Alright, What the Hell is Going On Here?
July 9, 2008 at 2:26 pm | Posted in C.C. Sabathia, Frank McCourt, Ken Rosenthal, Ned Colletti, rumors, Tony Jackson | 6 CommentsTony Jackson, LA Daily news, July 7th:
the Daily News learned that sometime in the days leading up to that deal, Dodgers owner Frank McCourt nixed a trade that would have brought Sabathia to Los Angeles, along with Indians third baseman Casey Blake and utility man Jamey Carroll.
McCourt’s reason was financial, according to multiple industry sources. But that is a charge McCourt flatly denied.
Tony Jackson, LA Daily News blog, July 8th:
I was told this morning, by a source completely separate from the ones from which I got the earlier story, that Matt Kemp WAS involved in the aborted trade for Sabathia, Blake and Carroll, and that either Jon Meloan or James McDonald also was involved.
Dylan Hernandez, LA Times, July 8th:
McCourt said a trade with the Indians was a real possibility at one point. “I think the deal as it started out had a potential to be a deal that wouldn’t have compromised the goals of this organization,” he said. “I think the deal, as it evolved, got to the point where it became unacceptable to the organization.”
The talks are believed to have started out with the Dodgers offering two players, one of them being third baseman Andy LaRoche, for Sabathia, but came to include several other players on both sides. Sabathia will be a free agent at the end of the season.
Ken Rosenthal, FoxSports.com, July 9th:
The Dodgers not only could have had Sabathia, but also Indians third baseman Casey Blake and infielder Jamey Carroll without giving up any of their top young major leaguers, according to major-league sources.
The Indians would have received a package that included the following types of players, if not the exact names: Third baseman Andy LaRoche, right-hander Cory Wade, Class AA right-hander James McDonald and Class A catcher Carlos Santana.
Will Carroll, Baseball Prospectus, July 9th:
The Dodgers continue to confuse everyone. “Some want to buy, some sell,” I’m told. One faction of the front office wants to deal for a shortstop and is focused on Jack Wilson or David Eckstein, while another (which appears to hold sway with the McCourts for now) want to see if Nomar Garciaparra can hold the position down. Teams simply don’t want to deal with the Dodgers because of the confusion over who has final authority. One front-office source told me that the Dodgers have made deals, only to have ownership pull out at least twice.
So let’s recap: Matt Kemp WAS in the deal. Matt Kemp WASN’T in the deal. The Dodgers could have acquired Sabathia, Blake, and Carroll without including Kemp, Billingsley, Kershaw, Martin, Loney, or Ethier. (!!!!!!!!) Or just LaRoche and someone else for Sabathia. And that Colletti had a deal done, except that McCourt put the kibosh on it. Twice. Or he didn’t. But if he did, it was because of money. Or it wasn’t. Ned Colletti’s in charge. Or McCourt’s pulling the strings. Or, says another source of Rosenthal’s,
Others believe that assistant general manager Logan White exerts an inordinate amount of influence, discouraging trades of players that he once selected as the team’s scouting director.
This is getting completely out of hand, and it’s hardly the first time around here, is it? It’s getting to the point where it doesn’t even matter if you side with McCourt, Colletti, or even White (MSTI chooses White!) on decision-making, you just want to know that someone is actually in charge over there. I mean, look at what Carroll says: “Teams simply don’t want to deal with the Dodgers because of the confusion over who has the final authority.” How is that even possible? Is McCourt meddling too much? Is Colletti not assertive enough? This is the kind of internal politics that I really hate discussing – partially because you’ll never get a straight answer from anyone, but mostly because it distracts from where the focus really ought to be: on the field. You know what? That proposed deal for Sabathia/Blake/Carroll? I probably make that deal. I hate to give up LaRoche, but the thought of getting those players without giving up Kemp is mind-blowing. If the Dodgers aren’t going to be able to improve their chances at the playoffs because of some internal “whose is bigger” contest (sorry, Kim!), then that’s an insult to the fan base. Guess what, guys? Get it together. NO ONE CARES ABOUT YOUR PERSONAL ISSUES. GET THE JOB DONE, OR GET OUT OF THE WAY.
- Mike Scioscia’s tragic illness 
6 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a Reply
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.








Logic says that Kemp was the deal breaker. The Tribe seemed to want one stud young hitter, which they ended up getting in LaPorta from the Brew-hahs. So, it probably came down down the Tribe adding from their end to try and justify the Dodgers including Kemp, or the Dodgers trying to expand the Tribe package to include expensive contracts they could dump to preclude from including Kemp. It sounds like the final offer came from the Tribe and the Dodgers ended up turning it down. My guess was the final request from the Tribe included Kemp, and if the Dodgers said no they would go for LaPorta. The Dodgers said no, and there is now some question as to who actually uttered the word, and why.
Comment by kennerbuggy— July 9, 2008 #
KB, I hope you’re right. I’m just getting increasingly worried that the front office is in disarray. Remember how the Piazza trade went down, with FOX execs doing it behind Fred Claire’s back? That’s what this is starting to sound like.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— July 9, 2008 #
I think the FO is in a bit of disarray, but I can’t recall any previous rumored instance of The Brand sticking their noses into player transactions other than to veto a signing. Most likely, we are in for a period of inaction due to the disarray and Babu being neutered a bit, which probably ain’t bad given the probablity that the alternative could be Babu making a risky, ill-advised trade trying to make a splash and save his neck. My feeling is that Babu’s tenure is gonna suffer a slow death as opposed to going out with a big bang after making a disasterous trade.
Comment by kennerbuggy— July 9, 2008 #
The idea of dealing LaRoche, Wade and McDonald for Sabathia, Blake and Carroll I would be okay with, but adding Carlos Santana, who is likely now a top five prospect on the Dodgers seems like overkill. Lucas May, they could’ve had. I wouldn’t even have put up much of a fuss if the deal included Elbert or Bryan Morris, but not Santana. Switch hitting catchers with his offensive potential don’t come around too often.
As for the disarray in the Dodger FO, I agree with Ken, the Brand is saving Colletti from making a bigger fool of himself. This trade smacks of desperation by Ned and is a job saving device. I know we are hard on Ned, but he is making both Evans and PDP look like geniuses in comparison.
Comment by grabarkewitz— July 9, 2008 #
I totally agree about Santana, dude can absolutely rake. Though I still disagree with the premise of the Indians trade in general.
-
And the FO seems like Logan White vs. Ned Colletti vs. Frank McCourt. Pretty pathetic.
Comment by Fire Ned Colletti Now— July 10, 2008 #
[...] the Dodgers love Jamey Carroll so much? We’ve been hearing his name floated in Dodger rumors since back in 2008, when the idea of a trade for C.C. Sabathia, Casey Blake, and Carroll came up. Well, it’s [...]
Pingback by Time for Today’s March of the Dead « Mike Scioscia’s tragic illness— December 3, 2009 #