Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/24204043/report-dodgers-listening-on-outfielders-who-has-the-most-trade-value

    The above article reports that the Dodgers might be willing to move Ethier, Crawford or Kemp this offseason...since we all know there would be no interest in Crawford, the other two might be possibilities, with myself leaning toward Kemp!

    If you want to find a suitable replacement for Ellsbury in the OF, Kemp might just be that guy. His trade value is probably at the lowest it will ever be, and when he returns to good health, and based on 2012 statistics, this guy would be a perfect fit. On the negative side he does have the baggage of a big contract still remaining...but now you might get the Dodgers to subsidize some of it with the remainder not being a problem for the Sox to handle.

    Here's info from the article on Kemp:

    MATT KEMP
    Contract status: $128 million through 2019
    Trade value: Moderate

    Kemp, 29, managed only a 105 OPS+ and 0.5 WAR in 73 games this past year due to shoulder, hamstring and ankle injuries. It was a disaster, injury-filled year. Kemp was, however, a true monster as recently as 2011 (172 OPS+ and 8.1 WAR) and very good in 2012 (147 OPS+ and 2.4 WAR) around another hamstring problem. He just turned 29 in September and while the contract is scary, the excellent 2011-12 performance is too good ignore. Kemp won't net a huge return, but if the Dodgers agreed to kick in some cash, a number of big market teams would inquire. There's too much potential to ignore considering he's right smack in the prime years of his career.

    Possible line-up:

    • RF Victorino
    • 2B Pedey
    • CF Kemp
    • DH Ortiz
    • 1B Napoli
    • C McCann/Salty
    • LF Gomes/Nava
    • SS Boegarts
    • 3B Middlebrooks

    Kemp's speed would lessen the loss of Ellsbury and bring another power right handed bat to Fenway.

     

     

     

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??


    They would probably prefer to move Crawford or Ethier...

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    They would probably prefer to move Crawford or Ethier...

    [/QUOTE]

    Ethier would be nice if they picked up most of the salary.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    softy the clown wanted Kemp, because he was more durable than Jacoby.

    Reason enough to pass on Kemp.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??


    Well, they are all equally durable until they break.  Scott Boras told me that...

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    I said no to Kemp a couple years ago and i still feel the same way. The only one Id consider, CONSIDER, is Puig and he will cost in prospects and Im not really sure what hes all about yet, so I have no idea how to put a value on him.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49thparallel. Show 49thparallel's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to notin's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Well, they are all equally durable until they break.  Scott Boras told me that...

    [/QUOTE]

    good one!

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49thparallel. Show 49thparallel's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I said no to Kemp a couple years ago and i still feel the same way. The only one Id consider, CONSIDER, is Puig and he will cost in prospects and Im not really sure what hes all about yet, so I have no idea how to put a value on him.

    [/QUOTE]

    Puig is a phenomal athlete! Huge potential. But has a lot to learn.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    The Dodgers have many vetrans, they will keep Puig with the intention of helping to mature and perfect his on and off the field performance.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sportswizard1. Show Sportswizard1's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    I'd rather they trade for Eithier if they trade with the Red Sox west.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    Peavy, Morales, Lava and Middy for Kemp and erase our $3.9M payments from the last trade.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    Wow. Kemp. That would be something. That is, if Ellsbury's definitely not coming back.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Peavy, Morales, Lava and Middy for Kemp and erase our $3.9M payments from the last trade.

    [/QUOTE]

    I say we get that 4m a year over the next 3 years back (and more) by trading Dempster for Ethier. Sure, throw in Morales as well. Keep Middy and Nava for our own club or for a future trade. Kemp is pretty expensive, the deal is for a LONG time AND the injury concerns are significant.

    Of course he could be the next Manny here.

    Ethier and 4m for Dempster in '14 becomes a salary wash. Ethier and 4m a year for the 3 years after that gives us the guy at the same 3/39 we just paid for Victorino ages 32-34 for Ethier age 33-35 years. Ethier is the slightly better player and far healthier player. Shane's 3 years before his 2012 disaster, ages 28-30, he was a .280/.345/.800 guy with 15 HR's a year.

    Ethier last 3 years ages 29-31 was a .285/.360/.800 guy who was VERY durable, avg 510 AB's a year, was a 15 HR/30 2B guy in a pitchers park and is versatile enough to play all 3 OF spots like Victorino. He is also one of Dusty's best friends from ASU.

    If ages 32-35 he drops down to a .270/.345/.785 guy, who keeps the same power #'s b/c of Fenway, I am fine with that in our 7-8 hole as LA picks up some of the tab.


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sobchack. Show Sobchack's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Peavy, Morales, Lava and Middy for Kemp and erase our $3.9M payments from the last trade.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm on board with that.  Offsetting Peavy's 16.5 for Kemp in a second.   

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    The Dodgers would prefer to move Crawford (no surprise, his 2013 numbers were awful) or Eithier over someone like Kemp or Puig. I can't see taking on 128 million for Kemp with the hope he will live up to the money. Now if he had a stellar 2013 I would say why not, but he didn't. Let's face it, he is only being discussed because he isn't putting up great numbers.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    Commie glad you brought up Kemp and so is softy.... softy has indicated he might be open to Kemp despite the huge contract and slightly suspect 2013 production... 

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Commie glad you brought up Kemp and so is softy.... softy has indicated he might be open to Kemp despite the huge contract and slightly suspect 2013 production... 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Interesting dilemma. That's a beautiful pic. But would you really want a guy that would pose for that shot?

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    Interesting dilemma. That's a beautiful pic. But would you really want a guy that would pose for that shot?

    As a Raider fan, I always felt that some of their downfall had to do with the move to LA.  Too many of their players went 'Hollywood'.  For most of these guys, certainly not all, It is difficullt to concentrate on sports, and also expect to be a 'red carpet' type.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    softy the clown wanted Kemp, because he was more durable than Jacoby.

    Reason enough to pass on Kemp.

    [/QUOTE]

    You have obviously forgotten the anti-Softlaw corrollary.  Once the players that Softy wants crash and burn, he pretends as if they don't exist, and they come back.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Peavy, Morales, Lava and Middy for Kemp and erase our $3.9M payments from the last trade.

    [/QUOTE]

    Too much.  At this point, Kemp looks like a negative value to me.  And while we would get some minor salary relief for Peavy and the $3.9, it isn't as much as it seems.  If we ate maybe $2-3M of Peavy's salary, we'd get a decent prospect, imho.  And the other 3.9 * 2 is pure profit.  But I don't think that is enough to offset Kemp's $21M+ cost.  Plus losing WMB?  Too much.

    • Injured the past two years
    • A 179/62 K/W over those two years
    • Except for his breakout year, his OPS generally runs in the .820 range.  Very good for a CF, but not off the charts good.
    • His contract runs to age 34.  Not quite a retirement contract, but a contract where 2 of his 6 years are eroding skill years.

    The way I look at it, he is an Ellsbury-equivalent player.  I guess a little upside on pure talent, but more 'everyday' injury-prone.  So if we could get an Ellsbury clone for even $19M, assuming LA kicks in $12M, then why not get the Ellsbury we already have.

    Plus, when do we go with our prospects?  We can't wait on everyone of them to prove themselves a star.  I'd go with JBJ over Kemp without a second thought.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Soxdog67. Show Soxdog67's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The Dodgers would prefer to move Crawford (no surprise, his 2013 numbers were awful) or Eithier over someone like Kemp or Puig. I can't see taking on 128 million for Kemp with the hope he will live up to the money. Now if he had a stellar 2013 I would say why not, but he didn't. Let's face it, he is only being discussed because he isn't putting up great numbers.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well it is safe to say that Crawford won't be walking through that door on Landsdowne St.

    If Kemp had a stellar 2013 he would not be on the trading block, or his trade value would be off the charts...2013 was a wipe out year for Kemp, and he only played 106 games in 2012...but had pretty good numbers. I see him coming back healthy and being the player he is expected to be...playing at Fenway for half his games we all might see even better production.

    Like Ellsbury, there is nothing you can do about baseball related injuries...and sometimes a change of scenery changes that. Watch Ellsbury play 155 games a year with whomever he signs with.

     

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to redsoxandguitars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Too late to get the value on Kemp, which should have been by unloading Ellsbury into the trade market, before the Dodgers changed hands. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah, Kemp has been some value.  Too bad we didn't have him instead of Ellsbury this year.

     

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: Dodgers OF's available...what about Matt Kemp??

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Commie glad you brought up Kemp and so is softy.... softy has indicated he might be open to Kemp despite the huge contract and slightly suspect 2013 production... 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    His name is Stiffy.  Please call him by his chosen name when discussing sensitive "topics."

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share