Pirates-Dodgers Trade scenario and bet

by streetjustice on May 1, 2008 5:49 PM PDT

I love to talk about potential trades, and I was having a discussion with a friend of mine (a Bucks fan) about an off-season trade between the Dodgers and Pirates. I insist it is equally beneficial, whereas he argues that it would never happen because each club will put too much value on what they are giving up (the Dodgers will give up too many young players under team control; the Pirates will put too much value on the face of a franchise and a young starter with ace-potential). The loser has to consume five (5!) bacon wrapped hotdogs from the vendors near downtown LA. The package is James Loney, Andre Ethier, Chin Lung-Hu, Scott Elbert/James McDonald, and Hong Chi Kuo for Jason Bay and Ian Snell.

Admittedly, the Bucks don't receive a ton of prospects with soaring ceilings (although, as stated earlier, Baseball Prospectus is high on Hu and McDonald, and Loney, Ethier and Kuo will have had 2+ years of production time in the majors to gain some insight on their projectability) but there are probably enough young, team-controlled assets that blend in age-wise with the up-coming crop of Pirates prospects (Walker, McClouth) that likely make this trade worthwhile. Furthermore, Adam LaRoche becomes another trade trip to add more pitching.

From the Dodger's side, the offer should be contingent on a couple of shrewd free-agent signings and re-signing Furcal. Unless Loney demonstrates that his spike in power from last year is sustainable for a whole season, he might have more value as a trade chip, and replaced with Texiera. Kent could be replaced in house, or with a player like Mark Ellis. The cost of these two would not likely eclipse 25 million annually, and coupled with the salaries of Snell and Bay (signed for the 2009 season at around 8 million I think), would still be less than the money shed during the off-season. Although Bay might be declining, the Dodger have a year to determine has value going forward to gauge the possibility of signing him long term. He at least provides an on base boost and solid production in left field.

What do you think?

This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.

Tweet Comment 9 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

So, uh...

...price of crack in Pittsburgh so affordable you kept the internet connection…

by Rev Halofan on May 1, 2008 5:54 PM PDT reply actions

Preposterous

Matt Kemp is better than Jason Bay right now (6.0 vs. 5.6 VORP), and that’s without considering Bay’s rapidly declining defense (103 Rate2 for Kemp, 85 Rate2 for Bay). Bay even plays the easier defensive position in left! Moreover, Kemp can be expected to improve, since he’s only 23; Bay is 30. The Dodgers have the best left-handed pitching prospect in the minors tearing up AA in Clayton Kershaw, who barely escaped making the team on a superlative spring training run. Neither of the two positions represent a need for the Dodgers.

Witty .sig goes here.

by scareduck on May 1, 2008 6:04 PM PDT reply actions

One more thing

Kemp accumulated that value in 94 plate appearances, while Bay got his in 117. No-brainer.

Witty .sig goes here.

by scareduck on May 1, 2008 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions

Small sample size perhaps?

~Till the Halo burns out...

by Zu Long on May 1, 2008 6:16 PM PDT up reply actions

Could be, but I doubt it

Kemp is going to be a good player. Strike that — he is a good player right now.

Witty .sig goes here.

by scareduck on May 1, 2008 6:54 PM PDT up reply actions

Kemp isn't a part of the suggested package...

But I agree, incredibly lopsided. I’m not sure I would trade J-Lo and Elbert, let alone HU and ETHIER for one year of an increasingly expensive and less valuable Bay, plus Snell. Besides, the Pirates can probably get more trading the two seperately is a realistic trade scenario.
However, young pitching is ALWAYS a position of need. With Lowe and Loiaza on the way out next year, a smaller package for Snell might make sense.

by CrispusAttucks on May 1, 2008 6:18 PM PDT reply actions

It's not that Kemp was part of the trade package

as much as why would the Dodgers go for that when they have an outfield similarly congested as the Angels’?

Witty .sig goes here.

by scareduck on May 1, 2008 6:54 PM PDT up reply actions

Anyone who does'nt like the bacon wrapped hot dogs in downtown LA

has to be a lunatic, and should not be taken seriously.

Scioscia, "Roll the hole!"

by 44FAN on May 1, 2008 6:50 PM PDT reply actions

exactly

I was going to start off by asking why it’s the loser who has to eat the hot dogs. Heck, that’s a bet I’d want to lose! But if this poster is to be taken seriously, I think the Dodgers should also have to throw in Kershaw, Kemp and Billingsley to make this a fair trade. [And just so it’s clear, the last sentence is dripping with sarcasm]. The Pirates would be all over this, and twice on Sunday. Whoever thinks that the Pirates wouldn’t do this deal is in serious need of psychiatric evaluation.

by jjackflash on May 1, 2008 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions