MLB News & Notes (other than Cubs or Sox)

[funkster]

Wow Friedman named President of baseball ops for the Dodgers.

[rok]

Kind of pisses me off that he rejected even an attempt at having a conversation with Ricketts 3 years ago. What changed since then? Anyway more from MLBTR:


The Rays and Dodgers have announced the franchise-altering news that Andrew Friedman will be leaving his role as GM of the Rays to become the new president of baseball operations for the Dodgers. Now-former Dodgers GM Ned Colletti will remain in the organization as an adviser to president Stan Kasten, while Rays president Matthew Silverman will now oversee baseball operations in St. Petersburg. Former VP of business operations Brian Auld will now fill Silvermans former role of president.


Andrew Friedman In a prepared statement, Friedman had the following to say about his time with the Rays:


As I embark upon my next journey, I have only thanks and gratitude to the Rays organization and the Tampa Bay region for a wonderful 10 years together. I am truly grateful for the opportunity to have been part of something so special and for the passion and support of this exceptional fan base. The Rays organization is loaded with talent from ownership to players and everyone between. We were able to create together an unbelievable culture that no doubt will continue, and I am absolutely confident that the successes we achieved will continue into the future.


Clearly, the move comes as a significant blow to the Rays, who will lose one of the most respected baseball executives in the entire game. And, as Marc Topkin of the Tampa Bay Times tweets, Friedman worked for the Rays without a contract, so there will be no compensation heading to the Rays from the Dodgers. Friedman is considered by many to be a wizard of sorts, turning the low-budget Rays into a perennial contender despite low revenue stemming from attendance issues and a dilapidated stadium. The Rays have only twice had a payroll over $70MM in Friedmans tenure, so even amid reports that the Dodgers will scale back spending, to an extent, Friedman should have significantly more than double 2014′s Rays franchise-record $76MM payroll.


Friedmans work with a modest payroll has garnered limitless praise from peers and pundits alike. Some of the 37-year-old Tulane grads most recognizable moves include a pair of extensions for Evan Longoria (the most recent of which guarantees him $100MM over six years); acquiring Ben Zobrist for Aubrey Huff and eventually signing him to a four-year, $18MM extension with two club options; the acquisition of Matt Garza and Jason Bartlett for Delmon Young; signing Matt Moore to a five-year, $14MM contract with three club options; signing Chris Archer to a five-year, $20MM extension; and acquiring Wil Myers and Jake Odorizzi in exchange for James Shields and Wade Davis. (For a full list of Friedmans moves while with the Rays, check out MLBTRs Transaction Tracker.)


Incredibly, Friedmans hiring and the reassignment of Colletti means that four of the five teams in the National League West have made a GM change in a five-month span. The Padres dismissed Josh Byrnes late in June, and the DBacks dismissed Kevin Towers in September. Dan ODowd resigned from the Rockies last week after declining an extension offer (Jeff Bridich was named the teams new GM), and now Friedman has a new role in a new organization at Collettis expense.


Bill Plaschke of the L.A. Times recently noted that Collettis job was in peril and reported that Friedman was the teams top target as a replacement. Joel Sherman of the New York Post tweets that the two sides have been talking for weeks, adding that negotiations predate the Dodgers disappointing exit from the National League Division Series at the hands of the Cardinals.


Topkin first reported that Friedman was leaving and Silverman would oversee Rays baseball operations (Twitter link). Sherman tweeted that Friedman would be the Dodgers new GM. ESPN Los Angeles Ramona Shelburne reported that Colletti would remain with the Dodgers as an adviser (Twitter link). Topkin tweeted that Auld would be the new Rays president.

[jstraw]

Kind of pisses me off that he rejected even an attempt at having a conversation with Ricketts 3 years ago. What changed since then? Anyway more from MLBTR:


The Rays and Dodgers have announced the franchise-altering news that Andrew Friedman will be leaving his role as GM of the Rays to become the new president of baseball operations for the Dodgers. Now-former Dodgers GM Ned Colletti will remain in the organization as an adviser to president Stan Kasten, while Rays president Matthew Silverman will now oversee baseball operations in St. Petersburg. Former VP of business operations Brian Auld will now fill Silvermans former role of president.


Andrew Friedman In a prepared statement, Friedman had the following to say about his time with the Rays:


As I embark upon my next journey, I have only thanks and gratitude to the Rays organization and the Tampa Bay region for a wonderful 10 years together. I am truly grateful for the opportunity to have been part of something so special and for the passion and support of this exceptional fan base. The Rays organization is loaded with talent from ownership to players and everyone between. We were able to create together an unbelievable culture that no doubt will continue, and I am absolutely confident that the successes we achieved will continue into the future.


Clearly, the move comes as a significant blow to the Rays, who will lose one of the most respected baseball executives in the entire game. And, as Marc Topkin of the Tampa Bay Times tweets, Friedman worked for the Rays without a contract, so there will be no compensation heading to the Rays from the Dodgers. Friedman is considered by many to be a wizard of sorts, turning the low-budget Rays into a perennial contender despite low revenue stemming from attendance issues and a dilapidated stadium. The Rays have only twice had a payroll over $70MM in Friedmans tenure, so even amid reports that the Dodgers will scale back spending, to an extent, Friedman should have significantly more than double 2014′s Rays franchise-record $76MM payroll.


Friedmans work with a modest payroll has garnered limitless praise from peers and pundits alike. Some of the 37-year-old Tulane grads most recognizable moves include a pair of extensions for Evan Longoria (the most recent of which guarantees him $100MM over six years); acquiring Ben Zobrist for Aubrey Huff and eventually signing him to a four-year, $18MM extension with two club options; the acquisition of Matt Garza and Jason Bartlett for Delmon Young; signing Matt Moore to a five-year, $14MM contract with three club options; signing Chris Archer to a five-year, $20MM extension; and acquiring Wil Myers and Jake Odorizzi in exchange for James Shields and Wade Davis. (For a full list of Friedmans moves while with the Rays, check out MLBTRs Transaction Tracker.)


Incredibly, Friedmans hiring and the reassignment of Colletti means that four of the five teams in the National League West have made a GM change in a five-month span. The Padres dismissed Josh Byrnes late in June, and the DBacks dismissed Kevin Towers in September. Dan ODowd resigned from the Rockies last week after declining an extension offer (Jeff Bridich was named the teams new GM), and now Friedman has a new role in a new organization at Collettis expense.


Bill Plaschke of the L.A. Times recently noted that Collettis job was in peril and reported that Friedman was the teams top target as a replacement. Joel Sherman of the New York Post tweets that the two sides have been talking for weeks, adding that negotiations predate the Dodgers disappointing exit from the National League Division Series at the hands of the Cardinals.


Topkin first reported that Friedman was leaving and Silverman would oversee Rays baseball operations (Twitter link). Sherman tweeted that Friedman would be the Dodgers new GM. ESPN Los Angeles Ramona Shelburne reported that Colletti would remain with the Dodgers as an adviser (Twitter link). Topkin tweeted that Auld would be the new Rays president.

Dude, we got Jesus Epstein.

[funkster]

Yeah, I still think Epstein was the target all along.  This is pretty big though.

[MickKelleherWasMyHero]

Good news for the Cubs. Probably means the Dodgers aren't likely to add significant payroll, which mean no bidding on Lester or Scherzer for the Dodgers (hopefully). (But I still believe the Cubs won't sign either. Some dumbass team will make a stupid offer that Epstein/Hoyer will--thankfully imo--not match.)

[rok]

So what are the chances that we approach the Dodgers about one of their surplus OFs in a bad contract swap for Jackson?

[Destined]

Probably means the Dodgers aren't likely to add significant payroll, which mean no bidding on Lester or Scherzer for the Dodgers (hopefully).

 

How do you figure? Just because Friedman never bid on FAs in Tampa doesn't mean he won't in LA. He never had the means to do so in Tampa if he wanted to. That said, I think fair to say he might see more value in a late first round pick than the risk of overpaying for Lester/Scherzer, but I don't think that puts them out of the bidding. The Dodgers can afford anyone they want, and I wouldn't put it past Kasten to demand they acquire a big piece on the FA market out of principle. 

 

Having said that...what I do think Friedman means to the Dodgers...is that Puig isn't going anywhere. Obviously no one is untouchable and any good GM/PofBO has to listen to every offer, but Friedman is a numbers guy. Puig's metrics are far and away his biggest draw, as his fundamentals and behavior are piss poor. Colletti being of the traditional sort, was always more likely to wear thin on the intangibles to where he'd have a lower threshold for dealing Puig or Kemp.

 

And for that, I'm forever thankful. I know it would've been far fetched, but I'd hate to deal for Puig when he theoretically have almost the same player in Soler without having to give up anything. I'd be interested in Scott Van Slyke, who is an OPS gawd without the outrageous price tag.

[Coldneck]

I believe this teams needs someone that can play CF. Soler and potentially Bryant or another converted infielder will fill the corner positions. Otherwise, I'd be huge on Matt Kemp if the LADs would eat some of his contract.  

[funkster]

Yeah, I don't think this will affect the Dodgers spending on FA at all.

[MickKelleherWasMyHero]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MickKelleherWasMyHero" data-cid="230428" data-time="1413322665">
<div>
Probably means the Dodgers aren't likely to add significant payroll, which mean no bidding on Lester or Scherzer for the Dodgers (hopefully).

 

How do you figure? Just because Friedman never bid on FAs in Tampa doesn't mean he won't in LA. He never had the means to do so in Tampa if he wanted to. That said, I think fair to say he might see more value in a late first round pick than the risk of overpaying for Lester/Scherzer, but I don't think that puts them out of the bidding. The Dodgers can afford anyone they want, and I wouldn't put it past Kasten to demand they acquire a big piece on the FA market out of principle. 

 

Having said that...what I do think Friedman means to the Dodgers...is that Puig isn't going anywhere. Obviously no one is untouchable and any good GM/PofBO has to listen to every offer, but Friedman is a numbers guy. Puig's metrics are far and away his biggest draw, as his fundamentals and behavior are piss poor. Colletti being of the traditional sort, was always more likely to wear thin on the intangibles to where he'd have a lower threshold for dealing Puig or Kemp.

 

And for that, I'm forever thankful. I know it would've been far fetched, but I'd hate to deal for Puig when he theoretically have almost the same player in Soler without having to give up anything. I'd be interested in Scott Van Slyke, who is an OPS gawd without the outrageous price tag.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
 

There were some stories last week that the Dodgers wanted to get their payroll down to $190 million. Hiring Friedman kind of confirms that report. You don't hire a guy like Friedman and continue on with business as usual.

[funkster]

I don't think that's true at all.  He's going to spend now that he has it.

[1060Ivy]

I don't think that's true at all.  He's going to spend now that he has it.

 

Agreed.  Having the opportunity to spend is most likely a driving factor for Friedman's departure.

 

Dodgers may not break the bank this offseason but they still have the ability to outspend the Rays by a significant factor - even in lean years.  Considering the Dodgers TV contract, lean years should be few and far between even with the luxury tax.

[MickKelleherWasMyHero]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="funkster" data-cid="230461" data-time="1413395333">
<div>
I don't think that's true at all.  He's going to spend now that he has it.

 

Agreed.  Having the opportunity to spend is most likely a driving factor for Friedman's departure.

 

Dodgers may not break the bank this offseason but they still have the ability to outspend the Rays by a significant factor - even in lean years.  Considering the Dodgers TV contract, lean years should be few and far between even with the luxury tax.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
 

(1) Why on earth would you hire a guy who has made his mark drafting and developing and then not have him draft and develop?

 

(2) Of course they'll outspend the Rays. $190 million is still a hefty payroll, but they're going to have to spend efficiently to get there. Spending another $20-25 million on a pitcher when you already have Kershaw, Greinke, and Ryu isn't spending efficiently, And there's the challenge that might have drawn Friedman to LA. He fixed a small market team, now he gets to fix a big market team that hasn't spend efficiently in the past.

[1060Ivy]

Dodgers have the opportunity to use parallel paths to improvement - free agency and drafting/developing prospects. 

 

Don't believe anyone mentioning that Dodgers would cease to leverage draft and development path to improving.  

 

It may be cheaper to draft and develop but given the Dodgers situation and competitive window, it may be more profitable for the Dodgers to win today than to wait on prospect development.

[4FP]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="1060Ivy" data-cid="230462" data-time="1413397070">
<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="funkster" data-cid="230461" data-time="1413395333">
<div>
I don't think that's true at all.  He's going to spend now that he has it.

 

Agreed.  Having the opportunity to spend is most likely a driving factor for Friedman's departure.

 

Dodgers may not break the bank this offseason but they still have the ability to outspend the Rays by a significant factor - even in lean years.  Considering the Dodgers TV contract, lean years should be few and far between even with the luxury tax.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
 

(1) Why on earth would you hire a guy who has made his mark drafting and developing and then not have him draft and develop?

 

(2) Of course they'll outspend the Rays. $190 million is still a hefty payroll, but they're going to have to spend efficiently to get there. Spending another $20-25 million on a pitcher when you already have Kershaw, Greinke, and Ryu isn't spending efficiently, And there's the challenge that might have drawn Friedman to LA. He fixed a small market team, now he gets to fix a big market team that hasn't spend efficiently in the past.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
 

I feel the same way about the Dodgers not being out of bidding on players like Lester.

 

1) Parallel fronts -- develop AND acquire expensive FAs, etc

 

2)  Friedman does just what you said: fixes a big market that hasn't spent efficiently in the past.

 

Spending about 5 million per WAR is pretty efficient even if (and on a fully developed roster, especially if) you are paying for a half dozen of them from one guy. And that's even if additional Wins are all the same value. (They aren't. Wins that put you in the post season are much more valuable than wins that put you over .500--Our team has been a study in that (and patience) for a couple of years.) And that's also even if millions are are all the same value. (They aren't either. Big market vs. small, TV deals, differed payments and otherwise creatively structured contracts, salary cap position, etc.)

 

If you are right, and the Dodgers don't really want to spend big on one or three more old expensive dudes, other bidders need only believe that they do; and the Dodgers are then still players in the bidding process. It doesn't cost Friedman a dime to drive up his competitors costs--exactly for the reason you stated originally; to prevent us from getting "good news." 

 

I am not necessarily saying I want Lester, cheap or no. Although signing him here would signal good news as to where the FO sees us in the rebuild, because they'd only go there to acquire those particular Wins that put us in the 2015 post season.

 

The Dodgers are still part of the calculus.

 

(Edit: I loved typing the phrase "put us in the 2015 post season," but I could have just read Ivy's post; it is what I wanted to say, said better, and shorter)