Dodgers “Snag” Betemit
Word on the street is the Dodgers just traded reliever Danys Baez and infielder Willy Aybar for Atlanta Braves backup 3B Wilson Betemit. I’m not seeing this on the newswires yet, so if your reading this soon after I post you’re almost certainly seeing it here first.
To me this trade is a wash at best at third base for the Dodgers, and a definite subtraction when you count the loss of Baez in the bullpen - a very usable part at a time when set-up men are commanding a premium. Aybar and Betemit are essentially the same player - you give up a bit of Aybar’s OBP to get a bit more power with Betemit - except that Aybar is two years younger and OBP is slightly more important (and harder to teach) than SLG.
So even if it were Aybar for Betemit alone I would be a bit unhappy as a Dodgers fan. Now when you give away Baez as well, it becomes a downright foolish trade, because you have to imagine that Baez could have gotten somebody pretty useful if he were traded on his own (considering how the Nats got Kearns and Lopez for two similar setup types).
I am quickly souring on on Ned Colletti as a general manager. He seems way too enamored of the “big names” as evidenced by the ridiculous contract he gave to Furcal and the decision to sign career downsiders Bill Mueller and Kenny Lofton when the Dodgers were rich with big-time prospects at those positions (Nomar was a big name that could have gone bust as well, but that gamble happened to work out so far). And for the past several weeks, he has insisted on playing “experienced veteran” Cesar Izturis (.601 OPS) at third base over Aybar (.770 OPS) or coveted triple-A stud Andy LaRoche.
Finally, at a time when the Dodgers should clearly be cashing in walk-year veterans to load up on young talent (They are 7 games out of both the wild card and the division), Colletti is insisting that the Dodgers are still in it and that he is going to instead do the opposite and trade away young talent for veterans.
Colletti is continuing the longstanding pattern that has led to the Dodgers only winning 1 playoff game since 1988 - no vision, no planning for the future, and constantly trading away valuable young prospects only to watch them bloom elsewhere while creaky veterans “help” the Dodgers limp to 85 wins each year.
As an aside, as I write this, Vin Scully has the call for the 1-for-their-last-14 Dodgers against the Nationals: “There’s a single driven up the middle, Martin goes to third, and the Dodgers are on the attack!” Pause. “Gosh, when is the last time I said those words?”
July 29th, 2006 at 2:53 pm
Nick, I see your point. But AJC sports columnist Mark Bradley sees things different. Here’s what Bradley wrote today:
Essentially the Braves swapped young infielders — Wilson Betemit goes, Willy Aybar arrives — for the purpose of hiring a set-up man. When you’re six games under .500 with 60 to play, where’s the percentage in giving up on Betemit, who’s further along than Aybar? Where’s the percentage in dealing away a guy who can play third and second base when your third baseman keeps getting hurt and your second baseman is having a lousy year?
As if on cue, Chipper Jones tweaked his oblique against the Mets on Friday, necessitating an in-game call to Betemit. Who, two hours later, was no longer on the team. The Braves had held out hope of getting reliever Scott Linebrink from San Diego for Betemit, but they settled for Danys Baez instead. Where’s the percentage in settling for anything? Isn’t the smarter move simply to let this season play out and not offload any more youngsters?
REPORT COMMENT
July 29th, 2006 at 3:45 pm
Coley, Bradley’s point is predicated on the notion that Betemit is clearly better than Aybar, and I don’t think that’s very clear at all. Aybar *already* has a higher OBP than Betemit and a higher career OPS, and he is two years younger.
Plus Aybar is also noted for his ability to play all infield positions (he has actually been playing second recently), so that point is moot as well.
REPORT COMMENT
July 29th, 2006 at 5:26 pm
This trade just keeps getting worse. Today, the LA Times is reporting that the Dodgers are paying all of Baez’s remaining salary as well!
I’d say that Ned Colletti got fleeced.
The other thing that really bothers me is, why are the Dodgers so desperate to get a third baseman anyway??? In addition to Cesar Izturis and Willy Aybar, arguably their best two prospects at Triple-A are both also third basemen - i.e. Andy LaRoche and Joel Guzman.
REPORT COMMENT
August 1st, 2006 at 5:44 pm
Phew! This should *finally* put to rest all those gay rumors.
REPORT COMMENT
September 23rd, 2006 at 7:23 pm
[...] Which brings me, of course, to David Ortiz. In my heart of hearts, I want him to have it. I do. I wanted him to have it last year. I think he deserves it, at some point. But given that the Sox were pretty much out of the postseason chase weeks ago, given that he is a DH (and while I’m willing to give it to a DH, I think that, like a pitcher, it’s got to be a standout case of deservedness, where the candidate is head-and-shoulders, Pedro-in-1999 above the rest) and given that the AL field of candidates is so crowded this year, I’m just not sure he will get it. But does he deserve it? Let’s take a moment to reflect in a calm and dispassionate manner. He’s had five walkoff hits this year (15 in his career with Boston), so without him, the Sox would have fallen from contention even sooner. He’s had 52 dingers (breaking a Sox club record that had stood since 1938) and 132 RBI—in fact, his slugging stats this year were so good, that even when he missed a week’s worth of games with an irregular heartbeat, no one else came close to dethroning him. Getting less fanfare than his homers and ribbies, but no less “of considerable use, service, or importance,” he’s first in the AL in walks (yes, even with Manny Ramirez hitting behind him for most of the season), second in slugging, third in runs scored, and third in OPS. Also, he’s David Ortiz. Clubhouse intangibles? Check. Awesome nickname? Check. Even managers of other teams send him thank-you notes for “what he’s done for the game.” But for me, silly dictionary definitions aside, “valuable” just means, “Which of these dudes would you rather have on your team?” Since this is UmpBump and not actually an MVP ballot, I’ll give Morneau and Jeter a tie for third. (What the hell Johan, you can tie for third place, too.) While Jeter’s run has gathered about it the sense of resigned inevitibility of, say, the Kerry nomination, I predict that like Kerry, it will ultimately fall short (I don’t know why this all seems so much like the 2004 election). He’ll get over it, though. Unlike Kerry, Jeter has his own cologne. [...]
REPORT COMMENT
November 7th, 2006 at 3:48 pm
[...] Wow, it must really hard to be Derek Jeter. There you are, captain of the New York Yankees. Men want to be you, women want to be with you. Your salary is $20 million a year, and you net an extra $6 mill in pocket money from endorsement deals with the likes of Nike and Gatorade. You have such magnetism that you forced one of the best shortstops ever to become a third baseman, so that you wouldn’t have to learn a new position, and yet scarcely a man, woman or child breathed a word against you for it, bewitched as they were they by your carefully woven cloak of charm. And this year, there seems to be an unstoppable momentum building towards your selection as AL MVP. Nationally, you’re the most popular player in baseball. Why, you even have your own cologne! [...]
REPORT COMMENT