Bullpen Banter Doesn't Like the Dodgers

http://bullpenbanter.com/index.php/rtmenu/15-2010spnnlw/121-2010ladpreview

They rave over the prospects, including Garrett Gould, Dee Gordon, and Allen Webster, but seem extremely disappointed with the team. Here are some excerpts:

Michael Herrick: In a system with Chris Withrow, Ethan Martin, Scott Elbert, Josh Lindblom, and Aaron Miller it's easy for a guy like Garrett Gould to get a bit overshadowed.  Gould was the Dodgers 2nd round pick in 2009, getting very little work in after signing.  He has an above average curve that projects to be at least plus if not plus-plus.  His fastball sits in the low 90's but he has room to fill out his frame and add 2-3 mph to it.  He's a prep arm, so say it with me now, his changeup needs work.  He looks like another solid pick by Logan White and his scouting department and could end up better than some of the names ahead of him on the depth chart now.

Al Skorupa: Let me start off by saying I think Dee Gordon is probably underrated. For me, he's the best SS prospect in the game right now.

I really like RHP Allen Webster. Talented high ceiling arm. OF Trayvon Robinson is someone I'm very interested to follow this season. Not sure how much of his breakthrough was the Cal League. I like the tools.

JD Sussman: Mike, I don't think Miller gets mentioned much, does he? I think he is a guy to watch. He struck out 32% of the batters he faced last year and 23% of those were swinging. Impressive.

 

I've got the Dodgers finishing second, but the problem is that they likely don't have enough starting pitching. I think James McDonald could be an important player for them this season, he can miss bats he just can't afford to miss the strike zone too.

Michael Herrick: I don't like the money they gave to Vicente Padilla.  He didn't pitch that well last year.  I'd have gambled on someone like Brett Myers instead.

Personally, I am not sure what they expected the Dodgers to do this off season, simply because they are returning the team that has made it to back to back NLCS's and is extremely young... Is this another publication that just doesn't like the Dodgers and what they do? Is this a case where the writers do not follow the team and therefore do not have enough information? Or are they correct?