Dodgers Reluctant to trade pitching prospects

by The Cheat on Dec 22, 2005 3:39 PM CST in White Sox News

Apparently new Dodgers GM Ned Colletti doesn't subscribe to the TINSTAAPP axiom. The LA Times reports that the Dodgers are not interested in trading top starting pitching prospects.

The spending might continue. The Dodgers want to add another starting pitcher before spring training -- preferably one who fits in the front of the rotation. Currently D.J. Houlton, Edwin Jackson and Chad Billingsley would compete for the fifth spot, but the Dodgers prefer that Houlton be used in a swing role and Jackson and Billingsley begin the season in triple A.

[...]

The Chicago White Sox are shopping right-hander Jon Garland, but the asking price might be too high for the Dodgers, who don't want to trade top pitching prospects.

Garland was a cornerstone of the White Sox's World Series championship season, posting an 18-10 record and 3.50 ERA. He made $3.4 million and is arbitration eligible, but is on the trading block because he turned down a three-year offer.

However, the White Sox want pitching prospects in return and Colletti is reluctant to part with top minor league starters Billingsley, Justin Orenduff and Chuck Tiffany.

ESPN 1000 Radio's Bruce Levine was reporting this morning that the Sox would be looking "for some relief help" in exchange for Garland, but he also said they would be looking for prospects also.

I'm not married to the trade proposal I made yesterday in the comments, but that appears to be the type of deal the Sox are looking for. -- A three-for-one deal with 1 young major league reliever, 1 good prospect who is close to the majors and has the opportunity to make the '06 club out of the pen, and a second tier prospect who has some upside. -- Any Garland deal should resemble something like this.

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Dodgers sign Tomko

and are probably less likely to deal for garland now. http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Annyui.HBwuRebCpjGZ3_9ARvLYF?slug=ap-dodgers-tomko&prov=ap &type=lgns

AIM: ozspengler

by spengler on Dec 22, 2005 4:37 PM CST reply actions

Tomko's ERA+

Last 5 years...

81
85
79
110
92

I suppose he could stop them from looking into Garland, but it would be a dumb decision.

I'm also surprised by Texas' courtship of Kevin Millwood. I don't understand why a team would contemplate giving him a 5/$55M deal when he was the best deal he could find last season was a 1/$7M. If he wasn't worth a multi-year contract last season, what makes him worth one this year?

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Dec 22, 2005 4:59 PM CST up reply actions

Garland is too good a fit

for the Dodgers not to budget on this one. They know the division is there for the taking if they make another move or two. If they really were set on not giving up their prospects, they would be hot after Kevin Millwood, but they know he's more of a health risk.

What is your take on the existing young Dodger major league relievers? I'm thinking specifically of Duaner Sanchez, Steve Schmoll, and Yhency Brazaban. Sanchez seems to be the class of that group, but is he even up for consideration?

Turning the Chicago Baseball Tide - One Championship at a Time

by WestSideSoxFan on Dec 22, 2005 4:40 PM CST reply actions

The waiting game

I'm guessing Kenny can wait longer than Coletti (read: Frank McCourt) can.

by Sox Machine on Dec 22, 2005 5:04 PM CST reply actions

I agree

The Sox have 6 good starting pitchers and are not required by any impending emergency to act.

AIM: ozspengler

by spengler on Dec 22, 2005 5:07 PM CST up reply actions

The one thing to note

is they may be forced into a trade due to payroll constraints. Some have speculated that Garland could receive up to $9M at arbitration, and with Crede due a couple million also, the Sox payroll will be in the mid-to-high 90's. They need to come in around '90 supposedly.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Dec 22, 2005 5:44 PM CST up reply actions

What is the largest figure any player has recieved

from arbitration?

AIM: i2ockbotm

by 3E8 on Dec 22, 2005 5:54 PM CST up reply actions

Clemens

got $18M last season.

The most lopsided I can ever remember two parties being was Gagne and the Dodgers. Gagne wanted $10M in his first year of arbitration. The dodgers obviously won the case by coming in at more reasonable $5M

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Dec 22, 2005 6:47 PM CST up reply actions

That would be bad

Not to be overly dramatic, but I think making a good trade is actually pretty important to the Sox future. It's a chance to acquire premium talent. If the Mets offered Milledge for Vazquez, the Sox should be able to get something good for Garland. To let a good SP, even one a year from FA, go for scrap would be a terrible misuse of the team's resources.

For the future of the franchise, I think it would be better to take the loss of a couple million dollars for 1/2 a season and wait. At the trading deadline, someone will want a SP badly.

by hitlesswonder on Dec 22, 2005 10:51 PM CST up reply actions

Don't Relent Williams

The article is irritating to me.

Dodgers are reluctant to forsake ANY of their top pitching prospects? The damn well better, unless a sub.500 record sounds appeasing. It'd be comparable to Williams refusing to trade Reed when he has Anderson, Young, Sweeney available. You're dealing from a position of strength, Los Angeles! Two years ago they would never have delt Miller or Jackson, and look at them now. Certaintly not the can't miss prospects they were. Man up, McCourt.

by TheKMan1 on Dec 22, 2005 6:23 PM CST up reply actions

How can someone...

...sign Brett Tomko but not be willing to trade a pitching prospect for Garland? That is annoying.

Also, apparently Levine reiterated today that the Sox want 2 bullpen arms for Garland, and are willing for one of them to be a prospect.

That is actually about what the Marlins got for Pierre. How can Garland not bring more than that? I obviously don't understand the market at all.

If all the Sox get are couple of bullpen guys, I won't be happy.

by hitlesswonder on Dec 22, 2005 11:11 PM CST reply actions

Here's why

Garland is going to be relatively expensive. He might make twice what Pierre will in '06. He also has only one year to free agency.

So you remove all of the small market teams from the running, because he costs money and isn't locked up for multiple years.

I am surprised that teams like the Mariners, Rangers, and Dodgers, who are spending money on the free agent market (expecially those offering 4&5 year deals to mediocre pitchers) wouldn't rather trade for a younger pitcher who will be cheaper and less risk than the guys they are signing.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Dec 22, 2005 11:24 PM CST up reply actions

I agree about the money...

...he will make more than Pierre. But Pierre is coming off a bad year, and a good SP should be more valuable than an good CF (at least to me).

It's hard for me to think of recent deals that would be good comps. It's funny that at the dealine, people thought both Garcia and Ponson brought pretty good hauls of minor league talent. And of course except for Reed (who hasn't been great), those prospects flamed out. Millwood for Estrada is another somewhat similar trade.

I think you're right that there's just not a big market right now. Which is weird when Tomko gets a big contract and someone wants to be on the hook to Millwood and Wasburn for 4 or 5 years at big money. You know someone will sign Garland for big money, why not trade for him now?

Oh well, maybe I should lower my expectations. I just hope the Sox get more than someone like Ron Villone.

by hitlesswonder on Dec 22, 2005 11:45 PM CST up reply actions

I wouldn't be disappointed

if that minor league bullpen arm was Broxton. That kid is a horse, who's still starting right now. He's considered a future closer though just because of his heat.

I suppose the Brazoban/Broxton/Miller trade doesn't sound sexy, but it's still a better haul than Mitre/Nolasco/Pinto

Braxoban and Mitre are a wash. back end of the pitching staff guys.

Broxton is heads and shoulders above either of the other two that the Cubs gave up.

Miller is in the same boat(setbacks, not a sure thing) with the two who the Cubs traded, but he has far more potential.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Dec 22, 2005 11:55 PM CST up reply actions

I would rather keep Garland

than trade him for prospects, so I am happy that the Dodgers got Tomko.

AIM: JoeCoolMan24 www.2ksports.com/forums Thats where i spend most of my day

by JoeCoolMan24 on Dec 22, 2005 11:50 PM CST reply actions

so is the rest of the NL West

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Dec 22, 2005 11:56 PM CST up reply actions

They Can't Afford to Keep JG after '06

The Sox can't carry a $100M+ payroll indefinitely, so they need to replenish the farm system. Assuming they get top prospects for Garland, it's better than letting him walk after next year. Someone's going to get left holding the bag on him anyway, I just hope it's not us.

Turning the Chicago Baseball Tide - One Championship at a Time

by WestSideSoxFan on Dec 23, 2005 2:32 PM CST reply actions