Where Are They Now?

where-are-they-now-the-cast-of-the-sandlotIt was just two and a half years ago when the Dodgers traded away their future, can’t miss star outfielder, Travon Robinson. On July 31, 2011, he was traded as part of a 3-team trade by the Los Angeles Dodgers to the Seattle Mariners. The Boston Red Sox sent Juan Rodriguez (minors), Tim Federowicz and Stephen Fife to the Los Angeles Dodgers. The Boston Red Sox sent Chih-Hsien Chiang (minors) to the Seattle Mariners. The Seattle Mariners sent Erik Bedard and Josh Fields to the Boston Red Sox.

Some of us were not happy and blasted Ned Colletti in the August 1, 2011 post, “Ned Half Franked it” :

“Trayvon Robinson, former standout at Crenshaw High was traded to the Red Sox for a Catcher, RP, and a SP. What’s the problem here.? They’re all 24 and older, in AA ball, not very good offensively or refined in pitching mechanics or 2nd out pitches. The two pitchers figure to become relief pitchers in the long run, and the 24 yr old Catcher, whom is being touted as the next coming of David Ross, not much offense, but plenty defense, career backup type player, for a budding big leaguer who led the team in HR’s, RBI’s etc., is just that, not much. We needed offense, blue chip players, but instead we got the busted items from the 99 cent only store.

We got a pretty good backup catcher in FedEx, and a very capable reserve pitcher in Barney (Fife) while Travon is currently out of a job after the following transactions:
November 20, 2012: Traded by the Seattle Mariners to the Baltimore Orioles for Robert Andino.
November 5, 2013: Granted Free Agency.
In 288 career at bats, Robinson has compiled a.215/.272/.330 line.

This just goes to show that some highly thought of prospects never pan out. And that maybe Colletti and his staff know just a little more than those of us in the peanut gallery.

Can you think of other Dodgers “can’t miss” prospects that never made it?


34 Responses to Where Are They Now?

  1. 32and53fan says:

    Where have you gone, Travon Robinson,
    Our nation turns it’s lonely eyes to you.
    What’s that you say, Mr. Robinson.
    Your big bat has left and gone away,
    Hey hey hey.

  2. dodgereric says:

    Hi everyone! It’s been a while but never far away.

    Greg Brock comes to mind immediately, 32.

    Nice letter to the Times on the last thread Kahli – well crafted and on the money!

    I’ve done some math. Assuming a human heart beats 60 times a minute, in 7 years it will beat 220,903,200 times. Therefore, that $215M contract Clayton gets will get him a buck for every heartbeat in the next 7 years.

    OK, almost.

    Amazing, isn’t it?

  3. trublu4ever says:

    Great to see you again, Dodgereric.

  4. lbirken says:

    Eric, good to hear from you. I like the topic of this thread because we used to hear a lot about al the prospects Ned (and others) traded away when in fact few of those prospects ever became “stars”. There will always be risk in trading away a young player (Pedro Martinez, Mike Piazza) but for the most part the players the Dodgers traded have not been huge impact players. To be sure some have been decent, average players but most of the players have bounced around from team to team after leaving the Dodgers.

  5. 32and53fan says:

    I remember that Willie Crawford, who was signed by Tommy Lasorda as a $100,000 “bonus baby”, two days after graduating from Fremont High School in 1964. His signing status meant he had to play both 1964 and 1965 on the Dodgers 25 man roster. He was hyped as being the next Willie Mays, a five tool player destined for the Hall of Fame.

    While he didn’t play much for the first few years of his career, he did play for 12 years and hit as much as .295 with 14 homers and 66 RBIs in 145 games. He also homered in the 1974 World Series against the Oakland A’s.

    Those years between Don Drysdale retiring and the emergence of the Garvey, Lopes, Russell and Cey infield were kind of a dark period in which I don’t have a lot of Dodger memories. Those were the years that Crawford was most active, so I kind of blocked out the fact that he played as much as he did.

    So, while he did not meet the lofty expectations that were heaped on him, he did have a decent career.

  6. oldbrooklynfan says:

    I never feel anything, good or bad, when a Dodger top prospect is traded away. To me I don’t really think (or feel) of them as Dodgers until they’ve played for a time with the parent team. I have to admit it doesn’t feel too good when one of them becomes a star like Roberto Clemente or Pedro Martinez but than again that’s just the way things happen.
    But once someone get’s to a point when you can’t think of him as anything but a Dodger, like Mike Piazza, than it hurts to see them go.

  7. I was thinking about this subject and remembered Jerry Sands. Wasn’t he considered a sure thing?

  8. enchantedbeaver says:

    Dee Gordon comes to mind.

    You ever stop to think though that guys like Lambo, Robinson, Sands and Gordon were overhyped because that’s all McCourt had to sell us on? We sure as hell weren’t ever going to get top tier talent, so he tried to sell us snake oil instead.

  9. Dodger4life says:

    Offerman came to my mind???

    • enchantedbeaver says:

      There was another shortstop many years later – think his name was Joel Guzman or something like that. He was supposed to be our dream shortstop.

      Then there was this outfielder… Andre something. Started out pretty good, but then could never hit left handers and his power deteriorated…

      • Dodger4life says:

        Fair enough… I wish good things for Mr. Clutch this coming season though.

      • JhallWally says:

        Tou’Che my brother….. Still got an undeserved contract from Nedcompoop……

      • JhallWally says:

        If I recall correctly, we (you and I) wanted to trade him (Andre) 4 years ago when we could have gotten a good haul for him…. I thought he was overrated 4-5 years ago.. Don’t get me wrong, I think he is a decent (1+ over replacement), but, we could have cashed in if we had traded him at the right time. Now, we’re just paying way too much for a player that will be maybe 2 games over replacement. I’m not just getting on Andre, Crawford is propably just as bad or worse……

        • Yes, Ethier falls in the line of Piazza. Athough he’s not in the same class as Piazza, not by far, but even though he never lived up to the player we thought we had, he’s still one of the most beloved players the Dodgers have. I know I wouldn’t at all be surprised if he is traded and I don’t think he’d be another Clemente because his lack of consistant power, these last few years, has shown us that. I have to say I still can’t imagine him in anther uniform.

  10. lbirken says:

    Without addressing the issue of his contract, I believe Ethier does not qualify as a “can’t miss” prospect simply because he has played pretty much up to his ability. Whether that has been “good enough” or not can be debated but when he came up to the big league club he was one of several outfielders (Jason Repko and Jason Werth come to mind) who looked the same. They all showed promise they could hit but not necessarily for power and they all were OK defensively. But none had the dazzle of a Matt Kemp and even he had trouble breaking into the starting lineup. Ethier stayed healthy and he is still a Dodger. He has had good times and not so good times but for the most part he has fulfilled his “promise”. Has he been the player we all wanted him to be? Probably not but that is not his fault.

  11. enchantedbeaver says:

    Guess nobody got that I was just trying to get a rise out of Tru.

    Dre I think exceeded expectations his first 2-3 years before settling into what are most likely his norms. I think he’s better than Crawford for whatever that’s worth, but I also think he’s the most likely to be traded at the deadline for whatever it is we need at that time, probably an infielder to replace Uribe, who I think will probably tank to the tune of .218 and a half dozen HRs.

    Anyone notice our current bench is beyond pathetic? That will most likely be this years team’s undoing unless something drastically changes.

    • trublu4ever says:

      I got it 😉 I do agree about the bench….pathetic, it is!

    • JhallWally says:

      🙂 I agree. I think Ethier is the most likely to be traded. We are not going to trade Kemp or Puig. Crawford is beyond worthless on the market… Ethier is almost worthless with his inability to hit lefties and that insane, ill advised, stupid contract the Dodgers signed him to. We would have to eat 80-90% of his contract to get anything back worth a damn in a trade…

      I would just keep him for now. We have 4 outfielders with a lot of injury problems… We can’t get much right now for him, and, with our injury issues, he is more valuable to the Dodgers….

      If we could get something useful for him I would go for it in a heart beat…. But, it aint gonna happen……

      • enchantedbeaver says:

        I think Dre’s contract had more to do with the popular thing than it did the right baseball thing. By the time he received his fat payday his metrics had already crested and he was noticeably on the downhill slope. Unless he’s going lights out this season (in which case you’d have to keep him anyway), that contract will stop us from even getting a replacement level infielder or catcher straight up. He’s in that category now that if you want a Zach Lee you have to take Dre too. And we’d still have to eat most of his salary.

      • messagebear says:

        I’m feeling in a generous mood about Andre today, and it’s not just to stay on the good side of Tru. He may have disappointed compared to the expectations from his first couple of seasons, but I’d rather have him than not. I also don’t fault him if he was able to take contract advantage of Ned and the Guggenheimers, There are too many assholes that are making gazillions of dollars in today’s sports environment. By comparison, Andre is a class act and at least knows how to project a good image. I agree that he was overpaid, but let’s wait and see how Matt pans out after his injuries and considering the huge contract he earned after his MVP year. If he doesn’t come back all the way, his contract could prove to be a bigger debacle than Andre’s ever will be. Besides which, I think that Andre could come back with a solid year and make that money worth while.

        • JhallWally says:

          Good point Bear… Kemps contract could turn out a lot worse than Andres’. If he doesn’t come back and play at an MVP level or at least be an impact player, his contract will dwarf Ethiers as a bad signing… I guess we will see.. I am hoping that a healthy Kemp will produce at an MVP level again….

  12. oldbrooklynfan says:

    It’s going to be quite a contest between Ethier and Kemp and Crawford will also most likely be be thrown into that fire. And it looks like it will start right away. I think our eyes, minds and hearts will be constantly on how that trio makes out.

  13. lbirken says:

    The situation with four “superstar” outfielders certainly will be looked at very carefully when ST begins. Last ST Puig got a lot of at bats as Kemp, Crawford and Ethier were brought along slowly. What will happen this ST? I was at the Dodger Fan Fest last year when Kemp told the crowd he was ready. I am sure he believed it at the time but we all know things did not work out well for him. Perhaps he understands his body better now but we still have no idea if he will be able to produce at the MVP level. Ethier’s struggles against left handers seems to scream platoon (a concept I have never liked) but at what position? Center? Left? Most of us don’t believe Crawford will improve and avoid injury. And what about Puig? Will he be able to make the adjustments offensively and not give up at bats? It will be interesting.

    • 32and53fan says:

      Sometimes Kemp lies. Or he really believes the overly optimistic stuff he says despite the nagging pains that are not healed.

  14. kahliforni says:

    I’m still of the belief that if each outfielder basically sat every fourth day, these players would be fresh come the dog days of late summer, and might actually be healthy for any playoff run. That’s over 120 games apiece. That’s plenty for a trio of outfielders who can’t stay healthy. And if one catches fire, you adjust accordingly. Egos be damned. At this point in their careers, how can Crawford, Ethier or Kemp really believe they’re 162-game players? Puig…maybe!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: