What is to become of Adrian Gonzalez?

[Mex17]

I don't see him as an option for the Mets (they are all in with Smith for better or for worse), but I do not see a place for him on the Dodgers anymore even if he is healthy and he has $21.5 million coming to him next year.

Does he get a landing spot with another team or do you think that LA is going to have to eat all of that?

[nymr83]

I hope the Mets aren't "all in" on Smith at this point - a capable backup at the position would be a very wise investment at this point. that doesnt need to be Gonzalez.

[Frayed Knot]

The thing about the Dodgers is that they've reached this post-season with little or no contributions from a bunch of their higher paid and/or longer tenured players:

- Adrian Gonzalez; $21.5 million in 2017 & 2018

- Andre Ethier; $17.5 mil + $17.5 mil option/$2 mil buyout for 2018

- Scott Kazmir; in the 2nd year of a 3-year deal for $11 mil in 2016, then $18 mil in each of 2017 & 2018 (I bet most folks don't even remember that they signed him to a FA deal just last year)

- Brandon McCarthy; in 3rd year of a 4 year deal: $10 mil in 2017 & $10 more next year

- Hyun-Jin Ryu; 4th year of a 5 year deal: $7 mil in each 2017 & 2018

and yet are getting much greater contributions from the likes of Logan Forsythe, Austin Barnes (over Yasmani Grandal), and minimum wage or near minimum guys like Pederson, Seager, Kike Hernandez,
Bellinger, Culberson, and especially Chris Taylor




In answer to the Adrian Gonzalez question, I think he's toast and the Dodgers will need to eat the money no matter where he plays next year or even IF he plays next year.
3 HRs (in 231 ABs), a diminishing glove, a .287 OBA, and maybe the slowest non-catcher in the league just ain't gonna cut it.

[Guest 41Forever]

Taking a vacation when the team in in the World Series seemed kind of odd to me.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Mex17 wrote: (they are all in with Smith for better or for worse)

I'm not at all convinced of that.

[HahnSolo]

Now that FK mentions it, I'm kind of interested in what's to become of Yasmani Grandal.

If Barnes is their guy moving forward, I certainly wouldn't object to Sandy kicking the tires to see if Grandal is available.

[Frayed Knot]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Mex17 wrote: (they are all in with Smith for better or for worse) I'm not at all convinced of that.

Depends on what one means by "all in".
If he's on the roster he's going to play at least most of the time, quite possibly with a RH-hitting platoon partner (maybe one of the catchers?).
But it's not like they can't send him down if he doesn't hit, nor do I think they see him as a 'can't trade' guy in the same way they think of Rosario (to the extent that anyone is ever a Can't trade)

The one thing I've said about Smith for 2018 is that if you're going to sign/trade-for a 1B with a multi-year deal then you need to deal him for help somewhere else.
Stashing him in the minors or on the bench as a PH/defensive replacement for the next three years is a waste of a resource.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I guess we'll see if the Mets go after Eric Hosmer this offseason, as some have suggested.

I agree that Smith isn't going to be displaced at first by someone like Wilmer Flores, unless Smith fails spectacularly. But I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Mets saw first base as a position that they could upgrade this winter. It may or may not happen, but I definitely don't think it's Smith "for better or worse."

[metirish]

41Forever wrote: Taking a vacation when the team in in the World Series seemed kind of odd to me.

I thought this was odd too, but I wonder if it happens more than we know?

[Centerfield]

Frayed Knot wrote: 3 HRs (in 231 ABs), a diminishing glove, a .287 OBA, and maybe the slowest non-catcher in the league just ain't gonna cut it.

Meanwhile we are about to hand our job to a guy who had a worse OBA, and would lose a foot race to Adrian Gonzalez.

More HR's though.

I really hope Dominic Smith works out. Funny though, he could just as easily hit .230 as he could .330 next year.

[Mex17]

Dodgers and Braves made a mutual salary dump trade today. Gonzalez, Kazmir, Brandon McCarthy, and Charlie Culberson go to Atlanta. Kemp goes back to LA. Then the Braves DFA Gonzalez immediately.

So any team in the league can now get a guy for the league minimum who as recently as 2016 produced 31 doubles, 18 HRs, 90 RBI, and a .784 OPS. But he is a 36 year old with a bad back.

Does he find a home or does he stay home and get paid off?

Edited December 16, 2017 by Guest

[Edgy MD]

That's 311 homers out there on the cheap, and a few Gold Gloves.

It's a shame. A year or two as somebody's lefty bat off the bench used to be a dignified closing act for these guys, but now teams can't afford a non-versatile reserve. Certainly NL teams can't. So the more readily available alternative is the James Loney plan. Swallow your pride and play AAA ball and wait until somebody's firstbaseman goes down.

[Mex17]

It's a shame. A year or two as somebody's lefty bat off the bench used to be a dignified closing act for these guys, but now teams can't afford a non-versatile reserve. Certainly NL teams can't.

The game has changed (fewer if no complete games anymore, more reliance on the bullpen, pitch counts, more mindfulness of "times around the order" with regard to pitchers being exposed to a lineup in a single game). . .I think that the roster rules need to change with it.

My proposal:
-Increase the number of players that you can dress for a game to 26.
-Increase the number of players that you can carry/travel with to 28.
-On a weekly basis, each team needs to submit five names (the customary amount for a starting rotation) that cannot be taken off of the active roster for that week (barring a DL assignment). That would generally prevent teams from just making a mockery of the new rules by simply taking whoever just started the most recently completed game off the roster (so, in most cases, you have to keep your entire rotation active).

The idea would be to make these adjustments so that teams can keep a fresh bullpen without sacrificing a bench spot.

[nymr83]

i don't think new roster sizes are a good idea. i'd rather the advantage go to the team that gets creative within the rules. the value of multi-inning relievers should go up.

[Edgy MD]

I agree that growing the roster just plays into more specialization. That makes the extraordinary boring by protecting people from their flaws. You think the All Star Game is boring? Try getting that every night. Don't kowtow the rules to strategic trends. Force people to innovate within those trends. Broader limits means no innovation, just boring sameness.

I'd much rather have teams with rosters of 16.

[Mex17]

Edgy MD wrote: I agree that growing the roster just plays into more specialization.

I think that you might be viewing this solely upon what you believe MLB can or cannot control within it's own self, but what if it is really beyond their control? In decades past, a guy like Tom Seaver would be playing football or running track in the fall and then playing basketball or wrestling in the winter, not picking up a baseball until probably late March. Now, kids specialize in a sport year round, so younger arms are throwing more and have more tread by the time an MLB team is even in the position to draft or sign them. So it isn't really all the "fault" of MLB that the game has gone in the direction that it has. But you need to adjust to the circumstances around you.

This might stand to be broken off into it's own discussion apart from the Adrian Gonzalez thread.

[Edgy MD]

It's not beyond their control.

[Mex17]

Edgy MD wrote: It's not beyond their control.

How? How can MLB tell a teenager (or his parents) not to forego other sports and not to play in summer leagues, go to youth camps in the winter, or hire private coaches who work them even more, all of which result in more torque and strain and repetitiveness of motion (which is an unnatural motion to begin with) on the arm at earlier ages before they are even drafted?

[Edgy MD]

Because MLB sets the roster limit and that's what they do. They control it.

And if the market up the stream doesn't adjust, then they don't. From my perspective, there has never been more restraint on pitchers' workloads in youth leagues than there is now. And there were huge restraints when I was a teenager 35 years ago.

[MFS62]

Heard Gonzalez was DFA today. Still signed for 2 yrs of lotsa bucks. If released, he can be signed by any team for any amount and Atlanta would have to eat the rest of his salary. I'll bet they're trying to make some sort of a deal where they at least something back for him (The other team would have to pick up the salary in that kind of deal.).
With the kind of production he has put up consistently, you would have thought that he would have been on the cover of lots of baseball magazines.
The problem is, he [crossout:3fn1a3eq]is one ugly m***er-f***er, even when he was young.[/crossout:3fn1a3eq] never had cover-boy looks.

Later

[Benjamin Grimm]

Buster Olney wrote: You can assume the Mets are among teams kicking around idea of pursuing long-time All-Star Adrian Gonzalez. They're looking for a short-term add-on at the position; when healthy, he's a good hitter/defender; was just cut by ATL, and costs nothing more than minimum salary in '18.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

For the league minimum, I think the Mets would be crazy not to give Adrian Gonzalez a shot. The cost is negligible and at worst he could mentor Dominic Smith and be a left handed bat off the bench. Of course, there a numerous teams that could just as likely take a low cost flyer on Gonzalez. Since he is essentially a free agent , it comes down to who might be able to offer the best potential situation for him.

[nymr83]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Buster Olney wrote: You can assume the Mets are among teams kicking around idea of pursuing long-time All-Star Adrian Gonzalez. They're looking for a short-term add-on at the position; when healthy, he's a good hitter/defender; was just cut by ATL, and costs nothing more than minimum salary in '18.

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/21821426/new-york-mets-reach-adrian-gonzalez

it went from "you can assume" to "sources have told Buster" - the natural evolution of bullshit right there. want to invent a rumor? add an unnamed source to keep the story alive a day later!

[MFS62]

Nymr83 wrote: Benjamin Grimm wrote: Buster Olney wrote: You can assume the Mets are among teams kicking around idea of pursuing long-time All-Star Adrian Gonzalez. They're looking for a short-term add-on at the position; when healthy, he's a good hitter/defender; was just cut by ATL, and costs nothing more than minimum salary in '18. http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/21821426/new-york-mets-reach-adrian-gonzalez it went from "you can assume" to "sources have told Buster" - the natural evolution of bullshit right there. want to invent a rumor? add an unnamed source to keep the story alive a day later!

I never trust anybody who calls himself "Buster". But in this case, I hope he's right.

Later

[nymr83]

I'd be fine with the addition considering the non-cost and its an added bonus that if he does well the Braves are paying for it. Not really exciting though. and i'd prefer a right handed hitter with more position flexibility be added.

[Edgy MD]

We'll record that as an Eric Campbell vote.

More seriously, if what's really wanted is a righthander to help Smith against lefties and to have positional flexibility when a need opens elsewhere, the team has that in Flores (or will if and when another infielder is brought in) and in Wright (or will if he recovers enough to play). This is more of a Tony Clarkian hedge against whether Smith is ready at all.

The Mets could conceivably sign him and shed him during the spring, I imagine.

[nymr83]

yeah which is why the signing wouldn't bother me, at minimum salary he is easily disposable. my only concern is the extent to which signing him causes the Mets to throw up their 'mission accomplished' banner for infield help rather than considering him essentially a fully guaranteed salary spring-training invitee

[Ceetar]

no one's throwing up a mission accomplished banner for Adrian Gonzalez, if they sign him it'd be to compete for the 2nd backup infielder bench spot.

[smg58]

Gonzalez has enough of a track record to warrant a major league deal, which means he will probably go to the team that gives him the clearest path to playing time. I'm not sure that's us -- I would think that an AL team that did not have a set DH would be a more viable option from his perspective -- but I see no reason not to call his agent and chat.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

yeah of course you talk to him. He'd at worst be a "James Loney" type who could fill in, and it's porobably a matter of which team's first baseman gets injured first otherwise.

No clue as to the remarks above about his looks. Geez.