Dodgers Week 11 In Review: Running The 1975 World Series Gauntlet
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 7:00 AM PDT
in Dodgers Weekly Reviews
Email
PrintThe Dodgers started out the week on a high note, but ran into their mortal enemy, the designated hitter, dropping all three in Boston in an all-too-familiar pattern. In their last 45 games in American League parks, the Dodgers have lost 35 times.
Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier have completely disappeared of late, and both had a sub-.500 OPS for the week. The offense was carried by a pair of aging outfielders, and a hot shortstop until he had to leave for the most unfortunate of reasons.
Chad Billingsley went on the disabled list, spreading the starting rotation even thinner, but Vicente Padilla came back, which will be a good thing, in time. But for this week, it was Kuroda and Kershaw and not much else. Any week when Jonathan Broxton faces just one batter is not a good week.
Dodger Batter of the Week: Manny Ramirez started five games this week, and hit home runs in three of them, to win the award for the second straight week. He hit .429/.478/.857 to lead the club. Honorable mention goes to Rafael Furcal, who had six hits in 11 at-bats before heading home to the Dominican Republic to be with his dying father, who sadly passed away Sunday. Garret Anderson had a great week, hitting .357/.357/.714.
Dodger Pitcher of the Week: Hiroki Kuroda had a great week, allowing just two runs in 12 innings, and it seems the only thing that kept him from pitching more innings was a long rain delay in Cincinnati. Honorable mention goes to Clayton Kershaw, who was routinely great in his one start, striking out seven in 7 1/3 innings.
Week 11 Record: 2-4
29 runs scored (4.83 per game)
26 runs allowed (4.33 per game)
.550 pythagorean winning percentage
Season Record: 38-31
321 runs scored (4.65 per game)
316 runs allowed (4.58 per game)
.507 pythagorean winning percentage (35-34)
| Dodgers Week By Week Standings | ||||||||||
| Wk 1 | Wk 2 | Wk 3 | Wk 4 | Wk 5 | Wk 6 | Wk 7 | Wk 8 | Wk 9 | Wk 10 | Wk 11 |
| 3 GB | 2 GB | 3 GB | 5 GB | 5 GB | 2 GB | 1 GB | 2 GB | ½ GB | 1 GB | 2 GB |
Who Needs a DH?: Dodger pitchers have struggled at the plate all season, at the bottom of the league in batting average, on-base percentage, slugging percentage, and OPS. They entered the week with a league-worst two runs batted in from their pitchers, but doubled that total in the Cincinnati series. Reliever Ramon Troncoso got a bases-loaded walk on Tuesday, and starter John Ely hit in an RBI single on Thursday. It was the first major league RBI for each pitcher, and the first bases-loaded walk by a Dodger pitcher since Brad Penny was walked by Kyle Lohse of the Reds on May 12, 2007.
An Exclusive Five-Hit Club: On Tuesday night, in a game that was delayed for 164 minutes due to rain, Rafael Furcal's bat brought the thunder in Cincinnati. Furcal got hits in his first five at-bats, had one double and would have had another had Ramon Troncoso been familiar with running the bases on Furcal's line drive off the wall. It was the third five-hit game of Furcal's career, and his second as a Dodger. Furcal grounded out in the ninth, but he became just the seventh Los Angeles Dodger to bat in a nine-inning game with a chance for six hits:
| LA Dodgers Batting w/ 5 Hits in a 9-inning game | ||||
| Date | Player | Opp | 6th AB | Comment |
| 6/15/10 | Rafael Furcal | @Cin | groundout | 2nd 5-hit game as a Dodger |
| 5/19/06 | Andre Ethier | Ana | sacrifice fly | Ethier's 14th career game |
| 5/23/02 | Shawn Green | @Mil | home run | greatest offensive day ever |
| 6/3/88 | Mickey Hatcher | Cin | flyout | Steve Sax also had 5 hits |
| 4/22/84 | Mike Marshall | SD | strikeout | had 2 HR, 2B, 6 RBI, and a steal |
| 8/26/81 | Ron Cey | @Pit | groundout | all singles |
| 8/20/74 | Davey Lopes | @Chi | groundout | only one to have 6th AB in 7th inning |
Power & Speed; Wait, What?: On Saturday, Manny Ramirez stole a base in the second inning off knuckleballer Tim Wakefield, which was his third steal since joining the Dodgers, and his first since August 29, 2008. Four innings later, Manny took Wakefield deep for his first home run against the Red Sox since September 13, 2000, when he was with Cleveland. This marked the eighth game in Manny's career that he had both a home run and a stolen base, and his first since April 17, 2004. Ramirez joins James Loney and Matt Kemp (twice) as the only Dodgers with a homer and stolen base in the same game this season.
Three-Run Homer Mania: We have had fun with Ely Mania this year, with the early success of rookie sensation John Ely. Little did we know how much he had in common with previous Dodger manias. Ely gave up a three-run home run this week to Reds' pitcher Bronson Arroyo, the first three-run home run by a pitcher allowed by a Dodger since May 7, 1995, when Bill Swift took Hideo Nomo deep in the midst of "Nomo Mania." Dating back to 1981, the only other Dodger to give up a three-run home run to a pitcher was the subject of the biggest mania of them all, Fernando Valenzuela. Valenzuela gave up a three-run shot to Dennis Cook on May 19, 1990, and gave up a three-run shot to Calvin Schiraldi on September 23, 1989.
Mr. Zero: Travis Schlichting was called up again this week when Chad Billingsley went on the disabled list, and proceeded to put up goose eggs on the scoreboard. After pitching four extra innings to earn his first major league win two weeks ago against the Diamondbacks, Schlichting pitched a scoreless inning against the Reds on Thursday, followed by 2 2/3 more scoreless innings in Boston on Friday. Schlichting came into the game in the fifth inning on Friday after the first eight batters reached against Carlos Monasterios and Ramon Troncoso, and he retired eight of the 11 batters he faced. On the season, Schlichting has not allowed a run in 7 2/3 innings, a nice comeback for someone who this offseason dealt with Gilbert's Syndrome, that caused him to lose 30 pounds.
Transactions:
- Wednesday: Chad Billingsley was placed on the 15-day disabled list with a strained right groin one day after feeling pain again during a bullpen session in preparation for his scheduled Thursday start. Reliever Travis Schlichting was recalled from Triple A Albuquerque to take his spot on the active roster.
- Thursday: Rafael Furcal was placed on the bereavement list, as he flew home to the Dominican Republic to tend to an ailing family member. Chin-Lung Hu was recalled from Albuquerque to take his spot on the roster.
- Saturday: Carlos Monasterios, who was pressed back into the starting rotation with the injury to Billingsley, was placed on the 15-day disabled list himself with a blister on his right index finger one day after giving up six runs in four innings in Boston. This created a roster spot for Vicente Padilla, who was activated from the disabled list after missing two months with an inflamed radial nerve in his right arm.
Game Results:
- Tuesday: Dodgers 12, Reds 0
- Wednesday: Dodgers 6, Reds 2
- Thursday: Reds 7, Dodgers 1
- Friday: Red Sox 10, Dodgers 6
- Saturday: Red Sox 5, Dodgers 4
- Sunday: Red Sox 2, Dodgers 0
Upcoming Week: After running the 1975 World Series gauntlet, going on the road to play both the Reds and Red Sox, the Dodgers return to southern California. This week they face the 2009 ALCS participants, playing the Angels in Anaheim and the Yankees at Dodger Stadium. Say, did you buy that mini-plan yet?
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
| 21 Off |
22 @Ana 7:10pm |
23 @Ana 7:10pm |
24 @Ana 7:10pm |
25 NYY 7:10pm |
26 NYY 4:10pm |
27 NYY 5pm |
Previous Weeks in Review: Wk 1 | Wk 2 | Wk 3 | Wk 4 | Wk 5 | Wk 6 | Wk 7 | Wk 8 | Wk 9 | Wk 10
Week 11 Stats
| Player | PA | AB | R | H | 2B | 3B | HR | RBI | BB | SB/CS | BA/OBP/SLG | OPS |
| Manny | 23 | 21 | 7 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 2 | 1/0 | .429/.478/.857 | 1.335 |
| Furcal | 11 | 11 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0/1 | .545/.545/.636 | 1.182 |
| Loney | 26 | 24 | 1 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 2 | 0/0 | .333/.385/.500 | .885 |
| Blake | 25 | 22 | 2 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0/0 | .318/.400/.364 | .764 |
| DeWitt | 21 | 17 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0/0 | .235/.381/.294 | .675 |
| Martin | 24 | 21 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1/0 | .190/.292/.238 | .530 |
| Ethier | 28 | 26 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0/0 | .154/.214/.269 | .484 |
| Kemp | 29 | 26 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 1/1 | .192/.207/.269 | .476 |
|
|
||||||||||||
| Anderson | 14 | 14 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0/0 | .357/.357/.714 | 1.071 |
| Johnson | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | .500/.500/.500 | 1.000 |
| Belliard | 6 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0/0 | .200/.333/.400 | .733 |
| Ellis | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0/0 | .000/.500/.000 | .500 |
| Carroll | 15 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1/0 | .000/.385/.000 | .385 |
| Hu | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | -----/-----/----- | ---- |
|
|
||||||||||||
| Pitchers | 9 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0/0 | .143/.250/.143 | .393 |
| Totals | 239 | 208 | 29 | 56 | 11 | 1 | 5 | 28 | 23 | 4/2 | .269/.347/.404 | .751 |
| Pitcher | G | W-L | Sv | IP | H | R | ER | BB | K | ERA | WHIP | FIP* |
| Kershaw | 1 | 1-0 | -- | 7.1 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 1.23 | 1.091 | 1.70 |
| Kuroda | 2 | 1-1 | -- | 12 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 17 | 1.50 | 1.000 | 0.87 |
| Padilla | 1 | 0-0 | -- | 5.1 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 6.75 | 1.125 | 7.14 |
| Ely | 1 | 0-1 | -- | 4.2 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 13.50 | 2.357 | 12.20 |
| Monasterios | 1 | 0-1 | -- | 4.0 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 13.50 | 2.500 | 10.20 |
| Starters | 6 |
2-3 | -- | 33.1 | 37 | 20 | 20 | 10 | 33 | 5.40 | 1.410 | 4.76 |
| Schlichting | 2 | 0-0 | -- | 3.2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0.00 | 0.818 | 1.84 |
| Miller | 3 | 0-0 | -- | 3.0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 0.00 | 1.333 | (1.47) |
| Sherrill | 4 | 0-0 | -- | 2.2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 1.125 | 3.20 |
| Weaver | 1 | 0-0 | -- | 1.1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.00 | 1.500 | 0.20 |
| Kuo | 2 | 0-0 | -- | 3.0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3.00 | 1.000 | 5.87 |
| Belisario | 3 | 0-1 | -- | 1.2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5.40 | 1.800 | 3.80 |
| Troncoso | 2 | 0-0 | -- | 2.0 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 18.00 | 3.000 | 9.20 |
| Broxton | 1 | 0-0 | -- | 0.0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | --- | inf | --- |
| Relievers | 6 |
0-1 | -- | 17.1 | 20 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 20 | 3.12 | 1.442 | 3.08 |
| Totals | 6 |
2-4 | -- | 50.2 | 57 | 26 | 26 | 15 | 53 | 4.62 | 1.421 | 4.19 |
*FIP is estimated
372 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
ESPNE put up a stat last night saying dodgers are worst IL team 2005-present. That is why I am writing off this week entirely, and just hope to start from scratch Monday. I hope they just win 2 games this week.
1997-2009
The Dodgers were at .474, better than Pittsburgh (.392), San Diego (.421), Philadelphia (.442), Cincy (.444), Arizona (.449).
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/history/interleague/records.jsp
by Little Blue Bicycle on Jun 21, 2010 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions
We do get the Yankee's at home so we can throw out the DH 10-35 stat.
I think we sweep the Angels. No Weaver and we will have Haeger the Honorable going on Thursday. Ely bounces back with a huge game Wednesday following Kershaw’s no hitter.
The Pirates are 6-30 on the road in AL parks during the same span.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions
The Manny Bashfest on ESPN
wasn’t in the game chat here yesterday but ESPN’s having Curt Schilling in the booth for 2 innings to bash Manny, with Orel joining in on the fun, made me actually quite angry. I fast forwarded through some of it but it seemed really unfair. And who are they to play amateur psychiatrist? It was absolutely shameful. Not sure that it would be worth complaining to anyone at that network but the whole thing made me sorry I’d bothered watching it in the archives last night (separate even from the frustration I felt for the lack of offensive support for Kuroda last night).
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
At one point
Schilling was explaining to Morgan how times have changed and the media will talk about an incident for much longer than they would in Morgan’s day. I wonder if he realized that he was, at that very moment, part of the problem.
Didn’t you see the blood stain on his dress sock?
by Little Blue Bicycle on Jun 21, 2010 9:08 AM PDT up reply actions
Actually I was struck by how little Orel said, and how he brought up Manny’s positive influence on the Dodgers, but only after Schilling left. Plus, as a poster said last night, it was a classic FJM moment for Morgan to claim that he’d never had a problem teammate. Wanna bet, Joe?
by Little Blue Bicycle on Jun 21, 2010 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions
I thought Orel made a bunch of good points
both about the game and about Manny. His description of Manny was perfect. He said as a teammate you give Manny the grace you would give a child, but after awhile you expect him to act like an adult, and that it could be frustrating as a teammate.
Orel also said he had a great work ethic, and in his description of Manny there was no agenda, no malice, and no ulterior motive.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions
He did say all those things, I agree, but seems to me he also sat back otherwise and let Schilling and Morgan drag Manny through the mire. And the Dodgers never came up until Schilling was out of the booth, when someone could have mentioned what his current teammates think.
by Little Blue Bicycle on Jun 21, 2010 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, both of you are right
He could’ve done more, but he didn’t jump on him incessantly the way Schilling did. Schilling being there was so one-sided (unfair and unbalanced) it was practically FoxNews-ian.
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
I didn’t hear the Schilling/Orel exhange last night, but I have often found myself to be a little disappointed in Orel when he broadcasts during a Dodger game. I am not expecting him to be an outright homer for the Dodgers, but I would like him to balance the scales a little more since Morgan takes every opportunity to take pot shots at the Dodgers.
I like Orel the way he is. I think Joe Morgan is going to say what he says regardless, but it doesn’t need to escalate into a battle in the booth. The less Morgan is engaged in such a thing, the better.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 9:31 AM PDT up reply actions
I’m not really expecting him to get into a verbal sparring match with Morgan. That wouldn’t be any good and really I think Orel is a pretty good announcer, I just wish he would shine more of a positive light on the Dodger organization and its good players. He really comes off as more ambivilant towards the Dodgers than anything, which is probably what he is going for.
It was very uncomfortable to watch
I believe Schilling said something like “it wasn’t that we wondered if Manny was going to play his best, we wondered if he would play at all.” That seemed a bit over the top. The discussion for those 2 innings focused on Ramirez and it was unfortunate that Schilling was given a national forum to go over the anti-Ramirez talking points.
Gets paid eight million to throw zero innings
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions
My wife and I could not believe how long they kept talking about it. And having Curt in there as an “expert” on the matter was pretty appalling. I thought it was some piss poor journalism/announcing.
by robotmadeofnails on Jun 21, 2010 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions
The NL has suck-diddly-ucked in interleague play
Since 2005, only three NL teams are .500 or above in IL play:
Overall
Col 0.586
StL 0.512
Fla 0.500
NYM 0.483
Atl 0.452
Mil 0.452
Was 0.451
Cin 0.437
SF 0.430
ChC 0.429
Hou 0.396
Ari 0.391
SD 0.376
Phi 0.376
Pit 0.358
LA 0.344
NL totals 0.436
Colorado is an amazing 31-11 at home against AL teams as well. Overall, the NL has a .488 interleague winning percentage at home.
On the road, no NL team has been over .500 in interleague play since 2005, but three teams are right at .500:
On the Road
StL 0.500
Fla 0.500
NYM 0.500
Col 0.444
Atl 0.410
SD 0.400
Phi 0.400
Mil 0.378
Cin 0.378
Was 0.373
ChC 0.359
SF 0.357
Ari 0.356
Hou 0.333
LA 0.222
Pit 0.167
NL totals 0.383
Amazing what home field advantage and a rule that heavily favors the AL will do.
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions
Don’t forget the “rival”: The Dodgers get six with the Angels while the Rockies don’t have one, the Cardinals get the Royals, and the Marlins got the bad-then-good [Devil] Rays.
by Little Blue Bicycle on Jun 21, 2010 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions
Oh no, Eric's turned into Ned Flanders! help!
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
I hope nobody shoots me as a zombie, only to ask “Eric was a zombie?” afterward.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions
Or maybe...you're the EricDevil!
“Ho-ho, it’s always the one you least suspect.”
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
I know Eric dislikes preemptive ‘whining’ about future whining, but please…spare me the Haeger is pitching on 3 days’ rest card on Thursday. If he sucks, it’s most likely because that’s his ability level.
I think you confuse whining with facts. Seriously
The stuff above about Schilling and Manny and most of yesterdays game thread.
That shit is whining.
Being irked about Schilling's commmentary on Manny that went on for 2 innings is whining?
If it’s a point that was made repeatedly in the game thread yesterday – presumably it was – I apologize. but i don’t think it should be dismissed otherwise as just whining.
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
Yes
the whole game thread struck me as one big whine fest about Manny getting shit on by the East Coast biased announcers who must hate the Dodgers. It is like we have some kind of persecution complex. Which is weird, we are the Dodgers.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah I personally would not take the train of thought THAT far... I don't get the persecution
complex. BUT I still think it was effing irritating Schilling for 2 innings give his “insight” on Manny. So in my opinion the first person who should shut the heck up is Schilling. Then much farther below the rest of us. ;-)
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
He was brought in to give his insight
we just didn’t like it. For balance they could also have brought in David Ortiz but he had a game to play. Maybe Pedro might have been the best balance.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions
he’s the Ernie Banks of 2010 Dodger series MVPs
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions
The Giants schedule is so favorable to them this week. I forecast SF-SD-LA at this time next week. Then a nice LA run.
We are playing one of the most depleted teams in baseball
from Tues – Thursday. We have the Yankee’s at home. We will have a great week.
And if we don't
it will because we are not a good baseball team at the moment, not because we got shafted by the baseball gods by having to play our “rival” and the NY Yankee’s.
Withrow
Withrow: 25IP 21H 2.52era 0HR 12bb 24k
the 0 homeruns is the best stat. hopefully he’s turning the corner and ready to have a great second half.
That and Aaron Miller are the best recent news from the Dodgers' Minors
Great to see…
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
I still think the Dodgers would be selling low on him
if they parted ways before this season ended. His value was certainly higher coming into the year and if he really is turning it around now it will surely be higher at the end of the year. Really, with Withrow still being rather young, if the point was to plump up his trade value to its peak, you would keep him all year and repeat him in AA next year (which is what they will do anyway) and hope he has a strong first half next year.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions
True, but we’re probably perceived as desperate for pitching and will be asked for much more than other teams.
arent we always perceived as desperate for pitching?
I can’t think of any year in the past 5 or so where we haven’t been looking for pitching at the deadline…
usually the story for anyone in a pennant race isn’t it?
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions
This is the first year that Kershaw’s name hasn’t been thrown around. It’s about time.
by silverwidow on Jun 21, 2010 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions
I’ll bet Billz wishes it was the same for him. I’m sure his will probably still pop up.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions
Dave Cameron of Fangraphs doesn’t like the Dodger OF defense:
Ethier and Kemp have the two lowest UZRs of any player in baseball so far in 2010.
Essentially, at this point, the Dodgers are running out an outfield that consists of a right fielder and two designated hitters. While all three are quality hitters and help the team score runs, they’re giving back a lot of value with their lack of range in the outfield. Their run prevention problems do not fall on just the pitchers, as they aren’t getting much support from the guys behind them.
As the Dodgers pursue a starting pitcher for the stretch run, may I suggest they target a guy who gets a lot of groundballs?
I know I don't really know a lot about stats
and I’m sure this gonna sound like I’m an old man or something, but I watch just about every Dodger game, and I really don’t get the harping on the defense of Kemp and Ethier. Kemp was pretty awful at the beginning of the season, but he’s been better. He still gets bad jumps, so he needs to improve on that. Ethier, I really don’t see him make too many boneheaded plays, but he’ll probably be moved to left field soon anyway. It’s just my opinion, and where better to tell it.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions
UZR is a stat which people continue to use mid-season
Even though those same people know full well that it’s meaningless until at least after the season.
Ignore, Ignore, Ignore.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions
Cameron does mention that UZR for this season is a small sample, but also uses their career defensive numbers to illustrate his point as well.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 9:55 AM PDT up reply actions
how much of Ethier’s numbers were skewed by Orlando Hudson getting a lot of the flyballs that should have been Ethier’s last year? I don’t know if that affects UZR, but if it does, it’d be interesting to know.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 9:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Ethier was bad before and bad after as well
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions
so do you think he might be moved to left field after Manny leaves?
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:01 AM PDT up reply actions
Only if they can convince him.
If I had to guess, he’ll make more money as a FA as a right fielder. Ethier’s not giving that up unless he can be convinced he can make similar money playing LF. Right or wrong, RF is considered a more defensive position than LF among traditional baseball people, and that has some value.
Recent corner OF free agent contracts
LF Manny Ramirez: 2 years, $45m (or 1/$25m plus an option if you prefer)
LF Matt Holliday: 7 years, $120m
LF Alfonso Soriano: 8 years, $136m
LF Carlos Lee: 6 years, $100m
LF Jason Bay: 4 years, $66m
LF Raul Ibanez: 3 years, $31.5m
LF Adam Dunn: 2 years, $20m (this is a stretch, but he was an OF when he signed)
RF Magglio Ordonez: 6 years, $90m (including this year’s option)
RF J.D. Drew: 5 years, $70m
RF Jose Guillen: 3 years, $36m (he played both but let’s call him RF for purposes of this)
RF Kosuke Fukudome: 4 years, $48m
RF: Bobby Abreu: 2 years, $19m
I’m probably missing a few, but it seems like LF have been paid more in free agency that RF. I think if you hit it doesn’t matter where you play.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions
I just read your excerpt
But if he wishes to make a point, there is absolutely no reason to note their UZR season to date.
Somebody else on this blog once made this point more eloquently than I, but throwing out small sample size warnings doesn’t give you a free pass to use it. Either a sample size meets the standard for having statistical significance or it doesn’t. I’m not perfect, I do the same thing on occasion, but to make a managerial decision (recommending the Dodgers sign a groundball pitcher) using statistically meaningless information would be silly.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions
I thought his point was more that Kemp and Ethier are terrible OF in general, based on multiple years of data.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:25 AM PDT up reply actions
hard to argue with his case
everyone we play uses our defense as the headline when they do the team preview. UZR may be flawed for SSS at this point, but when you are dead last by the numbers we are dead last it has to have significance.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions
The first couple weeks is basically it. The way UZR works if you make a bonehead play (which Kemp made a ton of the first couple weeks) you need to make an amazing play to make up for it. Kemp’s been decent since then, but it’s been enough just to keep his UZR steady.
Ethier just has no range so he doesn’t have the chance to bonehead.
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions
OF defense is one reason why the Dodgers are the 14th best organization and the Mariners are the 6th best!
Anyway, Cameron is assuming 09 is not an outlier or fluke season for Andre Ethier on defense. And that Kemp defense this season is his true talent level.
There does seem to be a direct correlation between how many bombs Ethier hits and how mobile he is.
Kemp has three seasons as a center fielder, and he’s gone awful, average, awful. I think Dave Cameron is terrible but he does use stats correctly.
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions
Just another point I wanted to make concerning things like this
Doesn’t it seem like when the Dodgers are doing well, they get either no attention or are percieved as playing over their head. But when they struggle, everyone seems to come out of the woodwork to say “See, See, I told you they were lousy, and I’ll show you why!” Again, might just be my opinion, and I can be very skewed.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions
I generally agree.
Though I think right before Manny got suspended last year, they were being perceived as the real deal. Great outfield, good rotation with Billingsley, Wolf, Kershaw and Kuroda, great bullpen. Loney and Martin still considered to be in just mild slumps. That was a pretty glorious time from a national perspective.
I do have to admit
It was very satisfying to sweep the Cardinals in the NLDS last year when most pundits had it going the other way around. What with going up against “Ace 1a and Ace 1b” in Carpenter and Wainwright. And then “Vicente Padilla is pitching game 3? He better pitch the game of his life, har har.”
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions
It does flip on its ear from time to time. Remember after we swept the Cubs in 2008, we became heavy favorites against the Phillies.
yeah, and the same after the 2009 sweep of the Cardinals. I still maintain it was a lack of execution and not a lack of talent that lost us that series.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions
You could say the same thing about any team that loses a short series
what point is that supposed to make?
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions
that the team we had last year was good enough to win?
I thought that was a pretty plain point. After we lost, it was more talk of, should of had an ace, should have had more hitting…etc. I thought the 2009 Dodger team was good enough to win the Pennant and the WS, it just didn’t happen because they didn’t play up to their capabilities. It does happen, but that’s what I was trying to say.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Part of what makes good players great
is being able to play up to their capabilities when the pressure is on.
I'm just saying any team who loses
didn’t play up to their capabilities. Seems like that is the case every year not something specific to the Dodgers in 2008 or 2009.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions
I agree
it was the same with the Phillies in the world series. Look at how bad Ryan Howard did. Heck I think the only pitcher of their’s who did really well was Cliff Lee.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions
Every team that makes the playoffs is good enough to win.
Any team can get hot in short stretches like the playoffs.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions
and maybe you can confirm this for me Jon
Have the Dodgers ever been favorites to win it all?
1955: “No way they can beat the Yankees, they never have”
1959: “They were in seventh last year, no way they win it all, especially against the Braves and the Go Go Sox”
1963: Maybe this one, but we were still facing a Yankee’s team with a plethora of HOFs.
1965: Not sure about this one either, as both teams had done poorly the year before, but I’m sure the Twins offense was much better than the Dodgers.
1981: Probably a lot like 1955, so many times facing the Yankees, why should this time be any different?
1988: We all know Tommy’s speech after this title, so I probably don’t need to say it.
My point is, the Dodgers are always seemingly the underdog.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions
Sure they have
You need to pick a year they didn’t win …
That was an interesting idea
I don’t know if the young team was favored to win in 74 against the A’s but I doubt we were favored to beat the Yankee’s in 77 or 78.
Tommy brings up an interesting project. How many times have the Dodgers been favored to win the World Series before the Season started and how many times before the World Series started?
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Just off the top of my head I know there have been times SI picked the Dodgers in their season baseball preview.
How could they possibly lose to the Phillies, whom they beat 10 of 11 times??? :)
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions
I’m looking through the SI Vault as we speak. I thought Straw would make the difference in 1991, but the Reds were favorites in the division
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:51 AM PDT up reply actions
So my guess before you finish
World Champion PreSeason Favorite since 1958
1962, 1964, 1966, 1975, 1979
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions
1962
I was confused by this statement:
OUTLOOK: The talent is all there, hut most of it was there in 1961, too. Manager Alston knows that if he doesn’t win this time around, he probably won’t get another chance. His job looks safe.
It seems that final sentence contradicts the rest.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
It looks safe because it looks like they’ll win the championship.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions
Ahh, thanks. For some reason I didn’t read it that way.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
That is what he must have meant.
Curious about all that talent. Wills and Davis were the studs in 62 and I don’t think anyone would have predicted that based on what they did in 61.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
When they didn't fire Walt after 62
nothing would get them to fire him.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions
1964
Loved this subheader:
Goats in 1962, world champions in 1963—now many believe the Dodgers, with Sandy Koufax, border on the unbeatable.
Also:
Once more pitching must pull the Dodgers along, and strange things often happen to pitchers. There are six teams with a good shot at the National League pennant this year and the Dodgers are just one of them.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions
1966
SI did not like their chances, especially with the Koufax/Drysdale holdout:
The Dodgers should have been upset and confused as a result of the long Koufax-Drysdale holdout siege. After all, how can a team properly prepare itself to defend a league championship and a World Series title when the heart and backbone of the team are missing for the first five weeks of spring training? How can a team that depends almost entirely on pitching (despite Maury Wills, the Dodgers were eighth in the league in runs scored) go into a season optimistically when the pair of titans who started 51% of its games last year have had only 10 days of training with the club by Opening Day? Morale in Dodgertown should have been mighty low this spring.
But it wasn’t. The Dodgers have irrepressible spirit. That spirit is a certain something that all Dodgers have a hand in but which none can put a finger on. “It’s just there,” says Reliever Ron Perranoski. “Things happen, but we’re ready to play.”
This is a team of delicate balance that had to have everything work right to win by a nose on the last weekend of the season. It is impossible to calculate the residual effects of the protracted holdout on pennant chances this year, but it is hard to see how it can do anything but hurt.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions
Started 51% of their games.
And it worked. Twice.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Then you realize it was the norm
with a four man rotation.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions
It wasn't the norm though
If we lower the bar to 38 starts, the Dodgers have had two pitchers make that many starts in a season just eight times:
1969: Osteen / Singer / Sutton
1966: Drysdale / Koufax / Osteen
1965: Drysdale / Koufax / Osteen
1975: Messersmith / Rau
1974: Messersmith / Sutton
1967: Drysdale / Osteen
1963: Drysdale / Koufax
1962: Drysdale / Podres
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions
In the 1960s, the Dodgers stood out. I went back to 40 starts (with the 162-game schedule for the most part), and here are the teams with multiple 40-start guys in the decade:
Dodgers: 5 times (including twice with 3)
1969 Cubs: Don Hands / Fergie Jenkins
1963 Giants: Juan Marichal / Jack Sanford
That’s it.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Put another way, the Dodgers had 13 of the 26 40-start seasons in the 1960s
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions
Then we get to go back to
amazing/crazy
Check out the 1950 Braves
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BSN/1950.shtml
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Vern Bickford got screwed by being left out of the phrase! :)
How about “Spahn, Sain, and Bickford, and pray for Mary Pickford”?
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
I know
he had more starts then either but never got a song.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions
Look at the K/9 for those guys
Spahn 5.9
Bickford 3.6
Sain 3.1
Chipman 2.1
Entire staff struck out 615 – Strasburg might get that by himself next year.
1950 St. Louis Browns pitching staff
448 K, led by Ned Garver’s 85 in 260 innings. Garver, the Browns’ best pitcher, had a 0.8 K/BB ration.
The Browns walked 651 … that’s a 0.69 K/BB
That 1966 Dodger team was like clockwork. They got 154 starts out of four guys, including a rookie named Don Sutton.
I thought the Rockies getting 155 starts out of five guys last year was amazing. :)
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions
I had forgotten about the holdout
or I would not have guessed that year.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions
1975
Steve Garvey was on the cover of the baseball preview (Headline: “Steve Garvey, Proud to be a Hero”), but Roy Blount, Jr. liked the Reds:
Everybody is picking the Dodgers to repeat, but everybody may be wrong. The Reds look better
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Give him kudos
for going against the grain and picking “The Machine”.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions
1979
Ron Fimrite liked the Dodgers:
The Dodger starting lineup will be the same: Steve Yeager and Joe Ferguson alternating at catcher, Garvey at first, Davey Lopes at second, Bill Russell at short, Ron Cey at third, Dusty Baker in left, Rick Monday in center and Reggie Smith in right. Gone to Pittsburgh is versatile Lee Lacy, but Lasorda hopes another Jack-of-most-trades, Derrel Thomas, will fill the holes Lacy once plugged up in the infield and outfield. This is still a team of power, speed and pitching. Its defensive weaknesses in the infield generally have not surfaced until World Series time, and by then it has been too late for the rest of the National League. The same pattern seems likely to be repeated this season.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions
True
to much good stuff to be left behind in a thread to nowhere.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions
Don't know
but from what I recall, whoever won the World Series the year before was usually considered the favorite the following year.
Only in 1967 were the Dodgers probably not considered at least a favorite after winning a world series. You know after sweeping the Yankees in 63 the 64 team had to be the favorite.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions
Definitely
1983 was the first year without Garvey and Cey, but there was optimism about Brock and Mike Marshall (who were on the cover of the Sporting News in May). Guerrero in his prime, and just a great pitching staff.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/LAD/1983.shtml
I had recently looked at the stats for that team. Impressive season, but you know how the playoffs go. Interesting to see they were on the cover of SN.
Brock had nine homers in the Dodgers' first 35 games.
Was batting only .267 but was getting recognition. Would have generated even more excitement in this era with OBP of .405, slugging .583, OPS .989.
Then the big adjustment began …
Remember the two home runs in Montreal
in which one was a Grand Slam and Vinny proudly announced that Greg Brock had arrived? That has always stuck with me, and to bad it was the highlight of Brocks’s career not the springboard.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions
That makes me teary eyed thinking about it.
I remember it and remember thinking too that Brock was the next big thing for the Dodgers. I then remember not understanding why he didn’t have a great career. (That was long before I learned this was all too common with a lot of once heralded young players.) But I really thought he was going to be the next Garvey if not better.
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
Plus/Minus System
per Bill James Online, here are runs saved
Manny Ramirez
2008: minus 5 in 974 LF innings with both teams (26th in MLB)
2009: minus 4 in 812 LF innings (22nd in MLB)
2010: minus 4 in 301.1 LF innings (24th in MLB)
Matt Kemp
2008: minus 1 in 825.2 CF innings (17th in MLB), 0 (average) in 478.2 RF innings (not enough to rank)
2009: minus 7 in 1355.1 CF innings (28th in MLB)
2010: minus 15 in 609.2 CF innings (35th in MLB)
Andre Ethier
2008: minus 11 in 881 RF innings (33rd in MLB), +1 in 277.1 LF innings (not enough to rank)
2009: minus 1 in 1365.1 RF innings (21st in MLB)
2010: minus 7 in 438 RF innings (32nd in MLB)
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Well, what can you say about the Mariners I guess
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions
hopefully it's like coffee
for the rest of the offense. or an energy drink…something
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions
For two weeks! :)
He was batter of the week last week as well
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Ethan Martin..
a little bit unlucky so far?
ERA: 5.29
FIP: 3.84
More Ks than IP, less H than IP…only 1 hr give up all year (outstanding in CAL). Obviously, wakl rate is high but FIP shows he’s still pitching well.
Looks like it
That FIP is better than Miller who is getting more pub around here.
Using FIP is a “must” considering the quality of the defenses in the low minors.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Though, Martin's HR/Air is really low
This season it’s at 1%. To put that into perspective, Aaron Miller’s is 5%, JMac’s was 6% in the Cal League.
Withrow was also fortunate with a HR/Air of 2% in the Cal League last year. He’s not quite as fortunate this year though….
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions
well I guess
but pitching in the CAL= homeruns given up the asshole. So Martin might be doing something right and we can attribute some of his ugly numbers to shotty defense?
Martin has great, great stuff (plus fastball, curve, developing change). Command is the only thing holding him back. He’s a future #2.
by silverwidow on Jun 21, 2010 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions
I’ll be interested in seeing where these guys all end up in or after AA.
Withrow racked up K’s last year because he got people to chase. He gets to AA and people stop chasing and his K rate drops. Withrow hopefully is making that adjustment now.
With the elements in the Cal League so extreme (and ABQ for that matter) I’m getting a bit shell shocked trying to rate these prospects at that level.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions
Eovaldi has yet to give up a home run in the Cal League
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions
eovaldi is so fucking weird
He doesn’t K anyone, doesn’t really give up too many hits, doesn’t have a high gb rate, and doesn’t give up homeruns.
Dodger Minor Leaguers FIP in the Cal League
James McDonald: 3.47
Chris Withrow: 3.49
Nate Eovaldi: 3.77
Ethan Martin: 3.84
Aaron Miller: 4.01
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Withrow & Eovaldi are the most impressive since they were 20.
by silverwidow on Jun 21, 2010 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions
Eovaldi has only allowed two home runs in 167 minor league innings
I thought last year was a fluke because of the MidWest league, but to not allow a home run in the Cal League, that is bloody awesome.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Also, Eovaldi has now pitched more innings season to date then Martin did. That blew me away since Eovaldi started in the Cal League late this year.
I’m not sold on him yet though since his K/PA is actually lower than it was last season (and I was disappointed with it last year) at 15.8%. Miller and Martin are both much better in that regard. No homeruns in the Cal League in so many innings is pretty insane, so I wonder if hitters are just making contact but not hitting him hard.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions
His K Rate is on the rise
I’m feeling much better about my argument with Baseball HQ when they did not put him on the top 15 Dodger List, compared to how I felt when he wasn’t even on a roster to start the year.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
For Example
http://www.minorleaguesplits.com/cgi-bin/pl.cgi
June is hitting 10.57 more then doubling the May rate of 4.19.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Yup, a 10.57 K/9 will definitely work.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions
Matt Kemp Struggling
April 5 – May 14
35 Games
32 Runs
7 2B
1 3B
8 HR
24 RBI
17 BB (1 IBB)
37 SO
.283/.354/.510
May 15 – June 20
34 Games
17 Runs
6 2B
3 3B
3 HR
13 RBI
9 BB
40 SO
.231/.274/.388
When players are struggling like this throughout the course of the season, how much one-on-one time do the hitting coaches spend with them? Is there a lot of video watching and one-on-one practice that occurs or do they often just let the players try to work through it on their own?
I expect that totally depends
on the player, what the philosophy of the hitting coach is. I doubt there is any cookie cutter approach to this.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions
agreed
I read Matt Kemp saying he was looking over video from last year to work on both his hitting and baserunning. We have yet to see improvement, but it’s only gonna be by going out there that he starts to come around.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions
Kemp's baserunning woes.
I know Kemp said that a lot of his problems on the bases are because he’s not getting big enough leads and he’s not leaning properly towards 2nd base. Is it possible that Kemp has just gotten slower? We had to figure that with his bison-like body he was going to eventually start to lose a step, maybe it’s already starting?
whenever I see Kemp get ready to steal a base, it looks like the kinda leans back towards first before he gets his jump. Rather than just leaning towards second and just going. I think this robs him of a step, which is usually the difference when he gets thrown out.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions
Kemp mentioned as much over the weekend, that he saw a flaw in his jump toward second.
As Dan Akroyd said in Tommy Boy in the elevator, “Great, you’ve identified it. Step two is washing it off.” :)
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions
I saw him say something similar
about his approach at the plate. I think he needs to focus on getting on base before he starts worrying about stealing them.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions
I forgot to put that in as another option. :)
I would imagine then that with Kemp being how young he is he’s working with Mattingly farily often lately?
from what I hear
they are pretty close in that regard.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions
Maybe
one of the biggest complaints from Kent about the attitude of the young players was that they did not take suggestions well because they felt they already knew everything.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions
gotta wonder what kind of suggestions ol' Chapass was giving.
“Hey, you suck, play better.”
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions
from what I hear it was not.
I think my assesment of what he might have been saying is actually close to the truth from what I can remember. I think Kent was pretty quick with the criticism, but not exactly free with advice.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Some criticism if taken correctly is actually advice
for example when I’m criticized for my grammar I can take that as advice on doing something about it, or like Kemp simply ignore it and keep swinging at the down and away slider.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions
it's more him swinging through fastballs that is bothering me.
I gotta wonder if he’s looking for breaking pitches when he’s up there.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions
It's really all downhill since the first Cincinnati series
First 15 games: .333/.405/.730 in 74 PA, 20 runs, 7 HR, 20 RBI, 10.8 BB%, 24.3 K%
Last 54 games: .236/.288/.370 in 236 PA, 29 runs, 4 HR, 17 RBI, 7.2 BB%, 25.0 K%
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions
so many things have happened in that span.
I know every big league team needs the ability to adjust, but having to make so many adjustments is hard on any team.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 10:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Vargas
FWIW, the ABQ game notes still list Claudio Vargas as the scheduled starting pitcher on Tuesday, which would eliminate him from Thursday consideration in Anaheim.
So much can change in a minute, and that start is like 2,000 minutes away.
But Haeger does seem the more logical bet.
Haeger will start with the added pressure of ending a six game losing streak
how he does will determine the future of the season:)
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 10:55 AM PDT up reply actions
I agree
A lot of those notes are cut & paste jobs by the PR staff anyway, but I thought it was interesting to note.
Agreed about Haeger, especially since he is on the 40-man.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions
Sunday
but will likely happen Monday, in SF (with Kershaw pitching Sunday vs NYY)
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions
He is throwing a bullpen session Tuesday or Wednesday, and they will know more after that.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions
Nice.
When Chad comes back our rotation will be rounding into shape nicely. #1-3 are great, and if Padilla can start pitching decent and Ely get back to his Maddux-like ways we’ll be set.
Ha
Yup, so long as Ely starts pitching like Greg Maddux again, we are good to go!
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 11:05 AM PDT up reply actions
After listening to them during the Ray/Marlin game
I’m not sure it is something I’d like to see happen at DT.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions
My neighbor’s kids were blowing those damn things all weekend.
I must be getting old.
People don't think it be like this, but it do.
by MartinGreen on Jun 21, 2010 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions
I've been hearing this all over the internet but have been too lazy to look up what it means.
Please enlighten me.
they are the things that make that buzzing noise during world cup games
I hope they never make it to DS.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Apparently, the Dodgers were interested in drafting Buchholz is 05, but went with Luke Hochevar
http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/baseball/red-sox/alex-speier/2010/06/20/buchholz-offers-painful-reminder-dodgers-what-
Canuck has said that Depo insisted on Hochevar, would have been interesting if Logan wanted Buchholz. Either way it worked out, because I’d rather have Kershaw then Bucholz.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions
Interesting to think: if we had signed Buchholz, would Hochevar still not have signed with whatever team drafted him in 2005?
I’m trying to concoct a way that we still would have had Kershaw in 2006.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions
The Royals didn’t have a GM during the draft so it’s safe to assume they would have taken Preston Mattingly.
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
The worse part of the 2006 draft
was that if Kershaw had not been available Logan White was going to take Morris with that slot.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions
Meanwhile, Florida would have Josh Johnson & Clayton Kershaw in their rotation. Unbelievable.
by silverwidow on Jun 21, 2010 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions
Maybe they don't trade Kershaw for Miggy
and Detroit has Verlander/Kershaw.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions
My feeling is Florida wanted Detroit’s top pitching prospect no matter what. Just speculation on my part.
by silverwidow on Jun 21, 2010 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions
I think a big reason that Miller got dealt was because he was already close to running out of options.
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm pretty sure back then I was on board with trading
Clayton and Loney for Miggy and I’d still do that today if given the same options.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions
I'd call you insane
Miggy is incredible, but Kershaw is alone more valuable than Miggy.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
Andrew Miller was traded int he 08 off season, he had one option year burned up and pitched 64 innings for the Tigers before being traded. Miller had two more years of option before being burned up. I doubt the Marlins and Tigers were that worried about options at that point.
I thought he burned two since he signed a major league deal.
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Even signing a major league deal, you don’t burn up options in the last month of the baseball season. And I think you gain 4 options under the old CBA if you sign a major league deal. So he had 4 to begin with, instead of 3.
You get the fourth option if you exercise the first three before completing five years as a pro. Or the occasional injury exemption.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions
But I don’t think he used up an option in 06. Which would be the screwy part of the equation, so it would matter for Miller until 2010 when it became obvious he wasn’t good enough to pitch in the majors.
He did use an option in 2006
The Tigers optioned him on August 8, and recalled him on August 27
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Miller is pitching in AA right now I believe.
by silverwidow on Jun 21, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah
one of the years he was in the minors on injury rehab or something
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Miller used options in 2006, 2007, 2009, and now 2010.
In 2008, he was placed on the DL on July 18, made 6 appearances and 4 starts in the minors, and was activated on September 1
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions
OT
With the opening of Harry Potter-land in Orlando, I hope we finally get an animated series of the entire Harry Potter books.
can see that happening
as an Anime, but that’s just me.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions
i would so love to go to that :(
I cannot wait for November and the 7th movie.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
Yeah, I'm really happy about that
The 7th book has so much info it needs at least 2 movies to do it justice. The 7th book is my favorite (3rd was my favorite till the 7th), and the last 5 chapters or so are the most amazing thing I have ever read.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
I was extremely bored on Saturday night
I nearly started reading the 7th book again, but I am so lazy about starting the actual reading of books now, so I just played Red Dead Redemption instead, lol.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
I just finished reading all 7 again
I had to have something to read at work when I need to stop looking at the computer screen for a few minutes.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh man, I don't think i could go 1-7 again any time soon
The only reason i even finished (well, really started) reading number 7 was when my PS3 died last summer and i had a couple months to kill. I’m really glad I got to read it, so I ended up reading it twice. I read half of the 5th one again, but then stopped because of distractions like PS3.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
I used to get distracted by games a lot
now i realize I have about 3-4 i never finished. I laugh because Mario Galaxy 2 is coming out, and I never even got a third of the way through the first one.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Lol, some games are just like that
When there are games that need to be played start to finish I normally dont play another game till i end it. Right now I’m 70% through Red Dead Redemption and I’m really hoping I can get 100% completion. I’ve only done that with a few games recently.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
the only game I recently bought and finished
was God of War 3
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions
Haven't played those, but I've heard they are great
One game you should definitely consider playing is Assassin’s Creed 2. Actually, go back and play Assassin’s Creed 1 as well.
These 2 games are my 2 favorite games I’ve ever played. The story is just amazing and it’s like a movie. It’s a trilogy and the 3rd comes out some time next year I think. You will definitely enjoy these games.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
I've seen that game played
It looks cool, but a lot of the time games like that intimidate me with the sheer amount of stuff there is to do. It’s like, “Do I really wanna sit here and do all that?”
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions
From Rosenthal:
The Mariners want major league or major league-ready hitters for Cliff Lee, but the Dodgers’ best prospects are a few years away from the majors.
We can't keep using Carlos Santana in hypothetical trades
If we didn’t use him on Blake he would have either been gone by now or Martin would be the one on the trading block.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions
I still think our best option is Oswalt, Frank just needs to swallow hard and pay some money.
by OB12 on Jun 21, 2010 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Full quote
* One of the Dodgers’ problems in pursuing right-hander Roy Halladay last winter was that their prospects, in the Blue Jays’ view, were not close enough to the majors.
The same issue could surface in the Lee sweepstakes; the Mariners want major-league or major-league ready hitters, and most of the Dodgers’ top prospects — outfielder Andrew Lambo, shortstop Dee Gordon, right-hander Chris Withrow — are still developing at Double A.
Lambo currently is serving a 50-game suspension for a second positive test for a drug of abuse, as opposed to a performance-enhancing drug.
Uh, I would say AA is close enough to the majors for teams to trade for. The problem this year wouldn’t be players not close enough to the majors, it would be teams deciding if the qualify of said prospects were good enough to trade for.
I think they mean close enough to the majors, as in ready to step in and play by 2011. None of those players listed will make an impact in the majors next season.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Except the Mariners need players for the next 4-5 years, not next year. That team needs talent in any way they can get. BTW, if what Rosenthal is inserting is true, how come the Blue Jays took Kyle Drabek (AA), Micheal Taylor (AAA) but traded for Brett Wallace (AAA) and still not called up yet and Travis d’Arnaud (low-A).
Wallace is the only one that is near major league ready but hasn’t been called up yet for a good Blue Jays team that could use another hitter if they wanted to.
It’s not that all of them have to be major league ready, but at least once, and Taylor/Wallace qualifies as one. No matter when they call up Wallace, it will still likely be at least a year sooner than they would/could have called up anyone traded to them by the Dodgers.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Okay, point. But I still think that if anyone is refusing say, Dee Gordon to trade for, its because they don’t think he’s good enough to play, not if he’s close enough. Talent is talent.
I think it plays a part, in terms of selling to the fanbase on some level. Hard to trade for guys 2 years away, leaving a perceived gap in competition, although as you said it’s not like Seattle is competing now anyway.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions
wouldn't it be possible to get a third team involved
I’ve heard the brewers mentioned in the past.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Moot point to me
I don’t think the Dodgers have any legit bats at any level. The organization has pitching up the wazoo but if a team is looking for impact hitters, we are not that organization.
They have Michael Saunders in LF which is basically Xavier Paul. Dee Gordon would be possible but Seattle does want to compete next year so that does not help them get there. No one is going to bite on Lambo right now. Seattle needs a power hitting 1st baseman or catcher or SS all ready to go and we have none of that.
What I would do if I was Seattle is trade Cliff Lee to the Rangers for Chris Davis, Scheppers. That is about what they should expect for a 1/2 season rental.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed. I don’t see how we match up well with Seattle. They are a team that is devoid of power and we don’t really have any prospects that we can confidently say will hit for power. We match up much better with Houston, who could use about anything. A couple of decent arms and a hitter like Van Slyke could probably get it done if we could take on some, not all, of his salary.
What we need is a 3rd partner who has that hitting
But needs pitching prospects.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
like i said
The Brewers. I heard Corey Hart’s name thrown around.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions
As I said to that
if we are going to get the Brewers involved with Cory Hart, I’d rather keep Corey Hart then moving him.
The Mariners have a solid outfield, it is infielders they need.
I don’t think the Dodgers have any legit bats at any level.
Anyone care to venture as to why this is? Too much focus on drafting stud HS pitchers? Too much focus on speed? Or bloodlines? Poor draft positions in the 1st round?
When was the last time we took a hitter in the first three rounds. DeWitt?
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Mattingley, our savior!
But Gordon and Russell in the 08 draft were the 3rd and 4th rounders for us. I would loved to have take a bat in the first round this year, but I guess it didn’t really matter who we took…
Anyway, I am all for going after more hitters in the next couple of drafts.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
Could be I'm simply wrong
When I say legit bats, I mean impact bats. I think we have players who will become major league hitters such as Gordon, Paul, Lambo, and Robinson but I don’t think anyone them will be wOBA guys of .330 or more.
Loney has to be above .330 wOBA lifetime or right around it, do you think any of our MiLB bats will be able to hit better then Loney?
I love this. Freaking Rosenthal.
DODGERS’ KEMP: BELOW AVERAGE IN CENTER
Remember back in late April when Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti said Matt Kemp was a below-average defender and base-runner?
Not only is Kemp performing below expectations offensively, but advanced defensive metrics also do not paint a pretty picture of his play in center field.
According to Ultimate Zone Rating, Kemp is the worst defensive center fielder in the majors. Even when you account for UZR’s flaws and the small sample, it’s startling that Kemp is 34.2 runs below average per 150 defensive games. The next worst center fielder according to UZR, the Braves’ Nate McLouth is 22.1 runs below average.
Kemp also fares poorly in the plus-minus ratings on Bill James Online, ranking 35th among all qualifying major-league center fielders.
He clearly notes that UZR has small sample size issues, than use UZR/150 as if rate stats progress steadily and predictive of the season.
He then uses +/- and notes that Kemp ranks 35th among all qualifying major-league center fielders but doesn’t mention to say how large the pool is, what the qualifying innings are, and how many of the players on the list are actual starters. Urgh.
When there are 30 teams in baseball, ranking 35th should give you a clear idea of where Kemp ranks.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions
Not really, if teams are using multiple center fielders in platoons and what not.
Part of what is supposed to make metrics useful are the large sample sizes for a player. You have to doubt a stat that rates would rate Darnell McDonald or Bill Hall in center field much higher than Matt Kemp despite playing a significant amount of less innings.
Again, qualified is not the same as starting center fielders. Not every team have multiple quality defenders for center field, so I have to assume that stats like +/- and UZR are still putting out a lot of statistical noise until the end of the season.
Plus/minus isn’t a rate stat; it’s a counting stat.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions
one that Kemp has rated poorly at in both 2009 and 2010, after being essentially average (minus 1) in 2008
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Not sure if it fluctuates
but I think it is 500 innings, at least by season’s end (Kemp had 478 innings in RF in 2008, but wasn’t “ranked”).
It’s hard to tell because the leaderboards only show the top ten at each position, and you have to dig player by player to fill in the rest.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Then I have an issue with that, as 500 innings is around 56 games. No way we can determine how good a player is with about 1/3 of the season if we’re using defensive metrics.
but just the general relativity of plus/minus works, because it compares the player to all the plays made by his position in total.
And Kemp has been below average and getting worse.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions
As much as it hurts to say about my favorite player, Kemp’s been a lousy hitter and a lousy fielder so far this year. We can talk about just how lousy he’s been and we can discuss the relative merits of using advanced stats halfway through the season, but that all misses the point, in my opinion…. it doesn’t matter whether Kemp has been the lousiest or second-lousiest or fourth-lousiest defensive CF. Does anyone suggest he’s been good or even average?
If the Dodgers are going to play in the postseason, Kemp has to improve.
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Jun 21, 2010 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, really. I’m more annoyed at the mis use of the metric by Rosenthal than by using Kemp. Kemp’s been bad defensively but he can’t just point to this season numbers and not analyze the data correctly and say “See, he has been bad!”
Agreed. But the reason we, on the Dodger board, are talking about it is that he used Kemp.
It’s like a high school math test where you’re instructed to show your work. Rosenthal’s the kid who got the right answer even though the supporting work is all wrong.
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Jun 21, 2010 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions
The season is almost 1/2 over
at what point can someone start using UZR without getting blasted over the SSS issue? Sept 30th? He threw out three different metrics and gets blasted. If he simply stated a subjective comment he’d get blasted. Seems like he’s not going to win no matter which way he toots this horn.
In the end he is simply saying what we have all been saying. Kemp sucks since April 17th. Ned was simply a head of the curve and no one is happy about Ned being right.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I forgot when I last looked up these numbers, but when I did (on Bill James Online), runners had taken an extra base on Kemp in an astonishing 26 of 30 opportunities (86.7%).
I looked again today, and now it is 35 extra bases in 46 opps (76.1%), which means it has been 9 for 16 (56.3%) since, a number more in line with his last few years:
2009: 55 bases / 114 opps (48.2%)
2008: 40 / 76 (52.6%) in CF, 22 / 54 (40.7%) in RF
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Ned was simply a head of the curve and no one is happy about Ned being right.
What did Ned see that led him to believe it would be a persistent problem? (I’m assuming he wouldn’t make that statement if he just saw Kemp make some bad plays but knew he would go back to being an exceptional fielder/baserunner).
Rosenthal is a dick
Who cares what he is saying ;)
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
It sucks that he is pretty much right about Kemp's suckitude right now
But he’s thrown out some of the worst trash I’ve read over the last few years. He seems to hate LA.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
Everyone seems to think everyone hates LA
why would the media hate Ned? he’s their old school kind of guy.
I know BP hates on the Dodgers since they fired Depo
but if the new school hates the Dodgers and the old school hates the Dodgers, then what would be the united reason for such disdain?
Fangraphs is the only outfit out there that I’d say actually hates the Dodgers. Rosenthal is just pointing out facts.
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I've noticed a pattern with Rosenthal
and he usually only looks at all the bad with this team, and never looks at any of the good.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
I think that’s true of any team that isn’t in the AL East though. Maybe the Phillies.
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions
I agree
Like I was saying before. When the Dodgers play well, the most anyone says about them is that “They’re probably playing over their head right now.”
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Well...
….I just put up a FanPost that argues that maybe, during the recent win streak, the Dodgers were doing just that.
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Jun 21, 2010 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions
That may be true, I've just noticed it more with Rosenthal and the Dodgers because I follow them MUCH more than all other teams
I just dislike him very bad.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
So why do all of you guys read Rosenthal? I can read baseball all day long on the internet and never come across his garbage.
I don't read him like I would on here
I just see articles and read them if they are Dodger related.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
I didn't say they hate Ned, just the team
Ned’s a tactical genius, it’s just not his fault Matt Kemp sucks, Billingsley can’t hold his composure in any game and just flat out blows, and Kershaw is too busy walking every batter he faces to get any outs.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
what really sucks
is that he’s so damn smug about it.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Maybe Ned should make a statement saying that Kemp is an above average defender and baserunner.
It worked like magic the last time he made a public statement.
I was thinking about a LF Ethier, CF Crawford, RF Kemp. But as far as “comfort level” who knows if the players/team would go for it.
by silverwidow on Jun 21, 2010 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions
No, but he as played there 900 innings in the past.
by silverwidow on Jun 21, 2010 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions
Not something I'd be betting my FA dollars on.
by meercatjohn on Jun 21, 2010 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions
That's my thinking too
I don’t sign FA’s and then have them switch positions.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions
How about signing Crawford to play RF, move Ethier to LF where he belongs
and assume / hope that Kemp improves in center since he has the speed and ability just not always the instincts for it? There, sold.
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
We like to look for left fielders for 2011
but given how bad Kemp is in CF, and how bad ASndre is in RF, we probably should once again be looking for a CF. Remember when everyone thought the White Sox were crazy for taking the chance on Alexis Rios? I sure wish we had been that crazy.
CF who might be available in 2011
BJ Upton ( Desmond Jenning) , Cameron Maybin (another part of the huge Miggy failure), Angel Pagan(Beltran Returning), or Beltran himself.
Not sure if everyone knows how solid Pagan has been in replacing Beltran both offensively and defensively.
Makes me laugh, may be SSS but when you are in last place by this much you have to wince.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=cf&stats=fld&lg=all&qual=y&type=1&season=2010&month=0
If this was to hold up over a full year Matt Kemp would have to hit like Willie Mays to make up for the difference. If this was Juan Pierre on this list we wouldn’t even be citing SSS we would simply have pitch forked him by now.
I really want BJ Upton. He would be awesome to have as a Dodger
His defense is extremely good, plus he’s shown he can have a great offensive season (2007 or 2008 I believe). He is only 26 years old and has tremendous value. I like the idea of trading for him.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
Also
Kemp>>>Pierre. There isn’t even a debate. Kemp is in the biggest funk of his career, but that tells us that he’s bound to regress to his norms pretty soon.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
I think the correct way to say that is progress to the norm. Someone correct me if that’s wrong because I’d like to know…
It’s mindblowing that this is Jansen’s first full year on the mound. Hard to comprehend how he’s this good, this soon.
Indeed
and with Sergio Santos doing good things in the White Sox bullpen with the same level of experience I would not be shocked to see Jansen a major part of the Dodger bullpen in 2011. Or 2010 in Sept. I don’t think we have had a bullpen arm like this since Broxton was doing his magic on the Jacksonville 2005 team when they moved him from the rotation to the bullpen.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=broxto001jon
I’d be fine with using him in a trade for a top of the line starter or big hitting 1b (though Phil will tell you we need a new CF than 1B, and right now he’d be correct), though he could very well be an impact arm in the BP by the end of the season. It’s a tough call, but RP aren’t as valuable as most other positions.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
Of course I’d trade him for Lee. Thing is, Seattle would view Jansen as a second or third piece, and he’s really a lot more talented than that.
As he should be, he definitely cannot headline a trade
But I’d much rather send Jansen as the 2nd piece than Webster, Eovaldi, or Miller.
"You're the only woman to ever love me." "I never loved you." "I meant physically!"
If I was a Mariners fan, I’d be pissed if we traded our one valuable asset for a package headlined by a AA reliever.
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t think anyone is suggesting Jansen will be a headliner in a trade.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions
If he’s more talented than a second or third piece, there’s not a lot of places to go.
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions
But…a relief pitcher with a freakish arm. But he’s so under-the-radar, fans wouldn’t accept someone like this, as you said.
Would you accept him as the haul for Lee?
Relievers are simply not that valuable.
by Michael White on Jun 21, 2010 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Remember when we are lashing out at Yankees fans suggesting
Robbie Cano for Matt Kemp?
I’m joking around but it’s important to remember that young players (most of them) fluctuate a lot within the season and even year to year. I expect Kemp to put things back on track this year.
Speaking of trades
I thought Toronto did great when they traded Rolen for Encarnacion, but man has that turned around the other way.
The Jays DFA’d Encarnacion today.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 1:38 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
.200/.298/.467
Why would you DFA the posterboy for Citoball?
by regfairfield on Jun 21, 2010 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions
I would certainly take a chance on him
given our future 3rd base options. What is another head case.
my favorite Encarnacion moment was in Cincinnati, when Jeff Brantley was just shitting on him, saying something like “I don’t care what the numbers say, he’s not a clutch player” when he was batting in the 9th inning.
Edwin then smacked a GW homer. :)
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I remember that
Brantley was one of those guys who talked liked he’d been the greatest pitcher ever.
what do you mean "was"? ;-)
Suffered through him recently, and he’s on MLBTV too
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
Huge attitude problems got in the way of questionable talent
I also remember when no one wanted Scott Rolen around here. Ha Ha
Rolen and Rios would be nice to have right around now and they came cheaper then cheap.
LOL
So we can say what a D4P when Humma puts up a post about how we were playing over our heads during the win streak?
I would call that fan post by Humma cautiously pessimistic.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 21, 2010 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions
I would, too.
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Jun 21, 2010 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions
if we're talking Royal's guys
MSTI was talking about Alex Gordon earlier.
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions
and what would that package be
MeercatNed?
by Tommy Blackjack on Jun 21, 2010 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think merrcat + ned would get it done
(hee)
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers/Lakers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants/Warriors country, and damned proud of it.
In ’02 with Boston, Rickey put up a .369 OBP.
I didn’t see any baseball in 2003 — I quit my job to bum around Europe — and I know that he didn’t look good with the Dodgers…. but I still can’t believe that there was no team that was willing to give him another shot in ’04. Maybe he just had a down season. .350 OBP off the bench could help a lot of teams.
And no one ever got rich by betting against Rickey Henderson.
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Jun 21, 2010 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions
An empty .350 from a corner outfielder who had no defensive value anymore
was not exactly going to help anyone in 2004. It was fun to see him play LF in 2003 but he was done.
Kershaw's K's
“Honorable mention goes to Clayton Kershaw, who was routinely great in his one start, striking out 10 in seven innings.”
7, not 10, in 7 and a third innings.
Oh man
I was looking at his previous start.
Thanks.
by Eric Stephen on Jun 22, 2010 10:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on True Blue LA
Related FanShots on True Blue LA
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- 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
