Talks with the Dodgers centered around Kemp/Ethier

[incubus]

This is getting ridiculous. If PA doesn't want to put money into this team then why doesn't he just sell it? He has made enough money. Is he really that selfish?

In a word, Yes.

[weams]

I'd be curious to see what kind of money the Dodgers offered. JJ as a salary dump is worth a whole lot more than Ethier and his (awful) contract.

That is what I believe. That the Kemp thing was dangled, but the Dodgers were not eating any of that. The only salary relief would be JJ.

Then they offered Ethier... who I would not want. I would have liked Kemp, but It is somewhat foolish to think we would have paid for him. They are not selling Kemp like he's Vernon Wells.

[MrOrange82]

That is what I believe. That the Kemp thing was dangled, but the Dodgers were not eating any of that. The only salary relief would be JJ.

Then they offered Ethier... who I would not want. I would have liked Kemp, but It is somewhat foolish to think we would have paid for him. They are not selling Kemp like he's Vernon Wells.

If the Orioles had turned JJ into Kemp I would've been blown away. That such a move is impossible under Angelos is infuriating. Kemp's recent injuries notwithstanding.

[mcgraw238]

That is what I believe. That the Kemp thing was dangled, but the Dodgers were not eating any of that. The only salary relief would be JJ.

Then they offered Ethier... who I would not want. I would have liked Kemp, but It is somewhat foolish to think we would have paid for him. They are not selling Kemp like he's Vernon Wells.

If the Orioles had turned JJ into Kemp I would've been blown away. That such a move is impossible under Angelos is infuriating. Kemp's recent injuries notwithstanding.

I agree with MrOrange82, that would have been a huge move with Kemp's talent. Nick's salary coming off next year helps offset the cost. As said, such a move under Angelos is impossible.

[TiredofLosing20]

I agree with MrOrange82, that would have been a huge move with Kemp's talent. Nick's salary coming off next year helps offset the cost. As said, such a move under Angelos is impossible.

Why do we think Kemp was available?

[weams]

Why do we think Kemp was available?

Because we spoke with the Dodgers regarding Jim. And we want Kemp. It's easy.

[TiredofLosing20]

Because we spoke with the Dodgers regarding Jim. And we want Kemp. It's easy.

Oh I know.. But my question really should have been, given our assumption that Kemp was offered, why do we think the Dodgers were willing to give up Kemp for JJ and maybe Markakis (that seems to be the rumor du jour)

Maybe because even the cash rich Dodgers know its a bad contract. But hey, why not take it on and be stuck with it. At least then we can say we are trying.

[Roll Tide]

Because we spoke with the Dodgers regarding Jim. And we want Kemp. It's easy.

I get it Weams ...but that doesn't mean Kemp was available.

Okay Dan we have too many outfielders

How about Kemp?

No , Either is available and perhaps Wells

No thanks I can get Weeks from Oakland :rofl:

[mcgraw238]

I get it Weams ...but that doesn't mean Kemp was available.

Okay Dan we have too many outfielders

How about Kemp?

No , Either is available and perhaps Wells

No thanks I can get Weeks from Oakland :rofl:

I think Kemp is very available but Dodgers are not going to eat much contract, if any. With Eithier they would throw in some cash but we know he stinks. So it sounds like Kemp could have been had in these talks but you know who wasn't going to take on the balance of the contract. It sounds like we maybe countered with JJ and Nick for Kemp and was told negative by the Dodgers. I'm speculating but trying to connect what few dots that are out there, I could be way off.

I'll say this though...Kemp oozes talent and would be the most talented player on our roster, but he's battled the injury bug a little of late. A contract like that always carries risk but a 3-4-5 of Kemp-Davis-Jones could be nasty. This strikes me as a move a baseball exec is ready to pull the trigger on but was shut down by his risk averse owner (again speculation by me).

[weams]

Oh I know.. But my question really should have been, given our assumption that Kemp was offered, why do we think the Dodgers were willing to give up Kemp for JJ and maybe Markakis (that seems to be the rumor du jour)

Maybe because even the cash rich Dodgers know its a bad contract. But hey, why not take it on and be stuck with it. At least then we can say we are trying.

It is a bad contract all of those types of contracts crush clubs that are not Yankees or Dodgers. I still like Kemp. So do the Red Sox.

[weams]

I think Kemp is very available but Dodgers are not going to eat much contract, if any. With Eithier they would throw in some cash but we know he stinks. So it sounds like Kemp could have been had in these talks but you know who wasn't going to take on the balance of the contract. It sounds like we maybe countered with JJ and Nick for Kemp and was told negative by the Dodgers. I'm speculating but trying to connect what few dots that are out there, I could be way off.

I'll say this though...Kemp oozes talent and would be the most talented player on our roster, but he's battled the injury bug a little of late. A contract like that always carries risk but a 3-4-5 of Kemp-Davis-Jones could be nasty. This strikes me as a move a baseball exec is ready to pull the trigger on but was shut down by his risk averse owner (again speculation by me).

I think the rumors is that they would have taken the 27 million in obligations from us. But I am not sure I believe that.

[Nigel Tufnel]

I'll say this though...Kemp oozes talent and would be the most talented player on our roster, but he's battled the injury bug a little of late. A contract like that always carries risk but a 3-4-5 of Kemp-Davis-Jones could be nasty. This strikes me as a move a baseball exec is ready to pull the trigger on but was shut down by his risk averse owner (again speculation by me).

But if Kemp can be had for a bag of balls and any sane owner would pay his contract, why hasn't he been traded yet?

[weams]

I think Kemp is very available but Dodgers are not going to eat much contract, if any. With Eithier they would throw in some cash but we know he stinks. So it sounds like Kemp could have been had in these talks but you know who wasn't going to take on the balance of the contract. It sounds like we maybe countered with JJ and Nick for Kemp and was told negative by the Dodgers. I'm speculating but trying to connect what few dots that are out there, I could be way off.

I'll say this though...Kemp oozes talent and would be the most talented player on our roster, but he's battled the injury bug a little of late. A contract like that always carries risk but a 3-4-5 of Kemp-Davis-Jones could be nasty. This strikes me as a move a baseball exec is ready to pull the trigger on but was shut down by his risk averse owner (again speculation by me).

The shut down would be that it would require more money than is in Dan's budget. I bet he never talked with Peter about the deal. Peter may wish that he had since there is so much fuss about it but I believe Dan when he says that it was his choice.

[weams]

But if Kemp can be had for a bag of balls and any sane owner would pay his contract, why hasn't he been traded yet?

He can't. And who knows. Maybe the Dodgers required EROD or Gausman as well. We don't know that.

[twinedenter]

It is a bad contract all of those types of contracts crush clubs that are not Yankees or Dodgers. I still like Kemp. So do the Red Sox.

I agree with Weams. The sad thing is if the Yankees/Dodgers/Angels/Red Sox make a 20 million dollar mistake, they can rebound from it.

IF the O's took on Matt Kemp and he got hurt, it would crush our financial flexibility, possibly for the remainder of his contract. We have ZERO room for error.

I like Kemp, but the risk is too high.