The Essence of Beard (Where Has it Gone?)
by meercatjohn on Feb 2, 2010 10:17 AM PST
Email
Print
Image via The Indianola Record Herald
by RawhideBlue on Feb 2, 2010 9:04 AM PST
The Essence of Beard (Where Has it Gone?)
To imagine such things could happen in life,
Giving a million bucks back, you and your wife.
Though that shows us you’re quite an honorable man,
More pressing questions are coming from this concerned fan.
Now Casey what have you gone and done?
Did you do it for spite? reputation? the kids or for fun?
Though you may not believe it you are known as the "beard".
Calling you "Chin" would seem a little weird.
We love your defense and last years bat was quite good,
But how do we manage when your face isn’t like wood?
Perhaps we can make it if you new face adds youth,
Cause if you hit over .300 we don’t care about the truth.
Your hammy was sore but perhaps that was the beard,
Every time you missed a game the worst was feared.
But a clean shaven Blake could possibly be the key,
Now don’t hurt yourself, get on base, don’t worry about being over thirty.
Your fans just hope your strength wasn’t in your extra hair.
Stranger things have happen in Dodger Blue. Let’s keep things fair.
If you’re not hitting well by the beginning of June, agree to this wrinkle…
GROW IT BACK OUT and longer than Rip Van Winkle!!
Go Dodgers! Go Beard!
132 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
lvdown mentioned Elbert in another thread. Over on ESPN, Keith Law listed 10 players outside of his top 100 who are “top rookie prospects” (in other words, those likely to contribute in the majors this year). Elbert was one of the 10:
He was primarily two-seamer/slider in the majors, with the fastball above-average and the slider plus, and his changeup is improving but still below-average, and the Dodgers wouldn’t let him use it in the big leagues; progress with that pitch this spring is probably his ticket to major league time in 2010
Damn, that’s awesome. It just seemed like he was forgotten after his 2007 injury season by all but Dodger fans, so it’s great to see that said about him. The best 3 pitch combo may be the fastball, slider, and change IMO. The next best would be the fastball, curve, and slider (best 4 pitch combo if the change up ever develops to above average…I <3 Kershaw, lol).
I wonder how much Law actually knows about Dodgers' prospects.
Not to discount the fact that developing a plus change-up would be huge for Elbert, I think he would still be a pretty effective with his plus fastball, slider and a below average change, IF he greatly improved his command. That to me, seems to be main thing hindering him, and will determine if he can be that 5th starter.
I haven't heard Leach's name much this offseason
Any ideas what the plans are for him? I’m just wondering if he still has a spot in the bullpen with two other darn good lefties in there.
He’s probably 3rd on the LHP reliever depth chart, and will be stashed in ABQ until he is needed (hopefully he won’t be — no offense to him; I just want Kuo healthy all year, that would be cool)
by Eric Stephen on Feb 2, 2010 10:55 AM PST up reply actions
Doubt it
He’s depth that will be kept in the minors until he’s needed…
by Michael White on Feb 2, 2010 10:55 AM PST up reply actions
What does his fastball top out at? From what I remember it just seemed like he was floating it up there, maybe very low 90s. I never saw anything above average from him when he had his shot. Then again, I’m no scout.
Unimpressive velocity
but he can get LH’s out, the question is can he get RH out once they have faced him a few times. I think not.
I expect he gets better velocity than Sherrill
the problem is the lack of control.
by Michael White on Feb 2, 2010 11:02 AM PST up reply actions
90 to 92
which isnt bad at all for a LHP and one that has a change up as good as his… his change up is probably best in the whoole orgnization..
#28 pick
Another high ceiling HS pitcher (Kershaw, Withrow, Martin), college arm close to the bigs (Lindblom, Miller) or an outside the box pick like a power hitter?
Aaron Miller
went 36, not that far a head of 28.
So Hudson doesn’t even have to worry about the team signing him giving up a draft pick and he still can’t find a home.
I’ll bet he had several serious inquiries, but I’d guess that he is underwhelmed by the guaranteed dollars teams are talking about.
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
Oh I'm sure he's had inquiries
but he’s not getting close to what he probably expected. At this point it looks like he can choose less money to play for a contender (Twins) or more money to play for a terrible team in 2010 (Nationals)
I would guess another Aaron Miller type
since I don’t see the Dodgers going nuts in signing free agent pitchers any time soon. Kuroda will be gone so they’ll have Bills and Kershaw and whoever wins the number 5 job this year. I expect the Dodgers will want to grab a guy closer to the majors.
by Michael White on Feb 2, 2010 11:02 AM PST up reply actions
Martin, Mcdonald, Elbert, Miller, Gould, Withrow, Webster, Eovaldi, Lindblom. I believe these are the best the Dodgers have got in terms of prospects or young, possible starters. I honestly think the depth for pitching is fine, and the focus should be on hitting for at least the 2010 draft (then go back to pitching, because that philosophy does work). I want a stud hitter drafted to us! lol
I would absolutely love to draft someone who drops due to signablity and give them an overslot bonus to sign. That will never happen with McCourt, but I would be so thrilled.
I see your point
Best guess, the only guys who would be competing for a starting role in 2010 that aren’t in the mix now (so not Lindblom, McDonald or Elbert) is Withrow and Miller. The others seem farther away (though a college draft pick would be too so your point is well taken.)
I wouldn’t mind targeting a power hitting outfielder. Dodgers seem to have a hard time developing sluggers, especially since the only one on the club (Ethier) was developed elsewhere.
by Michael White on Feb 2, 2010 11:23 AM PST up reply actions
I see your point too, because a college pitcher could make an impact a year from when he’s drafted, opposed to a guy like Gould who may take 4 years, 3 if we are lucky. And with Kuroda leaving after this year (most likely I would assume), the rotation should look like this in 2011 before any moves are done:
1. Kershaw
2. Billingsley
Those would be the only set in stone. The ones competing for 3-5 would be:
A free agent pitcher
Elbert
Mcdonald
Lindblom
Possibly Miller
Possibly Withrow
Lindblom would go to the bullpen I’d imagine, and Elbert and Mcdonald would get first crack at the rotation depending on how their 2010 seasons go. If money continues to be a problem, or (less likely) they would rather just use their homegrown talent, that would leave Miller and Withrow for the 5 spot. I would definitely be ok with that situation.
Kemp is turning into a power hitter (5 tool actually), but besides him no one’s got much power. Kyle Russell is the closest to a power hitter in this system, so I think a draft dedicated to drafting good hitters and power hitters is needed.
→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→
Dodgers seem to have a hard time developing sluggers?
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
why the confusion?
kemp is the only guy who has any power who we developed…
who else is there?
He didn’t mention Kemp in his post, which isn’t a big deal, but Kemp is an example of the Dodgers developing a good slugger.
and thats the only one i can think of...
in the last few years…
so his statement of
Dodgers seem to have a hard time developing sluggersis true isnt it?
since there has been 1 in the last 5 years..
Dude
Maybe I should have quoted this part instead (emphasis mine):
especially since the only one on the club (Ethier) was developed elsewhereI really was objecting to the “only”
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
No Pitcher Drafted In June...
…would be closer to the majors than a small army of pitching prospects we already have, so if a pitcher is taken with our first pick, it will not be because of need, it will be because Logan White thinks that the best talent available just happens to be a pitcher — and because I think White just has a hard-on for pitchers in general.
by CanuckDodger on Feb 2, 2010 11:33 AM PST up reply actions
I am thankful for Logan’s affinity for drafting pitchers, because we’ve gotten some absolute stud’s out of it. I just hope we don’t continue only drafting pitchers with our first pick. You should have seen me after I saw that we drafted an outfielder with the first pick last year, I couldn’t believe we took a hitter for once. Of course, I didn’t realize we’d want a pitcher with such a terrible ERA with our first pick, so I was mistaken, lol.
Oh please a power hitter, oh please oh please oh please. Then again, if Kyle Russell is any indication, they might just rot in our system by the way everyone sees him.
Where was Trout taken by the Angels this season? He seems to be a stud in the making, and I think he might have been a late first round pick. I’d love the Dodgers to strike gold like that. I would be happy to take a 1b, 3b, or corner OF with good power potential and some ability to take a walk.
Trout went 25 and Grichuk went 24. They both played in the AZL and were just a tad more impressive then our Jonathan Garcia stat wise.
I know because
he has talent and is a number one pick while Garcia almost matched him in production but was a 7th round pick so little respect until he does it again.
yup
like always… another high ceiling HS pitcher..
We Are Actually Pretty Strong In Outfield Prospects...
..and that is even with me thinking Kyle Russell is over-rated junk. We are really poor when it comes to infielders, but at least Gordon and DeJesus look plausible as future big league middle infielders. First basemen are lacking, but in a pinch you can move an outfielder to first. Third base looks like the real hole to me. It is Pedro Baez and a prayer, and Baez himself needs a whole lot of prayers.
I feel like I’m the only person who actually thinks anything of Russell, and haven’t seen anyone talking all that highly of him, so I’m not sure how he’s overrated.
As for 3b, yeah, losing Bell really hurt us there, and we were weak there to begin. It’s too bad that 3b out of high school didn’t sign with us in the 09 draft, I heard he had monster potential. I can’t remember his name, but he beat Bryce Harper in some homerun contest last year. Obviously that’s not what makes him great, but it was obvious potential was there….obviously (lol).
Our Top Five OF Prospects (In My Opinion)
1. Lambo
2. Robinson
3. Van Slyke
4. Garcia
5. Sands
On Russell, I will say that my reason for dismissing him is that the rate at which he struck out while playing at the grey old age of 23 in low A is nothing short of catastrophic. When that happens, it doesn’t matter how far the ball goes when he does make contact. He was facing very young and unsophisticated pitchers and if they K’d him as much as they did, what are pitchers at higher levels going to do to him? If Russell even makes it as far as Double A I can see him maxing out his batting average at about .210, and that will be as a 25-year-old.
by CanuckDodger on Feb 2, 2010 12:09 PM PST up reply actions
You are taking the strike out numbers too far. Yes he faced inferior pitching and younger pitching, but does that mean he can’t progress when all other players can? His average might suffer, but he still takes a bunch of walks and can hit for great power. Yeah, it would be terrible to have Adam Dunn-lite in our minors…
The Thing Is...
Adam Dunn didn’t strike out very much in the minors. And though some major leaguers did strike out excessively in the minors, their whiff rate wasn’t as bad as Russell’s, and they were younger and facing pitchers closer to their own age. The “Can he progress?” question seems to me to be answered by the age issue. Just a pediatricians look at babies and expect them to reach certain “developmental milestones” at certain ages you look at prospects and expect to see certain skills at certain ages. To be so easy to strikeout for young pitchers at age 23 tells us a great deal about his control of the strike zone and indicates he is WAY behind the development curve for a 23-year-old. Hitters just don’t overcome that at that age.
by CanuckDodger on Feb 2, 2010 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
I think it’s for you.
But if not, I’m not really sure how I would rank our OF prospects.
But hell, let’s give it a shot.
1. Lambo
2. Robinson
3. Russell
4. Garcia
5. Van-Slyke/Paul
Thanks both of you
I’m high on Lambo, but I guess I don’t know enough about Garcia/Sands to have them really on my radar. Trayvon had an excellent year, though I’d like to see him repeat his performance for me to consider him legit. I hope Canuck’s right on Van Slyke; if so, what an amazing turnaround. I personally think there’s a chance Dee Gordon could shift to OF some day. Watching him makes me think of Kenny Lofton so much I don’t quite see the infielder in him.
I'll go a different tack
1. Garcia – 850 OPS for a 17 year old, even in the rookie league vaults him for me over the others.
2. Robinson – centerfielder, speed, power
3. Lambo – corner outfield suspect defensive skills, suspect ability to hit for real power expected of a left fielder
4. Sands – power/speed/discipline, probably not a starter
5. Kyle Russell – Canuck is right about the K rate, but he is above average in every other part of the game. Holding out hope.
6. Van Slyke – prove it to me in something other then the Cal League after a career of failure.
I don’t see an impact starter among them unless Robinson continues to make big strides. Garcia is simply a huge question mark that may not even be answered in his 18 year old season.
Logan should stick with what he does best.
The problem with that
is that we’ve got Kemp in cf, and Gordon would most definitely be a CF if he went to the outfield. I think the best possible switch would be to 2b.
if gordon is actually as good as people say....
kemp would move to right or left field..
Kemp in LF would be a complete waste. His arm would fit very well in right, but I love him in CF, he’s too good. He reminds me of a young Andruw Jones.
kemp
dont u think he will become a bit bigger and slower in a few years.?
i dont think the metrics will like him much in CF in a few years.
Eventually, yes. But now, and for the next 3-5 years he should be in his peak form and should be quite good in CF. Gordon is maybe 2-3 years away from making the majors, and with Furcal leaving, his perfect fit will be at SS, especially with Kemp still in CF.
Well if Trayvon pans out
There is a good chance he could also bump Kemp over to right.
I would be amazed if the Dodgers could have an outfielder or two that would be good enough to make Kemp go to RF or LF. That would be one hell of a defensive outfield.
Joe Torre Has Said, In 2010,...
…that Kemp is really an RF — that is his TRUE position. so I don’t think it would take as much to move Kemp from CF as you think.
Top 125 Prospect list
http://www.topprospectalert.com/2010top100prospects.htm
This one has Gordon at 39, Withrow at 78 (does that mean Gordon is 2 times the prospect that Withrow is, lol), E. Martin at 92, and Miller at 110. Seems like a good list to me, because it doesn’t overrate (well, as much as some lists) absolute potential over potential mixed with results so far. Tim Beckham is down just above Withrow, and I like that move for now.
His Dodger top 10
- Dee Gordon
- Chris Withrow
- Ethan Martin
- Aaron Miller
- Andrew Lambo
- Scott Elbert
- Kyle Russell
- Nathan Eovaldi
- Allen Webster
- Ivan DeJesus
Hard to understand the devaluation of Josh Lindblom.
Lindblom has closer potential...
…so that should automatically put him in the top 10. I could even see him following the Broxton career path: start out in middle relief, then set-up, then close. Lindblom is not a Ramon Troncoso wannabe.
I suspect he has as much chance to remain a starter as Ethan Martin or Eovaldi have. And if he doesn’t he will only be a setup man because of Broxton. He has what it takes to close games. Good chance that Martin, Eovaldi, and Lindblom end up in the bullpen why is the guy who is most advanced behind the others?
Disagree About Martin...
I think Martin will be a starter, but Eovaldi is at risk of ending up in the bullpen. It is exactly the fact that Lindblom IS older and further along developmentally but STILL looks like a reliever that makes him fall a bit in the rankings compared to a Martin. When Lindblom was Martin’s age he couldn’t even hack it as a COLLEGE starter and had to be moved to the bullpen, and that is where he found his groove.
what?
its sad u think 09 mota was bad… besides not having good K rate.. he was really good..
haha so funny..
mota in 09 allowed 53 hits in 65 innings with a .224 BAA and a 3.44 ERA and 1.18 WHIP…
now we are talking about 09 mota… HE was really GOOD…
so you saying
Sad and unfortunate way to think.is very foolish and childish and mean
Reliever ERA doesn’t mean jack. Just ask Neal Huntington.
And he SUCKED in high leverage situations. Just look at his situational stats. But with the bases empty, he was “great.”
Don’t think it was foolish/childish/mean to say at all.
so who cares about mota
back to the real conversation…
u said i think lindblom will end up like 09 mota…
where the hell did that BS come from?
well whatever i said..
you are wording it wrong…
You said Lindblom would be a middle reliever. 2009 Mota was pretty much the definition of a middle reliever.
Belisario is also a middle reliever, no?
Mota seemed like cherry-picking the worst possible reliever we had last year.
by Michael White on Feb 2, 2010 2:49 PM PST up reply actions
Looking at ERA is the worst way to look at a reliever :)
See above.
by Michael White on Feb 2, 2010 2:56 PM PST up reply actions
I don’t necessarily disagree with Huntington’s thoughts on the subject, especially from a talent evaluation standpoint (which I believe was what Huntington was referring to when he made said comments), but I still think its useful to compare different relievers ERA+ or FIP in any given season. Not from a talent standpoint, but from a standpoint of performance, you can’t just look at K ratios or K/BB ratios and say “X” had a better season than “Y”. I suppose FIP or xFIP may be better than ERA+, but ERA+ is easy and even if one guy was in fact luckier than another, he still could have had the better season at the end of the day.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1467&position=P
According to WAR, mota was worth -0.1. Sadly, that is -0.1 less than his worth with the Brewers the year before.
but isnt belasario
at least a set up man for any other team?
I feel like this with our young potential starters.
Lindblom, McDonald, Elbert, Haeger possibly…
Wouldn’t they all be given the opportunity to be a 5th starter (or even 4th starter) on some teams. Since we have been perennial winners, I feel like there is too much emphasis on how good our 5th starter needs to be. Look at the melange of guys used last year in the 5th spot last year and we won 95 games. Just because these guys – lets say Lindblom for instance – isn’t immediately dominating at the big league level, does not mean that he couldn’t end up being a decent fifth starter and put up an ERA in the low-mid 4s. If thats what we get out of the 5th spot for $450k, that is fine by me.
Gallagher Was Injured Last Year
We’ll see what he can do in 2010.
“The Common Man” has a nice post up about ex-Dodger Frank Howard, a rare Dodger on the cover of Sports Illustrated.
I don’t see anything wrong with signing him to a minor league deal, but how many utility infielders do we need?
Can we just roll with Amezaga and trade Carroll now!?
seriously
the carroll deal is looking like a worse and worse deal everyday
Lindblom
I am willing wager on a sub-4 major league ERA with 100 IP. I have that much faith in talent.
id wager that big time
i dont know about the under 4 era.. he might do that… but NO WAY.. NO WAY.. does he get 100 IP with the dodgers and joe torre this year
2 Part Fantasy Baseball Question
1) What do you guys prefer in your stats for a league, especially if it is 5 and 5 with the categories? I am thinking of AVG, OPS, RBI, Runs, SB and for pitching: ERA, WHIP, QS, K, SV.
I don’t love all of those stat categories, but I am making compromises with people that worship the RBI and roll there eyes at me when I tell them it is not the best indicator of performance….same as ERA.
2) Would it make more sense to split OPS into OBP and SLG, or does it end up being a wash…or are there pros and cons for both?
Thanks
by robotmadeofnails on Feb 2, 2010 3:28 PM PST reply actions
Is it better to go with 6 and 6 or 7 and 7?
by robotmadeofnails on Feb 2, 2010 3:30 PM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
