J's Dodger Blog

The 2011 Season: Some Thoughts

2011-09-29T09:19:00.000-07:00

So, I guess that happened. That being the entire 2011 season. Anyway, I just had a couple of thoughts that were too long for Twitter and decided to post them here.

1. Before the season began, I thought to myself that if everything went right this season the Dodgers could get somewhere around 86 wins and (again, all things going right) that might allow them to win the division. That meant Casey Blake contributing (ha), getting quality innings from Jon Garland (Ha), getting a lot of scoreless outings from Broxton, Kuo, and Vicente Padilla (HA!), and getting a handful of homeruns and some solid defense from Juan Uribe (HAHAHA!). Obviously, things didn't go right.

On the bright side, Uribe did end up the star of one of the best baseball memes of the season.

Of course, I never imagined the Diamondbacks would win 94 games, so that really blew everything away anyway.

Still, for all the injuries and question marks, the Dodgers had a great second half and still ended up winning 82 games. Even though there's no reward for finishing in 3rd place in your division, there's still some pride to be had in having a winning record for this season, especially because a few months ago, winning 70 games seemed like a barely achievable goal.

This team deserves a lot of credit for the strong finish. And that means a lot coming from me, considering how cynical and "dead inside" I've been for the last several months.

2. Speaking of credit, James Loney deserves a bunch for saving himself from what was quickly becoming a horrific season. He somehow managed himself 12 homeruns and a line of .288/.339/.416. That's not that much worse than his career numbers. 2011 actually turned out to be a very James Loney year.

Does this mean he shouldn't still be non-tendered this offseason? Yes and no. I know that's not an answer. Let me explain.

If there is money to spend for free agents this offseason, 1st base is definitely in need of an upgrade. But let's be honest, the budget will probably be conservative. Where is McCourt going to get the money to sign big checks? If that's the case, might as well keep Loney (this route might include non-tendering him and resigning him cheaper). There's not a whole lot of sense in letting Loney go and creating a hole at first base if the front office isn't going to have the money available to replace him.

(Quickly, while I'm still partially on the subject, Rod Barajas had a totally Rod Barajas year as well: 16 homeruns and a line of .230/.287/.430. Compare that to his career line of .238/.284/.414. I guess you couldn't ask for more?)

3. Dee Gordon, Jerry Sands, and Rubby De La Rosa (may his 2012 season rest in peace) have me excited for the future. Flashes of brilliance from all three.

4. Finally, Clayton Kershaw and Matt Kemp.

Granted, I'm biased, but these two should be Cy Young and MVP, respectively. Both races are going to be close, and both players should be really proud of themselves no matter where they finish in the race.

A lot has been said about who should win what and for what reasons, so I won't get into it too heavily. I'll just say this about Matt Kemp:

If Matt Kemp had won the Triple Crown (ignoring how unimportant the stats that make up the Triple Crown are) he'd probably be a near unanimous MVP choice. Kemp finished the season at the top of the leaderboard in both homeruns and RBIs. He finished with a .324 batting average, coming in third to Ryan Braun (.332) and Jose Reyes (.337). Kemp was 195 for 602 on the season. If Kemp had gone 203 for 602, he would have finished the season batting .33721 to Reyes' .3371 (181 for 537).

What I'm saying is this: Kemp missed out on the batting title in the Triple Crown race by eight hits. Eight. This is over a six month season. That's something like just one more hit every three weeks of the season. One bloop single here or there. A lucky hop. A squib single towards a 3rd baseman who was playing too far back. A fly ball that an outfielder loses in the sun and never gets his glove on. A line drive or ground ball that stays fair instead of just drifting foul. Eight hits over the course of a long season is so, so minimal.

Point being, if you would have voted for Kemp had he won the Triple Crown but wouldn't now that he just missed out on it, consider how very slim the margin was here. If missing just eight hits over an entire season costs Kemp the MVP award, it would be a tremendous shame.

Last thing, still related to Kemp and Kershaw.

It is such a travesty that the Dodgers have, arguably, the best young starting pitcher and the best young position player in the league and the best they can do is finish 3rd in the NL West.

These two young players are in or entering their prime and they are being surrounded by players the likes of Juan Uribe and Eugenio Velez (not that Velez cost this team their shot at the playoffs, but I think you get my point). Frank McCourt won't, or can't, spend big to improve the team, and the small amount of money he does allot, Ned Colletti wastes on poor free agent signings (Matt Guerrier is still owed $7.5 million over the next two years).

They've turned what should be something great into a mess.

I guess if I were to point a single reason why I only went to one home game this season (and the tickets were bought by someone else) it'd be that. So, there you go, McCourt. If you are wondering why attendance is down so much this year, it's you. You are the face of a group of people that have turned this great franchise into one of constant upheaval, and one, worst of all, that has begun to squander some of the best years of its brightest young players.

Matt Kemp and Clayton Kershaw should be the center pieces of a 100 win team heading for the playoffs. Instead, they are heading home before the start of October while McCourt still sits in court trying to get control of a team no one wants him to have.

At least, that's just my reason for attending the fewest amount of Dodger games in season since I was a little kid ... though, what am I but just another fan?

God, this got depressing. I didn't mean for it to be, but whenever I get to thinking about the number McCourt has done to this franchise, I start to go to a dark place.

Sorry.

I'm going to take a couple of deep breaths and get myself ready for the offseason.

10 Games Into 2011: Some Thoughts

2011-04-11T23:22:00.000-07:00

What's this? A blog post?! Yes it is. I should point out that I've pretty much abandoned this blog and moved my Dodger opining exclusively to Twitter.

Except, that is, for when I have thoughts longer than 140 characters (not often).

Anyway, the Dodgers stand 6-4 after ten games, and I have some thoughts.

1. I'm still worried about this somewhat patchwork roster. Of the 25 men to make the roster, I'm still at unease with five of them.

Hector Gimenez had a good spring, but, frankly, he's looked overmatched more than a few times in the major leagues. He's on the DL now, with a phantom knee injury and I'm in no hurry to get him back.

Aaron Miles. I don't get the point. He's not a good hitter, not a great fielder. Jamey Carroll does everything he does and does it better. I guess with health questions hanging over the heads of both Rafael Furcal (who, as I'm writing this, it turns out has a broken thumb) and Casey Blake, you need another utility infielder around. I just wish we had better options than Miles. I'm no big fan of Ivan De Jesus, but at least he can provide the club some defensive value. And Mattingly won't be tempted to bat him leadoff or second.

Mike MacDougal and Lance Cormier. MacDougal was good at one point, but that was many moons ago. He's been ok so far in his relief appearances, giving up just a homerun over three innings of work. Cormier isn't a great option, barely squeaked onto the roster at the end of Spring Training, and has already given up four runs in four innings. I'm guessing Vicente Padilla, whenever he returns, kicks out Cormier and we just end up hoping MacDougal doesn't blow up in our faces, but that's really less than ideal.

AJ Ellis/Dioner Navarro. Ok, so this is more a technicality. Navarro wasn't really on the Opening Day roster and he's the one I have more of a problem with, but this is my blog, so deal with it. I'm not a big proponent of AJ Ellis. I like his on-base skills, but he has the power stroke of a four year old girl. Still, he seems to call a pretty decent game, and he's more than comfortable with our starting pitchers. And it's not like Dioner Navarro, who hit .258/.294/.323 in Spring Training (and .194/.270/.258 last year) is really a guaranteed offensive improvement. If Mattingly is intent on catching Rod Barajas almost every day (though in fairness to Mattingly, the way his roster was built, he has little choice), then I'm ok with Ellis as backup. Again, this is really less than ideal. It's an unfortunate by-product of the way this roster was put together.

2. If this team wants to continue to do well this season, we're going to need some players to not regress too much, and others to progress a whole lot more.

I love what Matt Kemp has done this first week and a half. He's been a man on fire. It's fantastic. But before we all freak out too much, let's not forget that Kemp, in his first 10 games last season, hit .333/.385/.756 with five homeruns, four doubles, and five walks. And we all remember how last season turned out. I'm not trying to be a downer, but I'm just reminding everyone that the .441 batting average Kemp has right not is almost certainly going to drop.

The key is making sure it doesn't drop too much.

The same goes for Tony Gwynn. He's had a pretty solid start to the season. And I really like the defense he provides in the outfield. But I have doubts we can trust him to continue hitting .333 like he has so far. However, if he can stay somewhere in the high .200s and continue with his excellent defense, I'll be ok with him taking a majority of the starts in left field.

On the flip side, Juan Uribe and James Loney are killing me. Both are hitting in the .100s (.129 and .154 respectively) and neither is drawing walks or getting extra base hits (0 BB, 1 2B for Uribe; 2 BB, 1 2B, 1 HR for Loney). These were the two guys expected to battle it out to be the third option behind Ethier and Kemp on offense. Instead, it feels like the entire offense is resting its hopes on Ethier, and more so Kemp to get anything done. The 5, 6, 7 spots in the lineup have been a black hole.

If these two can turn it on, I'll feel a lot better about our chances in 2011.

And isn't how I feel what really matters?

Offseason Awards: MVP

2010-11-13T18:02:00.000-08:00

Alright, last award, the big one: M. V. P.

Now, before I get into this, I want to preface it with something. I love stats. I really do. I like looking them up and examining them.

It used to be RBIs and Wins. Nowadays I'm working on learning newer ones that better explore and explain the game. I'm working on learning different kinds of Sabermetrics, figuring them out. I know I'm late to the game, but I'm getting there. I really like WAR.

All that being said, I'm going to work away from the stat books for this one.

And why not, it's all meaningless opinion anyway.

On a pretty mediocre 2010 Dodger team, there were still a few standouts. Kershaw, as well as Kuroda and Billingsley were a great three man pitching rotation. Hong-Chih Kuo had one of the best seasons for a reliever in recent memory. Rafael Furcal, when healthy, was an excellent addition on offense and defense.

All these men would be worthy picks for MVP of this team, but I really got to go with my gut (ugh) on this one.

So, the winner is...

Jamey Carroll.

Maybe you agree. Maybe you don't. (Carroll's WAR was 2.4 this year, 6th on the team in case you were wondering) But here's where I'm coming from.

When Carroll was signed this previous offseason, I was pretty blasé about it. Then, we added Ronnie Belliard, and I started wondering what the point of having both players on the roster would be. I wasn't really comfortable with the whole setup, and frankly, I was thinking: "We have Belliard, why do we need Carroll?"

Either way, the season began. In the first month, Carroll made sporadic appearances, coming in for defense, starting here and there at 2nd base or shortstop. Then Furcal got hurt.

Next thing you know, Carroll was starting everyday at shortstop. Then Furcal came back. And Carroll slipped back into the spot starter role. He made starts at shortstop, 2nd, and 3rd base this time. This utility role continued until early August, when Furcal was hurt again.

And Carroll stepped right back into the shortstop role. Then September rolls around. Furcal is back. Some kids are up. Carroll goes back into the utility/spot starter role.

I know I went on too long with that, but the point I'm making is, Carroll filled a lot of roles this year (including playing a little left field) and he never complained. He just did his job and he did it well. He filled in when he was needed, or he sat on the bench when he wasn't. And over this whole time, he still posted a .379 OBP, good for first on the team (minimum 300 plate appearances).

And look how David Eckstein trembles beneath him.

So, for being that guy, Jamey Carroll is your "J's Dodger Blog 2010 MVP"

Offseason Awards: Cy Young

2010-11-12T18:04:00.000-08:00

Big awards time, the tension is palpable...

The nominees are:

Hiroki Kuroda - The old guy showed he still had some stuff left in the old guy tank. Kuroda made 31 starts in 2010, posting a 3.31 ERA in 196.1 innings. He struck out 159 batters while walking just 48. He had 21 quality starts, including one where he carried a no-hitter into the 8th inning against the Phillies.

Chad Billingsley - I suppose Billingsley might have been a candidate for Comeback Player of the Year except I don't really feel like his 2009 was that bad. Either way, his 2010 was good stuff. 31 starts, 3.57 ERA over 191.2 innings. He struck out 171 to just 69 walks, had 18 quality starts, and pitched the second complete game shutout of his career.

Clayton Kershaw - The 22 year old pitched 204.1 innings, posting a 2.91 ERA over that span. He struck out 212 batters, had 23 quality starts, and picked up the first complete game shutout of his career.

And the winner is...

Everyone!

Alright, not everyone, but before I announce the winner, I want to give all three nominees props. Looking back at the stats, I was surprised by how good our top three pitchers were this season. I mean, just solid work from all three men. So, really, props to all three, but there can only be one winner, and that person is...

Clayton Kershaw for the second year in a row.

He had the 12th best ERA in all of baseball and was 7th in strikeouts per nine innings. And striking out 200+ batters in a season is flatout impressive.

For all that, he's the winner of the "J's Dodger Blog 2010 Cy Young" award.

Offseason Awards: Rookie of the Year

2010-11-11T18:40:00.000-08:00

I'm doing some more consolidating of the offseason awards I hand out.

Today, I'm cutting out the Gold Glove, mainly because fielding is hard to judge and checking out the UZR leaderboards on the Dodgers, I'm seeing Reed Johnson at number one, which seems acceptable except for how small the sample size is. Then, at number two, you have Casey Blake, which greatly surprised me.

So, I guess Casey Blake gets the Gold Glove award, but again, hard to judge.

Ok then. Rookie of the Year, another award with not a whole bunch of viable candidates.

Six players made their debuts this year: Carlos Monasterios, Russ Mitchell, Jon Link, John Lindsey, Kenley Jansen, and John Ely.

Russ Mitchell came up in September and didn't get a whole lot of experience. Jon Link got just 8.2 innings worth of work in.

You have to give John Lindsey an honorable mention for finally making it to the show but the poor guy got just twelve at-bats before breaking his hand. At least he got a base hit.

I give credit to Monasterios for jumping from the low minors and sticking the whole year on a major league roster. He had a couple of good moments, and was admirable for his ability to work out of the bullpen and make spot starts on short notice.

Unfortunately, not all of his 88.1 innings were of the highest quality. For example, he posted a 2.20 ERA in 28.2 innings in April and May, which was great. Then he posted a 5.43 ERA from June until the end of the season, which was not as great. Overall, he finished the season with a 4.38 ERA, which is pretty good for a guy who hadn't even sniffed the minors before this year.

That leaves us with our last two candidates: Ely and Jansen. This is actually pretty tough for me.

Jansen was fantastic. 0.67 ERA in 27 innings. 41 strikeouts to just 15 walks.

On the other hand, because Ely struggled through his last nine appearances (8.18 ERA in 44 IP) and raised his overall ERA on the season to 5.49, it makes it easy to forget that he was great through his first nine. After getting called up, Ely posted a 3.38 ERA in 56 innings through nine games, striking out 41 to 13 walks.

So, again, tough decision.

But I got to give it to Ely.

Taking nothing away from Jansen, because I thoroughly enjoyed watching him pitch this year and I think he's got a very bright future, but, at least for me, his 27 innings pitched can't trump the fact that John Ely was fourth on the list of Games Started for pitchers this year or that Ely racked up nine quality starts in his rookie campaign.

There's a lot of value in that, and as such, John Ely wins the "J's Dodger Blog 2010 Rookie of the Year" award.

Offseason Awards: Reliever of the Year

2010-11-10T18:38:00.000-08:00

Alright, I'm gonna jump into these awards with the Reliever of the Year. Historically (all of two years), I've started with Comeback Player of the Year.

This year though, not a whole lot to go on. If it means anything, Jay Gibbons. And he had all of 80 plate appearances this season, so, there you go.

...and provided Jeter-esque Gold Glove defense in left.

On the other hand, whatever the opposite of Comeback Player of the Year is, there were a handful of candidates for that.

Anyway, let's talk Reliever of the Year.

It's Hong-Chih Kuo.

Yeah, I'm not screwing around.

Well, I mean, I started this blog post with the intent of naming a bunch of candidates and their qualifications but, uh, looking at the stats and refreshing my memory of this season I realized what a miserable bullpen we had this year.

Kuo was pretty much the one bright spot. 60 innings of 1.20 ERA baseball.

So, for that, he wins the "J's Dodger Blog 2010 Reliever of the Year."

Dodgers Sign Ted Lilly

2010-10-17T12:19:00.000-07:00

I wasn't even in offseason mode yet, and look at the Dodgers, jumping in with a splash. (Small splash? Medium sized splash.)

The Dodgers re-upped with Ted Lilly, signing him to a three year deal. This news is a little bit bittersweet for me. Will Ted Lilly be good next year (definition of good being 25+ starts, about 4.00 ERA)? Yeah, probably.

But this deal immediately makes me thing of the Casey Blake deal: three years for a guy in his mid-30s who is beginning to show signs of decline. Sure, we got a decent offensive year out of Blake in 2009 (122 OPS+), but by the second year in the deal (2010, 99 OPS+), we were already starting to regret it. The third year (if Mattingly is smart) will have us paying Casey Blake $5.25 million to be a platoon(/bench?) player.

Which brings me back to Lilly. Obviously, there's no guarantee that Lilly will take the Casey Blake route of decline but it wouldn't shock me. Weird, but trends seem to show that players get worse, not better as they age.

I'm won't be surprised if we're regretting this deal by half-way through the second year.

We also don't know the monetary details of the contract yet. Ted Lilly was going to be one of the top pitchers on the free agent market this offseason. I'm worried about what the Dodgers offered him to not go into said market.

If it's too expensive, we might be looking at a guy who (in an ideal baseball world) is a 4th starter as our big free agent signing this offseason.

Still, our entire starting rotation at this point was comprised of Clayton Kershaw and Chad Billingsley, so being able to pencil in Ted Lilly for somewhere around 30 starts and 180-200 innings of about 4.00 ERA pitching is still a plus.

Just as long as you remember that pluses come in many sizes.

UPDATE: Lilly gets 3 years and $33 million. It's a lot, or, at least, more than I'd hoped. There's a couple ways to look at this. I'm sure on the open market, Lilly gets more than that (though I'm not sure too much more, I'm thinking maybe $12 million) so the Dodgers, in a way, got Lilly for cheap.

On the other hand, flash forward to a couple years from now, when Ted Lilly is still getting paid $11 million and possibly not producing as much. Suddenly, things aren't looking so cheap anymore.

Anyway, point is, next year we'll have Lilly in our rotation and be paying him $11 million. It's more than I hoped, but still better than I expected.

... so it's a plus.

Again, size of said plus to be determined.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 26

2010-10-03T20:57:00.000-07:00

Great week for the Dodgers to go on a winning streak. 5-1. Seriously Dodgers?

Dodgers finish the season 80-82, tied with Florida and the Angels. They'll have either the 12th, 13th, or 14th pick in the draft next year.

Eh. Whatever.

Honestly, I'm just glad this is all over. It's been a long, mostly painful season.

I honestly don't have much to add. Bring on the offseason already, even though I'm pretty sure this offseason is going to be just as painful as this actual season was.

I'll probably start working on the offseason awards soon, but for now I'm tired.

Sigh.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 25

2010-09-26T15:54:00.000-07:00

We're almost there. This long, winding death-march to mediocrity ends in a week.

I'm in a weird place with the Dodgers right now. I'll be honest, I haven't really been watching many games these past few weeks, at least not actively. I'll have the game on in the background with the sound down while I do other stuff or I'll check the score every now and then, but I can't seem to just sit down and watch them.

It's probably because I don't want the Dodgers to win. I'll explain. Being a fan, thinking with my heart, I couldn't really ever say "I want the Dodgers to lose." But, thinking about it logically, the best thing for the team is for them to do badly this last week.

I'm looking at it like this: coming into today, the Dodgers were in the middle of a pack of teams with similar records. You have the Milwaukee Brewers on one end, who at 73-82 would pick 9th in the Draft next year. On the other end, you have the Oakland A's, who at 77-77 would pick 15th in the Draft. The Dodgers, coming into Sunday at 75-80, would pick 11th.

Here's where I start to have a problem. What good, at all, does it to for the team to beat the Arizona Diamondbacks in the four games, including today, that we play against them? It's not as if we receive some kind of prize for finishing the season at .500 or finishing above a handful of other teams.

In fact, it's detrimental to us.

Some people might talk about playing for pride or something similar. I reject that notion. How much pride can someone really get from winning a meaningless game against a team like the Diamondbacks? They've been dead in the water since June. Really, Andre Ethier is going to go home this offseason, think back to the disappointment of this season, but cheer up when he remembers win #76 against the hapless D-backs?

Look, I'm not saying we should tank. I don't like the idea of intentionally losing.

What I'm saying is, I haven't been able to watch games the last couple weeks because, in a way, I'm rooting against the Dodgers. I'm sitting there thinking something like: I want a well pitched game that the Dodgers lose 2-1 because Reed Johnson loses a ball in the lights. Or let George Sherrill pitch more and see what happens. Do well, but not well enough to actually win these last 7 games.

The great equalizer.

So... that's where I'm at. There's not a whole lot else to add about this week because it was really just another blah week in a lost season.

I did realize one thing, though. If you are a Pirates fan and you run a real quality blog about them, I give you all the credit in the world.

The Pirates lost their 100th game this week. They've been a losing team longer than the internet has been around (the popular version that we know today). At the very least, the Pirates being a bad team predates the idea of blogs, for sure.

So, again, credit to Pirates bloggers. It's hard to be a fan of team and watch as they continuously lose, even more so to try and write interesting things about that team on a consistent basis.

I mean, this is the first time since I've started this blog that the Dodgers have had a losing season, and look, I'm spending my week recaps saying things like: "Yeah! I'm glad we're losing!"

Anyway, one more week of this nonsense and then we hop into what will probably be a long, and most likely painfully inactive offseason.

I can't wait.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 24

2010-09-19T18:05:00.000-07:00

So, apparently, A.J. Ellis, somehow, became an amazing hitter...

Yeah, I didn't see it coming either. Coming into Sunday, he was six for his last seven with a couple doubles and a walk.

That's why Joe Torre used him to pinch hit in the 11th inning of today's game with the bases loaded. And Ellis came through with his second walk-off hit of the season.

A nice way to salvage a week that was pretty bad. Even with the comeback win, the Dodgers still lost both series this week, and went 2-4 overall.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter, unless you're trying to figure out where the Dodgers will pick in next year's draft. (With the win today, they'd pick 11th, in case you were wondering...)

Anyway, there's not a whole lot else worth talking about this week, as far as on the field play goes.

Off the field, though...

Under New Management

So, obviously, the big news this week came when Joe Torre announced his retirement (from the Dodgers, at least) and named Don Mattingly his successor.

As I said on Twitter at the time, I'm wasn't surprised. Just disappointed.

Not that I don't think Mattingly could be a good major league manager. In all honesty, I have no idea. People are worried that because he learned under Joe Torre, he'll make many of the same mistakes as Joe. And while I'm sure he will make mistakes, I'm at least willing to give him a shot before I dismiss him.

The biggest issue I have is the lack of exploring other alternatives. They didn't interview any other candidates for the job, not Tim Wallach (who admittedly might not be a better manager, again, I have no idea), nor anyone else. They just handed the job straight to Mattingly. I guess, ultimately, going in another direction wasn't really an option as Dylan Hernandez reported that Mattingly signed a deal this offseason guaranteeing him the manager's job if Torre stepped down. It seems like a pretty low reward/high risk deal. Worst case: the Dodgers get stuck with a guy who can't manage a major league team or control a clubhouse. Best case: the Dodgers secure a guy who has never managed a team. I mean, what's the worst that could happen? Mattingly gets a better job offer from another team, and then what? We end up with Tim Wallach coaching? Just ... odd decisions coming from the front office.

Including those of the facial hair variety ... your soul patch is off center! Dammit!

Anyway, the key for me is who Mattingly gets to fill his staff. I get the feeling that if he keeps Bob Schaefer and Larry Bowa around, it's going to be a lot of the same old.

If he brings in some new guys, some people that take a different approach with the players and team, I have hope that he can learn and be a different kind of manager.

I guess we'll see, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a bit worried.

Smart Trades

I know I've been saying for a while we should've sold, so you'd think I'd be happy to see Octavio Dotel shipped off to the Rockies for a Player To Be Named Later. And, believe me, I am.

But I can't move past how horrid the original trade to bring Dotel here was in the first place.

If you want to do the math, the first trade was James McDonald and Andrew Lambo for Octavio Dotel. Dotel pitched 18.2 innings for the Dodgers (3.38 ERA) and then was swapped for cash and a PTBNL.

So, the final trade looks something like this: McDonald + Lambo = 18.2 IP of Dotel + PTBNL ... which looks absolutely terrible as it stands, until you realize that on the day Dotel was sent to the Rockies, McDonald had his streak of 20 straight scoreless innings finally snapped. Just solid work from the front office.

Totally worth it!

Yeah. If that trade was not the worst of Colletti's career, it has got to be top three, right? (Santana for Blake? Bell for Sherrill? At least both Blake and Sherrill contributed at some point to a playoff race. Dotel did nothing but cost us young players and money to pitch mediocre in a handful of meaningless games.)

Another Take On Manny

Just one last thing, apropos of nothing really.

I was listening to a podcast with comedian/character actor Larry Miller and he started talking about Manny Ramirez and baseball in general.

The whole episode is about 35 minutes and it's all about baseball memories if you have the time to listen to the whole thing, but if you want to jump to the Manny part, it's about 30 minutes in. If you have a little more time, I'd recommend starting at 24 minutes. Larry tells a pretty cool story that kind of leads into the Manny discussion.

Essentially, Larry says that despite the fact it got a little ugly at the end, Manny did something pretty great for this city in 2008.

And he's right. I will always be appreciative of Manny for what he did in those last few months in 2008 and hearing the way Larry Miller talked about it was pretty cool.

Anyway, you can find the podcast here, if you are interested.

... and, uh, I don't really have an interesting way to end this article and I'm tired so ... see you next week?

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 23

2010-09-12T14:20:00.000-07:00

Last week, in the recap, which I wrote before the game that day, I made some mention of the fact that if the Dodgers were really serious about trying to make the playoffs, it was really all in their hands. (In fairness to me, I did say there was only about a 2% chance of any of this happening.)

Anyway, that blog post was written before the Dodgers decided to roll over and die this week.

First, they lost the rubber match Sunday and the series as a whole to the Giants.

Then, and this is the really fun one: they went into San Diego to face a reeling, dying Padres team. A team that had lost ten straight games. And what happened? The Dodgers got swept by the Padres. Swept. They couldn't eke out one win in three? They couldn't, I dunno, continue the Padres anti-momentum and win the first game before dropping the next two? Nope. Guess not.

Oh, and then to finish it off, the Dodgers rode their losing streak to six games by losing the first game of four in Houston.

They did win the next two games, but it was too little, too late.

Put it like this. Coming into this week, the season's heart monitor was going "Beep ... beep ... beep ..." It was faint, but it was still alive. After the Padres series, it was more like "Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep..." And any win at this point is like the doctor who won't give up trying to hit the dead patient with more volts. "Clear!" Zap. "Clear!" Zap. The nurse comes running in. "Doctor! Stop it! Stop it! He's dead!"

Dramatic, I know. But inaccurate? I think not.

The Dodgers losing the fourth game of the series with the Astros, thus splitting the set, was like rigor mortis setting in.

Anyway, couple more things.

Good Decisions

Quickly want to make this point (again): how great is it that Ted Lilly, Hiroki Kuroda, Scott Podsednik, etc. are still on this team? Podsednik didn't even play in the last three games of the Astros series.

Pictured: A meaningful start.

Consider this, too: if Ned Colletti doesn't offer Lilly arbitration this offseason, then he'll hit the trifecta of bad decisions with him: trading for him, keeping him past August, and not offering him arbitration.

This could be fun.

Actual Good Decisions

This was something I was going to promote this week because, frankly, I didn't expect that this would actually happen.

I was going to say that, with the season dead, you have got to play the call-ups and see what you got.

And what happens this series against the Astros? John Ely gets back into the rotation to see if he can make a few quality big league starts. Russ Mitchell gets some starts. Jay Gibbons gets some starts. Trent Oeltjen and John Lindsey get some starts (and Lindsey gets his first career hit in the majors, which, by the way, is one of the few good things to happen for this team in the last several weeks).

Credit to Joe Torre for being smart and playing these guys instead of just running the regulars out there day after day. It's not like it hasn't been rewarding. Ely went 6.0 innings on Saturday giving up just three runs. Plus, it turns out Mitchell can't do much but fly out and Gibbons still has some power. Also, he's horrible defensively. See? We're learning.

Pictured: the Dodgers' 2011 4th outfielder

Anyway, I'd like to keep it up. I want to see more of these guys and start building toward next year. And if we lose, we lose. I'm not suggesting tanking for a better draft slot next year, but if we keep starting whoever and just let nature take its course, then I'm not going to complain.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 22

2010-09-05T16:25:00.000-07:00

I'm writing this up prior to the start of today's game, so, admittedly, it's not a full week review.

Especially because the result of today's game is really going to determine whether this has been a good week or bad week.

Obviously a loss puts the Dodgers at 2-4 on the week, and that is no good.

If the Dodgers win, then they take two out of three against the Giants and go 3-3 for the week. Now, this would normally be a really average week (maybe even bad considering how close to the end of the season we are and how many games need to be made up in the standings) except for the fact that the division leading Padres have now lost ten games in a row.

So, even though the Dodgers completely botched an opportunity (probably their last) to make up ground in the Wild Card race this week, the unbelievably bad play of the Padres has reentered them into a different playoff race: the one for the NL West. As of this moment, there are only three teams and 7.5 games in front of the Dodgers and the NL West crown, versus five teams and 8.5 games blocking the Dodgers from a Wild Card berth.

And it's not like the Dodgers can't control their own destiny in the NL West race. They'll play six more games against the Padres, six more against the Rockies, and three more with the Giants (not including today). Add to that, they'll play six games against the Diamondbacks and four against the Astros. If the Dodgers were really serious about getting to the playoffs, then it's not out of the realm of possibility. The just gotta want it enough. That, and, you know, play well and win. Well, mostly that, I guess.

In all honesty, though, I'm guessing the odds of the Dodgers playing a meaningful series in October are sitting somewhere around 2% right about now. (And yes, I know they have three games at the start of October ... they're with the D-backs, and unless we're three games out at that moment, then no, those aren't meaningful.)

But whatever. I'm going to be watching these games anyway, so we might as well be winning them.

Alright, couple more things.

Broxton

So, yeah ... Broxton.

Look, I've been a big supporter of Broxton. I still am. I still believe Broxton is more likely to revert to old Broxton, rather than to assume he'll never be a good pitcher again.

But, my God is there something wrong with him. At this point, he's as unreliable as Octavio Dotel. He's hittable. He can't seem to locate his fastball unless he throws it right down the middle of the plate. Meanwhile, his slider has been hanging, and, as Juan Uribe can attest to: hanging sliders are easily smashable.

I wouldn't be surprised if something is physically wrong with him. We've seen him try to pitch through pain before, only to have it affect him. Remember when he had an issue with the big toe on his landing foot last year?

I'm guessing (hoping) an offseason to rest and Broxton will be back to form by next Spring. Until then, he should maybe sit the next couple of plays out.

John Lindsey!

In case you didn't catch it earlier this week, Ramona Shelburne wrote a nice piece on career minor leaguer John Lindsey.

Read it. It'll make you feel good about the news that Lindsey is being called up to join the team Monday after 16 years in the minors.

And like I said on Twitter a few days ago, when Ronnie Belliard got the start at first base simply because he's a right handed batter, free John Lindsey! Get him some starts every now and then. Who knows, maybe he'll knock a few out and get himself a spot on the roster for next season.

I mean, come on, we've only got like a 2% chance of making the playoffs anyway, what's the worst that could happen?

The End of the Manny Era

2010-08-30T13:18:00.000-07:00

I just wanted to whip this graphic up real quick, because it was made official that the Dodgers just let Manny go to the White Sox on a pure waiver claim.

The black lines indicate either of the two possible actions the Dodgers should have taken with Manny this weekend. Obviously, there's risk and reward for either path, as designated by red circles (for negative outcomes) and green circles (for positive ones).

The blue line indicates what actually happened this weekend.

As you can see: the best of both worlds, really.

Look, I understand the player the Dodgers were likely to get back wasn't going to be a top prospect. At this point though, I just wanted something tangible for Manny.

Sure, the $4 million or so in salary relief is nice, in theory... assuming, of course, the money goes back into the team. But, at this point, with these owners (who currently sit in a Los Angeles courtroom arguing over money and control of this team), then who really knows?

There are a couple things I do know, though.

First, and foremost, there is no reason for Hiroki Kuroda, Ted Lilly, Octavio Dotel, George Sherrill, Scott Podsednik, and maybe even Casey Blake to remain on this team. There may be other players that I am forgetting, but these six strike me as the most important ones. (Looking at the roster, I think the guy I'm missing is Vicente Padilla, who can't be moved while on the DL, which is really a shame because his stock was so high earlier this season.)

With Manny gone, whether the front office wants to believe it or not, they've thrown in the towel on this season. As such, there's no reason to continue paying veterans with expiring contracts to help this team to a 4th place, .500 finish. Sell. Sell them all. Get whatever you can. But as the final, final trade deadline approaches tomorrow, none of these six players (five if you don't include Blake who has another year on his contract) should be on the roster.

Here's the second thing I know.

Joe Torre, the manager everyone in the media seems to adore for his ability to win, was managing a .500 team to a 2nd place finish in 2008. That was before Manny came along. Suddenly, the Dodgers start winning. Then, the Dodgers make the playoffs. And then, for the first time in 20 years, the Dodgers win a playoff series.

Now, it's 2010. Joe Torre is still here. There's that constant. Manny isn't. He mostly wasn't. (Though when he was, the Dodgers were 10 games over .500.) It's starting to look like crazy speak to even consider contending for the playoffs at this point.

So, you tell me who is really more important to this team.

Here's the third thing I know.

Ignoring the first five games of a season (when numbers like batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging can fluctuate like crazy due to the low amount of at-bats), Manny has never, not once, had his OPS dip below .800 in his tenure with the Dodgers.

For all the drama about steroids, and injuries, and lack of hustle or heart or whatever similar crap, Manny produced.

For all the hate that Manny received from main stream media (see Bill Plaschke, amongst many others), who turned and praised gritty guys like Juan Pierre, steroids or not, Manny always out-hit them.

Look, I'll admit it. When we acquired Manny, I was not thrilled. One, because we gave up Andy LaRoche (who I still like, despite the fact his career is slowly dying in Pittsburgh). And two, I was real worried he might give up on us (this mind you, in the same season Andruw Jones already had).

Well, now that the Manny era is over, I can say this: He never gave up.

The trade was definitely worth it. Resigning him was absolutely worth it. He made mistakes, sure. He was injured, sure. But up until the very last pitch of his very last at-bat, Manny never gave up on the team or the fans.

He showed up. And he produced.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 21

2010-08-29T16:12:00.000-07:00

Well, the week started out nice, didn't it? Sweeping the Brewers, coming back to take the first game from the Rockies. Things were looking good. And then, well, let's just jump into this...

So, in response to a Mike Scioscia's Tragic Illness post about what to do with Manny as he came off the DL (play him to raise his value and trade him), I commented this:

"I’m with you. I’ve been saying we should’ve sold for a while now. But, just to play Devil’s advocate and throw out a crazy hypothetical here…

Manny gets activated today. He comes back on fire, circa 2008. The offense is rejuvenated. The pitching is still solid. They win 8 of their next 9 and find themselves in 3rd place, four games out of the Wildcard at the start of August 31st. (Or Dodgers split the next two, Manny is activated Tuesday, Dodgers win next 6, etc.)

I mean, I understand there’s about a .76% chance of such a thing happening but this has been my one problem with selling: (and, this is probably because I’m looking at it through the rose colored glasses of a fan) but 8.0 games out in the Wildcard (and not totally in the race) is just one good hotstreak away from suddenly being in the thick of the race.

It’s dangerous thinking, akin to not knowing when to fold in poker, but I’m just wondering how close to the Wildcard leader would we have to be before we decide we shouldn’t sell?"

Some called me crazy. And I can't blame them. It was pretty preposterous. But damn, after Friday night's game, I was starting to more psychic than crazy. The Dodgers had won four in a row, and found themselves 4.5 games back in the Wildcard. They looked like a different team. The hitting was back. The bullpen was back. The pitching was still good.

Then, suddenly, and without warning, suck.

Ok, so, there was warning. Like, when on Saturday, Manny was benched for the third game in a row, for reasons not entirely clear. Joe Torre mumbled something about Scott Podsednik's energy or whatever. Unsurprisingly, Podsednik's energy and the Dodger offense scored one run through eight innings (before Rod Barajas hit a two-run homerun in the 9th to make the final score not look so one-sided).

Or, Sunday, when, apparently, everyone in Dodger management gave up and offered no explanation for Manny's absence from a 4th straight game. Just: he's not starting.

And then things got weird...

Manny came in to pinch hit in the 6th inning of Sunday's game, with the bases loaded and the Dodgers down 6, and he took a called strike on the outside corner. Manny, who has been playing professional baseball since 1991 (ie. He knows that arguing balls and strikes gets you automatically kicked out) then turned and fiercely argued balls and strikes with home plate ump Gary Cederstrom. He was kicked out.

I still don't know what to make of this.

I said on Twitter, I don't want to try and get into another person's head, least of all, Manny Ramirez. But, come on, did Manny really feel that emotional about a questionable first pitch called strike?

Or, did Manny, feeling like the end of his LA playing career was inevitable, and upset with his recent usage, decide to deliver one final 'eff you to Dodgers management? It's not unheard of. I can tell you this, though...

It only makes me like Manny even more.

Yeah, maybe it screwed the Dodgers at an important point within the game (though, let's be honest, the season is, for almost all intents and purposes, dead anyway). And yes, if intentional, it was a childish and unprofessional move.

But, you know what? I don't care.

Manny, if he intentionally got himself kicked out of a game, did to Joe Torre and Ned Colletti what most of us fans have wanted to do all year.

Whether it be the shortsighted, overpaying, and meaningless trades that Ned Colletti made, or the terrible roster decisions, almost thoughtless starting lineups, and horrific bullpen use that Joe Torre has made a staple of this season, I (like I'm guessing many other fans) have wanted to say, for lack of better terms, 'eff you to Dodgers management almost all season.

Manny, by getting kicked out after one pitch, essentially told management, "Screw you guys, I'm going home." (in this case, home = the Chicago White Sox.)

Maybe I'm making too big of a deal about this. Maybe I'm reading too much into it. I can't be 100% sure that what I'm saying is what really went down. But, again, I don't care. I love it. Manny's a folk hero.

Either way, here's what I am sure of: this offense, it's not the same without Manny. That's not to say they can't score runs without Manny, or that with Manny, they are guaranteed to not slump, but the feel is different.

The offense with Manny is a well oiled machine. Without him, it feels like grinding gears.

So, if you want to trade Manny away, do it. It should have been done a month ago, when the returning package would have been much better. But if you are going to trade Manny, don't stop there. Trade Kuroda, Lilly, Sherrill, Dotel, Podsednik, Blake. Trade them all. There's no need for them. We aren't going anywhere, especially without a Manny in the lineup, so why keep these pieces?

I wish there was less indecisiveness. I wish there was more critical thinking. I wish there wasn't so much deceit on what goes on behind the scenes. I wish there weren't so many bad decisions.

I wish we had different people in charge.

Basically, what I'm saying is:

'Eff you, management.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 20

2010-08-22T14:28:00.000-07:00

So, I skipped the Week 19 Retrospective... I was busy, and the Dodgers sucked that week. They lost four of six, hitting, then not hitting, then hitting and blowing games, and not hitting again, then not hitting or pitching.

Then they started this week by blowing a game on Monday in Atlanta. Then won two of three against Colorado. Then lost two of three to Cincinnati. So, 3-4 overall. Better than 2-4, yet still slowly killing me.

The season is pretty much over, but there was a big news story this week, so let's get to it.

Vin Scully Will Return

And thank God. I was really starting to worry we were going to get a 200% increase in games called by Steve Lyons, and that is really more Steve Lyons than anyone should have to bear.

Still, when word spread that Vin would make an announcement on his future on Sunday, a lot of people started to worry that he was going to call it a career.

Again, he's not, so crisis averted, but it really got me thinking: we need some sort of contingency plan for when Vin does decide to retire.

In an ideal world, when Vin decides he doesn't want to travel anymore, we just pipe in the tv feed to his house, let him call games from home, and then broadcast it on a slight delay. I have my doubts that he would go for such a thing, but I can dream.

More realistically, I kind of hope Vin finds a young broadcaster, and takes him under his wing and mentors him, the way Red Barber did for Vin.

I want someone who has grown up and learned under Vin, not a guy like Steve Lyons, who is only here because he lost his national tv job for saying stupid things. I want someone who is going to emulate Vin, not someone who is going to crack jokes all game about his 19 career homeruns or whatever other stupid thing he did during his playing career.

I know we can't have Vin call games forever, but having him play a big part in who replaces him would, for me, go a long way.

Until then, we have to just enjoy what time we do have left with him.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 18

2010-08-08T16:02:00.000-07:00

You know, in a vacuum, going 4-3 in a week, splitting a four game series with the best team in your league and then winning two games out of three in a weekend series might seem like a good week.

It's not a bad week, for sure. But in the scenario we find ourselves in, another week has been ticked off the season, and the Dodgers have only moved one game closer to the division leading Padres, and 1.5 games closer to the wild card leading Giants. Couple this with the fact that the Dodgers will now play seven games on the road (three against Philadelphia and four against Atlanta) and well ... you kinda wish there wasn't so much space between the Dodgers and the playoff race leaders.

Sorry to be a downer.

Alright, couple more things.

Unfortunate Timing

I had the feeling these trade deadline deals would come back to bite us in the future. I just didn't know it would be the following week.

What I'm saying is:

Don't you just hate it when you trade away your most promising catching prospect (one who is nearly ready for the majors) for a very average outfielder and then your starting catcher gets hurt and goes on the DL with a season ending injury and you now have to platoon at catcher for the rest of the year with a 41 year old coming off back surgery and a 29 year old career backup catcher with almost no power?

I know I sure do.

The End of An (Awful, Awful) Era

You know, I have to be honest, when I woke up this morning, one of the last things I expected was to learn that Garret Anderson had been Designated for Assignment.

Don't get me wrong. It's good news. In fact, I had a permanent smile on my face for a good half hour after hearing about the move. I'm really not kidding. I was explaining it to people who don't care about baseball and smiling the whole time.

But, it was just odd timing.

I mean, what exactly was it that finally forced Joe Torre's hand? Anderson didn't even play in yesterday's game. And we won that game. You'd think Anderson would have gotten the boot after another 0-4 spot start, or a pinch-hit GIDP to end the game or something. Nope, the Dodgers win and Anderson watches from the bench, then gets Designated for Assignment the next day.

And the decision was made in mid-August, no less, months longer than should have taken. Anderson had hung on this long, I thought for sure he was going to reach the safety plateau of expanded rosters in September.

But, nope. Anderson is gone and whatever the reason, I'll take it. Everyone knew he was done. Fans most of all, but the coaches had to know, too. Garret Anderson probably knew. It was no doubt tough on him to struggle so badly this year.

So, this is farewell, then. So long, Garret. Sorry for ripping on you so much this year, but in fairness, you were terrible.

When saying goodbye, it's important to remember the good times we had. Or, in Anderson's case, that one good time.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 17

2010-08-01T15:39:00.000-07:00

So, I'm writing this week recap up now, before the game today for two reasons. One, if I wait until after the game, it tends to mess up my entire night. Two, regardless of whether the Dodgers win today's game or not, this is already a sucky week.

I said last week that the coming week would be big. Either big good, or big bad.

As of today, the Dodgers can only hope to finish this week 2-4 against the two teams in front of them in the playoff race, so I guess you know how that panned out. (Post game update: 1-5 on the week. So. Whatever.)

More importantly, the trade deadline came this week, and the Dodgers, for some reason, decided to be buyers.

Here's the realization I came to this week: if the Dodgers happen to find success this year, they will do so in spite of management and ownership.

I mean, maybe, in the back of my head, I've always known this to be true, but as long as the Dodgers were winning, I was willing to let management slide.

But this week has just been a Doctorate level course in bad management, at both the manager and GM level. So, if you'll indulge me (more than you already are just by visiting my blog), I've got a lot of complaining to do.

First, you have the manager. Much has been made about Joe Torre's managing style, especially his mismanagement of the bullpen (which is terrible*) but at this point, I almost don't even care about it so much. Yeah, really.

*Long aside: another shining example of which came on Thursday. Dodgers vs. Padres, 9th inning, tie score, and both Jonathan Broxton and George Sherrill warming in the bullpen. So, who comes in to face a righty heavy portion of the San Diego lineup? George Sherrill, of course, who, by the way, can't seem to get anybody out, but especially can't get out right handed hitters. Shocker upon all shockers, Sherrill loses the game. Broxton, meanwhile, stands in the bullpen waiting for a save opportunity that will never come. Ok, his terrible bullpen management still does make me miserable, but...

At this point, I'll take any manager, bullpen mistakes or not, who is able to make roster moves that aren't mind-numbingly stupid. I mean, for God's sake, why is Sherrill still on this team? And why the Hell is Garret Anderson still allowed to eat up a valuable roster spot? And who's bright effing idea was Jack Taschner?!

All I really want is someone who is willing to give Sherrill and Anderson their walking papers. Or someone, who, when presented with the idea of bring Jack Taschner up to the major league roster, stops for just a second and thinks: "That's a terrible idea. Absolutely not."

Seriously, why is this so damn hard? If we are so dedicated to winning this year, why are we not filling our roster with the 25 best players we can?

... which brings me to the General Manager.

Ned Colletti had one hell of a trade deadline this week.

Colletti completed three trades this week. Lucas May and Elisaul Pimentel for Scott Podsednik. Blake DeWitt and pitching prospects Brett Wallach and Kyle Smit for Ted Lilly and Ryan Theriot. And finally, right before the deadline, Colletti swapped James McDonald and Andrew Lambo for Octavio Dotel. Now, before I break down these trades, I need to address whether or not the Dodgers should have even been buyers.

There's a good argument to be made that the Dodgers should have sold at the deadline. Hiroki Kuroda, Manny Ramirez, and Vicente Padilla will be free agents this offseason. Also, one or two of the handful of young players who will look for raises in the offseason could have also been on the move. Any of these players could have been shipped out for what would likely be a good return.

The counter-argument to this, though, is that the Dodgers were still within five games of the Wildcard when the deadline passed on Saturday.

Add to that the fact that most Dodger fans would have revolted, and I could see how it would be difficult justifying a fire sale.

So, you have two other options. You can do what the Dodgers did and buy ... or you can stand pat.

Personally, I would've have done nothing. I can see how this method also might have it's issues. Again, you deal with the fans who see this as waving the white flag. Also, you probably end up getting nothing for leaving veterans like Kuroda, who will most likely not receive an offer for arbitration in the offseason.

But, I'm sticking with this as having been the best choice. I see it like this, aside from the starting pitching, the Dodgers are playing far below their potential. When the Dodgers scored five runs on Friday, it was only the fourth time since the All-Star break that the Dodgers scored more than three runs in a game. (Ironically, they are 0-4 in those games, so, yes, the only time the Dodgers can score runs is when the pitching is giving up even more.)

What is it going to take for the Dodgers to reach the postseason? The regulars need to show up. Casey Blake and Russell Martin continue to fade offensively (though they might never turn it around). Matt Kemp, meanwhile, needs to pull out of his long, long slump. Rafael Furcal, who was so vital to the Dodger offense for the first half, has only been hitting .263 since the break. Worse off is Andre Ethier, who is hitting .135 (.507 OPS) since the break. If the Dodgers hope to have any success this season, these guys (plus Manny) have to return to form.

So, what did the Dodgers do? They added Scott Podsednik, who, admittedly, could be a nice complementary piece, but isn't going to be the difference maker in the race for the pennant.

They added Ted Lilly, who fills the gaping hole of #5 starter, and Ryan Theriot, an offensive downgrade at 2nd base to both Blake DeWitt (now on the Cubs) and Jamey Carroll (now warming the bench).

Then Colletti finished his tour with the addition of Octavio Dotel, who, again, could be a nice complementary piece, but isn't a game changer with his shiny 4.28 ERA (his 3.84 FIP is nicer but not more so than the man he's replacing ... Travis Schlichting has a 3.16 FIP in only 18 less innings).

In case it wasn't obvious, I'm not a fan of these trades. And I have four reasons to back this up.

1. We are buying when we shouldn't be. To rehash a previous point, we really should have sold or stood pat, just given the growing improbability that we actually make the playoffs.

2. Almost all of these trades were severe examples of overpaying.

Look at the Podsednik trade. Didn't we have the leverage? The Royals are going nowhere and Podsednik is a free agent at the end of the season. What were they going to do, keep him? Did we really need to send both our last bit of catching depth (May) and a promising young pitcher (Pimentel)? It really feels like one or the other should have been enough. If the Royals demanded more, then just say no. We really needed Podsednik that badly?

The Lilly/Theriot trade was more fair in terms of returns for each team. Don't get me wrong, it's a bad trade in it's own rights (Lilly is unnecessary and Theriot is a downgrade) but as far as one young 2nd baseman and two low level pitching prospects for a solid left handed pitcher and extremely average major league 2nd baseman, it's about even.

But all that is ruined with the Dotel trade. If Colletti had just sent James McDonald (a cheap, young pitcher who has shown a lot of promise in the past) to Pittsburg for Octavio Dotel (a 36 year old reliever), the trade would have been a win for Pittsburgh.

But. But... For some reason, Colletti threw into the trade, one time highly rated prospect Andrew Lambo. Yes, Lambo has had some issues in the minors with substance related suspensions. And, yes, he has struggled so far to adjust to high minors level pitching, but he's 22. He's got time to adjust. And he's got a high, high ceiling. So, why in the world was he sent to Pittsburgh for a 36 year old relief pitcher? I mean, if I had to guess, it'd be because the Pirates are paying the $500,000 remaining on Dotel's contract, but that's not really what I'm getting at.

What I'm saying is, when Dotel's name was brought up for trade consideration, why, when the Pirates asked for both McDonald and Lambo didn't Colletti just say no. It's so easy...

"You want Dotel. We want James McDonald."
"Eh, ok."
"And we want Lambo."
"You do realize Dotel is a 36 year old relief pitcher? And he's got an ERA over 4.00? So... no."

3. The returns the Dodgers received for all the players they gave up was overall, probably a lot less than it could've been. This is related to overpaying. This has been covered by several other blogs, but I think Jon Weisman tweeted it best:

"If you package Pimentel, May, McDonald, Lambo, DeWitt, Wallach and Smit together, I think that gets you something nicer."

Yeah, it probably does. If we were willing to send off all of these young players for a handful of average players, some of which we really didn't need, couldn't we have turned these young players into a really good player that we could use?

4. Finally, these trades didn't need to be made. At least, not now. Not at this point in time.

Look at it like this: with the exception of Ted Lilly (maybe), do any of the players the Dodgers acquired become off limits past the July 31st deadline?

Was Scott Podsednik really not going to clear waivers? Or Theriot? Or Dotel?

Couldn't we have waited another two or three weeks and saw where we were in the standings before we pulled the trigger on a trade that sent away a bunch of prospects. Two weeks from now, if we were still in the race, couldn't we have then called up the Royals and asked about Podsednik? We were really that worried someone else was going to win the Octavio Dotel sweepstakes?

And, by the way, these players would most likely come cheaper the later into the season we acquire them.

What's the downside? Two less weeks of Ryan Theriot?

It's just frustrating.

It's so, so frustrating.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 16

2010-07-25T15:47:00.000-07:00

After losing four straight out of the All-Star break, it was hard for the Dodgers to not have a better week.

Still, the Dodgers found themselves winning only four of seven this week, and in all honesty, they were probably lucky to win that many.

The offense has been seriously struggling post All-Star break. Coming off a series in St. Louis where the Dodger scored a combined 9 runs in four games, the Dodgers had run outputs of 2, 5, 2, 2, 1, 2, and 1 this week (and they didn't win the game they scored five runs in).

Luckily for the Dodgers, the starters bailed them out. Chad Billingsley went 9 scoreless innings in a win against the Giants on Wednesday, Kuroda went 8 scoreless in a win against the Mets on Thursday, and Kershaw went 8 scoreless in a win against the Mets today.

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to finish the week over .500. I'm happy the starters are pitching so well. But if the offense doesn't start to turn around, we are going to be in trouble.

Alright, enough complaining. Few more quick topics to touch on this week.

Credit Where Credit Is Due

I've ripped Vicente Padilla in the past on this blog. And truthfully, I'm still not a huge fan of his.

But I can't deny how good he's been since coming off the DL. He's had some pretty good success this season, due to things like having a career year in both K/9 (8.00) and BB/9 (1.97), and mixing that with some good luck (career low in BABIP). Is this kind of production sustainable? Eh, probably not. But as long as Padilla continues to put up numbers like a 0.98 ERA in four starts in July (22 Ks in 27.2 IP), I'm going to enjoy the ride.

Reality Check Week

This is a big week coming up. I mean, take a look at the upcoming schedule. First, the Dodgers are going to take on the division leading Padres for three games. Then, they'll follow that up by taking on the Wild Card leading Giants.

On top of all this, the trade deadline is Saturday.

I'm going to go ahead and say that by this point next week, we're going to have a pretty good idea of how the rest of the season is going to shape up.

That's not to say the Dodgers will definitively be in or out of the race by next Sunday (especially because after Sunday, the Dodgers start a four game set against the Padres again), all I'm saying is, we're probably going to have a good idea of how the season will unfold.

Frankly, I'm a little worried about this week, but at the same time, I'm excited. I want to know how this whole thing is going to work out.

On Broxton, Complainers, and Expectations

2010-07-19T13:28:00.000-07:00

Alright, I'm back on a working computer. Still, I'm going to be skipping the Dodgers Retrospective this week for a few reasons.

One, it was a half week. Two, it was a terrible half week. Three, a big topic I was going to discuss was Broxton anyway, so this post makes the Retrospective moot.

Jumping right into it, let's recap: Broxton blew a game yesterday. In turn, the Dodger fanbase reacted in a calm demeanor, showing their full support for a good young player.

Oh wait. (Credit, obviously, to Memories of Kevin Malone)

Ok, so, Dodger fans freaked out. And I can't blame fans for being angry. The Dodgers were trying to avoid a four game sweep while San Diego continues to win and separate themselves from the pack. This was a tough game to lose.

But here's where we begin to have a problem.

We need to be able to distinguish between being upset and misinformed complaining.

Be mad that we lost the game. Again, tough game to lose. Be upset with Broxton for the game. He was wild and ineffective. It happens and you are allowed to be upset about it.

That's fine. But. But...

Don't start spewing nonsense about replacing Broxton. Stop it. Seriously. You look foolish because really, it's nonsense.

In some form or another, here's what always seems to happen whenever I have a discussion in which I end up defending Broxton against a detractor.

Person: "Broxton sucks."
Me: "Broxton is one of the better closers in the game."
Person: "Broxton blows too many big games."
Me: "Everyone blows games. Everyone gives up runs, that's why there's such thing as ERA."
Person: "I don't like Broxton. He's not a major league closer."

And here's where misinformed complainers always get caught:

Me: "Ok, who would you replace him with?"

Now, the person is always caught with this question because there is no good answer to this question.

I mean, that doesn't stop the other person from going: "I don't know!" or "It's not my job, I don't get paid to figure that stuff out!" which are both versions of "There is no good answer to that question!"

But, ok, fine, you haven't had the time to research and make the calls into other GMs, so you don't have a list of candidates. If you want to play this game though, misinformed complainers, you should know this: all but one pitcher in baseball with 10 or more save opportunities this year has blown a game.

(Long tangent: the one pitcher is John Axford of the Milwaukee Brewers ... don't you dare pretend to tell me you know who that is. Axford is 11 for 11 in save opportunities, but then you should probably also know this: because of the flawed way saves are kept, Axford's 11 for 11 doesn't explain the fact that in five of those opportunities, Axford surrendered an earned run. He's been lucky enough to have his leads be larger than one run at the time and avoid the blown save. Oh, and by the way, Axford has given up the go ahead run while the game was tied on three separate occasions this year, so by no means is Axford the perfect closer.)

Point is, there isn't going to be a pitcher you can replace Broxton with who will satisfy you. Even the great Mariano Rivera, who I will happily admit is a superior pitcher to Broxton has blown two games this year.

These calls for Broxton's head are misinformed. You people are hoping that Ned Colletti will magically pull a pitcher out of his hat that throws a 102 fastball, a 93 slider, and a 79 curveball that drops a foot off the table at the last second. This pitcher has a 0.00 ERA, never blows a save, and can pitch 3 out of 4 days or not for a week but will remain sharp either way. That's a great thing to hope for, but this pitcher only exists in MLB 2k10 (and I know this because he's the closer on my Create-A-Team).

Here's where I'm guessing this problem stems from:

1. Unrealistic expectations.

Since Eric Gagne took over closing duties in 2002, Dodger fans haven't really know what it's like to not have a lights out closer. He dominated from 2002-2004 unlike any closer in history, at one point saving an unbelievable 84 games in 84 save opportunities. The whole "Game Over" era not only gave regular fans an unrealistic expectation of what to expect from a closer, but I suspect it brought on board many casual fans as well, who at that point only had "Game Over" Gagne as their image of what a closer should be.

2005 was a transitional year. Gagne was injured and Yhency Brazoban ended up leading the team in saves with 21, while holding down a 5.33 ERA. It was easy enough to dismiss the year as a throw away year.

But then 2006 comes around. Takashi Saito comes out of the blue to become one of the top closers in baseball over the next two seasons.

Broxton shares closer's duties with Saito in 2008, before fully taking over the job in 2009.

Now, what I'm suggesting is, from 2002-2007, with the exception of 2005, the Dodgers have had an extraordinary run of lights out closers. And, worse for Broxton, from two different closers.

Many Dodgers fans have come to expect that you can just replace one lights out closer with another like it's something that's easy to do, or that's been happening forever, for that matter. Gagne was here, he was great, he went away and got replaced with Saito, who was also great. Saito is gone, and has been replaced with Broxton. Why is Broxton not as great as Gagne was from 02-04 or Saito from 06-07?

We were supremely lucky to have such high quality closers for several years. That's not to say Broxton isn't high quality, but he will never convert 84 straight save opportunities in a row (I doubt anyone ever will), nor will Broxton probably ever post a 1.40 ERA (with a 0.72 WHIP) over an entire season like Saito did in 2007. Broxton might be able to have a similar season, but is not likely to have these types of numbers over the span of several seasons. It's not that seasons like that are unheard of, but to expect them from the same pitcher every year is ludicrous unless that pitcher is Mariano Rivera (a Hall of Famer).

The other part of this blame Broxton problem is this:

2. Emotionally charged losses

The blown game is probably the hardest game to lose other than maybe having Ken Griffey Jr. rob the game winning homerun in the 12th inning during the last game of the season, knocking you out of the playoffs ala "Little Big League". But, I digress.

Blown save losses are the most emotionally charged losses because you go from happiness to anger in the span of an inning.

If the starting pitcher gives up three runs in the 2nd inning, and those three runs turn out to be the difference in the game, there isn't much uproar. If the closer does it in the 9th, the fans have no time to think, they just blow a gasket.

Everyone remembers that Broxton blew the big game in the NLCS last year. No one seems to remember the save he converted in the 2-1 victory in that same series.

Conversely, everyone remembers that Vicente Padilla had an amazing start against the Phillies in the NLCS (that same 2-1 game, coincidentally) but no one seems to remember that when the Dodgers needed him to show up to avoid elimination in Game 5, he gave up 6 runs in three innings.

This isn't meant to bag on Padilla, who I must admit has been excellent since returning from the DL and deserves some acknowledgment from this blog at some point in the near future. No, this is simply meant to point out that people have a completely unbalanced, much more severe reaction to a later inning loss than a game lost in the first few innings.

So, what's the solution?

Here it is, for all of you misinformed complainers out there.

1. First, realize that Broxton is not as bad as you believe him to be. If I can't interest you in looking up his sabermetric stats like his xFIP, at least just know this: Broxton has made his way into 40 games this season and has only really negatively affected two (maybe a few others but if we are only considering games in which Broxton's actions have led to a direct loss, then two).

2. Realize there are not a lot of better options than Broxton this year, and that most of those better options are on teams that won't be giving them up anytime soon. You think the Pittsburgh Pirates or the Baltimore Orioles have the solution to your problem? Because they don't. Maybe the Yankees do, maybe the Braves do, but guess what? They are leading their divisions. They have no reason at all to send their closer to you.

3. And this is the important one. Take a deep breath.

It's a game. It's one game. It sucks to lose it and it's easy to overreact.

So don't. Calm down. Understand that games get blown, closers give up runs, and sometimes wins become losses.

I can assure you, this isn't the only time this has ever happened, nor will it be the last.

And I can assure you, you replace Jonathan Broxton with any other closer in the league and the previous statement isn't any less true.

Because the "perfect" closer you are looking for pitches for the J-City Demons and I've got no reason to send him your way.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 14

2010-07-11T20:17:00.000-07:00

I don't know about you, but this week was kinda weird for me.

It felt like a pretty good week, right? And yet, I take look back at past seven games and see the Dodgers finished just a game over .500 (4-3).

Still, the Dodgers will head into the All-Star break 10 games over .500 and two games back of the Padres in the NL West, tied for the Wildcard lead with the Rockies, which ain't a bad place to be with half a season to go.

Today, We Spell Redemption: K-U-O.

A quick note before I jump into it this week, congrats to Rafael Furcal and Hong-Chih Kuo for making it into the All-Star game as reserves, replacing Jose Reyes and Jason Heyward, respectively. Doesn't really make up for the fact that Reyes shouldn't have ever made the team in the first place or that Heyward shouldn't have been voted in by the fans as a starter, but I'm done complaining about that. Better late than never. It's a nice thing for a couple of guys who've been through a lot.

-----

The retrospective this week is actually more a retrospective for the first half. I'm not going to go crazy in-depth into it, but I just wanted to touch on who I felt were the top 3 and bottom 3 MVPs of the first half.

First Half Anti-MVPs

3. Tie - Ramon Ortiz and Russ Ortiz

Oh yes, I haven't forgotten. I've covered my extreme dislike of the Ortizes several times on this blog, but I'll just remind you of some of their numbers. Russ Ortiz: 7.0 IP, 8 ER, and a sweet, sweet 2.143 WHIP. Ramon Ortiz stuck around for 30.0 IP over 16 games and posted a nice 6.30 ERA.

2. George Sherrill

He doesn't have the worst ERA of all the pitchers the Dodgers have used this year, but of all the pitchers, Sherrill has been, by far, the biggest disappointment. He has struggled to get outs all year and as such, has affected the entire bullpen.

I mean, could you imagine if Joe Torre had Sherrill in his bullpen pitching like he did last year. Imagine if he trusted Sherrill enough to use him when he's overworked Broxton. Then he could use Hong-Chih Kuo more sparingly. Wow. The idea having more than two go-to guys in the bullpen makes me doubly sad when I'm confronted with the reality of the situation.

1. Garret Anderson

Hey, maybe it was obvious, but how I can I not give it to him?

He finished his first half batting .179. And not just in 30 something at-bats. He went 24-134. That's twenty-four hits ... in one hundred and thirty four at-bats. He's also drawn three walks. I can't help but smile as I write this because that is so ludicrously absurd. It's insane. He can't hit and he has no patience. He can't play defense. He can't run. I just... I start talking about how bad Anderson is and I begin to ramble because there's so much ground to cover. My thoughts are rapid firing from one reason to the next as to why Anderson should have been released months ago. I'm want to express myself but I can't. I feel like I need to get a canvas and just start painting my feelings. Yes, Garret Anderson is so bad, he's inspiring me to create art.

To be honest though, I can't help but enjoy watching Anderson play. At this point, I almost don't know if I want him gone because I have to know how bad he can be. Mike at MSTI broke down Anderson's numbers to show that he's having one of the worst seasons in Dodger history. He might not have the worst season ever, but at this point, I kinda want to see how close he can get.

"Only three walks? That's hilarious! Manny had three walks in one game a week ago!"

First Half MVPs

3. Andre Ethier

Ethier is second on the team in batting average, leads the team in slugging, and is second in OPS, just four points behind Manny, but in almost 100 more at-bats. He's got 14 homers on the season, and, oh yeah, a starting job in the All-Star game. I have to wonder how good Ethier's season might be if he didn't break his finger when he was his hottest (.392, 1.201 OPS when he went down). I know expecting that kind of play over a full season is unrealistic, but when you are on a crazy hot streak, you got to ride it out.

2. Clayton Kershaw

Remember when Jon Heyman said Kershaw was regressing? Ha-ha-hah-ha-ha.

Kershaw in 18 starts: 112.1 IP, 2.96 ERA, 128 Ks. For record junkies, that translates to 9-4.

He polished off his first half with an excellent 8.0 innings against the Cubs on Thursday, striking out 12.

1. Rafael Furcal

Furcal leads the team in average, and more importantly, heart. That's right. I found a way to measure it. Still working on scrappy-ness, but that's for another day.

Seriously though. Furcal returned from family tragedy and started putting it all out on the field. Since June 23th, Furcal has been hitting .397, with a 1.109 OPS. He's hit six doubles, a triple, four homeruns, and has driven in 14 runs over the 17 game span. More importantly, though, for a leadoff hitter, he's scored 21 runs in those 17 games. Oh, and he's also stolen five bases.

All this is for a guy who was already hitting .305 coming in.

Furcal is playing out of his mind, and when he plays like that, the Dodgers play like a different team.

...and so, for all that, Furcal got named to the All-Star team.

...and for all that, he's my first half MVP.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 13

2010-07-04T16:20:00.000-07:00

Wow. A 5-1 roadtrip and the Dodgers are suddenly back to nine games over .500.

Was this the same team that lost eight of their last ten at the end of last Sunday's game?

The Dodgers just eat up the NL West, which is a very good thing. Especially because the Dodgers will spend most of September playing those teams.

Alright, just a couple more things to cover this week.

Comings And Goings

The Dodgers made a couple of roster moves this week that I can get behind.

First off, like I suggested in the Dodger Retrospective last week, Ramon Troncoso was taken off the roster in favor of Travis Schlichting. I suggested Troncoso be put on the DL because I wanted him to rest his arm and just not pitch for a little while, but a demotion to AAA isn't bad either. Management hopes he can work on his mechanics while he's down there, but honestly, I'm not sure if it's a mechanics issue with Troncoso so much as an inflated expectations issue. He was probably not ever going to be as good as he was in 2009, and those expectations might have hurt him as much as his poor performance in 2010.

Secondly, with Manny put on the DL, the Dodgers called up Xavier Paul. Sure, the news isn't as good as Paul being called up to replace a DFA'd Garret Anderson, but it's a step in the right direction. I mean, who knows, maybe this time when Manny comes back, Paul will get to stay instead of Anderson.

Here's a fun fact: Xavier Paul and Garret Anderson have the same amount of multi-hit games (1) since May 30th. The only difference is that Xavier Paul didn't play in the majors from May 31st through July 2nd.

On the other hand: Garret Anderson provided 40+ professional at-bats over the span of May 31st through July 2nd, including such gems as Wednesday's 0-5 with 4 Ks game.

Also, Paul makes this goofy face when he slides into home, so there's that as well...

Last one. I know last week I called for George Sherrill's head, but I've calmed down on that. I'm ok with keeping Sherrill under the condition that he only come in during blowouts or only to face one or two left handed batters before the 8th inning. Never a right handed batter, and never in the 8th inning or later.

Meanwhile, I'm now done with Justin Miller. He's finally pitching like ... well, Justin Miller. Carlos Monasterios should be off the DL soon, he's a good choice to replace Miller.

The All-Star Game Is A Great Showcase (For How Stupid People Are)

So, the All-Star Game selections were announced this morning, and they've already been discussed to death, but I still have to complain about this stupidity.

And no, I'm not just talking about Omar Infante. Yes, Infante is a dumb choice. And yes, leaving Joey Votto off the team was equally as dumb. But these two stupid decisions (among a few others) are laid solely at the feet of one guy: Charlie Manuel. I'm not saying Manuel is stupid, but he's an old baseball guy ... the kind who goes with his gut rather than fancy new-fan-dangled statistics like ... OPS (rhymes with cops), so I'm not expecting every decision he makes to be a great baseball one.

The two biggest issues I have with the All Star team this year are both fan selections.

One, Jason Heyward. Look, I get it. Dude's having a solid year for a rookie. .251, 11 homers, .821 OPS. Solid. But you're telling me there's not at least ten more qualified outfielders in the National League than Heyward? (Because if that's what you're telling me then...)

But, ok. Heyward is a popular guy surrounded by a ton of hype. Then explain this one to me: Yadier Molina.

I mean, check some of these numbers: .229 BA, 3 HR, .611 OPS.

Compare his numbers versus the three other guys in the National League with enough at-bats to qualify for the batting title. Molina is the worst in almost every major offensive category: BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, HR. The only leg he has to stand on is RBI, which is as much a function of his team as of Molina himself.

So I ask you, fans of baseball, what the hell were you thinking? Don't you know that this one counts?!

It's got to stop. If the league insists on making something as inane as the All-Star game count for homefield advantage in the World Series, then take the vote out of the hands of the fans who have little to no idea what they are doing. Just let all the voting be done by (and I might regret this eventually) players. Or if you insist on letting the fans vote, then take the meaning out of the game.

Because this "having it both ways" thing is not working.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 12

2010-06-27T22:24:00.000-07:00

Technically, this is supposed to be a week recap, but I really only want to talk about one game this week ... I think you know which one.

I don't know about you, but for me, there seems to be a time every year where I just want to throw out everybody. GM, coaches, players. Everyone. I want to get rid of them all and start over.

Eventually I settle down and come to my senses ... but Jesus, has this past week in a half been a punch in the gut. Or really, several punches.

Pictured: Gut punch.

Today's loss was so brutal because it was a game the Dodgers needed. I mean, I guess there really isn't such thing as a must win game in June, but taking two of three from the World Champion Yankees would be a step in the right direction for a team that's reeling.

Instead, a four run lead is blown. Then the rest of the bullpen serves up the game to the Yankees on a silver platter. And here we are, five games back of the Padres.

And I'm pissed.

And so, while I'm not going to throw out the whole Dodger organization, we do need change. Just a handful of things I want:

Move 1a. Ramon Troncoso to DL with anything. I don't care what it is, something is wrong with Troncoso and he needs to be on the DL. Honestly, it's probably a combination of overuse and Troncoso not really being as good as we once thought, but he has been horrible since April when he was used in 15 of the first 22 games of the season. Whatever the reason, since the beginning of May (and not including today because Baseball Reference hasn't been updated yet), Troncoso has a 6.86 ERA in 20 games. Opposing batters have hit .300 off him in that span and for a .889 OPS.

Move 1b: So, again, Troncoso to the DL. Bring up Travis Schlichting.

Move 2a. DFA George Sherrill. He's done. Everyone has figured him out. I mean, come on, he's giving up homeruns to lefties. If he's supposed to be able to get anyone out, it's supposed to be a left handed hitter.

Pictured: Not. Doing. Your. JOB.

Move 2b: Bring up Jon Link or wait for Carlos Monasterios to come off the DL. I realize this leaves just one lefty in the bullpen, Hong-Chih Kuo. Now, if you feel that he's too valuable to just be a left handed specialist, and you absolutely need one, then replace Sherrill with Juan Perez. Who?! Yeah, I don't know either. But scanning the Albuquerque roster, he's got a 3.19 ERA and 32 Ks in 31 innings, so he's not horrible. Admittedly, his stats against lefties aren't fantastic, but we're working with a coaching staff who insists on the lefty/lefty matchup rather than going with the most effective reliever at the time, so as long as he throws with his left arm, he should do the job for Torre and co.

Pictured: Lefty/Lefty matchup working out the right way.

Move 3a: DFA Garret Anderson. He still can't hit. After a good week, he reverted back to his old self with a 1-9 week.

Move 3b: Xavier Paul.

Move 4: Use Jonathan Broxton only when he is needed. (Broxton, by the way, isn't absolved of all blame for this recent incident, even with the overuse coming in.) Here's the thing, and maybe I just don't understand because I've never been a major league reliever, but does Broxton absolutely need to get his work in? If he doesn't pitch for four games, can't he throw a light bullpen session to keep the rust off? I mean, again, maybe I don't get it, but I just don't feel like Broxton is going to forget how to throw a fastball if he doesn't do it for a handful of days.

These are just a few things that could be changed immediately and improve the team. Some of this is with the front office, some of this is with the coaching staff.

Speaking of, I'm on the fence with Joe Torre. He obviously misuses the pitching staff, and he has such an unreasonable trust of aging veterans that it becomes increasingly more difficult to defend his choices.

On the other hand, he has led the Dodgers to two straight NLCS, which is impressive considering our playoff highlight reel before Joe Torre featured only Jose Lima and then JD Drew and Jeff Kent getting thrown out at home on the same play.

On the third hand, you have to wonder how much of our recent success is his influence, and how much is just the ability of the players. How many fewer (or more?) games would the Dodgers have won if the players just coached themselves? Torre might be gone when his contract is up at the end of the year, and at this point, I don't know if I'll miss him.

Anyway, I'm probably rambling. I'm tired, it's late, and I'm frustrated. Sometimes, it's just hard to be a fan.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 11

2010-06-20T18:20:00.000-07:00

Alright, I'm posting this week recap as the Dodgers trail 2-0 in the bottom of the 8th versus the Red Sox. So far, at least up until this point, it's been a pretty lame week.

It started well, with the Dodgers taking the first two games from Cincinnati, winning their first road series outside the NL West this season. And then they lost the third game to the Reds, and then they came into Boston and decided they liked losing better than winning, because they proceeded to lose the next two games.

And Garret Anderson is batting 5th today (yes, I know GA has been better the last week or so. I'm not ready to anoint him undead just yet) so I'm not holding my hopes too high for a win here.

So, I don't have much to add this week. Mostly because it's getting a little late and I'm on a borrowed computer so I just want to quickly talk about this one thing.

The Dodger Schedule Is Unfair Because Of Who Is On The Payroll

Now, granted, schedules are inherently unfair based on things like what division and league you play in. The Baltimore Orioles have to play more games against the Yankees and Red Sox than any other non-divisional teams.

But, I'm just talking about interleague play.

The theme for the NL West in interleague play this year seems to be AL East.

For example, the Giants played the Orioles and Blue Jays this week. This coming week, they'll play the Red Sox.

The Padres, this week, played three game sets against the Blue Jays and Orioles, and next week they'll play the Rays.

The Dodgers, meanwhile, obviously played the Reds and Red Sox, and this coming week, they'll play the Angels and Yankees.

So, here's the thing that bothers me. It's not just that the Dodgers play a tougher schedule, it's that the Dodgers are playing this tougher schedule because of people on the payroll.

I'll explain... what's the reason the Dodgers are playing a three game set in Boston rather than against any other AL East team? It's because MLB wanted to pump up Manny's return to Boston. Obviously, it has worked because every sports program, website, or blog mentions it: SportsCenter mentioned the Dodgers in the first twenty minutes of the program for the first time this year. Don't quote me on that, I don't know for sure. It just seems that every time I've watched SportsCenter this year, the Dodgers don't come up til somewhere in the last 4th of the show. Suddenly, Manny is back in Boston and boom, Dodgers are one of the top stories.

In fairness, this only took three minutes of searching.

So then, what's the reason for the Dodgers playing the Yankees next week and not the Orioles? Obviously, Joe Torre versus his old team. The main stream media is going to be all over it.

Yeah, I'm probably making too much of a deal about this. Sure, it doesn't help anything that the Dodgers are a storied team with something of a rivalry with the Yankees.

I guess all I'm saying is, I wish George Sherrill had said some really horrible, inflammatory things about the Orioles after he left so we could've played them this weekend instead.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 10

2010-06-13T16:31:00.000-07:00

So ... that was an odd week.

If I were to tell you at the beginning of the week that the Dodgers would go 3-3 in three games sets versus the Cardinals and Angels, would you guess a sweep of the Cardinals and then a sweep by the Angels? Would you?! I think not. The results this week were not necessarily odd, just unexpected.

No, no. The odd this week seemed to come more from off the field than on it.

Draft Dodgers (SEE WHAT I DID THERE?!)

The annual amateur draft was held this week, and the Dodgers made a couple picks that might be considered odd.

First, they drafted an 18 year old pitcher who almost everyone feels is "unsignable." You can read my thoughts here ... as if you didn't already.

But, here's just a couple other things I noticed.

Logan White seems to have something against the coaches at LSU because he's trying to steal all their players.

First he drafts Zach Lee in the 1st round, who has a strong commitment to LSU.

Later, in the sixth round, White drafted Kevin Gausman, another high schooler with who seems committed to LSU.

But White didn't stop there. Before he drafted Gausman, he drafted LSU's center fielder Leon Landry in the 3rd round, and after, in the 8th round, he drafted LSU's 1st baseman Blake Dean.

In an ideal world, the Dodgers would take both of LSU's top pitching recruits, their center fielder, and their first baseman.

Lucky for LSU, the Dodgers will probably sign neither Lee nor Gausman, so at least their rotation will be ok next year.

The second thing I noticed was the Dodgers drafted (and signed) someone who already has my support because of his facial hair.

"What?" you ask. I'll tell you.

In the 28th round, the Dodgers drafted Mike Drowne out of Sacred Heart University. Now, I like to look up a little bit of info on the players the Dodgers draft so I went to Sacred Heart U's website and navigated my way to the athletics page and then to Drowne's page, where I found this amazing profile pic.

They look like vertical parenthesis for his mouth!

Immediately, I was intrigued. I mean, it's fantastic! He looks like a villain from the 1800s. A train magnate who wants to demolish a small town to build his railroad empire ... and yes, he's wearing a tophat in this scenario.

However ... I was disappointed when I visited the website a few days later to see an article talking about Drowne being drafted. Accompanying said story was this picture of Drowne.

Suddenly, heart-breakingly mustache-less.

Admittedly, this soured me on Drowne just a bit.

I later realized, though, it does take a certain kind of bravado (or stupidity) to take a profile picture of yourself with a crazy set of fake facial hair and allow it to go up on a website that's going to be visited by a good amount of people.

So, Mike Drowne, if you are reading this, and I'm sure you are, I'm not mad at you for the fake facial hair, and I'm telling you this: if you grow back that facial hair and keep it through your trip in the minors, and you have my full support.

The McCourts Did Something Crazy, Though Really, Not Totally Surprising

Ok, seriously, at this point, is there anyone left in the McCourt camp?

I mean, is there any Dodger fan who's been following the events of the past year or so who still fully supports either of the McCourts as owner of this team?

If so, this one is for you...

The McCourts hired and paid a six figure salary to an old Russian to send positive vibes, or "V Energy" to the Dodgers.

This has already been sufficiently discussed/made fun of on various blogs (like MSTI, MoKM, and SoSG) so I'll just add one thing, the thing that makes me most sad about all this.

Yes, this whole thing is impossibly stupid/incredibly insane/a tremendous waste of money ... pick your choice.

The real sad thing about all this is this question: were you really shocked? To be honest, I wasn't.

Sure, I was surprised. It's hard to see something like this coming. But at this point, did anyone read this article and react with disbelief. "Noooo ... the McCourts couldn't have done something so irrational ... they wouldn't have paid all this money to some crazy Russian guy who knows nothing about baseball! Impossible!"

I think, at least for Dodgers fans, the McCourts have entered the Tyson Zone. For those who don't know, the Tyson Zone (described here) was created by Bill Simmons as a way to describe an athlete (or in this case, team owner) whose behavior is so odd that any story you ready about them, no matter how bizarre, is believable.

For example, if you were to read tomorrow that the McCourts spent a million dollars two seasons ago to uproot the grass in the outfield and replant it with special Australian fertilizer that would bring good fortunes to the team, would you blink an eye? Oh, and by the way, to pay off the dirt, parking is being raised to $25 a car.

Or, say you read tomorrow that the McCourts were fighting for custody of Reed Johnson. Would you faint from surprise?

It's really unfortunate that it has come to this. The Dodgers are one of the most historic franchises in baseball, and right now the McCourts are making them a laughing stock. I mean, how many pre-season predictions did you read this Spring Training that had the Dodgers not finishing in first in the NL West because of distractions with ownership?

Luckily, at least so far, the Dodgers have been able to avoid front office issues. I mean, hey, they were in first place at one point this week before finishing the week a game behind the Padres.

But that's not to say the Dodgers haven't been affected. Just this week, the Dodgers most likely forfeited a first round pick on a player that was always going to be too expensive to sign. And this comes after they forfeited two other early picks when they didn't offer arbitration to Randy Wolf and Orlando Hudson this offseason.

... What do you believe an owner's role should be with a team? I see it as this: First, the Owner should pony up the money. The Owner should never be afraid to put money into their team. If they don't want to spend, then they shouldn't be an Owner. Two, the Owner shouldn't embarrass the team. That doesn't mean they necessarily need to be the face of the team (see Arte Moreno), but if you aren't going to put on a good front, then just disappear into your Owner's box. Be a silent owner. Show up to hold up the Championship Trophy and then go away. The last thing you should be doing is filling newspaper headlines with your divorce hearings or doing things like hiring Rasputin for a six figure sum to send brain waves and advise you on team decisions.

Mike Drowne: this facial hair is also acceptable...

Look, McCourts, if you guys are fans of the game like you've always purported to be, then you should understand that you are making a mockery of one of the storied franchises.

If you were really fans of baseball, you'd sell the Dodgers or step down as owners.

Because at this point, you are not just embarrassing yourselves, you are embarrassing all of us.

Dodgers Draft Zach Lee And Raise Questions

2010-06-07T22:38:00.000-07:00

So, I was watching the first round of the MLB draft on MLB Network earlier today, and the Dodgers were on the clock.

Now despite the fact that I know almost absolutely nothing about the kids being drafted except the most basic of information (I've heard good things about #1 pick Bruce Howard ... he's going to be the next Steve Strasman) I still get pumped for the draft.

Horrible, insane looking Strasburg picture courtesy of Yahoo! Sports.

So even though I had to sit through Bud Selig pronounce Los Angeles as "Los Angeleees" several times, I patiently awaited the announcement of the Dodger pick.

The time came, and Bud Selig stepped to the podium in all his wrinkly glory and proclaimed the Dodgers had selected Zach Lee with the 28th pick.

And almost immediately there was some negativity. The Twitter-sphere was confused. The MLB Network guys already started talking about signability issues. And then, oddly enough, in the space where the MLB Network guys had been showing scouting footage of other players all day, they began showing clips of Zach Lee playing high school football.

And that was it. They showed some grainy footage of Lee completing a pass in some football game then went immediately to an interview with an unrelated old guy.

It was all very ... different.

I mean, seriously. Google Image search "Zachary Lee baseball" and you get mostly football pictures.

Response continued to pour in, most of it confused or unfavorable.

Jim Callis chimed in with: "WOW. LAD was about the last team I would have expected to take Zack Lee. Can they really sign him?"

Joe Sheehan felt that the Dodgers were "blatantly pushing [their] pick into 2011."

The more I read about, the more it started to seem like the biggest question was not whether Lee would be signed or not, but rather: is the best analogy for what the Dodgers did in the first round a punt or a fold?

I mean, this kid seems all ready to go play two sports as LSU next year. Some reports say he was asking for at least $5 million before considering not fulfilling his commitment to LSU (although others have said it's all a ploy to get more money at the bargaining table).

Basically, a big part of the picture being painted here is something like this: Lee is going to need a lot of money to sign. A lot. (Lest you forget that Matt Kemp is only making $4 million this year.) The rest of the picture is two words: Frank McCourt. As a whole, the picture looks pretty bleak.

But I started giving it some thought.

First I read the article on Dodgers.com. Logan White was optimistic, saying:

"People can think what they want, he was the best talent available and I want to sign him, absolutely ... I didn't take Zach to not sign him. You'll see as the summer goes along we'll make every effort to sign him, and I want to sign him. I know it won't be easy, but hopefully we'll get it done."

Now sure, this is probably just a PR job, and White said almost the exact same thing after the Dodgers picked a similarly unsignable Luke Hochevar in 2005:

"We took him with the intention of signing him. I talked to Scott a couple days ago. I feel he's signable. He wants to play. As long as the family thinks we're fair, I think the kid will sign."

I and my 5.35 career ERA demand 40 million dollars!

Still, despite all the evidence mounting against actually getting this signing done, I kept thinking about it and finally I came to this peace:

What's the worst that could happen?

Well, I mean other than spending millions of dollars on Lee to have him be a total bust.

There's really two scenarios to what happens here:

1. McCourt shells out the money, the Dodgers sign a good young pitcher.

2. The Dodgers don't sign him, he goes to college, and the Dodgers get another high pick in next years draft, which is expected to have a higher quality of amateur talent than this year's draft.

The key to all this is the fact that Lee is a quality prospect and as such, I think I can appreciate this technique. White didn't draft a more mediocre prospect who might sign for less. White went for broke.

I guess, ultimately, there's two ways to look at this: either the Dodgers punted/folded a first round pick in an act of cheapness/insanity or ... or the Dodgers made a shrewd pick at number 28 that's a possible win-win.

Of course, I might just be trying to talk some sense into a first day of the draft that didn't seem to have much.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 9

2010-06-06T16:56:00.000-07:00

The more I think about it, the more it seems like this week was a bad week disguised as a good week.

Don't get me wrong. Anytime you can go 5-2, you are doing fine. It's just that some of these wins really could have ended up losses.

Monday, for example, when the Dodgers beat the Diamondbacks 5-4. The Dodgers were trailing 4-2 into the 8th before scoring two runs on an error and winning the game on a balk. That's not really winning a game so much as having it handed to you on a platter.

Then you have Tuesday and Wednesday. There's two sides to these two games. You can appreciate how Dodger pitching completely shutdown the Arizona offense, but at the same time, you have to realize that the Dodger offense looked pretty weak against Arizona's starters. In fact, Arizona's starters, Dan Haren and Edwin Jackson, pitched a combined 17.0 shutout innings over the two days and it wasn't until the Dodgers cracked into the terrible Arizona bullpen that they were able to finally score some runs.

All I'm saying is: yes, the Dodgers swept the D-backs but frankly, the D-backs could have almost just as easily swept the Dodgers right back.

The Atlanta split was a little more straight forward, with neither team scoring a whole bunch of runs ... except, for, you know, when the Braves scored 9 in two innings against the Dodger bullpen.

Anyway, I only have two more things.

I'm A Little Worried About Next Few Weeks

You know this last four game series with the Braves? It was tough and close ... and the Dodgers fought for a split.

Guess what. It ain't gettin' easier.

And not just the next series. The rest of this month. Every team the Dodgers play for the rest of the month, at this moment in time, has 30 or more wins.

Here's the schedule until the end of June with the team's current records:

3 vs. Cardinals (33-23)
3 vs. Angels (31-28)
3 at Reds (33-24)
3 at Red Sox (33-25)
3 at Angels (30-28)
3 vs. Yankees (35-22)
3 at Giants (30-25)

Yeah, maybe some things change by the time we play those teams, but I'm guessing whatever the record, this next month is going to be a challenge.

Garret Anderson Hit A Walk-Off This Week And I Still Want Him Gone

Because he still went 1-13 this week.

Look, I get that Joe Torre and gang love busted down veterans better than young players, and as such, it's going to take a lot for Xavier Paul to replace Anderson on the roster.

But Joe Torre, for God's sake, stop starting Anderson. Take a look down that bench. You see Reed Johnson? He's a veteran, too. Better yet, he's a gamer. Hard-nosed and stuff.

And the best thing? He can still kinda hit. And run. And, for the most part, play defense. What's the worst that could happen? Johnson can go 0-3 like anyone else.

You seem hellbent on only starting Manny four games a week, but Anderson doesn't have to be his replacement.

I mean, neither does Johnson, but Paul isn't 30 yet, so he's out of the running.

Anderson, seen here celebrating getting a base hit.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 8

2010-05-30T15:41:00.000-07:00

Getting back in the swing of things. I'm glad I got back to town just in time to see the Dodgers start playing .500 baseball again.

They went 3-3 this week ... although, silver lining: they did it in such a nice pattern - L, W, L, W, L, W.

Alright, so, what happened this week?

Clayton Kershaw Continues To Regress

Admittedly, he looked shaky at times this week, but he made two starts and the final box score shows:

-6.0 IP, 0 ER (1 Run), 4 Ks
-5.0 IP, 2 ER, 9 Ks

So, you can obviously see his future is bleak.

Ryan Dempster Practices Voodoo

... It's the only way to explain how he can shut down the Dodgers so consistently. In 22 career games (12 starts) spanning 93.2 innings against the Dodgers, Dempster's ERA is 2.31. I mean ... seriously.

Notorious Dodger slayer Jake Peavy has a 2.27 career ERA against the Dodgers in 158.1 innings. Tim Lincecum's career ERA against the Dodgers is 2.96 in 48.2 innings.

Dempster is a guy, by the way, who has a career ERA of 4.39. His 2.31 mark against the Dodgers is 2nd lowest amongst all NL teams (Dempster has a 2.00 ERA against Florida, in 27 IP) and the lowest in his career against any team he's pitched over 30 innings against.

I know a pitcher's ERA versus a team over their career is a skewed stat because of all the variables (changes in lineup, changes with the pitcher himself) ... all I'm getting at is this: why in the world can't the Dodgers beat Ryan Dempster?

Ryan Dempster, seen here owning the Dodgers.

Andre Ethier Is Almost Back

... and I'm giddy like a school girl.

After being shutout twice by the Cubs (Tuesday vs. Dempster and Thursday vs. Ted *cough* cheater *cough* Lilly ... I kid. But seriously ... cheater.) the Dodgers could use him back in the lineup.

Whatever The Opposite Of A Gold Glove Is, Rafael Furcal Wins It For This Week

Furcal came off the DL this week, and apparently forgot how to play defense while he was away.

Here's a quick list of the days this week in which Rafael Furcal started a game and did not commit an error: Friday.

Seriously. This was his week:

Two errors Tuesday, one error Wednesday, pinch hit on Thursday and didn't play the field, error-less Friday, one error Saturday, and one error Sunday.

At this point, you start to wonder if it's a mental thing. Doubt that he can't make a simple play might have gotten in his head and it's screwing with him.

Or maybe it's just rust and maybe he just shakes it off. I guess we'll see...

...and finally:

The Dodgers Can't Win When Vin Scully Doesn't Call The Game

The Dodgers record in all games in Denver or West of Denver: 23-9

The Dodgers record in all games East of Denver: 5-13

I mean, it's good to be able to win at home (15-8), and it's definitely good to be able to beat up on the other NL West teams (15-5), but at some point you have to be able to get past the fact the Steve Lyons is announcing and win in a foreign land (The Dodgers play another 24 games east of Denver, plus more if we get to the playoffs).

Dodgers Retrospective - ...Since I've Been Gone

2010-05-24T16:35:00.000-07:00

Alright! I'm back! I was in Argentina for the last week or so. The timeline was something like this: I left when the Dodgers swept Arizona and they proceeded to lose only one game while I was gone.

I got back early Sunday morning, just in time to learn Jose Lima died and then watch the Dodgers lose ... so, sadness...

Either way, I won't do a full week review because I had limited access to information ... Still, here are a few things I was able gather, even while on another continent.

#JonHeymanIsBadAtHisJob

Clayton Kershaw's three games since then:
-8.0 IP, 0 R, 9 Ks
-7.0 IP, 1 R, 7 Ks
-7.1 IP, 1 R, 7 Ks

Chad Billingsley's four games since then:
-6.0 IP, 4 R, 3 Ks
-5.1 IP, 2 R, 7 Ks
-7.1 IP, 0 R, 6 Ks
-7.0 IP, 1 R, 5 Ks

...

Bran Penny's four games since then:
-6.0 IP, 3 R
-7.0 IP, 4 R
-5.0 IP, 7 R
-3.0 IP, 4 R (+ a trip to the DL)

#HowIsItYouGetPaidToDoThis?

Oh, and by the way, this isn't related to anything, but I gotta love this tweet.

So, wait ... are you proud of yourself for doing this? Come on...

#SeverePettiness

EDIT: Credit to MikeSciosciasTragicIllness and nineteen84 on Twitter who found out that Heyman's definition of regressing isn't "the act of trending or shifting toward a lower state" but rather "had a bad start." I guess that's good news because horrible regression turned into progression in less than a month.

Gotta love how he plays it off not like he was wrong, but that he can just make bold declarations with no substance whenever he wants, then change his mind depending on circumstances. Bravo for journalism!

Broken Pinkies Suck

Probably doesn't need much more explanation, but seriously: Ethier is having a Triple Crown season and a broken pinkie derails him (at least temporarily). Suckage.

Ramon Ortiz Continues To Prove Me Right

I wrote way back in my thoughts on Opening Day I was not a fan of Ramon Ortiz, nor Russ Ortiz.

Now, some people who shall remain unnamed jumped all over me for this, calling me such things as "nimrod." Granted, I didn't give a whole lot of evidence to prove either Ortiz was a bad pitcher, I was just acting on a baseball hunch.

I'll admit I'm not always right, or probably not even mostly right. I've said stupid things on this blog. But guess what ... I nailed this.

Russ Ortiz had a 10.29 ERA when he was Designated for Assignment less than three weeks after I wrote that post. Not long after that he retired so he could spend more time BEING A HORRIBLE PITCHER WITH HIS FAMILY!

Meanwhile, Ramon Ortiz continues to defy odds and common sense by taking up a roster spot. He's sporting a nice 6.30 ERA in 30 innings. 30. That's not a: "Oh, I gave up two runs in three innings" six ERA. It's a: "I've been in 16 of the 44 games this season and made two starts" six ERA. What I'm saying is, it's not a small sample size. Ortiz is bad. Ortiz needs to be replaced.

I was right all along.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 5

2010-05-09T19:06:00.000-07:00

So that was odd. It was a week that ultimately saw the Dodgers go .500, but I can't remember a week that had more highs and lows. And not just highs and lows, but highs that were really high, and lows that were really low.

I mean, look at these games. Dodgers get blown out on Tuesday after the Brewers score 9 runs in the second inning. Then on Wednesday, the Dodgers blew a close game late when the bullpen gave up 7 runs in the 8th and 9th innings. And on Saturday, the Rockies scored six runs in the first and shut the Dodgers out the rest of the way. Three games ... three ugly losses.

But the three wins? A walk-off Grand Slam on Thursday, a close back and forth game the Dodgers pulled a win out of on Friday, and on Sunday, the Dodgers won a pitchers' duel against arguably the best pitcher in the league. Three games ... three really nice wins.

And so, with that, let's take a look at the players who made it the week that was. It's going to be a little shortened because it's late and I'm coming off a Mother's Day high.

Andre Ethier - Ethier had another fantastic week, going 10-22 with a walk, two doubles, and a walk-off Grand Slam. Oh, and by the way, he's either in the lead (BA and RBIs) or tied for the lead (HRs) in all three of the Triple Crown categories.

John Ely - One start for Ely this week, and a pretty good one. 6.2 innings, one run, seven strikeouts. He was a stopper when the Dodgers needed one. And his reward? A demotion to AAA. Yep, Ely was sent back to AAA while Ramon Ortiz remains on the roster. A demotion for a young player in favor of a broken down veteran. On Joe Torre's watch? What?! But more on that later.

Clayton Kershaw - Kershaw's week mirrored the Dodgers' week in general. His low was probably the lowest of his career. 1.1 innings, 7 runs. Just an ugly, ugly, terrible, ugly start. But his high mark, 8.0 innings, no runs, 9 strikeouts, was arguably the best of his career. Two starts, one awful, one brilliant = two stars for the week.

Charlie Haeger - What's going to be forgotten in Haeger's week is that he did provide 4.0 innings of quality relief on Tuesday. Still, it's impossible to overlook his start on Saturday. He wasn't able to record an out and ended up credited with five runs. He most likely lost his spot in the rotation if not on the roster as a whole.

Garret Anderson - Anderson is my new Mark Sweeney. Especially because Anderson has now committed a similar crime to what Mark Sweeney did in 2008. He's unbelievably, impossibly bad, yet somehow manages to take up a roster spot that should belong to a younger player who deserves it better.

In Anderson's case, he's now occupies a roster spot that rightfully belongs to Xavier Paul. Now look, I'm not mad at Anderson personally. He's a baseball player just trying to keep his job and he didn't make the decision to send Xavier Paul back to AAA. But seriously, is there one thing Anderson does better than Paul? One single thing? Fielding? No. Throwing? No. Running? No. And at this point, not even hitting.

Admittedly, this is a small sample size, but in 29 at-bats for Paul, he hit .276, had a .323 OBP, and slugged .483 (that's a .805 OPS in case you were wondering). Anderson, on the other hand, went 1-6 this week, bring his season total (in 48 at-bats) to 6 hits. That brings his average for the season to ... .125. His OBP is .157! His slugging is .208! In case you are too lazy to do the math, that's a .365 OPS.

So ... yeah, there's absolutely no reason to keep Anderson over Paul unless, of course, the managerial staff has a thing for keeping around useless veterans at the end of the careers while sending down better younger players at the cost of making the team worse as a whole ... but that would be ... that would be just crazy...

The Dodgers head back on the road this week, where they are 4-11. It is, however, against two NL West teams (the Diamondbacks and Padres) and the Dodgers are 6-3 against NL West teams this season. Something has got to give, let's hope it's the horrible road record.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 4

2010-05-02T15:26:00.000-07:00

Week 4 was like two weeks in one. There was the really ugly part of the week where the Dodgers were swept by the Mets in New York before coming home and losing the series opener to the Pirates 2-0 on Thursday.

And then there was the second part of the week ... suddenly: Pitching! Hitting! Winning! The Dodgers suddenly turned it on and took the last three games from the Pirates.

Ultimately, though, the Dodgers still went under .500 on the week. The Dodgers are 4-11 on the road this season. On the bright side, they are 7-3 at home, so there's that.

Hiroki Kuroda - Kuroda had two good starts this week. In the first game of the doubleheader against the Mets, Kuroda surrendered just two runs in 6.0 innings. Then on Sunday, Kuroda went 8.0 strong innings against the Pirates allowing just one run. 14.0 innings, three runs. Kuroda has a 2.08 ERA on the season.

Andre Ethier - Andre went 9-26 this week with three walks, two doubles, and four homeruns.

Clayton Kershaw - Kershaw had one start this week, and like last week, it was pretty solid. 6.2 innings, two runs, and seven strikeouts.

Chad Billingsley - Billingsley had a similar week. In his one start, he went 6.0 innings, gave up two runs as well, though Billingsley only struck out four.

Carlos Monasterios - Monasterios had a start this week, too, the first of his major league career, and though he only went four innings, they were quality (just one run on a solo homerun). Plus, add to that the two innings of scoreless relief he pitched Tuesday, and his final line for the week comes to 6.0 innings, one run.

James Loney - Loney's hitting this week kind of paralleled the performance of the Dodgers in general. Loney during the four losses: 1-14 with four strikeouts. Loney during the three wins: 8-11, three doubles, a walk, and a homer. I know that ultimately makes Loney 9-25 on the week, but I'm giving him two stars for a half good week and a half bad week ... because I can.

The two faces of James Loney this week.

Garret Anderson - Another week, another step closer to a DFA for Anderson. 0-7 with four strikeouts. He's now on a 1-26 tear since April 14th. Now, I know I advocated for putting Anderson on the roster when we signed him in Spring Training and I stand by that because the alternative was Doug Mientkiewicz and it seemed we were destined to have an old guy on the roster. However, Mientkiewicz is gone (somewhere) so we don't need to worry about him, and Xavier Paul has looked pretty good in the last week, so here's to hoping we keep Paul over Anderson when the next roster move comes.

Russell Martin - Martin started the year strong but has since seen his numbers starting to dip. He went 3-24 with a homerun and a couple walks.

Martin scoring on one of his hits this week ... because they don't take pictures of people not getting hits.

Casey Blake - Blake had an even worse week than Martin. 1-20 with a couple walks. Maybe it's time to start letting the beard grow again.

The Dodgers went 3-4 on the week, but it still feels like a win because you start to feel like the momentum has shifted.

Of course, it could just be because we played the Pirates, but I'd like to look on the positive side and say we've turned a corner.

Six games coming up at home this week against the Brewers and the Rockies, two teams that should be good but have gotten off to slow starts.

Is this the week? Is this finally the week we get over .500? A guy can hope, right?

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 3

2010-04-25T18:22:00.000-07:00

Week 3 was a step back from Week 2.

2-4, losing two straight series on the road, just like Week 1. So for those of you keeping score at home, Dodgers are 4-2 in games at home against the NL West ... and they are 4-8 in games on the road against the rest of the league.

This week was particularly infuriating as the Dodgers were able to find new ways to lose, utilizing both slugfests (11-9 to the Reds on Tuesday) and pitchers' duels (1-0 to the Nationals on Sunday) to fall two games under .500 on the season.

At least a turn around can't be too far away, right? Alright, enough of that, it's time to hand out some stars.

Matt Kemp - Kemp went 7-24 on the week, with a two homeruns and a couple walks. He did go 0-4 on Friday, though, bringing the total amount of games this year in which Kemp has not collected a base hit to: 2.

Andre Ethier - Ethier went 7-23 this week, with three walks and a couple homeruns.

James Loney - Loney went 9-27 on the week with a walk and three doubles.

Rafael Furcal - Furcal went 8-28 this week with a double, two triples, two walks, and four stolen bases.

Carlos Monasterios - Monasterios pitched 4.1 scoreless innings this week in two appearances and collected his first career win.

Quality-Relief-High-Five!

Clayton Kershaw - Kershaw had a solid start this week. One start, nothing Earth-shattering, but he held the Nationals to two runs in 6.0 innings on Saturday.

Chad Billingsley - Chad Billingsley had two starts this week. One was of high quality, one was of suck quality. Billingsley went 6.0 strong innings against Washington Sunday, allowing just one run while striking out five ... and if that was his only start this week, he would've walked away with three stars. Except that on Tuesday he went just 3.0 innings and gave up 7 runs. Yeah, only four we're earned, but Billingsley's own error led to the other three, so really ... they count. Ironically, Billingsley took the loss in Sunday's start, but walked away with a no-decision on Tuesday. Either way, one bad start, one good start equals something like two stars.

Garret Anderson - First the positive: Anderson hit a pinch hit homerun this week. Now the negative: he went 1-12 this week, the one hit being, of course, the homerun. Anderson started the season 2-5, and has since gone 3-30. He's sporting a .441 OPS right now, which is just ... nifty.

Anderson, collecting a hit on April 11th, after which he's gone 1-19.

Week 1 = Bad. Week 2 = Good. Week 3 = Bad. Week 4 = ? It has to be good, right? Maybe this is the week we finally get above the .500 mark. Maybe.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 2

2010-04-18T22:28:00.000-07:00

Week 2 in the books for the Dodgers, and we witnessed a nice improvement.

The Dodgers went 4-2 on the week, beating both the D-backs and the Giants in three game sets.

But, like always, there were ups and downs, and luckily, I have a 4 Star system to deal with just that!

Clayton Kershaw - Two good starts for Kershaw this week. On Tuesday, he went 5.1 innings against Arizona surrendering only two runs, and followed that up by going 7.0 strong against the Giants, giving up just one solo homerun while striking out nine.

Andre Ethier - Ethier went 11-26 this week, with three homeruns, and nine RBIs. He had a multi-homer game and a walk-off hit.

Matt Kemp - Kemp went 8-25, with a double and four homeruns, which came on four consectutive days. Meanwhile, Kemp is also riding a eight game hitting streak and has collected a base hit in all but one game this season.

Jonathan Broxton - Broxton threw four scoreless innings of relief this week, bring his season total to 5.2 scoreless innings. He hasn't gotten a lot of work, but he's looked solid when he's gotten it.

Vicente Padilla - How nice of Vicente to show up in his third start of the year: 7.0 innings, 7 Ks, three runs. Solid. He lowered his ERA from 11.42 to a sparkling ... 8.04. Good start, but I'd like to see that just a little bit lower. Little bit.

Hiroki Kuroda - Speaking of solid, Kuroda's one outing this week: 3 runs (2 earned) in 7.0 innings against Arizona.

Chad Billingsley - Chad Billingsley had three good scoreless innings, and then fell apart. He surrendered six runs in his next three innings.

Charlie Haeger - Haegar was put in the Arizona game for relief on Wednesday, despite making 117 pitches on Sunday. Now, I know the idea is that knuckleballers can pretty much pitch any day because they aren't straining themselves that much, but 117 pitches is still 117 pitches, whether he was throwing knuckleballs or not. I'm not saying it necessarily affected him, but he did then proceed to give up seven runs (five earned) in 3.0 innings against San Francisco on Saturday. The knuckleball wasn't working and tired or not, Haeger still got lit up.

Russ Ortiz - Tough week for Russ Ortiz. Six earned runs in 3.2 innings. I was never a big fan of Russ Ortiz ... and apparently, neither was the front office. They designated Russ for assignment on Sunday, recalling pitcher Jon Link. He leaves the Dodgers with an 0-1 record, and a 10.29 ERA in six games. So long, Russ.

So, overall, nice turnaround for the Dodgers, but a 4-2 week still only puts the Dodgers at .500.

And here's the bad news: the Dodgers head back East for a nine game road trip. You know what that means? More Steve Lyons. Sigh.

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 1

2010-04-11T13:42:00.000-07:00

Well, one week in the books for the Dodgers and they are off to a 2-4 start, which is a bit unexpected. I mean, when you looked at the schedule and saw the Dodgers were starting the season against Pittsburgh and Florida, you thought that we'd at least finish this week 4-2, right? Sure you did. And no one blamed you for it.

But here we are, several bullpen implosions later, and the Dodgers finish a road trip that they could have hypothetically gone 5-1 on, with a record of 2-4.

Anyway, enough of what could have been. Let's look at what really was. Last season, on my weekly reviews, you might remember I had a "HOT" "COLD" and "ROOM TEMPERATURE" system. Well, I'm tired of that. I now introduce my new system: a Four Star rating! With real stars!

What's the difference? Now there's four tiers instead of three!

Does it change much? No!
Does it mean anything? No!
Am I having flashbacks of Jim Tracy interviews right now? Yes!

Enough of that, let's do this!

Hiroki Kuroda - Kuroda only had one start this week, but went 8.0 innings and surrendered only one unearned run while striking out seven.

Matt Kemp - Painful error in Sunday's game aside, Kemp went 9-28 this week, with three doubles and a (monster) homerun. A side note: maybe it's just me, but does it seem like Kemp is chasing more bad breaking balls this year? He was definitely showing improvement on that aspect of his game last season, but so far this week, he's taken some bad hacks at sliders he'll never get to. Chalk it up to Opening Week nerves?

Ronnie Belliard - Belliard made the most of his playing time this week, going 6-12. He went 3-5 on Thursday with a double, a triple, and a homerun, just missing out on the cycle. If he keeps this up, he might make a case for more playing time.

Charlie Haeger - Haeger went 6.0 solid innings in his start, striking out 12 ... 12 (!) Marlins. He did surrender a pretty ugly three run homerun to Jorge Cantú and allowed a fourth unearned run (see aforementioned painful Matt Kemp error) but I won't hold that against him. Six innings, three runs is almost exactly what you'd hope for from a 5th starter.

Chad Billingsley - Billingsley went 5.1 innings in his only start this week, and was solid. He only gave up one run while striking out seven. Still, he gave up five hits and four walks in just those 5.1 innings, and saw his pitch count over 100 by the 6th inning, and that my friends, is not pitching effectively.

Russ Ortiz - Ortiz had two good outings (three innings) to start the season before imploding on Friday. Ortiz came into the game in the 9th inning, with a 7-1 lead, gave up a single, retired one batter, and gave up two walks to load the bases, bringing Joe Torre out of the dugout to pull him.

Ramon Ortiz - The other half of the Ortiz power hour, Ramon had almost the opposite week of Russ. Ramon went two scoreless innings in his third outing on Saturday. This, unfortunately, was only after his first outing, when he allowed three inherited runners to score before giving up a run of his own, and his second outing, in which he allowed the Pirates to score the winning run in the 10th inning on Wednesday.

Clayton Kershaw - Kershaw struggled a lot in his first start. A LOT. He only made it 4.2 innings while giving up five hits and walking six. By the time Kershaw was pulled with two outs in the 5th inning, he had made 109 pitches and left with the bases loaded. Jeff Weaver came in and got out of the inning without any more damage. It was not a good start to the season for Kershaw. On the other hand, he still managed to only give up three runs, so I can't bump him down to 1 STAR.

Vicente Padilla - Padilla made two starts this week in which he only made it 4.1 innings into the game. In his first start, he was charged with seven runs (three given up by Ramon Ortiz). In his second start, he gave up four runs and left with two runners on in the 5th before Weaver came in to bail him out.

George Sherrill - Sherrill gave up two runs in 27.2 innings of work last year for us. In three games this year (two innings), Sherrill has given up five runs. On Monday, he gave up a big three run homerun that basically closed the door on any hope of a comeback in that game. On Saturday, he blew a save and gave the Marlins a win by surrendering two runs in the bottom of the 9th.

Ok, there you have it. The Stars and lesser Stars of the first week that was. 2-4. Sigh.

Opening Day Thoughts

2010-04-05T15:20:00.000-07:00

So... that happened. 11-5 to the Pirates.

Look, Opening Day is just another game, and an Opening Day loss is just one of many that will happen this season. There's really not a whole lot that should be made of what happened today.

... That being said, I have some notes.

1. This isn't just reactionary as I've felt this way for a little while. I don't like Vicente Padilla. I've not really ever been a fan of his, even during the good times, for a couple reasons. One, I just straight up don't like the guy. He's a hothead, his ex-teammates tend to not like him, and (though this one is just something I feel and I have no plausible way of proving) he seems to carry a bad air around him, in that, he's the kind of guy who spends an off-season recovering from a bullet wound. Two, he's not that good a pitcher. We gave him a contract this offseason pretty much based on the 8 games he played for us at the end of last season, and the one good start he made in the playoffs, and we did this completely ignoring the fact he had a near five ERA in Texas before we picked him up. In fact, Padilla hasn't had a sub-4.00 ERA for a season since 2003. He hasn't been a good pitcher for a long time. Anyway, long story short, I'm not a Vicente Padilla fan.

But he probably doesn't like me much either, so it's ok.

Now, here's the other problem. People are going to look at this game, see Padilla got shelled and claim the Dodgers don't have an ace. First off, "aces" aren't real things. You are either a good pitcher, or you aren't. "Aces" are just good pitchers dressed up by color commentators and newspaper columnists as mythical creatures. Second, just because Padilla started today, does not make him the Dodgers' "Ace" and frankly, if people we hinging their hopes for the season on the Vicente Padilla wagon, they deserve to be scared into thinking the season is already over.

2. I also don't like Ramon Ortiz and Russ Ortiz. This isn't too reactionary either as I didn't care for either when they were signed this offseason. Ramon had a bad game. Russ was better. I don't think either is a good fit for a major league team. Yes, both had good Springs, but that doesn't necessarily translate to regular season success.

...which brings me to:

3. Carlos Monasterios, who also had a good spring, and is someone I'm genuinely glad to see we kept on the roster. Monasterios had a good outing today, but again, I'm trying not to take too much from one game, so we'll have to see if he can keep up his success.

4. George Sherrill game up more runs in one inning today than he did in all 30 appearances combined that he made for us at the end of last season. Something is seriously up with Sherrill, and I'm thinking he might have a DL trip soon, if only just to work out his mechanical issues and not necessarily for an injury.

5. The hitting was ok today, but my God do we have to cut down on leaving all these runners in scoring position. The Dodgers went 2-13 with runners in scoring position today, and giving up 11 runs aside, that's no way to win a game.

6. ...and finally, I've come to a conclusion about all non-Vin Scully Dodger announcers. The Rick Monday - Charlie Steiner comedy hour is nearly impossible to listen to. If these two take over the booth when Vin hangs it up, I will watch games with a sharpened spoon jabbed in each ear.

Eric Collins is bearable when he doesn't say things that are stupid, which he's ok at, half of the time.

Steve Lyons is bearable when he doesn't say things that are stupid, which is a two-minute window that occurs only once a week. I was trying to think if I've heard Steve Lyons say something [interesting/meaningful/insightful/different/all of the above] in the four (five?) years he's been calling Dodger games. I can't think of an instance where I said to myself: "Thank God Steve Lyons was here to clear things up for me." ... Seriously, do we even need Steve Lyons anymore, or can we just stick someone in the booth with a Steve Lyons soundboard? Would anyone know the difference?

Alright, enough of that.

The game, like I said, is just one game, and there are 161 to go. They can't get much worse, right?

Although, I guess they can never get too much better.

Complaints

2010-03-28T15:35:00.000-07:00

It was apparently decided a few days back that Garret Anderson would be taking the left handed pinch hitting role over Doug Mientkiewicz.

Now, this really shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone, but a still shocked Mientkiewicz supposedly left camp when he heard the news ... which is interesting because I just read this blurb in ESPN Magazine from Kim Ng on cutting players:

"Reactions vary. Young guys are rarely rattled; they expect it. Vets who know it's time to hang it up go proudly. But some guys do get upset. We tell them to take the day off and talk with friends."

Now, you would think a guy like Mientkiewicz would be one of the vets who knows it's time to hang it up. Nope, turns out he's more a guy who gets upset. And apparently, Mientkiewicz went and talked with his friends, and they decided his battle plan should be to act like a douche.

Mientkiewicz came back today demanding his release, which would be well and good, if he didn't follow that up by making a scene.

"...they won't give me [my release] because they say if Garret Anderson blows out his hamstring, I'm the pinch-hitter.

...So I'm not bitter or pouting, but I feel like the Shawshank Redemption. Let me go. No place I'd rather be than with the Los Angeles Dodgers. But I'm not one of the 25. I'm OK with that. I get it. Then, why hold onto me?"

First of all, nice job of throwing the coaching staff under the bus with Anderson. Somewhere, Garret is sobbing to himself, wondering why nobody has faith in his hamstring.

"Don't I have feelings, too?"

Second, why is this so hard to understand? They want to keep you around as an insurance policy, in case, as you so delicately put it, Anderson blows out his hamstring. Is that really that crazy an idea? What?! A backup?! This is unheard of!

Third, what's the motivation to keep playing? The fact that Torre wants to keep you around in case something happens to Anderson is actually pretty high praise.

I mean, you haven't shown any indication that you can throw anything other than lobs with that injured shoulder of yours ... so there's no way that could be problematic; is there anything stopping a runner from going 1st to 3rd on a fielder's choice when you are playing?

On the other hand, you went 7-24 (with two doubles!) this Spring (mostly as a late inning replacement, so really that's against the #83s and #97s of the world), so at least the mediocre hitting is still there.

At least you can still catch a ball ... I guess you've got that going for you...

Oh, and finally, Shawshank Redemption?! Really? You have an opt-out clause in your contract that can be enacted on Friday, so yeah, that's a lot like serving consecutive life sentences in a depressing prison with only Morgan Freeman to help you get through your ordeal.

He can probably make throws across the diamond better than Mientkiewicz.

What I'm saying is, give it a rest Doug.

If there's strong interest today amongst other teams in a 35 year old first baseman who can't throw and can only hit .292 against scrubs, but who can catch the ball like the dickens, then they'll still be interest on Friday.

-----

EDIT: It's Friday. Mientkiewicz was released. Good luck in finding a job, Doug. Hope these last six days didn't ruin your blossoming career.

Down Goes Giles

2010-03-11T11:39:00.000-08:00

As Dylan Hernandez reported:

"Brian Giles announced his retirement today."

With the Giles era over in Los Angeles, you know what this means...

The Garret Anderson for old-busted-lefty-off-the-bench-train is picking up steam.

"I'm still your man."

Injuries Everywhere!

2010-03-08T15:08:00.000-08:00

What is going on?!

On the heels of Russell Martin announcing he'd be out 4-6 weeks, Cory Wade is going to be out 2 weeks with a shoulder issue, and Casey Blake had to leave today's game because of a strained side muscle.

We're less than a week into Spring Training and everyone is breaking down! Luckily, Blake's injury doesn't seem serious, and Wade will be back before Spring Training is over, but I don't like the bad vibes we're starting this season with.

-----

In other news, this headline from Dodgers.com forced me to come up with a bad joke, that I know I shouldn't share with the outside world, but I just can't help myself.

Well, sure, Martin is easy. Let's see him spell Mientkiewicz.

This Could Be A Problem

2010-03-07T16:36:00.000-08:00

Russell Martin is going to be out for the next four to six weeks with a pulled groin. Now this poses a few issues.

The first is obvious. Who will replace Martin? Word from Joe Torre is that A.J. Ellis will get most of Martin's starts to begin the season, which is something I'm only 60% ok with. I like Ellis, and I like the fact that he's stuck in there for the last seven seasons since he's been drafted by the Dodgers, and I've even supported Ellis as backup catcher for the last two seasons or so, I'm just worried with the idea of "A.J. Ellis, starting catcher." Still, there aren't many other options, none especially better, so that issue kind of settles itself.

Here's the bigger issue, Martin has in a round-about way declared that he's going to push hard to try to come back quickly which is, really, just the worst thing he can do.

Martin has always been known as a hard nosed guy, who doesn't want to sit out a game, or who wants to play through injuries, etc. but in this instance, he would be putting himself at risk for no reason.

I mean, really, we're not just talking about a handful of games in April, but here are the teams we are playing:

3 @ Pittsburgh, 3 @ Florida, 3 vs Arizona, 3 vs SF, 3 @ Cincinnati, 3 @ Washington, 3 @ New York Mets, 4 vs Pittsburgh

That takes us to May 3rd. 8 weeks from now. Which is more than enough time to heal up and make sure you are 100% ready for the season.

Is there one series in those eight (in April, by the way) that is an absolute must win? There is absolutely no need for Martin to rush back.

Russell, you feel like you need to play, but you couldn't be further from the truth. Sit. Heal. Watch some scouting videos or something.

Or grow your totally awesome mustache back.

...and get paid to do it. We'll see you in six weeks.

If You Must Have One Old Broken Down Lefty Off The Bench...

2010-03-03T21:17:00.000-08:00

...make it Garret Anderson!

The Dodgers added Anderson today on a minor league contract, and he'll supposedly compete with Brian Giles and Doug Mientkiewicz for the role of 5th outfielder/left handed batter off the bench.

Now, we can debate whether or not we really need a 5th outfielder¹ or if we could fill the role of left handed batter with a better option than one of the aforementioned.²

1. We don't.
2. We could.

...however, we do have Joe Torre as a manager, so having an old busted up veteran to fill the unnecessary role is almost a guarantee.

So, who to pick out of the three? All three are pretty much question marks.

Mientkiewicz only had 18 at-bats last year, and wasn't bad, but that's such a small sample size, you can't draw anything from it. He still deserves a spot and a chance in Spring Training, but for the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to rule him out.

I mean, come on, this was the highlight of his season.

So that brings us to Brian Giles and Garret Anderson.

Brian Giles had a horrid season last year, splitting half the time being injured and the other half being a terrible hitter. I've said it before, but his numbers last year (.191, 2 HR, .548 OPS!) dipped into Andruw Jones-ian territory. And that's not 20 at-bats. That's 225 at-bats! That's a good 2/5th's of a season.

Garret Anderson, on the other hand, has been slowly melting, statistically speaking. Average, On-Base Percentage, Slugging, and Homeruns have been on a downward trend the last three years. So, now the question is, has he bottomed out, or does he still have room to slide more?

Between the last two, Giles has far bigger upside, in that, if he returns to form as the Brian Giles of old, he can make a huge impact on the team. However, I'm going to say there's only a 10% chance of that happening, whereas with Anderson, I feel like we know what we can get from him.

I'm going to go out on a limb here (so Anderson can screw me over) and say that I think Anderson has fallen to his lowest level. Anderson hit .268 (.705 OPS) with 13 HRs in a weak 2009 season and I feel that's probably similar to what he would do if we threw him out there everyday in 2010, which would be really terrible if he was going to be our starting left fielder, but not the worst thing if you are going to make him a left handed pinch hitter, a la Jim Thome.

Basically, what I'm saying is, if we absolutely, positively, gots-to have a 5th outfielder/left handed pinch hitter/old person, then I'm ok with Garret Anderson for the job.

"I'm your man!"

Ok, Fine...

2010-02-03T23:00:00.000-08:00

I know I haven't been posting a lot, but it's all part of the plan. You see, this is how I've been going about this offseason:

Picture the offseason as a glass. Every meaningless signing adds a few drops to the glass. Eventually, the glass starts to get full and overflows. And then, as all the non-roster invitees are spilling on the counter, I finally decide to do something about it.

Why am I doing it like this? Laziness? Busyness? The inability to bring myself to dedicate an entire post to Justin Knoedler? Pick one.

Who???

Either way, consider this post emptying out the glass.

Ok, let's take a look at what we've added since I last posted:

Timo Perez - Outfielder. Hasn't been in the majors since 2007. Doesn't have much value. He's dead to me.

John Koronka - Pitcher. 4 games since 2006. Never posted an ERA below 5.60. He's dead to me.

Reed Johnson - He was signed to be out 4th outfielder. He's ok. His contract is cheap. There were probably better options, but I'm not going to go to war over a 4th outfielder.

Justin Knoedler - Catcher. Hasn't played in the majors since 2006. I can't imagine using him at all in 2010 unless something horrible happens to the several catchers ahead of him in the depth chart. Dead to me.

Alfredo Amezaga - Utility player. Much like Johnson, he's ok. Also, he's cheap. He can play a bunch of positions. He's coming off surgery so who knows how effective he'll be. Also, I don't know who's spot he's taking on the roster, so he might not even be relevant this year.

Jeff Weaver - I actually like this signing! Wow! Weaver was effective as a swing man last year, he's coming back as a non-roster invitee. So, either Weaver will be good and find his way back to the roster, or he won't and will sit cheaply in AAA. Nice.

Ramon Ortiz - Pitcher. 5 games for two teams in 2007. 5.45 combined ERA. Has had a below 4.00 ERA once in his career (2002). Here's a better question ... who has a better chance of being useful in 2010: Russ Ortiz or Ramon Ortiz? The answer? They're both dead to me.

Alright. That's it. The glass has been emptied and I feel better.

Look, if something meaningful happens, I'll post about it.

Otherwise, I'll be back in a week and a half to discuss the addition of another five players who are already dead to me.

Adding Pieces

2010-01-27T00:28:00.000-08:00

So, I was out and about today, and I finally got around to checking the news, and what did I see?

Well, lookey here. The Dodgers resigned Ronnie Belliard and Brad Ausmus.

And like almost every thing we've done this offseason, I am just ... feeling ... blah ... about it.

Ausmus is fine. He did well enough as a backup catcher last year, and he'll be back this year relatively cheap. If he continues to play adequately and maybe impart some old catcher wisdom on some of the younger players, then he's a good guy to have around.

Plus, he's got connections.

Ronnie Belliard is a bit of a different story. Don't get me wrong. I love what Belliard did for us down the stretch last year, but I didn't really want him back this year. He was playing way over his head in '09. A 1.034 OPS over 24 games?! Let's all be honest, that's not Ronnie Belliard.

Which I guess brings me to why I'm so unsure about Belliard. What is his point? Is he here to start or come off the bench? And if we have Belliard, what's the point of Jamey Carroll? They play the same positions. Both bat right handed. Carroll gets on base better. Belliard slugs better. Neither excels at both. It's just a little ... blah.

On the bright side, Yahoo! Sports reports that Belliard's contract comes with a stipulation that is both sad and funny:

"The infielder’s $825,000, one-year contract, which was announced Tuesday, will become guaranteed only if he reports to spring training at 209 pounds or less. If he reports at over 209 pounds, the Dodgers can release him and owe only termination pay."

Basically, show up fat and you lose everything!

I can only imagine the horribly depressing conversation that would take place between the coaches if Belliard doesn't show up in shape in Spring. The inevitable: "Is Ronnie looking sluggish?" question. The debate whether or not to bust out the scale. The decision on whether or not to cut him for being 215.

"Are we supposed to add the weight of dreadlocks, too?"

Say what you will about the signings, but at the very least they've added a little bit of suspense to Spring Training.

And really, isn't that all you can ask for in a blah offseason?

Hey Everybody! Vicente's Back!

2010-01-21T12:40:00.000-08:00

The Dodgers announced today that they have resigned Vicente Padilla to a one year contract worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $5 million.

Now, I'm having trouble deciding how I feel about this.

For one, I don't care much for Vicente Padilla, the man. And that's not just me, lest we forget his Rangers teammates threw a small party when they learned he was let go from the team last year. But this is also the guy who mysteriously got shot in the leg this offseason. Seriously, did we ever get the straight story about what went down? The article on Dodgers.com said he did it, but until I just read that, I was pretty sure his bodyguard did it. Look, this has obviously nothing to do with his pitching skills. I'm just saying that this guy seems to have trouble follow him around wherever he goes.

Also, is it Vincente or Vicente? That always messes me up.

But personal feelings aside, Vicente Padilla the pitcher is a bit of a question mark.

Which Padilla is going to show up for us in 2010? Is it going to be the one who posted a 4.92 ERA in Texas for the good part of 2009, or the one who showed up in Los Angeles and had a 3.20 ERA over seven starts and made two excellent starts in the playoffs?

Also, how many innings can we get out of Padilla? In his last six seasons, Padilla only made over 30 starts and cracked 200 innings just once, in 2006.

To be honest, I was hoping to fill the #4 starter spot with Jon Garland (or someone like him, though, really, I'm too lazy to think of a comparable name on the Free Agent market). Garland is someone who has made 30+ starts in each of his last eight seasons and has gone 200+ innings in five of those (the other three ending with him in the 190 inning range). Garland's ERA, though similar to Padilla's over that stretch, seems to be slightly lower. Oh, and, in each of those eight seasons, Garland was never run out of a city, nor has he been shot or shot somebody (or both, at the same time).

But, I guess you go into the 2010 season with the team you have, not the team you want. Look, Padilla isn't horrible. He isn't good, but he'll probably give us 20 something starts and a 4.00 ERA, which for a #4 starter at $5 million isn't horrendous.

It's just, after Milton Bradley, Jeff Kent, and Manny, you start to get a little tired of the headcases.

This Is What It Has Come To

2010-01-09T12:27:00.000-08:00

So, I haven't written a blog post in almost a month. But can you really blame me? There hasn't really been a substantial bit of news in that time.

Matt Kemp is dating Rihanna? Good for him, but how sad is it that the biggest news the Dodgers have had in the last month was reported by TMZ?

Big News.

What then, you might ask, is this post about? Well, a small bit of Dodger news was reported today and I'm jumping all over it for two reasons. One: Guilt for not posting anything for about three and a half weeks. Two: I'm starving for any kind of Dodger news. I keep checking Dodger news sites and blogs just hoping for some sign of a pulse in this team's offseason.

Well, ladies and gentlemen, that pulse was found today!

The Dodgers have signed ... RUSS ORTIZ!

HUZZAH! HUZZAH! ...

Wait a second. Russ Ortiz? RUSS ORTIZ?! WHAT?! WHY?!

Look, normally I'm a sucker for these stupid "Local Boy Comes Home to Pitch for Dodgers" stories, but even I can't get behind this one.

Russ Ortiz? Russ Ortiz who's last "just above average" year was 2004? Russ Ortiz who's has been dreadful in every following year (and I mean dreadful, ERAs: 6.89, 8.14, 5.51, 5.57)?

Russ Ortiz, seen here being slightly above-average.

No, no. This is bad. Granted, it's a minor league deal, but my God do I not want to see us have to use Russ Ortiz this year.

Oh, and the Dodgers signed Michael Restovich, too, which immediately places him 7th on the Dodger outfielder depth chart, behind Jamie Hoffmann, who's on another team.

A Medley Of (Semi) Important News

2009-12-17T09:43:00.000-08:00

Alright, let's talk about a couple things that have gone down recently.

Jamey Carroll signed with the Dodgers for two years and I am apathetic. Carroll's an average bat, and not bad with the glove. It kind of goes down like this: if Carroll is our starting 2nd baseman, we're in trouble. If Carroll fills the role that Mark Loretta had last year, then we are better off. Either way, the contract is only two years and it's under $4 million, so it's not a bad signing.

The Dodgers also added Luis Ayala on the cheap. As Mike at MSTI points out, Ayala's been (in Mike's words) a "monumental jackass." He did a write up about Ayala here. I don't like how much of a jackass Ayala is, but I'm not worried much about him affecting clubhouse chemistry or anything. The brilliant thing about Joe Torre is, say what you will about his coaching style but the man knows how to control a clubhouse. I don't think Ayala will be a problem. He might suck at pitching, but that's another story...

Speaking of adding players on the cheap, Diamond Leung reported on his Twitter that the Dodgers also brought back Doug Mientkiewicz and Ángel Berroa on minor league deals. I like Mientkiewicz, he's not great, but he's an okay option as a backup to Loney or being a left handed bat off the bench. If we have to use Berroa, I'm going to be off-put.

Off-putting.

And finally, Juan Pierre is gone, and he's still getting on my nerves. When Dylan Hernandez covered the Pierre trade for the L.A. Times, he went to Pierre to get some quotes. Here's a piece of the article:

"'I've been in the witness protection program for the last two years.'

Pierre said he didn't consider his last three years a waste.

'When I first signed with them, people were like, 'What in the world were they thinking?' ' he said. 'I've been criticized so much in the last three years, so I'm ready for the Chicago media. All in all, it's made me a stronger person.'"

Long sigh...

"Witness protection"? You appeared in 264 of 324 games the last two years and started 162 of those games. You weren't a ghost.

And I'm glad this whole experience made you "a stronger person." Guess what, Juan? You were getting paid millions upon millions of dollars to play baseball, so take a little criticism in the media.

And by the way, most of the things I see about you in the media are complementary. Writers and television announcers have had almost nothing but praise for your "grittiness" or "baseball attitude" or whatever.

You're a baseball player, not a pariah. Get over yourself.

Beastmode, Deactivated

2009-12-15T08:46:00.000-08:00

I was going to call this post something along the lines of "Our Long National Nightmare is Over" but I always seem to come late to the party.

Anyway, sources (I'm looking at you, Tim Brown) are reporting the Dodgers have shipped Juan Pierre off to the White Sox. Dodgers will eat $10.5 million of the $18.5 million left on the two years of Pierre's contract.

In return, we are getting a couple of PTBNL's, some salary relief, and a new lease on life.

Ok, maybe it's not that bad, but Pierre has been somewhat of albatross on the Dodgers the last three years. A combination of his strikingly sub-par ability to get on-base (as a leadoff man, no less), his horrifyingly below average throwing arm, and his dwindling stolen base rate (71.% in 2009) has made Pierre somewhat of a negative word amongst Dodger fans.

... But all that's over. That's Chicago's problem now.

Now, as for the trade, we could talk about Pierre's (mostly) professional attitude to becoming a bench player for the first time in his life, but that's been covered.

We could also look at the implications of the trade: is this money we just opened up for a free agent or lawyers' bills? Given that we are eating much of his contract, will the PTBNL's we get have some nice value or are we just happy if they have a pulse? Questions to be answered.

... But you know what? That's for a later time. For now, I'll just leave it at this: Pierre it's been fun. Enjoy the fact that you will actually be playing in Chicago. (We all will.)

Another Week, Another Dollar

2009-12-13T09:27:00.000-08:00

So, another week has gone by without any substantial Dodger news taking place, at the GM winter meetings, no less. Well, I suppose that's not necessarily true. We did lose Randy Wolf to the Brewers for three years and about 9.25 million a year.

Now, you can debate whether giving that contract to Wolf to keep him would have been in our best interest or not, but what's become pretty clear is that, at the very least, arbitration should have been offered. Milwaukee was the 14th worst team in the league last year, so we would have been given their 2nd round pick, as well as a sandwich pick in between the 1st and 2nd round of next year's draft. There's a lot of quality to be found in those picks, especially when Logan White is running the draft.

But alas, no arbitration offered, no picks gained, and the farm system becomes harder to replenish. It's kind of amazing how this whole McCourts' divorce thing is not only finding ways to screw up the Dodgers in the present but the future as well.

Really, though, I feel like the worst part about all this is that there never was any real intention of bringing Wolf back. There were some reports about Wolf being open to returning to the Dodgers at two years for around 8 million a year. Whether these claims were valid or not, I don't know, but ultimately, I don't think it matters. I think the key to the claims is that Wolf wanted to remain a Dodger. And why not? We've had success (at least more so than Milwaukee). We've got a good young core. And, probably most important to Wolf, we're his home town team. He had reason to stay, and yes, he probably would have given us a home town discount. But again, I just get the feeling that we weren't having any of it.

So, that's where we stand. No Wolf. No draft picks. Nothing but memories of one of our best pitchers last year. Sigh.

...and even worse: no more "Hungry like the Wolf" jokes.

Meanwhile, in lesser news: Jamie Hoffmann was taken in the Rule 5 draft by the Yankees. The key here is that Hoffmann has to stay on the Yankees roster the whole season otherwise he is offered back to us. The Yankees have Curtis Granderson and Nick Swisher on the roster for next season, as well as Melky Cabrera and Brett Gardner, who serve as reserve outfielders and pinch runners. If the Yankees don't add a free agent outfielder, I could see Hoffman making it as the 5th outfielder. But let's be honest. They have a field of Jason Bay, Matt Holliday, Johnny Damon, and Hideki Matsui to choose from... The Yankees will buy one of them. Maybe two. Unless they ship off Cabrera or Gardner (or both), Hoffmann probably doesn't make it the whole season. Of course, then the question becomes: how willing are we to take on the added payroll of a Jamie Hoffmann?

Hoffmann is likely to demand a salary of at least six figures.

Elsewhere, the Dodgers tendered contracts to all nine players who were contract tender-able. Eight of those players pretty much compose the young core of the team, and there's also Jason Repko. What? Yeah, he's still with the team. Some people are upset we are still paying him, I don't care. He's like a remnant of the Dan Evans era. Keep him around. Meanwhile, the other eight players are in line for a big raise through arbitration. So, look for that to be one of the reasons given for our lack of free agent spending at the end of the offseason.

And finally!

The Dodgers signed Josh Towers to a minor league contract this week. Now, when I heard this news, I was happy for some reason. For a while, I couldn't remember why. Towers has had minimal success in the majors, and none really since 2005. He spent all of 2008 in the minors, and he made a couple appearances last year for the Yankees and was ok. Apparently he was pretty good in AAA for most of the year.

Basically, what I'm saying is, it's not a fantastic signing. Towers might make it as the swingman/long relief guy, but more likely, he'll probably come up from AAA to make a few spot starts sometime during the season a la Eric Milton. I mean, this is not a bad signing, but it's not lighting the Dodger world on fire.

But for some reason, I like Josh Towers. I looked him up, he's from Port Hueneme. That's round here. So, he's a local boy. I always like when we bring back local players. But that wasn't the reason I knew Josh Towers. I mean, there are a lot of players from the Los Angeles area. I don't know them all.

So, I kept thinking about it, and finally, it hit me.

Josh Towers was a very valuable part of the 2005 World Champion Dodgers... on my copy of MVP Baseball 2005. I won't delve too deeply into how good a game MVP Baseball 2005 was, but I will say that it was, and still is, the only baseball video game that I've been able to go a full season in. Most games, I'll start a season, make 30-40 games in and eventually lose interest. Not with MVP Baseball 2005. 162 games... and I'm pretty sure I went 162-0 over that span, too. And then I swept my way through the playoffs and won the World Series in 4 games. And Josh Towers was my number five starter that year. He probably won 20-something games that year. I don't remember how or why I traded for him, but I do know that he provided 30+ quality starts for an improbable championship team.

Josh Towers, Starting Pitcher, 2005 World Champion Dodgers

If that's not enough of a reason for me to be happy we signed him five years later, then I don't know what is...

Quiz Time

2009-12-06T17:58:00.000-08:00

So, it's been a while since my last post, and it's not for lack of not being around. It's just that the biggest news recently is the signing of Justin Miller, so you can understand my lack of enthusiasm.

Whoo-pee...

I'll probably have to figure a way to write posts about nothing, because the way this off-season is shaping up, I don't get the feeling there's going to be a lot of action.

Hence this post.

If you are bored, take a hack at one of the following puzzles based on statistics from the last season.

HERE'S THE BATTER'S ONE

and

HERE'S THE PITCHER'S ONE

The pitcher one is admittedly tougher, though the whole thing is kind of tough if you don't follow baseball as a whole.

Anyway, while you are at it, you might want to take another swipe at the Dodger based quiz I posted about earlier this offseason.

If you want, you can post your scores in the comments section of this post.

The Strange History of the Dodgers

2009-11-23T13:01:00.000-08:00

So this weekend I delivered my third and final speech in a college speech class I'm enrolled in. Naturally, I chose to talk about the Dodgers. Look, I even made an awesome time line:

But I digress. In researching the topic, I came across the Dodgers History page from the official site.

And in looking through the history of the Dodgers, I learned something interesting... the Dodgers have some weird-ass moments in their history.

And now, I'd like to share some of my favorite moments with you.

"June 12, 1890: Brooklyn beats the Giants, 12-6, at Washington Park in the first game to feature a passionate dispute between the two clubs in the National League, ignited by Brooklyn third-base coach Darby O'Brien, who pretended to be a baserunner and drew a throw over to third."

-What now? How does this even happen? Did the pitcher have such short term memory that he couldn't remember there wasn't a runner on third? That's such an 1890s thing, a third base coach acting like a runner and trying to trick the pitcher. That's crazy... I mean, could you imagine Larry Bowa trying that today? ... Eh, bad example.

"Sept. 1, 1890: Let's play three? Brooklyn dispatches Pittsburgh three times in one day."

-The triple header? Nice. "I'm ready for a fourth!" says Dodger center fielder Cornelius "One-eyed" Jackson.

"May 29, 1892: Eight days after losing 28-year-old outfielder George "Hub" Collins to typhoid fever, the Bridegrooms and St. Louis Browns put on a benefit All-Star Game to raise money for his widow."

-They lost an outfielder to typhoid fever?! "Suck it up, Hub!" says polio-stricken Dodger first baseman Cornelius "Wheelchair" Jackson. That's definitely another thing that's very 1890s, a player catching typhoid fever. I mean, what would your reaction be if you learned Manny caught typhoid fever? ... Eh, bad example.

"May 30, 1893: William "Brickyard" Kennedy beats Louisville, 3-0 and 6-2, in both games of a twin bill, allowing just eight hits all day. He's the first Major Leaguer to pitch and win two games on the same day since the mound was moved to 60 feet, six inches from the plate."

-Good ol' "Brickyard" Kennedy tossed a double header. I know men were men in those days, but still, didn't their arms ever get sore?

"July 21, 1900: Deacon McGuire sticks his bat out to avoid being intentionally walked, and connects to allow the winning run to cross the plate."

-No one pulls a fast one over Deacon McGuire!

"Sept. 12, 1900: "Iron Man" Joe McGinnity, who has appeared in every game of the week, closes out both ends of a twin bill on a good day for the Superbas and not so good day for the Reds, who commit a record 17 errors in the doubleheader."

-Nothing too weird here, just love the idea of being referred to as "Iron Man" McGinnity. Though 17 errors? I'd put much of the blame for that at the feet of the Reds manager for starting Reginald "No-arms" McIntyre at first.

I love the timeline here:

"April 17, 1904: Blue Laws prevent charging for ballgames on Sundays, but Charles Ebbets holds a game anyway, selling scorecards to all fans instead of tickets."

"June 17, 1906: Charles Ebbets and manager Ned Hanlon are arrested after a scheme to charge fans after a Sunday game to avoid the Blue Laws doesn't pass muster with the local authorities."

-No one escapes Johnny Law, Ebbets!

"March 13, 1915: Wilbert Robinson, after bragging that he could catch a baseball dropped from an airplane, is set to prove his mettle. But when aviation pioneer Ruth Law forgets to bring the baseball, she drops a grapefruit, which explodes on impact in Robbie's glove."

-Well, that seems like a reasonable bet. This is even more fun when you realize Robinson was the manager at the time. This time the question actually works: can you imagine Joe Torre trying out a stunt like this? That would be amazing to watch.

By the way, if your only job is to fly the plane and drop the baseball, how do you forget the baseball? And what makes you think dropping a grapefruit in it's place is a good idea?

"July 1, 1917: Another Sunday, another attempt by Charles Ebbets to find a way to play baseball, despite Blue Laws prohibiting him from charging admission. Ebbets claims the money is going to charity and has a band and exhibition to prove it, but the police who arrest him and his manager Wilbert Robinson are unconvinced."

-That Ebbets, what a sneaky guy... Whenever you get worried about the Dodgers being negatively affected by the McCourts divorce, just comfort yourself with this: at least neither of them has been arrested multiple times.

"June 6, 1918: Casey Stengel, making his return to Ebbets Field after being traded during the offseason, tips his cap to the crowd and a sparrow flies out from under it."

-That's mildly creepy. And yet, unfortunately, another thing I don't have trouble imagining Manny doing.

"April 30, 1919: Burleigh Grimes pitches 20 long innings, but Philadelphia's Joe Oeschger matches him and the game ends in a 9-9 tie."

-Ha HA! Burleigh Grimes sees "Brickyard" Kennedy tossing a double header and says: "I'll pitch two more innings than you! And I'll do it without a break!"

"Sept. 7, 1924: Thousands of fans show up early and use crowbars to tear the gates open at Ebbets Field for a chance to watch Brooklyn battle the Giants."

-Well, you got to admire a fan's passion... Weird thing is, these were still the days when people wore their Sunday best to go out to the ballpark. Suits, fedoras, and crowbars. That, my friends, is a recipe for awesome.

"April 18, 1925: Charles Ebbets dies from heart failure. Co-owner Edward McKeever catches a cold at Ebbets' funeral and dies 11 days after Ebbets. Wilbert Robinson will be elected president."

-NOOO WILBERT! THE POSITION IS CUR-SED!!!

"Jan. 24, 1934: Giants skipper Bill Terry flippantly asks "Brooklyn? Is Brooklyn still in the league?"

-Nice that this is considered part of our history... "You haberdasher!" replies Dodgers bench coach/reserve outfielder Cornelius "Father Time" Jackson.

"Aug. 2, 1938: Larry MacPhail introduces yellow baseballs, which only see action in three games."

-I guess that idea Mac-failed! Hey-oh!

"July 19, 1942: Pete Reiser suffers a concussion after crashing into the outfield wall at Sportsman's Park, one of 11 times the outfielder had to be carried off the field in his career."

-"Get up, you scalawag!" yells Cornelius "How old is this guy?!" Jackson. "My record is 15 times!"

"June 4, 1947: A priest administers last rights to Dodgers outfielder Pete Reiser after he crashes into the wall, but holds on to the ball in a 9-4 victory over the Pirates. Reiser recovered after a stint in the hospital."

-"Impressive work, Mr. Reiser!" says Cornelius "Deathbed" Jackson. "But get back to me after you've been buried alive for three days only to play a double header on the fourth!"

April 23, 1950: Cornelius "Dead" Jackson dies. It is the last time anything weird ever happens to the Dodgers.

The End.

Offseason Awards: MVP

2009-11-20T13:12:00.000-08:00

So, it's come to this. The final award. MVP.

This is a tough one, let's take a look at the options.

The nominees are:

Randy Wolf
-A nominee for the "J's Dodger Blog Cy Young Award," even though Randy didn't win, one could arguably say he meant more to the team. He delivered quality start after quality start down the stretch for the Dodgers, and there is a lot of value in that.

Matt Kemp
-Gold Glove? Check. Silver Slugger? Check. 26 homeruns and 101 RBIs? Yeah. 34 stolen bases, too? Uh-huh. A breakout season for Matt Kemp as he slowly becomes a top tier player in this league. He's got five tools, and he uses them all. If this season is just a sign of things to come, Kemp is going to have a monster career.

Clayton Kershaw
-He did win the "J's Dodger Blog Cy Young Award." Have I mentioned yet that he's 21 and very good?

Andre Ethier
-A Silver Slugger, too? Yeah. Andre Ethier notched 31 homeruns and drove in 106 RBIs this season. I think most people felt Ethier could be a good player, but I don't know how many people thought Ethier was a 30-100 guy. He not only met expectations, he passed them easily. Oh, and by the way, when the playoffs came around, Ethier only got better: a .355 average, three homers, six RBIs, and a 1.235 OPS.

...and the winner is...

Andre Ethier.

This was a close call for me. Kemp was so good this year, but I can't deny what Ethier did. On top of how good his numbers were, you have to also factor in his six walk off hits.

Six walk off hits... including four homeruns. That, my friends, is a clutch performer.

Ethier was the team leader in homeruns, doubles, RBIs, walks, and walk off hits.

And for all that, Andre Ethier is your "J's Dodger Blog 2009 MVP."

Offseason Awards: Cy Young

2009-11-18T11:43:00.000-08:00

Alright, moving on to the heavy hitters of the awards. First up: Cy Young. There are three big candidates for this, let's jump in.

The nominees are:

Randy Wolf
-When Randy Wolf is healthy, he can be one of the most effective pitchers in the game. Wolf set new career highs with 34 starts and 214.1 innings worth of pitching this year. And he posted a 3.23 ERA over that span (in his career: second only to his 3.20 ERA in 2002). Maybe Wolf wasn't always lights out, but he was consistent. And over a long season, that means a lot. In fact, in only one start this year did Wolf not go a full 5.0 innings. And in 29 of his 34 starts, Wolf went 6.0 or more innings. All in all, a pretty good year for Wolf.

Clayton Kershaw
-30 starts, 185 Ks, and a 2.79 ERA is a nice line of stats. When you consider that those numbers were put up by a 21 year old kid in his first real full season, they look so much better. The future is bright for Kershaw.

Jonathan Broxton
-He's the "J's Dodger Blog 2009 Reliever of the Year." Isn't that good enough?!

...and the winner is...

Clayton Kershaw.

Randy Wolf had a career year, and I want to take nothing away from him, but just check some of the stats Clayton Kershaw has:

8th in all of baseball in ERA. 7th in all of baseball in strikeouts per 9 innings. 2nd in all of baseball in fewest homeruns per 9 innings. 1st in all of baseball in fewest hits per 9 innings.

Not to mention his ERA at home this year was 1.83.

I mean, this kid is good.

And he's 21.

Here's to the bright future. Clayton Kershaw is the winner of "J's Dodger Blog 2009 Cy Young Award."

Offseason Awards: Rookie of the Year

2009-11-13T12:58:00.000-08:00

Like the Gold Glove award, this one is pretty easy.

There were six players who made their major league debuts this season: Ronald Belisario, Brent Leach, Travis Schlichting, Xavier Paul, Mitch Jones, and Jamie Hoffmann.

Paul, Jones, and Hoffman had 14, 13, and 22 at-bats, respectively. Which means they were pretty insignificant during the season.

And talking about insignificant this season: Schlichting pitched 2.2 innings in 2 games this season.

Which leaves us with Brent Leach and Ronald Belisario.

Leach did have a pretty effective month and a half with the team during the season. Unfortunately, he was with the team for three months.

Meanwhile, Belisario appeared in 69 games and posted a 2.04 ERA. He was even a nominee for the "J's Dodger Blog 2009 Reliever of the Year" award. I mean, come on. This one was a run-away.

So, congratulations to Ronald Belisario, the "J's Dodger Blog 2009 Rookie of the Year."

Offseason Awards: Gold Glove

2009-11-11T12:57:00.000-08:00

Ok, well, I was going to award the Gold Glove today. And I was going to award it to Matt Kemp for the second year in a row. I was going to do this because I felt he was good enough last year to be the team's Gold Glove and I think he's only improved since then.

And then I was going to talk about how Kemp's defense is underrated. And complain he doesn't get enough accolades for it. Yadda yadda...

Well, lookie here. I guess I don't need to do that.

Matt Kemp snagged the first Gold Glove of his career. Congratulations also to Orlando Hudson for getting his 4th Gold Glove.

So, my award was negated by the real one, but in any case, Matt Kemp is your "J's Dodger Blog 2009 Gold Glove" winner.

Offseason Awards: Reliever of the Year

2009-11-09T13:02:00.000-08:00

Award season continues at J's Dodger Blog, as we move on to Reliever of the Year. There are four big candidates for this prestigious award.

And the nominees are:

George Sherrill
-Ok, granted, Sherrill only pitched in 27.2 innings for the Dodgers. But what a fantastic 27.2 innings those were. A 0.65 ERA! That's two runs. Two runs spread out over thirty games, while holding opponents to a .192 BAA. He also picked up 11 Holds over that span, putting him fourth on the team behind only Hong-Chih Kuo, Troncoso, and Belisario.

Jonathan Broxton
-The big man in his first full season as the Dodgers' closer wasn't bad. He picked up 36 saves over the course of the season, but more impressive are some of his other numbers. Just look at this stuff: 2.61 ERA, 0.96 WHIP, and a .165 BAA. Plus: 114 strikeouts in 76.0 innings. Broxton's 114 strikeouts was good for fourth place on the entire team, and he did it in less than half the innings the starters did it in. That's just impressive.

Ramon Troncoso
-Where'd this guy come from?! He debuted in 2008 and posted a 4.26 ERA over 38 innings. It was unimpressive to say the least. Then, suddenly, this year, Troncoso appears in 73 games, pitching 82.2 innings, and posting a 2.72 ERA over that span. That, my friends, is a nice turn around.

Ronald Belisario
-Remember when I asked where Troncoso came from? Remember how I pointed out that he seemingly appeared from nowhere, the depths of mediocrity to become one of our best relievers this season? (I just wrote those things, you better have not forgotten by now.) Anyway, Ronald Belisario looks at Troncoso's surprising rise, and scoffs. MSTI wrote a pretty good piece summarizing the main question people had coming into the season: who the hell is Ronald Belisario?! He's had a sketchy baseball past to say the least, and his career stats weren't promising, so, it really is quite odd that Belisario posted a 2.04 ERA in 69 games for us this season. I mean, come on, those are some pretty great stats for a guy who almost literally came from nowhere.

...and the winner is...

Jonathan Broxton.

Sherrill was good, but didn't make enough impact over the full season. Belisario and Troncoso were both surprisingly excellent, but both suffered from fatigue late in the season, and saw their stats start to slide.

That's not to say Broxton didn't have his own struggles as well, but darn if I can't ignore how good his numbers are. 114 strikeouts?! A 0.96 WHIP?! Those numbers ain't right!

Unfortunately for Broxton, most people choose to ignore how great he was this year and focus on the blown saves. And yes, a closer's job is to get saves, but I think Broxton suffers for people's selective memories.

I mean, Broxton did pick up two big saves this postseason, but in the end, all people will remember is the one blown one.

Ultimately, that is part of being a closer. You are the easiest person to blame because your failures are so memorable and take place with you positioned on center stage.

That's why, I propose this to all Dodger fans, or baseball fans in general. Don't make any decisions on the team after a blown save. Those blown saves are the hardest to take, and you are often so emotionally charged after the game that your opinions and views are skewed. Take a couple of deep breaths, wait a couple days, then revisit it.

...that's why I'm rewarding Broxton with this award. Because if you step back from the emotion of the blown save and just look at Broxton's numbers, you realize how very good he was this year.

So, for all that, Jonathan Broxton is the "J's Dodger Blog 2009 Reliever of the Year."

Offseason Awards: Comeback Player of the Year

2009-11-05T11:58:00.000-08:00

How about that? As I noted on my Twitter feed last night:

Who'd have thought the Yankees could win it all? All it took was team chemistry, a little bit of magic, and a half billion dollar payroll.

Anything is possible!!! Congratulations to the Yankees, but don't do it again. Seriously. I'll go right back to hating you. We just had a more common enemy this time in the Phillies.

Anyway. Enough with all that business. Let's get down to everybody's favorite part of the year: Award Season!

Today's award: The J's Dodger Blog Comeback Player of the Year!

And the nominees are:

Guillermo Mota
-Mota not only revived himself from his 2008 season, he revived his dying career mid-way through the 2009 season. Mota finished the year with a 3.44 ERA which seems a small miracle now. If you had told me on May 17th that Mota would not only finish the season with the team, but that he would do it with a sub-3.50 ERA, I'd have slapped you for outright lying to me. Of course, right about now you'd be getting a call from me, apologizing for the slapping, but with a careful reminder that at the time, you sounded crazy, and that really, you were lucky I didn't try burning you at the stake for your words.

Why would I go through all this trouble? Because on May 17th, Guillermo Mota, who hadn't pitched in a week coming off an outing where he surrendered three runs in 2.0 IP against the Giants, came in to a 10-0 game in Florida. Clayton Kershaw had put up a masterful seven innings before giving up a leadoff double in the 8th. Mota allowed that runner to score, and got out of the inning, which would have been forgivable enough had the Dodgers not scored two runs in the top of the 9th and given Mota a cushy 12-1 lead. Mota got two quick outs, then almost as quickly, he loaded the bases. He followed that up by throwing a fat pitch to Cody Ross, which he promptly deposited over the center field wall. Mota was pulled from the game so Will Ohman could come in and get one out on one pitch. And Mota left that game with a 9.00 ERA.

It really seemed like he was cooked. That 9.00 ERA was through 15 innings pitched, mind you. But then Brad Ausmus stepped up and saved his career, at least temporarily. Ausmus noted Mota was not hiding the ball as well as he used to, therefore making it oh, so easy for the Cody Ross'es of the world to feast on him. A couple tweaks later, and Mota surrenders just two runs from May 17th all the way until the end of July (35.1 innings pitched). His ERA, for a little while, was in the high 2.00's. God, I sure hope Mota bought Ausmus something nice for that one.

Vicente Padilla
-When it was made news in the Rangers clubhouse that Vicente Padilla was let go, reports say a small celebration took place. The clubhouse in Texas had turned on Padilla. He was a hot head who threw at opposing team's players too often and didn't have good enough stats to back him up (4.92 ERA in 18 starts).

Flashforward. Padilla is picked up by the Dodgers. He had just gone 4-0 in 7 starts and had a 3.20 ERA during the regular season. But now, surprisingly, Padilla had made it onto the NLDS roster. Not as a long relief arm out of the pen, but as the Game 3 starter! Padilla goes seven shutout innings in St. Louis to clinch the series. Dodger fans are shocked. This has turned out surprisingly well. How does Padilla build on that? He pitches 7.1 innings of one run ball against Philadelphia in the NLCS, starting and keeping us in the only game we would win that series. Yes, the (seemingly inevitable) meltdown that took place in Game 6 really put a damper on the "Vicente Padilla: Playoffs MVP" parade that was building up, but nevertheless, you got to give it to a guy who was tossed out of Texas. He showed up in L.A. and played ball.

Jeff Weaver
-You want to talk about bad career prospects? At this time, last season, Weaver had just finished a stint with the Cleveland Indians' AAA team in Buffalo. He had a 6.07 ERA. This, mind you, came after spending the first half of the season with Milwaukee's AAA team in Nashville, where he posted a 6.22 ERA. Most people with numbers like that might have called it quits. Not Jeff Weaver. Nope, Weaver decided he'd still have a go at it and caught on with his former team the Dodgers.

Where he went on to post 3.65 ERA in 28 games (79 IP). Weaver was our long man out of the pen and an occasional spot starter this year, and he was fairly successful in both roles.

He even had some nice high points during the season. On June 20th, he started opposite his younger brother Jered in Anaheim and came out victorious.

And even though he only made on postseason appearance, he pitched a good 1.1 innings against the Cardinals and came away with a win for his efforts. Not bad.

...And the J's Dodger Blog Comeback Player of the Year is...

Jeff Weaver.

There's a lot to be said for Mota's and Padilla's comebacks ...and I said a lot of it. They were nice stories, but let's be honest, coming into this season, both pitchers probably felt pretty secure with the idea they would have a home on a major league team. (Plus, as far as this award goes, Padilla shot himself in the foot when he shot himself in the foot.)

Jeff Weaver didn't. How could he? How can you put up such God-awful numbers in AAA and expect to even be pitching in AAA the next season. Weaver was looking like a prime candidate for a quiet and early retirement.

But he proved all the doubters who still cared about his career wrong. He really did have a nice season. Can he repeat on his success? I don't know, but I do think he's done enough to earn himself a spot on next year's roster in the same role.

So, for reviving a career that flat-lined for an entire year in AAA, Jeff Weaver is the "J's Dodger Blog 2009 Comeback Player of the Year."

Seriously?!

2009-11-03T21:47:00.000-08:00

Ok, I wasn't planning on posting until after the World Series, but sometimes a story comes along that's too good to pass up.

Vicente Padilla... shot himself in the leg.

That is unbelievably fantastic and tragic at the same time. I'm excited because I never thought I'd have a chance to use this, but...

Vicente Padilla totally Plaxico Burress'd himself!

I know he could be hurt, but I have to make jokes about this. I mean, come on, how often does something like this come along?

Seriously though, I wasn't gung-ho on resigning Padilla before, two good postseason starts aside, but now? Well, I'll just say that this doesn't quite raise my opinion of the man. Frankly, I've always worried he was a bit of a head case. Yes, there is still information to be uncovered about all this (apparently his bodyguard shot him) but there's just something off with this whole Padilla business. Maybe it's his fault, maybe it's an accident... All I'm saying is: weird stuff seems to happen to right people.

By the way, if we still do try to resign him, how much do you think we can shave off the price for this?

J's Dodger Tweets - October Edition

2009-11-01T22:24:00.000-08:00

Ok, I'm back. I've been taking a slight break after the Dodger elimination. Once the World Series ends, I plan on handing out some Dodger Awards, and then we'll glide smoothly into the offseason. Until then though, as has been the newly formed tradition, we'll take a look back at some of what I consider my best-est Tweets from the last month or so.

I'm not going to lie to you, much of the month was filled with emotional reaction Tweets to what was happening in the playoffs, or just general complaining about umpires. But I did dig in and find a couple things other than that. Here's you go:

Whoever the guy doing color commentary on ESPN Radio is a genius. Paraphrase: Phillies are 0-6 in playoff series if they lose the 1st game.
Is that all-time? Does that include Mike Schmidt's teams? Does that go back to the Phillies of the 1880s? That stat means NOTHING!
Then Berman: "Lee has retired the side in order in the last 4 inn." Color Commentary Genius: "Yeah, retired, but is he getting tired?" Nice.

We have a chance to lose Plaschke and Simers? Choices... RT @villaraigosa ...we're willing to give up the LA Times if we lose the series.

Dodgers let Will Ohman go. I'm upset. He was on the DL so long this year, I couldn't get in any "Oh man!" jokes. Maybe it's for the better.

Man, Ben Francisco is three types of ugly. What a frightening face...

[TBS Color Commentary Guy:] "That's a ball that's got to be played, a double play that's got to be made... and the Dodgers should be back in the dugout." Nice finish.
How about: "That a ball that's got to be played, a double play that's got to be made, then the Dodgers gonna get paid." Needs a little work.

According to Vin, the Philadelphia authorities have greased every pole in the city. Fill in your own jokes here.

I'm rooting for the Yankees in the WS. They spent more, they should win. That's capitalism. A lower payroll team winning is socialism.

Hahaha. Fill in your own jokes, ladies and gentlemen. RT @MLBONFOX Karros: Angels are baseballs version of a "cockroach."

This does make me feel a little better. Phillies Fan Fail:

Yankee Stadium: looking a little empty. I thought Dodger fans were the only ones who left early? Media? Oh, they're an East Coast team? Nvm.

I hate the Yankees, but gotta admit, love the Phillies beat down, especially Lidge. Reminds me of how much I love this:

Alright, we're through four games in the World Series. It's probably over before long now. I'll see you all then.

Well, At Least We Aren't The Angels

2009-10-20T21:14:00.000-07:00

Being down 3-1 is bad. Being down 3-1 with the only hope left being three straight wins against the Yankees, with two games on the road? That's worse.

Anyway, I just had a couple thoughts so, here it goes.

1. Ned Colletti signed an extension with the Dodgers. I'm indifferent. I've liked some of Colletti's moves (or non-moves for that matter) but I've also hated some of his moves. He's neither the best GM nor the worst, but he's serviceable, and I feel like he has gotten a little better as the years have gone on. For now, I'm ok with this decision, especially because it saves us from having to do a GM search during the offseason.

However! However... the caveat to this situation is the loss of one of our assistant GMs. If we can keep intact this GM triangle of Colletti, Logan White, and Kim Ng, then I'm happy. If we lose either of those two to some other team, then I'll be sad.

2. Another blown call today in the Yankees/Angels game, following the strike zone debacle of yesterday, and now I'm only half-joking when I say I'm ready to throw out the umps and let robots call the games ...or at the very least, extend instant replay.

3. Game 5 is tomorrow. I'm still optimistic.

We're not eliminated yet, and we won't be until the last out is recorded.

Deep Breath

2009-10-19T23:30:00.000-07:00

I was going to go with "Huuuu huuuuhhhh," but I'm not sure entirely how to spell out a deep breath. And I only do this because that's one of the few ways I can express my feelings on tonight's game.

And believe me, I had a lot of feelings. First, stunned silence. Then anger. Sadness. Denial. And now it's just deep breaths. In a way, they're kinda deep breaths of acceptance. We are down 3-1 in the NLCS. Our season is on the brink of ending, and our prospects don't look good.

I'd recap what happened for you, but chances are you've already seen it, and if you haven't, you probably don't want to know. Trust me, if you didn't see it, all you want to know is that we lost.

So, let's move on. Let's look ahead. It's easy to call it a season. It's easy to say we have no chance to come back. And in all honesty, it's probably the wise and correct route to go, so I don't blame anyone who wants to feel that way.

But here's how I'm going to look at it.

I am going to remain cheerfully (possibly ignorantly) optimistic.

And why not? I've, for a long time, believed in the idea of hoping for the best and expecting the worst. So... what is the absolute worst that happens? We lose Game 5 on Wednesday and go out in the NLCS. Ok.

And what's the best? Well, consider this. Coming into these three games in Philadelphia, would you be content with winning just one game out of three and bringing the series back to Los Angeles? No, it's not the ideal situation, but if I knew coming in we'd be able to bring the series back home, I would be content. Frankly, it's kind of what I was expecting anyway. I wasn't expecting a blowout and a heartbreaking loss in the span of two nights, but ultimately, how you lose doesn't matter in the end.

Look, all I'm saying is this: wait for Game 5. As crushing as this game was, and as bad as Game 3 was, we are still not eliminated yet. Again: We're not eliminated yet. Take it one game at a time. If we win Wednesday, then we've gone 1-2 in Philadelphia, and we're only down one game. Then we take it home. Then, who knows?

Right, Randy Wolf (via Dodgers.com)?

"All we have to do is win three in a row," said Dodgers Game 4 starter Randy Wolf, who was one out away from picking up a win against his former team.

"No matter how you spin it, when you're that close, it hurts. You feel stunned. It's not a good feeling and you've just got to move on. It's always tough to swallow. Now we have the opportunity to make something magical happen."

Don't give up hope. We've played underdog all year. We've come from behind all year. We've done some magical stuff already this year. Why not do some more?

3-1 is not impossible.

Why can't we do this?

The McCourts Separate

2009-10-15T00:41:00.000-07:00

Reports today are saying that Frank and Jamie McCourt, owner and CEO (respectively) of the Dodgers are separating.

I don't want to delve too deep into this. As much as you might or might not like the McCourts, you don't want to wish any hardship on them. And separation can be a messy thing, so, I'd like to avoid talking too much about their personal situation.

It's just a little shocking to me, and immediately, I have some questions.

Is this going to cause a lot of front office commotion? There can't be any way Frank continues to pay Jamie to remain in the team CEO position if they're going through a messy split. Is this going to cause problems when Ned Colletti's contract is up at the end of this season and the team might or might not be looking for a new GM?

Is this going to lead to a Padres-esque situation? Many of the stories being written are comparing this situation to that of Padres owner John Moores, who is splitting with his wife. As is part of the divorce proceedings, the couple begin to split their possessions. Moores prepared for this process by beginning to slash payroll, trading away bigger contract players for lesser players just to rid the team of contracts. Obviously, you can see the effect this practice has had on the Padres.

Finally, is this going to lead to a sale of the team? Can McCourt continue to support a major league sports team that he was already having some trouble financially supporting?

Again, just a lot of questions that popped into my head. Who knows? In the end, it might not be a problem.

Or it could. There could be a lot of upheaval coming. We'll see.

Ultimately, I guess it boils down to this for me: a lot of people really care about the Dodgers and I'm just hoping that the team doesn't getting negatively affected as an unfortunate by-product of an already unfortunate situation.

EDIT: There's been some word from Jamie's lawyers that she doesn't intend to step away from her position with the Dodgers. Think about that for a second: a team CEO working for her ex-husband owner. Yeah, that's not going to create any distractions...

So I Guess Anyone Can Be An Expert These Days

2009-10-11T12:58:00.001-07:00

That was easy... Too easy...

It's a trap!

Ok, maybe it's not a trap. Rather, it's a trip to the NLCS, the second year in a row for the Dodgers. And as I said on my Twitter account, I'd really just like to dedicate this series to the "experts" who picked against us.

First though, a little credit for those who got it right. What's that, Eric Neel? You picked us? In 5 games? Ok. Half-credit for you.
Also, congrats to Jeff Bradley, Peter Pascarelli, Enrique Rosas (who?), Jon Sciambi, and Gene Wojciechowski. Of the 24 people who made predictions for ESPN, you were the select few who picked the Dodgers correctly. Did any of you have the Dodgers in 3? I seriously doubt it, but that's ok. Everyone gets half credit.

Now, on to the wrong people.

Who had the Dodgers and Cardinals battling it out to five games, only to have the Cardinals come out on top?
Wow, look at that. Pedro Gomez, Buster Olney, and Keith Law amongst the moderately wrong people. Include in that list magical baseball stat gnome Tim Kurkjian, who stated in an article his prediction of "Cardinals in Five."

And I'll just include these names here, as their predictions didn't have a number to go with them, but good work to Dave Campbell, Jerry Crasnick, Peter Gammons, Steve Phillips (who knew he was a bad decision maker?), and Jayson Stark who all picked the Cards. Also, I'd like to acknowledge the select few who picked the Cardinals to win the World Series: Jorge Arangure Jr., Dave Campbell, Jason Grey, and Steve Phillips. I'm no "Expert" but I have to imagine the Cardinals elimination in the NLDS is probably detrimental to their World Series hopes.

Who's left who did have a number attached to their prediction? Why, Jim Caple of ESPN.com, who predicted this:
Cards in 4, eh? (He also picked the Cards to win the World Series) Yeah, I guess the Cards would pretty much just beat down on us like they did in 2004, and maybe the ghost of Jose Lima possesses Vicente Padilla or something and we scrape out a win. Sure thing. Expertly picked, buddy.

Which brings me, finally, to this. Karl Ravech. Who was absolutely correct in one sense... he predicted a sweep.
A Cardinals sweep. Ravech, my friend, turn in your card, and go home. You could have sat a monkey down at a computer and told it to make a prediction and there's only a 1/6 chance that he picks as badly as Ravech does. Ravech's prediction could only be more wrong if he predicted something like "Dodgers forfeit the series after Game 1" or "Cardinals in flurple!" Karl Ravech, you are so so so wrong, that I'll ask this of you one more time: turn in your "Expert" card, and go home. Otherwise, the people may have to rise up and seize your card from you. (By the way, as I typed this article, the Angels just completed a sweep of the Boston Red Sox, and you'll never guess which team Ravech picked there. Don't worry though, he had the Red Sox in 4, which is lucky, because I think if someone was so wrong in such a short span of time, they'd probably burst into flames.)

So there you go. A special thanks to all of you who picked against us. In all honesty, it probably helped us win. We didn't have the pressure on us of being the heavy favorite while having the horrible fear of a tremendous collapse in the back of our minds. In fact, you almost put us in the mentality of a team playing spoiler at the end of the season. You'd written us off, and counted us out. Some of you, like Ravech, made it seem like we didn't even need to show up. Why bother? We're only going to get swept anyway.

But here's where you guys are so fail. We don't mind playing underdog. We've done it all season. I've said it before, but we don't give up. We have that something special about our team. Something you experts would probably notice if you cared to stay up late enough to watch West Coast games (it might have helped some more of you pick the Angels, too).
In any case, I noticed no one, not one person in the 24 who made predictions for ESPN picked the Dodgers to win the World Series (though I imagine that would be hard considering 18 of you already had us eliminated). But again, that's ok. Do whatever you guys gotta do. We'll just keep doing what we're doing. And I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens.

But in the meantime, someone needs to find Karl Ravech and tell him to surrender his card.

Off-Day Puzzle (Sorry SoSG)

2009-10-06T10:43:00.000-07:00

You might have already seen this on my Twitter feed but I'll repost it here just in case.

I created a puzzle on Sporcle.com about various player stats from the Dodger 2009 Season. Some are easy, others more difficult. Anyway, give it a shot, it'll only take you six minutes, at the very most.

BIG LINK TO PUZZLE RIGHT HERE!

J's Dodger Blog

The 2011 Season: Some Thoughts

10 Games Into 2011: Some Thoughts

Offseason Awards: MVP

Offseason Awards: Cy Young

Offseason Awards: Rookie of the Year

Offseason Awards: Reliever of the Year

Dodgers Sign Ted Lilly

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 26

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 25

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 24

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 23

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 22

The End of the Manny Era

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 21

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 20

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 18

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 17

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 16

On Broxton, Complainers, and Expectations

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 14

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 13

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 12

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 11

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 10

Dodgers Draft Zach Lee And Raise Questions

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 9

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 8

Dodgers Retrospective - ...Since I've Been Gone

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 5

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 4

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 3

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 2

Dodgers Retrospective - Week 1

Opening Day Thoughts

Complaints

Down Goes Giles

Injuries Everywhere!

This Could Be A Problem

If You Must Have One Old Broken Down Lefty Off The Bench...

Ok, Fine...

Adding Pieces

Hey Everybody! Vicente's Back!

This Is What It Has Come To

A Medley Of (Semi) Important News

Beastmode, Deactivated

Another Week, Another Dollar

Quiz Time

The Strange History of the Dodgers

Offseason Awards: MVP

Offseason Awards: Cy Young

Offseason Awards: Rookie of the Year

Offseason Awards: Gold Glove

Offseason Awards: Reliever of the Year

Offseason Awards: Comeback Player of the Year

Seriously?!

J's Dodger Tweets - October Edition

Well, At Least We Aren't The Angels

*Deep Breath*

The McCourts Separate

So I Guess Anyone Can Be An Expert These Days

Off-Day Puzzle (Sorry SoSG)

Deep Breath