Hmmm... perhaps I'll have to add the Dodgers back to the very short list with the Angels.

Wonder if Torre will get a bonus from Boras if Moreno and McCourt get in a bidding war.

And batting eighth for the Los Angeles Dodgers…

Ya gotta put him 9th so he can start an inning occasionally and be bunted to 2nd by Pierre. Small ball, baby. Young punks like A-rod gotta earn their playing time in LA with proven vets like Kent and Gonzo showing them the way.

I'd say that the one thing A-Rod is comfortable with is lots of money.

It's possible Ian Paisley could join the Knights of Columbus, I guess.

'All I know is it was very comfortable for both of us,' the manager said. 'And I think my being uncomfortable came from the fact that I didn’t think he was as comfortable'

My God, the Dodgers mistakenly hired Yogi Berra.

'All I know is it was very comfortable for both of us,' the manager said. 'And I think my being uncomfortable came from the fact that I didn’t think he was as comfortable'

You know the problem with the Yankees lately has been all the people pleasing....

Young punks like A-rod gotta earn their playing time in LA with proven vets like Kent and Gonzo showing them the way.

I know you're just trying to be funny but if A-Rod goes to the Dodgers, he would most likely be the second oldest person in the lineup behind Kent.

If the Dodgers get A-Rod, the NL west is theirs for the next 3-5 years. By the time he becomes an albatross, all the young controllable players the D Backs have will be on their way to free agency. This would truly suck for us D Back fans.

If the Dodgers get A-Rod, the NL west is theirs for the next 3-5 years.

Are you serious? Rodriguez would of course be a big help to the Dodgers, but he'd guarantee nothing, particularly with Coletti in charge. My guess is the Doodgers would get rid of Kemp (along with LaRoche of course) if Rodriguez signs in LA and bring in more mediocre guys over 30.

Are you serious? Rodriguez would of course be a big help to the Dodgers, but he'd guarantee nothing, particularly with Coletti in charge. My guess is the Doodgers would get rid of Kemp (along with LaRoche of course) if Rodriguez signs in LA and bring in more mediocre guys over 30.

I agree that Colletti scares the hell out of me but if he gets ARod, he's not trading any of the kids just so he will be able to keep the payroll at a reasonable number.

Laroche could probably be available though but it could be a prospect for prospect swap like Laroche to the Twins for Garza or someone.

Or Colletti could go even more bonkers and go Laroche, McDonald and Kershaw for an extended Santana.

I agree that Colletti scares the hell out of me but if he gets ARod, he's not trading any of the kids just so he will be able to keep the payroll at a reasonable number.

I think Kemp will be moved regardless, and if the Dodgers get Rodriguez, they would be going 'all-in' so that will make it easier to sell the move. I don't think Colletti wants Kemp and Loney, crazy as it is.

I don't think Colletti wants Kemp and Loney, crazy as it is.

Yea, who needs 22/23 year olds that hit .330+

wait...why do you say that? Kemp and Loney are not prospects anymore. They are proven, young, major league players who project to be above league average at their positions. What could Colletti trade them for besides a superstar?

What could Colletti trade them for besides a superstar?

A veteran starter and a veteran OF. Or in a deal for Santana, of course.

I may be dead wrong, but I think Colletti has decided that Kemp and Loney are not "winners" and that the Dodgers need some proven veterans who "know how to win."

I think it is nuts--but I think that Colletti's words, actions and history make it a plausible thing to believe about him. Adding Alex Rodriguez would be a way to justify it, as I said.

What could Colletti trade them for besides a superstar?

Joey Gathright.

Laroche could probably be available

If the Dodgers sign ARod I would expect LaRoche to be traded - not that I trust Colletti to get value, but coming into 2007 he was ranked as the #2 third baseman on many prospect lists. 2007 didn't help him, but shouldn't knock him down too much either.

A rotation with Santana, Billingsley, Penny, and Lowe would be fantastic, much as I'd hate for the Dodgers to trade Kershaw. I don't know if the Twins could get more for Santana, though they could hold out for Kemp to replace Hunter in center.

That's nuts. I'm not going to believe it until something like that happens.

He hasn't really traded anyone away that would cause Dodger fans to feel any remorse. So until he does, I'm not even going to think about that.

the Dodgers need some proven veterans who "know how to win."

Someone made fun of me when I suggested that the Dodgers fans may see a little of Bernie Williams patrolling the outfield in Dodger Blue this year. I was being sarcastic, but now, I'm not so sure that this doesn't actually happen from what you guys have been posting.

Someone made fun of me when I suggested that the Dodgers fans may see a little of Bernie Williams patrolling the outfield in Dodger Blue this year. I was being sarcastic, but now, I'm not so sure that this doesn't actually happen from what you guys have been posting.

I may be wrong. But the stuff Colletti said last week, and some other things, indicate to me that he has no idea what he has in Kemp and Loney. Plus, they are "Logan White's guys" and most execs in all fields want to go with "their people."

But the stuff Colletti said last week

What did he say last week besides stating that Kemp and Loney are still not complete players and they have room to improve in some areas of their game?

I may be dead wrong, but I think Colletti has decided that Kemp and Loney are not "winners" and that the Dodgers need some proven veterans who "know how to win."

And what do you base that belief on? Colletti's statements on the conflict between Gonzo and Kent and the kids has been to support the kids. And after Gonzo's comments Luis saw little playing time. Kent saw some, but the Dodgers didn't worry when he had a minor injury and missed the last week. Frankly, I think the only reason that Kent won't be traded is that he might retire if he were (and still might retire anyway - he has yet to announce his coming back).


I don't trust Colletti too far - but Kemp and Loney were the bright spots of the team, and unmistakeably so. I don't see them going unless it's to get a superstar.

Keep in mind that the Dodgers have Penny, Lowe, and Billingsley returning as starting pitchers - and for face saving reasons, Colletti has to keep a spot open for Schmidt. I don't see them going after an expensive starting pitcher - unless it's a true ace like Santana. Otherwise, they'll probably monitor Wolf and if he's progressing re-sign him.

And what do you base that belief on? Colletti's statements on the conflict between Gonzo and Kent and the kids has been to support the kids

.

His comments last week, his off-season moves, and his history with Sabean. And I think what he said last week throws the idea he is "supporting the kids" into question. Before that, his "support" was lukewarm as well (granting that was a no-win situation for a GM).

I am not saying he is going to dump them next week, but I think he values them far, far less than the internet wing of the Dodger fanbase does and that one of them will get traded at some point sooner than would be optimal--UNLESS Torre really likes them, which Dodger fans need to hope for.

His comments last week, his off-season moves, and his history with Sabean.

As Nick pointed out - his comments were that they weren't complete.

In terms of his offseason moves - while I don't like to defend Colletti - the young players he has traded are those who played poorly under him. He has yet to trade ANY prospect who played well since he was hired. I would agree if you argued that he has given up on players too soon. But Loney and Kemp have played very well. I read his comments as pre-emptive, made to keep the kids from becoming complacent.

As soon as Colletti makes a Sabeanesque move - trading immediately useful prospects for a crappy veteran, get back to me. He's yet to do that. The worst he's done is trade Edwin Jackson - who hadn't produced for several seasons, and required half a horrific season in a major league rotation before he started turning around.

I read his comments as pre-emptive, made to keep the kids from becoming complacent.

Well, that is one way to look at it. I read the article--I saw it as dodgy, cryptic, petty, negative, and unnecessary--the kind of thing you would say if you don't like them but can't admit it for political reasons. I think if he really liked them, he would praise them to the media and criticize them, if need be, in his office.

As soon as Colletti makes a Sabeanesque move - trading immediately useful prospects for a crappy veteran,get back to me

.

Sabean did this most infamously with Pierzynski of course, but the real calling card of Sabean is not valuing or developing young talent at all, and overpaying for mediocre/damaged veterans, not bad trades. The Pierre, Garciaparra, and Schmidt contracts were all "Sabeanesque moves" and, IMO, so was NOT saying "Matt Kemp is one heck of a young player and we're glad to have him" and leaving it at that.

But, OTOH Torre may really like them. And Torre will have as much power or more power than Colletti.

Signing A-rod may be a move of genius if it forces Colletti to trade/buyout Pierre and focus more on the youngsters. Bad news for DBacks, at least for the next three to five years.