Dodgers Week 4 in Review
by Eric Stephen on May 4, 2009 7:34 AM PDT
in Dodgers Game Recaps
Email
PrintAfter a rocky start to the week in San Francisco, the Dodgers returned to their undefeated paradise of Dodger Stadium to end the week strong. They not only ended the week with the best record in baseball, but widened their NL West lead for the second week in a row, as they have a 4½ lead over the 2nd place Giants.
Dodger Batter of the Week: Manny Ramirez had the only standout week on offense, hitting .421/.593/.789. He tied a Dodger record with a three-double game in San Francisco, and had more extra base hits during the week than Russell Martin, James Loney, Casey Blake, and Rafael Furcal combined.
Dodger Pitcher of the Week: Since I told Ken Levine and Josh Suchon that my most disappointing Dodger so far was Clayton Kershaw, after two bad road outings, I have to reward Kershaw for his excellent start this week. He didn't get a win, but his seven scoreless innings on Friday allowed the Dodgers to hang on to eventually win a game started by Jake Peavy. Other candidates were Chad Billingsley (two more solid outings), Jeff Weaver (four scoreless innings to bail out James McDonald), and Cory Wade (three perfect innings after returning from the DL).
Week 4 Record: 5-2
31 runs scored, 26 runs allowed
.587 pythagorean winning percentage
Overall Seasonal Record: 18-8
141 runs scored (5.42 per game)
100 runs allowed (3.85 per game)
.665 pythagorean winning percentage
Upcoming Week: The Dodgers end their season-high 11-game home stand with Arizona for two, Washington for two, and San Francisco for three games.
Week 4 Stats
| Player | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | BA/OBP/SLG | OPS |
| Manny | 19 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 8 | .421/.593/.789 | 1.382 |
| Hudson | 30 | 3 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 1 | .300/.323/.500 | .823 |
| Ethier | 24 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | .292/.370/.375 | .745 |
| Kemp | 21 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | .190/.320/.333 | .653 |
| Furcal | 25 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | .240/.345/.280 | .625 |
| Loney | 20 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | .200/.360/.250 | .610 |
| Blake | 24 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | .208/.240/.333 | .573 |
| Martin | 22 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | .182/.250/.182 | .432 |
| Ausmus | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | .500/.600/.500 | 1.100 |
| Pierre | 13 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | .462/.462/.538 | 1.000 |
| Castro | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | .500/.500/.500 | 1.000 |
| DeWitt | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | .500/.500/.500 | 1.000 |
| Loretta | 10 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | .200/.333/.300 | .633 |
| Pitchers | 16 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | .125/.125/.188 | .313 |
| Totals | 234 | 31 | 62 | 15 | 1 | 3 | 28 | 29 | .265/.351/.376 | .727 |
| Pitcher | G | W-L | Sv | IP | H | R | ER | BB | K | ERA | WHIP |
| Billingsley | 2 | 1-0 | -- | 14.1 | 12 | 5 | 4 | 7 | 16 | 2.51 | 1.33 |
| Wolf | 2 | 0-0 | -- | 11.1 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 3.18 | 1.06 |
| Kershaw | 1 | 0-0 | -- | 7.0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 0.00 | 0.86 |
| Stults | 1 | 0-1 | -- | 2.2 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 16.88 | 3.38 |
| McDonald | 1 | 0-0 | -- | 1.2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 16.20 | 3.60 |
| Broxton | 3 | 2-0 | 1 | 2.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 0.00 | 1.13 |
| Troncoso | 3 | 0-0 | -- | 5.0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.00 | 0.20 |
| Wade | 2 | 0-0 | -- | 3.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Weaver | 1 | 0-0 | -- | 4.0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0.00 | 1.25 |
| Belisario | 3 | 1-1 | -- | 3.1 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 5.40 | 1.50 |
| Kuo | 1 | 0-0 | -- | 1.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Ohman | 4 | 0-0 | 1 | 2.0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 13.50 | 2.50 |
| Mota | 2 | 1-0 | -- | 1.2 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 10.80 | 3.60 |
| Elbert | 1 | 0-0 | -- | 2.1 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 7.71 | 2.14 |
| Totals | 7 | 5-2 | 2 | 62.0 | 52 | 26 | 25 | 30 | 53 | 3.63 | 1.323 |
96 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I should have added Tron Tron. 1 hit in 5 innings.
by Eric Stephen on May 4, 2009 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Juan Pierre needs to get some love, he’s been doing a bangup job whenever he’s gotten a chance. I would bet Eric’s life that Juan Pierre has never had an OPS of .862 on May 4th before.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/pierrju01.shtml
So what, can’t you give up props for what he’s done so far? I don’t understand sentiments like that, this isn’t a prediction thread.
yeah i agree
i’m a little confused as to why people won’t give Pierre credit for anything he does. I get that he’s not a home run hitter and that he’s not the most efficient guy, but he’s (by all accounts) the nicest, hardest working guy you could meet, and he does what is expected of him very well – that being, hit .270 and steal a ton of bases. i just don’t get all the hate towards him.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions
We don’t hate Pierre, we hate the fact we have to pay him 10 million per year for the next three years. Many of us were very unhappy that he has taken at bats away from Ethier and Kemp over the last few years. Don’t misunderstand my comment, I’m not a fan of the way Pierre plays baseball, but I do like what he’s done so far for us coming off the bench.
Nicest, hardest working guy you could meet?
I don’t know about all that. He may well work hard (in fact I heard he does.) And I’m sure he’s nice to fans. But don’t forget, last year when the Dodgers dealt for Manny it was received by Pierre with a pout and concerns about his own playing time. Even this offseason, he was vocal about his unhappiness with his role as the 4th outfielder. When discussing Pierre as a 4th outfielder (which in an outfield of Manny, Ethier and Kemp he certainly is) his state of mind is something that should be discussed. I know we tend to focus on the stats around here, but I do think having a guy who thinks he deserves to be a starter sitting in the dugout (as opposed to Ausmus, Minky, Loretta and Castro who know their role) is a problem that will need to be dealt with.
by Michael White on May 4, 2009 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions
he was unhappy about lack of playing time?
of course he was. he went from an everyday player to rarely seeing the field. But did he hurt the team by whining and splitting the clubhouse? apparently not, since we won the division and now have the best record in baseball.
Ausmus, Mink, Loretta, and Castro are veterans that are past their prime. They know that. Pierre is still in his “prime” seeing as he’s 30. i agree that we’re overpaying him but it bothers me how much crap he gets. He’s done nothing to deserve that. If anything blame Colletti for giving him the deal. Don’t blame Juan for signing it.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Exactly
Orlando Hudson won’t have a .950 OPS in 650 PA either.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm with Phil
Pierre is not on pace for 700 PA. He’s not even on pace for 200 PA. Going forward, will he have an .800+ OPS? No, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve credit either.
Mark Loretta isn’t going to hit .636 as a PH all year, but it’s still cool that he’s sitting there right now.
If you can’t enjoy success without worrying about inevitable failure, what’s the point of being a fan?
by Eric Stephen on May 4, 2009 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions
Sure
He’s been a good 4th outfielder so far. I can admit that.
It’s just that I read a few comments this morning elsewhere that clamored for Pierre getting more playing time (probably at the expense of Kemp). It hits a raw nerve when I read stuff like that because what he’s doing now is very flukey and will not translate well with consistent PAs.
Bottom line: Yes, he IS an asset. And he will probably remain one in small doses. Just don’t put him out there very often and I’ll keep my e-mouth shut.
I understand your point
The idea of Pierre replacing Kemp would not please me one bit. Though (and I hope this doesn’t come back to bite me) I just don’t see Torre doing it this year. Last year Pierre starting get at bats as soon as Furcal went down and Torre felt he needed a small fast guy to leadoff the game. Later he realized that Kemp or Martin could fill that role and that “being small” was not a characteristic that in and of itself helped a lead off hitter. And even if Furcal were to go down this year, he had Hudson who can jump into the lead off role.
Kemp’s job should be more secure (in Joe’s mind) then it was last year.
by Michael White on May 4, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions
In 2008
Once Furcal went down, Pierre started every game batting leadoff until he got hurt himself at the end of June. If Pierre didn’t get hurt, he would have been playing everyday batting 1st at least until Manny arrived. I wonder even if Manny would have been on the radar if Pierre was healthy in July.
by Eric Stephen on May 4, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions
Pierre
Juan Pierre = Decent Left Fielder, OK Center Fielder
Outfield of Manny, Kemp, Ethier = Outfield Gods
Let’s all be fair to us mere mortals. Pierre will be popping his head into this line-up, pinch-hitting, and running. Let’s all be thankful how our cup does runneth over in the outfield. I think Kemp and Ethier came out all right, don’t you?
When you are as privaleged as we are in the outfield and you complain, it is called whining and is the sign of someone who is spoiled.
yep
i’m in no way suggesting that pierre deserves PT over Kemp/Ethier/Manny. He just isn’t as bad as people make him sound. And we probably have the most loaded outfield in the league. Pierre would start for 20 teams in the league. Just not us.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
No
They’ve got Pie, Adam Jones, Markakis, and Luke Scott. They’re loaded in the OF too.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions
But at least he's young and has promise.
Seeing as the Orioles aren’t contenders, Pierre would not be starting over Pie.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Pie isn't starting
Luke Scott is. Which isn’t much better
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions
I was comparing Pierre to Pie
And salary aside Pierre > Pie, no?
by Michael White on May 4, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions
I'd definitely trade Pierre for Pie straight up
Not considering salary.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Pie is a joke
my friend is a huge O’s fan and he’s sick of Pie. He would make that trade too.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Well
I think were all pretty sick of Pierre. Pie has not gotten much of a chance as a everyday regular, Pierre is what he is.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions
I think Pie
is similar to Laroche in the way that he clearly has potential but we haven’t seen anything close to it. We were tired of waiting, and the Cubs (and now Os) were tired of waiting for Pie
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
and Scott is ok
but Pierre is better in my opinion
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Scott has been worth
7 WAR the last three years. Pierre has been worth 4.6 WAR, and he’s been trending way down. Scott is unquestionably a better player.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions
you may be right about Scott
still. that leaves over a dozen teams
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions
"Pierre would start for 20 teams in the league"
Really? Care to name the 20 he start for, because I can’t think of them…
by Michael White on May 4, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions
not quite 20 but this is a decent amount of teams
He should start on these teams:
Orioles over Felix Pie/Luke Scott
Yankees over Brett Gardner
Blue Jays over Travis Snyder
White Sox over Brian Anderson
A’s over Travis Buck or Ryan Sweeney
Reds over Willy Taveras
Pirates over Brandon Moss
Dbacks over Chris Young (he’s awful right now)
Padres over Gerut or Giles
And he’d get a look on these teams:
Tigers over Josh Anderson
Royals over David Dejesus or Coco Crisp
Twins over Carlos Gomez
Mariners over Endy Chavez
Nationals over Austin Kearns
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions
and maybe if he wouldn't start on those teams
he’s better than the guys above. some are just younger/“potential” players
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions
Josh Anderson doesn't start for the Tigers
Carlos Guillen does.
by Michael White on May 4, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions
either way
Guillen is hitting under 200 with no HRs and 1 steal
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Small sample size.
I wouldn’t count that for very much yet.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
small sample size
but if I were the Tigers i’d have guillen over everett at SS and Pierre in left
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions
I wouldn't
Everett is a great fielder at SS. He’s been worth at least +10 runs every year since 2003 except for last year.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions
yes
but Guillen wasn’’t exactly a defensive slouch when he was a SS
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions
He was in 2007
-7.4 runs playing mostly at short. Even in 2008 he was -3.2 runs playing at LF and 1st base. He won’t be moving back to short.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions
point taken
so maybe not Detroit. still over a dozen teams…many more than 1.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Guillen is a horrible fielder
no matter where he plays. His value is his bat. Besides, check out prior years, he is a notoriously slow starter. He will start hitting.
by Michael White on May 4, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions
He's not better than
Travis Snider, Chris Young, Gerut, Giles, Dejesus, Buck or Sweeney, or Carlos Gomez.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions
well i'd take him over those guys
obviously i have a different opinion of him, but the only guy i’d consider over him is Young, based on what he could potentially become. and maybe snider for the same reason. Buck, Sweeney, Dejesus, Giles it’s not even close for me.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Giles?
You realize that Giles was a top 10 outfielder last year? Unless you are only looking at his stats this year, I don’t see how the two are even close.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions
as you said
trending down. Just watching him play. he’s a shell of his former self. he’ll give you slightly more power, about the same average and WAY less speed. I’ll take Pierre
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Slightly more power
Way, way better OBP, and somewhat worse in the field. The only huge advantage Pierre has is on the bases, and that is nowhere near enough to make up for the gigantic gap in their hitting values.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions
i don't see it as a gigantic gap
Here’s why…if you take the amount of bases they steal and combine that with their slugging %, I bet Pierre’s is higher than Giles’. not a fact…just a guess. especially now.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions
You can't just add up the stolen bases though
Without factoring in the caught stealings. Because Pierre gets thrown out so much, his steals don’t really provide all that much value.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Gets thrown out so much? His career success rate is 75%
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions
And 72% is about break-even point.
Meaning if you are successful on less than 72% of your steals, you are actually costing your teams runs. Pierre’s steals provide some value, but probably no more than 5 or so runs per season.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
again though
stats like that depend on the team. If he’s on a team with limited hitting – like the padres – they need as many guys in scoring position as possible. If I were Bud Black I’d want a guy that can move into scoring position as much as possible even if it means getting caught sometimes.
on a team with lots of power, like the cardinals for example, his steals wouldn’t be worth much since you just want guys on base. But teams that play small ball would find more value in Pierre than 5 runs per season
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions
True
Although I don’t think it would be that much more value. Certainly not enough to make up for the fact that Pierre can’t get on base or hit for power at all.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
you say he can't get on base
but he has an above average OBP for his career (.347). he walks more than he strikes out (as does Giles, I know). And Giles doesn’t exactly have world ending power anymore.
So we basically have average speed, a little power and good OBP against great speed, average OBP and no power. Plus Pierre has better range in the OF. And I’ll take what Pierre brings
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Pierre's OBP's since 2004:
.326, .330, .331, .327. Clearly he can’t get on at that rate anymore. And Giles has elite OBP skills. Pierre has the speed advantage and is better on defense, but he’s a below average player at this point.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
“if you take the amount of bases they steal and combine that with their slugging %, I bet Pierre’s is higher than Giles’. not a fact…just a guess. especially now.”
Or you could use a stat like EqA.
Weaver On Acid: 1/2 oz Jagermeister, 1/2 oz Malibu coconut rum, 1/2 oz pineapple juice
by the big grabowski on May 4, 2009 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions
but again
I need to say – i’ll value 50 steals over 10 HRs in a top/bottom of the order spot. tons of speed over around average power for me
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Are you considering OBP though?
GIles is one of the best players at getting on base, while Pierre is mediocre at best.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions
he is one of the best
.400 career to pierre’s .330. Clearly Giles is better at it. And for most of their careers, i’d take giles. He’s past his prime though. The OBP may remain high, but that’s about it.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Do you have any evidence he's past his prime
Other than 100 PA’s this year with an amazingly low .172 BABIP, I don’t see why we should think Giles won’t be good this year. He was an all-star caliber player last year.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions
All star caliber?
306/398/465 with 12 HRs and 2 steals isn’t exactly all star caliber…
plus his power and steals have decreased ever year since 2004.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
He was the 9th most valuable outfielder in 2008
Only Manny, Holliday, and Ludwick were more valuable in the NL, so I’d say he was All-star worthy. He would start over Ethier based on last years numbers and Pierre wouldn’t even be in the discussion.
Also, he plays at Petco, the toughest pitcher’s park in the game, so you have to adjust his numbers (especially power numbers) upward quite a bit.
He’s a great player who has been underrated for years in my opinion.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
i think he's been underrated also
but he’s declining. As for the 9th most valuable outfielder…that depends on who you ask/what formula you use. i don’t like formulas that just spit out “Value” numbers because they’re subjective to what criteria are used
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
also brandon moss was a tough one
he’s horrible right now but has the same potential as Young.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions
i'd also rather have
a leadoff guy hitting .270 with 50 steals then a #6-7 hitter hitting .270 with 12 HRs and 10 steals. I’ll leave the power for the guys in the middle.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Who does the second option represent?
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions
a lot of the guys on the list
Giles is one example
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Giles will hit .270
with 100 walks. Pierre will hit .270 with 30 walks. That is a gigantic difference in value. To put it in context, Giles has been more valuable than Pierre for each of the last 7 years except for 2002. And not just a little bit more valuable, WAY more valuable. He’s been wroth a total of 16.3 wins more than Pierre over the last 7 years according to Fangraphs.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions
The problem with Fangraphs and sites like it
is that you can’t just put a player’s stats into a equation and get a chart on which player’s better. It depends on the team – what stat is more valued, what the team lacks, etc. It’s like the RPI in college basketball…great for a starting point, but it doesn’t come close to telling the whole story.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions
It's not perfect.
But its the best we’ve got in my opinion. The thingabout baseball is, generally in order to win you need to be good at certain things. You have to get on base a lot, hit for power, play good defense, and/or have good pitching.
I do think Pierre could be used in such a way that he would be a more vaulable player. But there’s no way he can ever be considered truly “good”, because the only thing he excels at is baserunning, which is a far less important skill than the aspects of the game he is lacking.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions
you'll never find me saying
Pierre is a great player or even very good. But he’s good at what he does – stealing bases and making contact – and we knew that when we signed him. And that’s where this whole debate started – I don’t like it when people trash Pierre for doing what he does. Blame Ned for giving him the deal. Blame the staff for playing him over other guys. But don’t blame Pierre for taking the money offered to him or for wanting to play.
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't blame Pierre
Anyone would have taken the deal. I blame Ned, but that still doesn’t change the fact that Pierre isn’t very good.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
we can agree to disagree on him as a player then
clearly i won’t convince you and i doubt you’ll convince me. But that’s the beauty of sports…we can argue about this for days but it doesn’t change that we have the best team in baseball :)
by bucknellbruin on May 4, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Eric
Which broadcast do I click on to listen to your interview with Ken and Josh?
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 11:58 AM PDT reply actions
KABC has no archival system
and I didn’t think to record it with a digital camera (like SOSG) or somehow pirate the internet feed and capture that (like MSTI).
I emailed Suchon and he said he’d ask but that he asked for something in March from KABC and still hasn’t heard back yet, so I’m not holding my breath.
Pierre may not be worth 10 million, but to Dodger Bloggers, he's probably worth at least 15
I’m sure Mota and Castro appreciate him too.
Actually I’d rather we didn’t have the Pierre wars. It is going on three years now and they are repetitive for those of us who have been through all of them.
I'm in the same boat
Pierre is nearly in [name redacted] category for me. That said, I addressed the Pierre situation in a way in today’s game thread, which should be up in a few hours.
[name redacted]
That’s no fun!
Don’t you want to have a JD Drew and then a HS Choi argument to complete the trifecta?
Weaver On Acid: 1/2 oz Jagermeister, 1/2 oz Malibu coconut rum, 1/2 oz pineapple juice
by the big grabowski on May 4, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions
I’d rather focus on the fact that we might have the best starting outfield in LA Dodger history.
by meercatjohn on May 4, 2009 12:12 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Yes
That is pretty awesome to think about.
by Brendan Scolari on May 4, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions
/claps
Will you be here all week?
Weaver On Acid: 1/2 oz Jagermeister, 1/2 oz Malibu coconut rum, 1/2 oz pineapple juice
by the big grabowski on May 4, 2009 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Ah Juan Pierre
I can’t wait to never talk about him again
Weaver On Acid: 1/2 oz Jagermeister, 1/2 oz Malibu coconut rum, 1/2 oz pineapple juice
by the big grabowski on May 4, 2009 2:01 PM PDT reply actions
Baseball Reference now has minor league data going way way back
I just noticed this today. I had no idea Tom Kelly was a player/manager for a few years in the Twins’ system.
Ain’t it cool. This guy was on my Babe Ruth Team, and should be a fav of yours as he went to USC and holds some records there. Ended up being the Baseball Coach from his alma mater – Glendale High School
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=psalti001spi
This guy beat my Babe Ruth team in the City Finals. Incredible power
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=worden001wil
This guy has the season tickets in front me. He’s also a high school baseball coach.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=burcia001man
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on True Blue LA
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
