PDA

View Full Version : The Colletti Poll:



southerndodgerf
07-21-2008, 09:26 AM
Most of us agree that Colletti has made some of the worst moves in baseball. Most of us also believe that it is these moves that will send him packing. However, we seem to not always agree on the one move that made his GM job expendable.

The following poll lists Colletti's moves to date. Please choose the one that you believe will cost him his job.

darth550
07-21-2008, 09:57 AM
There's no poll. Must be some tough choices! ;)

The fact is, beyond Pierre (which is everyone's bane even though he plays right to the expected levels), most of his moves were justifiable at the times he made them and the general consensus around here was that they were overall good. The fact that these guys have been injured is largely out of his control, even though lots of kids feel he and Conte were in collusion with Schmidt. I for one loved it when he backed Boras down and treated Gagne like the door mat he is.

This is a lynchmob thread.

McCourt is very PR conscience and if he was to fire Ned after Depo and Evans, the scrutiny would set him back (and his quest for 4MM) for many years.

Beaver Liquor
07-21-2008, 11:22 AM
I'd like an "all of the above" option. It's not necessarily one wrong move, it's that practically everything that Colletti has done has turned out bad. I agree with Darth that in many ways the moves were okay at the time, but each one has found a way to turn out badly for us. Ned is cursed. He's not a bad guy or a bad GM, I think he's cursed because we were stupid enough to hire an assistant GM from the Giants--of course he's going to be cursed.

GHGHCP
07-21-2008, 11:47 AM
Lot of.. gems on this poll hehe. I'll go with Pierre, 4 years in decline now, knee jerk reaction signing, bad contract and blocks Ethier or Kemp when in the lineup.

dan1to
07-21-2008, 12:12 PM
This was seriously hard to make the decision.

I went with the not signing Maddux. Pierre's contract was incredibly odd to me, but its not super terrible, Schmidt got injured and wont be back, Jones... who knows but at least it was short term.

Not resigning a guaranteed HOF pitcher who can still pitch, has a great baseball mind, can help coach other teammates, will steal a base (seriously that was a hilarious moment), and make the whole team better... not signing Maddux was like saying Im and idiot.

blueplatespcial
07-21-2008, 12:25 PM
Pierre. With the length of the contract, Ned has made Pierre the franchise player. He follows in the footsteps of JD Drew and Shawn Green. If you are going to purchase a franchise player, he should be able to put the ball over the wall once in awhile. Examples - Vlad and Manny are ideal franchise players. This is LA, so Ned should have been able to find us a good one. He did not. He got us a slap hitter with a wonderful work ethic --- for FIVE years.

bestlakersfan
07-21-2008, 12:38 PM
Too tough... We need either a few combo choices or an all of the above choice.

don'tfireNedCo
07-21-2008, 12:50 PM
wow. to ask us to pick one out of that bunch is just unfair.


BTW, what a depressing track record that is. I would be surprised to see this guy be a GM for another team after us

BLUE4EVER
07-21-2008, 01:05 PM
I voted for the Schmidt signing,but I think the worst move of all is the aquisition of Stan"Lou Ferrigno"Conte..I dont remember so many injuries to our pitching staff in years,this guy is bad frickin luck....he and Ned are in way over thier heads!!!!!!get them the hell out of here fast...kick them back to the gay area!!!

Malone for Pres
07-21-2008, 03:20 PM
I voted the Schmidt signing, hands down. They are all horrible moves and hard choices to make in this poll but what pushes Schmidt over the top in this one is that Ned was the Assistant GM (or assman, as he liked to refer to himself) in SF during Schmidtty's time there. How was this bonehead so high up in this organization and yet clueless to the fact that Schmidt was on steroids and had a bum shoulder? Your run of the mill gnats fan knew this and I heard it from a few of them right after we signed him, how was Colletti so ignorant to see it?

BlueMouse
07-21-2008, 03:56 PM
It's a tough question. The Jones signing is going to be "the straw that broke the camel's back" as it could've saved him. If any other one thing would get him fired, he would be gone by now.

As far as worst thing he's done, Pierre and Schmidt are close. Schmidt is the worse of the two because something doesn't add up there.

The 6-4-3
07-21-2008, 04:03 PM
It's a tough question. The Jones signing is going to be "the straw that broke the camel's back" as it could've saved him. If any other one thing would get him fired, he would be gone by now.

As far as worst thing he's done, Pierre and Schmidt are close. Schmidt is the worse of the two because something doesn't add up there.



by far jason schmidt. at the very very very least JP has been contributing to the team, not they way all you want but he contributes and we got what we expected from him.

and i dont know how many times ive seen Jones with his "double play" rbi hits.
f^ckin horrible.
but schmidt has to be the worst

LARock21
07-21-2008, 04:04 PM
I voted Pierre because the schmidt signing was bad due to injury which is hard to blame ned, although you can argue he should have known about schmidt's health problems. The Pierre signing was just bad, due to Ned's horrible judgement in building a successful team. We did not need to sign him to such a long, big contract at the time especially knowing all the talent we had in the minors that were just about to be brought up. Pierre is a very average player that we did not need and who blocked the development of the younger guys. Ned should have had the foresight to see that.

GHGHCP
07-21-2008, 04:18 PM
I voted Pierre because the schmidt signing was bad due to injury which is hard to blame ned, although you can argue he should have known about schmidt's health problems. The Pierre signing was just bad, due to Ned's horrible judgement in building a successful team. We did not need to sign him to such a long, big contract at the time especially knowing all the talent we had in the minors that were just about to be brought up. Pierre is a very average player that we did not need and who blocked the development of the younger guys. Ned should have had the foresight to see that.

Yeah, Lofton woulda been the answer signing him to a short and cheap contract as a stop gap to Kemp. An ankle sprain and Drew opting out turned into a 5 year contract for a guy 3 years in decline (now working on his 4th). :sigh: @ NedCo.

grizz8884
07-21-2008, 04:22 PM
I voted Schmidt. Pierre certainly hasn't earn what he signed for on the dotted line, but at least we got some run from him. I compare Schmidt to being a nice car that you just bought and when you go to drive it the **** is a Lemon!

LARock21
07-21-2008, 04:28 PM
Schmidt was a signing that people agreed with at the time. It wasn't a bad signing IF he had been healthy and a lot of gm's would have made the deal. With Pierre, he knew what he was getting and he knew (or should have known) the consequences of signing him and how it would affect the team. It was universally criticized as one of the worst contracts and signings in baseball at the time and that holds true even now. Even though Pierre has obviously been more productive then Schmidt, it has still hurt the team, perhaps even more than the schmidt signing.

tide4life
07-21-2008, 05:13 PM
Signing Schmidt. Ned either didn't do his homework well enough before he signed him (it's apparent Schmidt came to LA as damaged goods) or he took too big a gamble hoping he would recover and contribute. Either way, we haven't got s**t from Schmidt!

dusto_magnifico
07-21-2008, 05:22 PM
Schmidt was a signing that people agreed with at the time. It wasn't a bad signing IF he had been healthy and a lot of gm's would have made the deal. With Pierre, he knew what he was getting and he knew (or should have known) the consequences of signing him and how it would affect the team. It was universally criticized as one of the worst contracts and signings in baseball at the time and that holds true even now. Even though Pierre has obviously been more productive then Schmidt, it has still hurt the team, perhaps even more than the schmidt signing.

I agree. This is why I always thought that the Dreifiort signing wasn't as bad as everyone thought. Thought it was a terrible decision. Dreifort and Schmidt will cost the Dodgers money, and a lot of it! But Pierre is going to cost the Dodgers monumentally more. Wins!

If Schmidt can't go every 5th day someone else will. And with the Dodgers deep deep pockets the money lost wont hurt as much as it would say the Dimondbacks or Padres.

On the other hand we knew Pierre would want to play every single game and make more outs than ever recorded. Even worse was the length of the contract. A player of his skillset (speed and only speed) shouldn't be signed to the ripe old age of 34. The possibility of a decline is just too much of a risk for a guy that relies heavily on his one skill. Only because of his contract, Pierre is supposedly blocking Ethier and or Kemp from playing. This one signing all by itself is the worst in Dodgers history EVER!!!!

dusto_magnifico
07-21-2008, 05:26 PM
I voted Schmidt. Pierre certainly hasn't earn what he signed for on the dotted line, but at least we got some run from him. I compare Schmidt to being a nice car that you just bought and when you go to drive it the **** is a Lemon!

Were racing here. If Schmidt breaks down we can always buy another one. Its not like the Dodgers dont have the cash.

Pierre on the other hand has been the good ole reliable Pinto that doesn't take you anywhere, and since he is always healthy you can't just go out and buy an upgrade to replace him because you are stuck with him for 5 years. Then Ned went out and tried to replace him anyway with an even worse player.

The fact that we are having this discussion is ridiculous. I think it should go without saying, but Ned needs to go!

MrChris951
07-21-2008, 05:28 PM
Tough choice here...I went with the Schmidt signing, but that was just barely ahead of the Jackson trade.

G2BOAT
07-21-2008, 06:13 PM
It all came down to Schmidt and Jones for me. Schmidt hasn't played and has 2 years left and about 15.5 mil. Jones has 2 years worth 18 mil. Jones is worth more and hasn't done **** besides striking out, being lazy, and eating doughnuts. Plus, with all the expectations he came with. (IE: .250 30 HRs 100 RBI)

dusto_magnifico
07-21-2008, 06:18 PM
It all came down to Schmidt and Jones for me. Schmidt hasn't played and has 2 years left and about 15.5 mil. Jones has 2 years worth 18 mil. Jones is worth more and hasn't done **** besides striking out, being lazy, and eating doughnuts. Plus, with all the expectations he came with. (IE: .250 30 HRs 100 RBI)

If Jones is underperforming, that is a Jones problem. If Schmidt isn't healthy that is a Schmidt problem. Juan Pierre just plain sucks and it was a bad signing from moment one. There were a lot of people that thought the Jone and Schmidt signings weren't too bad when they happened. But almost everyone felt that Pierre was overpaid and overrated for waaaay to long of a contract. When Andruw Joens was originally signed it was viewed as one of the best deals in the offseason.

BlueMouse
07-21-2008, 07:17 PM
^ Injury is not the GM's fault, but a trend of signing people with health questions in the first place is a problem. As close as he was to the Schmidt situation, the fact that he (and Conte) didn't catch anything before signing is either very unlucky on Colletti's part, or very neglectful.

The Pierre deal is worse for our team, but the cloudiness surrounding the Schmidt deal (in addition to oft injured Nomar and now Jones) makes me scared to have Colletti as a GM.

BlueMouse
07-21-2008, 07:19 PM
Oddly enough, all these bad moves aren't even the most compelling reasons to fire Ned. The 2 biggest reasons to fire Colletti are:

#1) Because Ned is a gnat
#2) So we can promote White and not lose him to another team

J-Rodzilla
07-21-2008, 08:11 PM
Tough choices but Schmidt was the worst of all. How could the scouts not see his velocity declining. Like TIDE4LIFE said it seemed like no homework was done or they just covered their eyes & said oh he's ok he just has a tired arm. Tired my *****, the only thing that's tiring is all of these injuries & non producing players. McCourt's fault, Ned's fault, coaching staff or players what ever it is heads need to be pulled out of many a$$e$ to get this big Dodger blue ball rolling!

J-Rodzilla
07-21-2008, 08:12 PM
Man my bad I said blue ball. LMAO

BlueZoo
07-21-2008, 08:47 PM
The suspicious, slimy signing of the worthless chipmunk-faced pitcher Jason Schmidt got my vote...not only a smack in the face of Dodger fans everywhere, but the start of a group of signings and behavior which reeked of collusion between all parties involved. Investigation! Conspiracy!
The relegation of the pre - signing physical to complete, total irrelevance as far as LA.

BlueZoo
07-21-2008, 08:52 PM
Oddly enough, all these bad moves aren't even the most compelling reasons to fire Ned. The 2 biggest reasons to fire Colletti are:

#1) Because Ned is a gnat
#2) So we can promote White and not lose him to another team


It's also a known fact that Schmidt bought Ned a fully-loaded Sunflower yellow Volkswagen Cabriolet after he signed.

BlueZoo
07-21-2008, 09:06 PM
If Jones is underperforming, that is a Jones problem. If Schmidt isn't healthy that is a Schmidt problem. Juan Pierre just plain sucks and it was a bad signing from moment one. There were a lot of people that thought the Jone and Schmidt signings weren't too bad when they happened. But almost everyone felt that Pierre was overpaid and overrated for waaaay to long of a contract. When Andruw Joens was originally signed it was viewed as one of the best deals in the offseason.



I'll give you that Jones was thought of by many as a pick up that would definitely help LA...who knew just how bad he would be? It was thought that if he did suck as much as he did last season with the Braves, he still would probably be an offensive leader on a team like LA...26 HRs and 96 RBIs?
But the Schmidt statement is a crock and you should know it. He came to LA damaged and Ned didn't do his homework - plain and simple. How did it not show up in the physical? I'm saying he never even had one. That's what that toad gets paid for...it was a Giant thing from the get go; all involved with it.
It's not Schmidt's problem...here's sitting around collecting 47million dollars.. how ridiculous...some "problem."
It's a Dodger/ Dodger fan problem, and a lot more of one than Juan Pierre.

blueplatespcial
07-21-2008, 09:09 PM
Andruw Jones was to be the solution to Juan Pierre's wimpy bat and arm.

blueplatespcial
07-22-2008, 12:09 AM
It's also a known fact that Schmidt bought Ned a fully-loaded Sunflower yellow Volkswagen Cabriolet after he signed.

:laugh:
:laugh:
:laugh:

KOOL-AID Man
07-22-2008, 01:10 AM
Jones was a horrible signing, but at least he goes out there and plays and at his age he had a chance to turn things around and get back to they way he used to be. We've gotten absoultey nothing out of Schmidt and he was on the decline before we signed him, so I'd say that was the worst move. Jones is a close second though. Pierre gets too much criticism. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't and I'm still not a fan of the signing, but at least the guy gives some production and has the speed to steal bases.

grizz8884
07-22-2008, 01:14 AM
Were racing here. If Schmidt breaks down we can always buy another one. Its not like the Dodgers dont have the cash.

Pierre on the other hand has been the good ole reliable Pinto that doesn't take you anywhere, and since he is always healthy you can't just go out and buy an upgrade to replace him because you are stuck with him for 5 years. Then Ned went out and tried to replace him anyway with an even worse player.

The fact that we are having this discussion is ridiculous. I think it should go without saying, but Ned needs to go!

I agree with you that this whole discussion is sad, but we have had nothing to show for the Schmidt deal. That's the only reason why I say what I say. If Schmidt was still pitching and pitching ******, that vote would have been for Pierre maybe.

N.Z's #1 Dodger
07-22-2008, 01:18 AM
I voted Pierre. It was bad because Coletti knew exactly what he was getting, and still did it.

dusto_magnifico
07-22-2008, 02:17 AM
I'll give you that Jones was thought of by many as a pick up that would definitely help LA...who knew just how bad he would be? It was thought that if he did suck as much as he did last season with the Braves, he still would probably be an offensive leader on a team like LA...26 HRs and 96 RBIs?
But the Schmidt statement is a crock and you should know it. He came to LA damaged and Ned didn't do his homework - plain and simple. How did it not show up in the physical? I'm saying he never even had one. That's what that toad gets paid for...it was a Giant thing from the get go; all involved with it.
It's not Schmidt's problem...here's sitting around collecting 47million dollars.. how ridiculous...some "problem."
It's a Dodger/ Dodger fan problem, and a lot more of one than Juan Pierre.

Yeah... these are all moves for which Ned should have his noose yanked!

Which one is worse is irrelevant. This is 3 years in a row that Ned has signed the worst free agent to a contract totaling at least 20 million.

Schmidt is only hurting the dodgers finanacially at the moment, while Pierre hurts us by taking at bats away from Ethier/ Kemp. When he comes back him and Jones should platoon.

mOrphosis
07-22-2008, 02:48 AM
Oh please...nobody in this forum was complaining at all when Jones or Schmidt was signed. To throw Coletti under the bus is lame. The Dodgers are still in transition, and despite the injury to Schmidt and the complete non-factor that Andruw Jones has been, the team is still competing and in the race.

In the end, I believe that the homegrown Dodgers (Kemp, Loney, Martin, Billingsley, Broxton, Ethier (via the A's), and now Kershaw) will be the decding factor if the Dodgers succeed or fail to win a championship within the next 5 years or so. Coletti kept the kids around and didn't bite on the short term gamble/gain to win instantly. How they do will ultimately determine Coletti years as GM.

I am not selling out the Coletti or Dodgers at all. In Ned I trust. Go Dodgers!!

LAFord
07-22-2008, 05:41 AM
I voted Pierre. It was bad because Coletti knew exactly what he was getting, and still did it.
LMAO...That's the truth...Now, after your post, I want to change my vote! Pierre was probably worst of all.

I voted for the Schmidt deal because I don't understand how Conte and Ned didn't know the risk.
Sure, most of us fans thought it was a great deal at the time, because we all figured the Ex-Giant's trainer and Ex-assistant GM knew all about Schmidt.
Point is, they were stupid, ignorant, and blind and ended up getting burnt!

LAFord
07-22-2008, 05:52 AM
The Dodgers are still in transition, and despite the injury to Schmidt and the complete non-factor that Andruw Jones has been, the team is still competing and in the race.

Coletti kept the kids around and didn't bite on the short term gamble/gain to win instantly. How they do will ultimately determine Coletti years as GM.

Good points.

I also believe that Ned made many moves that really made sense at the time and for some unknown reason, the players simply failed. Hendrickson, Lugo, and Betemit come to mind as well as Jones.

Nomar and Wolf were great moves IMO, just bitten by injuries. both did a lot to better the team.

And don't forget the best moves ever...acquiring Marlon Anderson, Kurudo, Maddux, and Saito.

I'm not a Ned Hater... yet. This trade deadline may sway me 100% to one side or the other.

BlueZoo
07-22-2008, 12:12 PM
Oh please...nobody in this forum was complaining at all when Jones or Schmidt was signed. To throw Coletti under the bus is lame. The Dodgers are still in transition, and despite the injury to Schmidt and the complete non-factor that Andruw Jones has been, the team is still competing and in the race.

In the end, I believe that the homegrown Dodgers (Kemp, Loney, Martin, Billingsley, Broxton, Ethier (via the A's), and now Kershaw) will be the decding factor if the Dodgers succeed or fail to win a championship within the next 5 years or so. Coletti kept the kids around and didn't bite on the short term gamble/gain to win instantly. How they do will ultimately determine Coletti years as GM.

I am not selling out the Coletti or Dodgers at all. In Ned I trust. Go Dodgers!!


Maybe that's because we read and believe all the BS that we are fed by the LA media on signing him..."oh please", could that have something to do with it.
Sure, I thought that Schmidt was a great signing...how did I ,or anyone else, know the slimebag lies that were being perpetrated on the fans with this washed up has - been piece of SF dung? Along with the trainer, Cunte.
Ned spent $ 47M on nothing, and because we trusted and believed in him doesn't exonerate him in the slightest. How are we supposed to know what the real deal is until it happens?
That "we all thought they were great signings" arguement means nil, IMO. So what if that's what we thought ? We're just people supporting our team on a TV set or going to watch them play in a ballpark...how the hell does that change the Schmidt signing? Are we getting paid like Ned for his expertise and inside "knowledge?"
Why is there so much ink on this guy getting the boot, then ?
Because he didn't make moves then?
Based on the big ones he's made in the last two years, maybe even he is afraid of himself.
He probably can read right?

BlueMouse
07-22-2008, 02:38 PM
^ When Schmidt was signed there were questions about his health, but the spin put on it was "If anyone would know, it would be Colletti and Conte...". So, like everyone, I hesitantly said "OK, I guess these guys would know".

Either they are incompetent, excesive risk takers, or corrupt. Unlucky would be a fourth choice, but the other bad moves appear to prove that one unlikely.

southerndodgerf
07-22-2008, 02:57 PM
uuuuugggggggrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhh (grunt!)
This is me taking a poo on your trust in Ned Colletti.

l
l
(
l
)
O0
@QO0

Grow up please.

dusto_magnifico
07-22-2008, 03:00 PM
Grow up please.

No way!

Mr Blue
07-22-2008, 10:21 PM
It's a tough question. The Jones signing is going to be "the straw that broke the camel's back" as it could've saved him. If any other one thing would get him fired, he would be gone by now.

As far as worst thing he's done, Pierre and Schmidt are close. Schmidt is the worse of the two because something doesn't add up there.
What doesn't add up is that that went they went in to operate they found not 1, not 2, but 3 discreet problems. The team physician is with Kerlan-Jobe, so he most likely is very competent. He also does the evals before players are signed. That tells me that (A) Frank was pinching pennies and didn't have an MRI done or (B) A MRI was done, the report was sent to Conte, and he didn't read it or swept it under the carpet because he wanted his ex-Gnat buddy so badly. Schmidt sure as h#ll didn't pick up all those shoulder problems over the off-season, and he had lost significant velocity in his final year with the Gnats. A clue???? It could also be A and B above plus Ned buying into the cover-up, even though in Darth's mind that makes me a 'kid'. So an overwhelming vote for Schmidt from yours truly. :smoking::mad:

Mr Blue
07-22-2008, 10:42 PM
Good points.

I also believe that Ned made many moves that really made sense at the time and for some unknown reason, the players simply failed. Hendrickson, Lugo, and Betemit come to mind as well as Jones.

Nomar and Wolf were great moves IMO, just bitten by injuries. both did a lot to better the team.

And don't forget the best moves ever...acquiring Marlon Anderson, Kurudo, Maddux, and Saito.

I'm not a Ned Hater... yet. This trade deadline may sway me 100% to one side or the other.When we made our big acquisition of Hendrickson, e had 4.5 years in the majors with a W?L of 37-40 and an ERA of 4.5. We gave up Navarro, who we received as "The Yankee's top prospect" at a very young age. With Martin's emergence, Ned let him go for a proven loser, when we could have sent him down, let him mature for a couple of years and gotten huge value for him. Really made sense indeed.

LAFord
07-23-2008, 05:40 AM
When we made our big acquisition of Hendrickson, e had 4.5 years in the majors with a W?L of 37-40 and an ERA of 4.5. We gave up Navarro, who we received as "The Yankee's top prospect" at a very young age. With Martin's emergence, Ned let him go for a proven loser, when we could have sent him down, let him mature for a couple of years and gotten huge value for him. Really made sense indeed.At that time it made sense...
Well, obviously it was a "live in the now" type move. We were in a pennant race.

Navarro was complete crap at that time, and of NO use to the Dodgers with Martin tearing it up.
As far as W-L record on a team as bad as Tampa Bay was back then, well how would any pitcher win games there?
Henkrickson was holding a 3.81ERA in 13 starts that year in Tampa Bay. We needed pitching badly, and we were getting Toby Hall to replace the useless, seemingly overrated Navarro. Though as you said, he probably just needed more time to mature.

So yes, in hindsight it was a terrible move...but at the time, it seemed good to many of us.

Mr Blue
07-23-2008, 02:16 PM
At that time it made sense...
Well, obviously it was a "live in the now" type move. We were in a pennant race.

Navarro was complete crap at that time, and of NO use to the Dodgers with Martin tearing it up.
As far as W-L record on a team as bad as Tampa Bay was back then, well how would any pitcher win games there?
Henkrickson was holding a 3.81ERA in 13 starts that year in Tampa Bay. We needed pitching badly, and we were getting Toby Hall to replace the useless, seemingly overrated Navarro. Though as you said, he probably just needed more time to mature.

So yes, in hindsight it was a terrible move...but at the time, it seemed good to many of us.Lurch showed in 2 years with a pretty good team (TOR) that he couldn't pitch, and they dumped him on TB. In his last year at TB he did have a 3.81 ERA as you say, but he put 115 runners on base in 89 innings (81H, 34BB) and was 4-12. So I guess the bully ate a lot of those runners (a general topic for another time). So when I took a long look at this guy's record, I couldn't see one positive about him at the time. Plus at 6"9', you knew everybody was going to steal on him. OTOH, I WAS excited to pick up a solid b/u catcher for once, but he was pissed because had been a starter the last 4 years and never got any playing time because Russell emerged instantly. You are correct that Navarro did zero, zip, zilch for us, but we did throw him into the coals at a pretty young age for 2 reasons: We didn't know we had anybody else, and to justify the Kevin Brown deal. So in my mind we were giving up "possibly" too much for a b/u catcher, with a LH P as a toss-in.That's just the way I saw it at the time.

Trying not to be a dick for once,:)
-G

jaydizel
07-23-2008, 03:32 PM
you guys are lame!
how does Juan Pierre suck, because he doesn't hit home runs, look at his stats. This is by far the best signing. We paid so much, because there were other teams after him---or could have been Mathews, Damon.
Brett tomko was the worst signing! How does somebody give dog ****e soooo much money.
Sometimes I think Ned likes to give money to players he's had a relationship with. I'll hook you up, it's not my money.
I hope to God that we trade the Vet's
J

BlueMouse
07-23-2008, 03:42 PM
^ I hate Juan Pierre

LARock21
07-23-2008, 03:45 PM
^I hate Juan Pierre

And yes he sucks because he doesn't hit home runs, he doesn't get on base the way someone who lacks certain skills he does should, he is a liability on defense, and he has blocked the progress of our younger better, cheaper players. What else am I missing? I think you should look at his stats and attempt to justify the signing at the time.

The 6-4-3
07-23-2008, 04:22 PM
some of you foo's are ********, how can JP be the worst signing?
steals bases, hits and hits and hits, played in more games, doesn't smile when i K's, hardworker, a f^ckin GAMER

mean while Jones and shcmidt have yet to do 1 thing for this team!

how how how?
yea pierre is over payed for a player that he is. but is still a good player

jones and schmidt have yet to do 1 thing to make them a Dodger.

The 6-4-3
07-23-2008, 04:26 PM
you guys are lame!
how does Juan Pierre suck, because he doesn't hit home runs, look at his stats. This is by far the best signing. We paid so much, because there were other teams after him---or could have been Mathews, Damon.
Brett tomko was the worst signing! How does somebody give dog ****e soooo much money.
Sometimes I think Ned likes to give money to players he's had a relationship with. I'll hook you up, it's not my money.
I hope to God that we trade the Vet's
J


F^CKIN AYE THANK YOU!

exactly right, at the very least he is producing how HE is suppose

dusto_magnifico
07-23-2008, 11:01 PM
some of you foo's are ********, how can JP be the worst signing?
steals bases, hits and hits and hits, played in more games, doesn't smile when i K's, hardworker, a f^ckin GAMER

mean while Jones and shcmidt have yet to do 1 thing for this team!

how how how?
yea pierre is over payed for a player that he is. but is still a good player

jones and schmidt have yet to do 1 thing to make them a Dodger.

Apparently you didn't see his numbers since Furcal went out and we went on an offensive slump that could only be compared to the Dodgers of 2003. Pierre since Furcal's been out 261, 296, 291. I knew we had some idiots here but you top them all. Pierre= overrated!

dusto_magnifico
07-23-2008, 11:03 PM
F^CKIN AYE THANK YOU!

exactly right, at the very least he is producing how HE is suppose


Really? I doubt that 261 is what we expect from him but ok? whatever.

dusto_magnifico
07-23-2008, 11:05 PM
you guys are lame!
how does Juan Pierre suck, because he doesn't hit home runs, look at his stats. This is by far the best signing. We paid so much, because there were other teams after him---or could have been Mathews, Damon.
Brett tomko was the worst signing! How does somebody give dog ****e soooo much money.
Sometimes I think Ned likes to give money to players he's had a relationship with. I'll hook you up, it's not my money.
I hope to God that we trade the Vet's
J

I hate people who think Juan Pierre has value on a team with NO power, OBP, or really any kind of offensive firepower whatsoever!

N.Z's #1 Dodger
07-23-2008, 11:05 PM
you guys are lame!
how does Juan Pierre suck, because he doesn't hit home runs, look at his stats. This is by far the best signing. We paid so much, because there were other teams after him---or could have been Mathews, Damon.
Brett tomko was the worst signing! How does somebody give dog ****e soooo much money.
Sometimes I think Ned likes to give money to players he's had a relationship with. I'll hook you up, it's not my money.
I hope to God that we trade the Vet's
J

Not even going to bother.

LA BUMS
07-23-2008, 11:14 PM
**** Ned

LARock21
07-23-2008, 11:29 PM
Not even going to bother.

My thoughts exactly. Some people just don't know what they're talking about when it comes to baseball.

GHGHCP
07-23-2008, 11:31 PM
NedCo wanted the Pierre of 03' and 04' (his only good seasons). What he got was the 3 year (now 4 year) in decline Pierre (or what I call "normal Pierre") which is bad in offense, defense and who blocks better players from playing.

In short, NedCo signed a player that sucks for 5 years who is getting worse and isn't getting any younger.

I like many others are tired of NedCo not doing research and wasting our money.

LA BUMS
07-23-2008, 11:37 PM
7 days to get something in return for Lowe.
clock is ticking...time to fire ned and bring on the great white.
trade lowe to ny for kenedy and tabata, trade a computer for depo to the madres for the mad dog, send laroche hu and melaon to sea for belly, give nosebones number to andru so they can get together and an asada sunday maybe then we might get production out of cf, and send schmidt to japan for some cup o noodles and those clapper things.
did I miss anything?

**** you ned!

LARock21
07-23-2008, 11:38 PM
^GH we're usually on the same page when it comes to these things. I said the same thing about 3 or 4 pages ago and people don't read. Pierres contract can't really be justified as a good signing. It was criticized when he did it by experts and it's a terrible signing now. It should have never been done.

GHGHCP
07-23-2008, 11:57 PM
^GH we're usually on the same page when it comes to these things. I said the same thing about 3 or 4 pages ago and people don't read. Pierres contract can't really be justified as a good signing. It was criticized when he did it by experts and it's a terrible signing now. It should have never been done.

Not just experts, any fan that had a clue about baseball criticized it. :D

http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/pierrju01.shtml

This alone should get NedCo fired, the rest of the garbage is just gravy. Check out that awesome OPS+, such awesome offensive production!