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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
