For most teams, having a 40-year-old 2B and a flotilla of unproductive veterans costing $35 M would be taken as a sign that the GM who flushed $35 M down the toilet isn't very good at his job.

But the Dodgers think it's a good idea to give the guy a second flush.

And really I'm just kidding. Kent & Penny at least were both reasonable deals. Nomar and Loaiza were pretty dumb though.

Putting aside Penny's 2008 season, basically all the big moves that DePodesta made worked out well for the Dodgers: signing Lowe, signing Kent, acquiring and extending Penny, acquiring Milton Bradley (who's still a great hitter anyhow, but Colletti gets credit for getting Ethier for him). It's the dumb Colletti moves coming into 2008 that are still strangling the team: signing Pierre, signing Schmidt, signing Andruw Jones, signing Nomar, signing Mueller (who luckily retired). Just look at these three dumb contracts

Andruw Jones of
2 years/$36.2M (2008-09)

* 2 years/$36.2M (2008-09)
o signed by LA Dodgers as a free agent 12/07
o $12.2M signing bonus ($5.1M in 2008, $2.1M in 2009, $5M in 2010)
o 08:$9M, 09:$15M
o no-trade clause
o perks: suite on road
o Jones to donate $0.15M annually to club charity

Jason Schmidt rhp
3 years/$47M (2007-09)

* 3 years/$47M (2007-09)
o signed by LA Dodgers as a free agent 12/06
o $10.5M signing bonus (paid 2008-2011)
o 07:$12.5M, 08:$12M, 09:$12M
o no-trade protection
o perks: premium tickets for home games
o Schmidt to donate $0.1M annually to club charity

Juan Pierre of
5 years/$44M (2007-11)

* 5 years/$44M (2007-11)
o signed by LA Dodgers as a free agent 11/06
o 07:$7.5M, 08:$8M, 09:$10M, 10:$10M, 11:$8.5M
o contract includes limited no-trade protection

Colletti is lucky that he inherited the best minor league system in baseball when he came in

Schmidt and Pierre sure, but it's hard to blame Coletti for Andruw, it's not like anyone predicted that he would turn into Bill Bergen.

Loaiza was a gamble - the team was in desperate need of another starter, but thought there was some chance of Loaiza filling the hole without costing anything but money. It only really became an issue because Colletti wasted so much other money that the budget ended up being clamped down.

Loaiza was a gamble - the team was in desperate need of another starter, but thought there was some chance of Loaiza filling the hole without costing anything but money. It only really became an issue because Colletti wasted so much other money that the budget ended up being clamped down.

Considering that the Dodgers jettisoned Loaiza so they could start Clayton Kerhsaw as soon as they could, it wasn't much of a problem. Picking up Loaiza was stupid, but replacing him was easy enough. The Dodgers can eat $7.5 million, they can't eat $50 million or so in dead money in Jones, Schimdt, and Pierre and pretend they can contend.

but it's hard to blame Coletti for Andruw

Why? Did someone else make that decision? Because the warning signs on Jones were there, and it's not like the Dodgers were hurting for outfielders.

Why? Did someone else make that decision? Because the warning signs on Jones were there, and it's not like the Dodgers were hurting for outfielders.

And they got him very cheaply compared to what he would have cost a year earlier.

And they got him very cheaply compared to what he would have cost a year earlier.

So? Like I said, the Dodgers had a lot of good outfielders. Just because you can get someone cheaply doesn't mean you should.

Like I said, the Dodgers had a lot of good outfielders.

And not just good outfielders. They had Juan Pierre, too.

Dodgers had Matt Kemp, Andre Ethier, Juan Pierre, and Luis Gonzales in 07. Are people counting Luis Gonzales in the 'good' outfielder category?

Are people counting Luis Gonzales in the 'good' outfielder category?

101 OPS+ ain't horrible

101 OPS+ from a poor defensive left fielder might not be replacement level, but is definitely not in the "good" category.

Bringing in Gonzalez also provided Colletti the necessary surplus to non-tender Jayson Werth 5 days later.

Bringing in Gonzalez also provided Colletti the necessary surplus to non-tender Jayson Werth 5 days later.

Gonzo has always been a favorite of mine.

I blame the Werth's lost seasons of 2005-06 squarely on the Dodgers training staff. That bunch - now gone, thankfully - was awful at keeping players healthy and worse at healing them when hurt.

I blame the Werth's lost seasons of 2005-06 squarely on the Dodgers training staff. That bunch - now gone, thankfully - was awful at keeping players healthy and worse at healing them when hurt.

The current Dodgers training staff isn't stellar at that job either.

No, but back then it was real bad.
c. 2003, you could count on at least two injury-related personnel blow-ups per season.

Putting aside Penny's 2008 season, basically all the big moves that DePodesta made worked out well for the Dodgers

Not signing Adrian Beltre didn't work out too well.

Schmidt and Pierre sure, but it's hard to blame Coletti for Andruw, it's not like anyone predicted that he would turn into Bill Bergen.

It surely wasn't that hard to see, and Coletti paid top dollar (and then some) for an aging player who had just had a very poor year. Given that Andruw was no longer a premier defender you didn't have to predict he was going to be a complete disaster to know that Coletti was paying the absolute maximum, and that that would only be correct if Andruw was going to have two years at the plate comparable to his career year. On top of that, the signing destroyed what little value Pierre had left. Yuck.

edit: I wrote in a thread at the time that signing Andruw to that contract was a firing offense. 'Course, I did predict him to put up an OPS around 825.

p.s., I hate full disclosure.

Not signing Adrian Beltre didn't work out too well.

It didn't? Seems like NOT giving a HUGE contract to a head case who only ever performed to his ability in his contract year is a pretty good decision. Granted the production from 3B has not been the same as Beltre's, but it came at much less expense, which gave the team payroll flexibility elsewhere.

See the recent thread on Beltre's production as a Mariner, and how a "HUGE" contract can seem like a pretty reasonable deal in a hurry.

Beltre's contract year looks more like a fluke than his true "ability," given the consistency of his numbers since then. And there's a lot unsaid in that "granted the production from 3B has not been the same as Beltre's." Here's the raw OPS, never mind the defense:

.722 .716
.737 .793
.713 .801
.697 .784

During that time the Mariners have had a grand total four 3Bman start as many as 10 games in a season. The Dodgers? 17.

Saving money and increasing flexibility is great; so is having a reasonable plan for the position being vacated. I don't think DePodesta ever had one.

Eh, it worked eventually going to work out for the Dodgers with the draft picks the Dodgers got from the M's for Beltre. (a 2nd rounder used to pick Ivan DeJesus Jr, and the comp pick used to select Luke Hochevar.) Even if Hochevar didn't sign with the Dodgers, he got picked first by the Royals the next year, which led to Clayton Kershaw being around to be picked 7th in the 2006 draft.

See the recent thread on Beltre's production as a Mariner, and how a "HUGE" contract can seem like a pretty reasonable deal in a hurry.

I did and I'm not impressed. Consistentcy (and focusing on fantasy baseball counting stats) doesn't warrant paying $12 million a year for 5 years to a guy who had shown no inclination to work to develop and live up to his talent other than in a contract year.

Beltre's contract year looks more like a fluke than his true "ability," given the consistency of his numbers since then. And there's a lot unsaid in that "granted the production from 3B has not been the same as Beltre's." Here's the raw OPS, never mind the defense:

.722 .716
.737 .793
.713 .801
.697 .784

I view Beltre as Andruw Jones at a corner IF spot. A guy with loads of talent who is simply too lazy to take advantage of it. There aren't a whole lot of guys who put up a 7.3 WARP3 season at just 21 years of age and then do nothing for the next 3 years (until their contract is up and they miraculously have a 13 WARP3 season). ymmv

During that time the Mariners have had a grand total four 3Bman start as many as 10 games in a season. The Dodgers? 17.

Saving money and increasing flexibility is great; so is having a reasonable plan for the position being vacated. I don't think DePodesta ever had one.

Perhaps you might want to take a look at the dodgers top prospects as rated by Baseball America. For 2005, the year Beltre left, two of the top 10 were 3B, with DeWitt listed as the organizations best hitter for average and LaRoche listed as the best infield arm. Additionally, the number one prospect and best hitter for power was a SS who was listed as a 3B prospect the very next year. In other words, it was not a stretch to project 3 of their top 10 prospects as 3B in the year Beltre was allowed to walk. I'll bet DePo had more of a plan than you credit him with.

Perhaps you might want to take a look at the dodgers top prospects as rated by Baseball America. For 2005, the year Beltre left, two of the top 10 were 3B, with DeWitt listed as the organizations best hitter for average and LaRoche listed as the best infield arm. Additionally, the number one prospect and best hitter for power was a SS who was listed as a 3B prospect the very next year. In other words, it was not a stretch to project 3 of their top 10 prospects as 3B in the year Beltre was allowed to walk. I'll bet DePo had more of a plan than you credit him with.

I don't see where Jose Valentin, an 18-year-old, and a 21-year-old (neither of whom have distinguished themselves in the Majors to this day) constitute anything like a near-term "plan" in 2005 for receiving anything better than crap play from 3B, which is exactly what the Dodgers have gotten (and not necessarily for cheap, either: Valentin and Mueller and now Blake cost real money to suck this bad).

Eh, it worked eventually going to work out for the Dodgers with the draft picks the Dodgers got from the M's for Beltre. (a 2nd rounder used to pick Ivan DeJesus Jr, and the comp pick used to select Luke Hochevar.) Even if Hochevar didn't sign with the Dodgers, he got picked first by the Royals the next year, which led to Clayton Kershaw being around to be picked 7th in the 2006 draft.

So, four years of lousy 3B play is worth suffering through if you have the promise of two players maybe helping out by the fifth year? It actually might be -- if you have any reason to believe that the standard two-pick compensation will bring you players that good, which is pretty rare. But it helps if you have a reasonable Plan B for the position being vacated, like (say) the Angels did with Teixeira and K-Rod.

Jose Valentin sucked with the Dodgers - slow start, then got hurt. But the following year he was pretty good with the Mets. He was plan B, and looking at his subsequent performance it wasn't totally unreasonable.

Perhaps you might want to take a look at the dodgers top prospects as rated by Baseball America. For 2005, the year Beltre left, two of the top 10 were 3B, with DeWitt listed as the organizations best hitter for average and LaRoche listed as the best infield arm. Additionally, the number one prospect and best hitter for power was a SS who was listed as a 3B prospect the very next year. In other words, it was not a stretch to project 3 of their top 10 prospects as 3B in the year Beltre was allowed to walk. I'll bet DePo had more of a plan than you credit him with.

I don't see where Jose Valentin, an 18-year-old, and a 21-year-old (neither of whom have distinguished themselves in the Majors to this day) constitute anything like a near-term "plan" in 2005 for receiving anything better than crap play from 3B, which is exactly what the Dodgers have gotten (and not necessarily for cheap, either: Valentin and Mueller and now Blake cost real money to suck this bad).

I didn't say it was a near term plan; we're talking about four years here, not just 2005. An organization cannot simply look at each year in isolation; there has to be long term as well as short term planning going on all the time. Also, claiming it was a bad decision because LaRoche hasn't yet become productive is judging a decision in hindsight. Given the information at the time he was expected to become a solid MLB player and it was reasonable to let Beltre go, save the money by filling a spot with a replacement level player, and waiting a couple of years to see which of DeWitt, LaRoche and possibly Joel Guzman developed. This is a perfectly reasonable plan, and claiming a guy like DePo never had a plan is just silly, imo. The guy is highly intelligent and highly successful, with a great track record and tremendous experience. Sitting on the sidelines as a fan and saying he never had a plan is the epitome of ignorance, again, imo. And DeWitt put up 13 WS last year while Beltre put up 14. If that constitutes sucking, at least he wasn't sucking up $12 million like Beltre was while sucking just as hard.