MLB-ready. De La Rosa, I did realize. But, I think especially with Farrell coming back that the sox will hold off on making any rash decisions about Lester’s poor 2012 and see what kind of season he has before making a decision on his 2014 option, attempting to move him or trying to work out some kind of a long-term extension..
He was one of our top pitching prospects and some fans wanted to see him compete in ST for a rotation spot. I think he needs a little AAA, but our AAA is usually skipped by top prospects. I’d love to have Lester on the dodgers, but I would be very surprised if the BoSox dealt him
I don’t think Webster is even a starter in the future from the various reports have seen of him, or not a lot better than Workman at least except Webster is younger.
Lester isn’t going anywhere regardless. Other teams will be attempting to buy low on him all winter, but Cherrington isn’t about to fall for that ploy.
You don’t even get an ace for someone who’s currently an ace. Halladay’s centerpiece was Kyle Drabek. Lol. Just because a player’s an ace doesn’t mean that’s what you get back, it’s about a lot more than that.
^^ One reason why it would be foolish for the Red Sox to trade Lester. Especially coming off a poor season.
Lester is getting down to the last two years on his contract. With comparable arms in FA I would move him for Ethier and move Andre to LF and either sign Ross or commit to Brentz or Linares for the season in RF.
And what would your plans be for the Red Sox pitching rotation in this scenario? Seriously curious.
As in most good trades each team gets something they need. We need another bat and another corner of’der. In return we give up a pitcher , I believe, may be on the downward side of his career.
How to replace Lester–through another trade or FAgency. Talk about Ells for Holland. FA—Gavin Floyd, Shaun Marcum, Dan Haren, Edwin Jackson or Ervin Santana or someone else.
Buch, Lackey, Doubie, Morales and a PTBNL. I’m sure you watched or followed the Sox with your “handle”–Lester was far from the Lester we have been use to. There will be alot of movement in the months to come.Just my thought.
if it gets to that point in trading him hopefully Lester or maybe shields or price out in tampa if a 3rd team gets involved.
If you meant Shields or Price to Bos, I doubt it would happen
No i mean if this is all start of a 3 team deal that can land Ethier somewhere else and that other team send prospects to tampa as well as the dodgers send prospects to tampa and they send shields and price to LA….
M’s make a lot of sense here
Trading prospects for an aging platoon player with limited defensive value isn’t really what the M’s should be doing right now. They need cost-controlled young hitting that they don’t need to platoon.
World Series championships: NorCal 6, SoCal 6. Tiebreaker anyone? (LAD 5, OAK 4, SF 2, ANA 1
Doesn’t make sense to trade Ethier unless is to make room for Ethier.
Victories is awful.
On another note posting comments on the app is terrible. 6th time now trying to post this.
I know it’s apps fault, but “Victories is awful” is very icanhaz-ish 🙂
Maybe its just me but I think this makes sense especially with Victorino wanting to return to LA and being less expensive. Ethier just doesnt seem to have the power that he did a few years back and his defense is just averge. Victorino provides more speed on thr bases and field. Signing Victorino to a 3 year deal for much less than Ethier makes sense. And dont’t forget we still have Puig getting ready to take over an OF spot in about 2 years… I feel like we can sacrifice a lil power given the potential power numbers we could have. Victorino leading off and Crawford batting 2nd… Sounds good to me!
except that Victorino was horrible last year and has never really been very special
.255/.321/.383 with 11 homers and 39 steals plus strong defense to total 3.3 fWAR is “horrible?”
Victorino’s dang good even in his down seasons.
horrible for the Dodgers, yea. 245/316/351 for a guy supposed to spark the lineup?
He was pretty horrible in a few months with the Dodgers, but he’s been a pretty great player for his career.
sounds pretty good. flip Ethier for a pitcher. resign Victorino, people are talking trash about his off year, yet he did steal 40 bases in an “OFF:” year, if he is in good health his numbers would definitely be better with speed at the top of the lineup
personally, I don’t want Victorino back. He’s fast, but he will get a multi year deal and did nothing of what was expected when he was in LA. He was nothing close to the leadoff guy we needed him to be
if Ethier can be a main piece in helping us land a good to great pitcher its worth listening or looking into. thus Victorino wouldn’t be bad in Re-Signing
ring ring….hello Ned? This is Ben Cherrington from the Boston Red Sox. How would you feel about a Jacoby Ellsbury for Andre Ethier trade?
That trade scenario makes 99% of us Red Sox fans uncomfortable.
If I’m the Dodgers I jump all over that deal. Ellsbury is younger, probably won’t cost that much more after he signs an extension, allows Kemp to move to RF and upgrades the defense in a couple spots and gives the Dodgers a great top of the order presence in front of Kemp, Gonzalez, Hanley, Crawford, Ellis, etc. The only concern is Ellsbury’s health, but I think the upside of that deal far outweighs that risk. The only reason I see for the Red Sox to make that deal is if they believe Ellsbury’s contract extension will be outlandish. They can afford pretty much anything so its really just a question of whether they’d WANT to meet Ellsbury’s price not if they could. Thats very possible, and I guess in that scenario the only other teams that could realistically be looking for a player like Ellsbury at that price would be the Cubs, Dodgers and Phillies which would drastically limit what Boston could get in trade. I guess I could see that happening even though, as a Giants fan, I really hope it doesn’t.
IMO if I’m the Dodgers I would sign Victorino or Bourn and move Kemp to RF.
How about Lester and a prospect (not Web or RDLR) for Andre? He and Pedroia are supposedly good buddies.
BoSox desperately need pitching. No way they trade their de facto ace for an injury prone outfielder with horrible splits. Not to mention they just got out of 3 large contracts, so why rush to add more all of a sudden. Red Sox will most likely be smart spenders and upgrade through the trade market. Thanks to the lower expectations as a result of their last place finish they are probably going to field a young, cost effective team and not begin to spend again until they are confident they have rebuilt a winner.
Ellsbury is 29, Ethier is 30. Ellsbury will likely be significantly more expensive. (Scott Boras).
Ellsbury for Ethier feels a lot like Rondo for Gasol
…
not happening.
LOL how ironic would it be if the Dodgers traded Ethier to the Red Sox for Webster and De La Rosa?
this made me laugh. well done
Hahahaha, awesome comment
Wait, settle down! This is being reported by BUSTER OLNEY for cryin’ out loud.
And none of you think this has anything to do with Yasiel Puig being blocked at every position? Seriously? None of you, at all, thought this? Wow.
Puig is AT LEAST a year away
Its not likely Ethier’s trade value is likely to go up in the next year. Trading him and signing a CF allows them to move Kemp to RF, have a year to assess Crawford’s health and Puig’s progress and enter next trade deadline/offseason with a clearer idea of what their needs are and a lot less money tied up in corner outfielder/1B types.
I understand that, but I would take Ethier over Crawford any day.
Don’t understand why so many Dodgers fans are acting like Ethier is on the trading block or something. There’s a difference between “we’ll listen to offers on this guy” and “we need to trade this guy!”
If this is true, based at how the team has done moves recently, he basically would be on the trading block. Like I’ve said below, I think this is not true, but because it is so surprising, it’s gonna get a reaction
You look at his slashline against southpaws and then overall slashline, you just wonder how well he has to hit against righties to raise his overall numbers to that level. If he only faced righties, he could very well be MVP candidate every year I would think.
Yeah, he CRUSHES RHP, but struggles against LHP He still has value because teams face more RHPs than LHPs, but obviously he can be neutralized late in games with a LOOGY.
Ethier has value, but there are situations that he will need to be replaced. The Dodgers need a 4th OF who can play CF and can hit lefties well. That guy could rotate in the OF to give rest to the starters and also pinch hit for Ethier late in games when teams go to a LOOGY.
In that case, they need a fourth OF who is better against lefties than Ethier. Victorino may very well fit the bill. Also he will be needed as Crawford recovers from the surgery I suppose. I think an OF(+reserve) of Ethier, Kemp, Crawford, and Victorino is pretty good.
Problem is Victorino wants to start and he will be too expensive.
Crawford said he will be ready to participate in Spring Training so I think he’s on track to start the season playing.
I think the Dodgers will look at cheap options for a 4th OF. A guy like Reed Johnson could make sense. He hits lefties pretty well and they could move him around the OF.
To NY for ARod, Yankees chip in 50+ mil or so…LA goes after Hamilton and Grienke…they move Hanley to SS?
Correction 100+ mil**
One would hope for this kind of posting well into the offseason… I know the WS left everyone hungry for more… Dodger declined their option for Rivera just yesterday traded Sands to Boston Puig isn´t playing Winter Ball until December at the least and you´re telling me they are trading Ethier ??? PLEASE Do Not make it worst it´s a looooooong offseason as it is…
No matter what the Red Sox will be linked to this until it’s proven false or traded elsewhere…
I expect management to deny this ASAP
Agree. I think they will deny this rumor.
Reality is that a lot of teams are not in the market for Ethier and his 5yrs/$85 mill contract.
I suppose the Dodgers could eat some salary, but I think they would only do that if they get a significant piece back. While Ethier’s $17 mill/yr is not cheap, in this current market, its not a huge overpay, either. Just don’t see a lot of big market teams who have a need for a guy with Ethier’s skill set, especially considering he’s likely a platoon player in the near future. He does kill RHP’s though and his defense is not bad as some like to say.
In fact, in the Dodgers’ lineup next year, I would not be shocked to see Ethier bounce back and hit around .290-.300 and hit around 25 to 30 HRs. He won’t be under the pressure he was before to produce, with so many other bats like Crawford, Kemp, HanRam and AGon to help carry the load. Ethier thrived with Manny Ramirez in the lineup and should do the same with all the help he has now.
Why no discussion of the Dodgers retaining Victorino? Despite perceptions, the Dodgers are probably looking for some payroll relief down the road. Victorino can be had cheaper and for a shorter period of time.
Good thing I put off buying those season tickets.
This would essentially end up as Ethier for Victorino? Not a good trade in my opinion. Ethier’s WAY better than Victorino. Next year’s outfield, Crawford, Kemp & Ethier is the ticket.
completely agree.
I don’t know why the Dodgers would want Victorino back. Why not Hamilton? Upton? Bourn? Swisher? Hunter? They’re all free agents…
Who says the dodgers won’t go after Hamilton if they trade ethier they could clear up some money sign Shane for a backup spot and then fill ethiers spot with Hamilton nothing personal just good business
Ellsbury for Ethier! Mega deal that makes sense. Add a few more pieces an then the Red Sox will have a new look and the Los Angeles Red Sox will be born
His salary is not going away from the Dodgers books, they’d owe him a lot of money and I know they can afford it and all but you might as well keep him until his contract is up. I am kind of sick of theses teams signing players and then trading them off like pieces of meat. It kind of takes things away from the game but at the same time its business. But trading Ethier is not the solution. Ned Colletti was desperate for a bat, and Yasiel Puig was not a mistake to sign but pretty risky if you ask me. I don’t know anything about the guy, I’ve only seen videos of him. So if they do sign Ethier they’ll make way for this guy and if he doesn’t do well, then expect Joc Pederson to be called up. He might be the next Andre Ethier but better. I am hoping.
maybe they are trying to Trade either for picthing or bulpen help and then they will sign Josh Hamilton to replace him in the outfiled as well as sign Grienke
LOL
On paper dumping Ethier for a pitcher and re-signing Victorino makes sense…. but dammit, I don’t think I can stand to see Victorino play one more inning in Dodger Blue.
they can trade either to the rays for James shields and sing peavy or loshe to be the 4th starter and then sign Josh Hamilton to replace Either.
The Dodgers would have to pay all of Ethier’s salary for the rays to take him.
Fun facts:
Player A: 149 games, 123 OPS+, 20 HR, 89 RBI, -6.7 defensive runs, 3.4 WAR
Player B: 151 games, 121 OPS+, 32 HR, 108 RBI, +5.1 defensive runs, 4.0 WAR
Player A is, of course, Ethier. Player B is Alfonso Soriano. I’m NOT saying Soriano is actually as good as Ethier, but it’s still a bit odd that teams would likely line up to take on Ethier’s $85MM left when the Cubs couldn’t GIVE Soriano away, even when reportedly offering to pay 80-85% of his salary.
How about firing Mattingly and not trade Ethier, those two don,t get along. I think he is the best player on the team. He carried the team for a long time.
I’m just interested in what their payroll will look like next year. This team is putting 200+ into this lineup and they still don’t have the pitching to keep them winning. I see too many injuries and too many ego’s on this team to thrive together. They can get anyone they want and they still won’t win.
Ethier for Halladay.
ethier for hanrahan and prospect , make it happen .
This would be a good move for my Dodgers. I get to watch Ethier play alot. he is over-rated and not worth that big contract. And for the person talking about signing a contract in good faith.. What? Are you kidding me? Ethier signed for the big $$$… PERIOD!
I think Holland would excel in the NL and specially in Dodger Stadium. Holland for Ethier and $10M? Or Martin Perez and Justin Grimm