An NPUT already? I still need group therapy from the Laker game last night.

After Game 1, I warned everyone to stop watching the NBA Finals. And just like Yoda and Obi-Wan couldn't help Luke once he left Dagobah before completing his training, I can't help you now.

LAT'd from below (not that anyone necessarily wants to read this)-

Painful losses, by team -

Dodgers-
-Clark and Ozzie Smith (I treat them as one game)
-Reggie Jackson's thigh
-The Joe Morgan game
-can't pick out a single game, but the 91 stretch drive stunk

Lakers
-the game in the 84 finals where Worthy threw the ball away
-the Sampson shot in the first round (was that 86?)

Cal (this could get long)
beating Southern Miss by only 10 in 2004
1990 Big Game (though I contend this game didn't actually happen)
2004 USC
2006 USC
2006 Arizona
Pick a game from the second half of 07 (Oregon State ferinstance)
1994 NCAA tournament first round loss to Wisc-Green Bay
1994 hoops loss to OSU on the last day of the season to blow conference title
1991 or 2 hoops loss to USC at home, leading by 5 with less than 30 seconds to play
1993 hoops loss at home to WSU, leading by 20 in the second half

Special category, Cubs
2003 Bartman game - I'm not really much of a Cubs fan, but that one weighed on me, mostly because my dad was crushed.

Last night's Laker game was brutal to be sure, but my interest in the Lakers is so diminished from earlier in the decade, that it just didn't get to me emotionally.

I always used to wish the Dodgers would play the Tigers in the World Series just so I could see them play at Tiger Stadium. I do like the look of Comerica Park though, at least from afar in TV land.

Man, last night was depressing....

So what's all this Dodger trade talk about???

Would people here be OK if losing Kemp meant Gaining Bay?

I just want Torre to start the best lineup....he has cost the Dodgers more wins than any "manager" should.

2

A sage you were, mmmmm?

I think it's tough because it's the Celtics. I also don't understand the "I care less about them now than I used to" business. What changed about the Lakers that makes them less important now? It's still OUR team!

But really, the Lakers doubly exceeded our expectations this year. I just wouldn't be nearly as upset if, say, it was the Cavs or the Pistons on the verge of closing us out.

no, trading kemp would not be good. did all of these "rumors" just start from rosenthal? do we think that he got his idea from colletti and, if so, are we worried that he might do something crazy like trade the bison for jason bay?

No sympathy for Lakers fans from this Suns fan. At least your team GOES to the Finals.

6
You care a lot more passionately about things when you're younger for the most part. I cared last night, but I cared more in 1984.

But in 24 years, a lot of stuff happens. My metaphorical personal bridge has a Mississippi River's worth of water under it since then.

Your hydrology may vary.

3
The Sampson shot was Game 5 of the Western Conference Finals, the season before I started watching. I never got any retroactive anger from that shot -- even though it was amazing and ridiculous, and I can still see Michael Cooper laying on the floor with his arms folded above his forehead -- because the Rockets did win the series in 5 games.

You care a lot more passionately about things when you're younger for the most part

Especially things like sports.

7- I am very emotionally attached to the idea of the Bison staying a Dodger, but Bay is a fantastic player. I've just been hearing a ton of rumors...and I need something to distract from the Lakers fiasco.

I am much more open to a trade that involves player that are not prarie roaming bovine. That said, this team would do a lot better if ummmm Torre sat Pierre...nevermind.

What changed about the Lakers that makes them less important now?

I'm not sure you're actually looking for an answer to this, but here goes. The 2000 to 2002 run wherein the Lakers were winning championships without the slightest bit of joy or camaraderie was a huge turnoff. What's wrong with winning championships? Why such a overwhelming need to determine who's the alpha dog? (The answer of course, is that everyone wants to be like Mike.) I recognize that the current Lakers are a different group, but we are still less than 12 months removed from some serious drama with this team. Plus, while I've begun to appreciate the current Lakers as the season has worn on, I've still found it difficult to reintegrate watching NBA games into my routine. In short, I've found it fairly easy to live without.

If I was 10 years old, last night might have made me cry.

I guess I'm lucky that I didn't actually have to WATCH the Laker game.

12

i love matt kemp as much as the next guy, but i wouldn't be opposed to trading him for someone who is obviously better now and will be for the next few years. but its just disheartening to know he could have brought miguel cabrera and now we're talking about jason bay

16- MCab is sizing up to be a flop, while Bay is OPSing over 900....

10 Speaking of which, how ridiculous was Coop during the local postgame show last night? There's a not-so-fine line between analyst, former player, and fanboy.

18
Was he on KABC after the game? I am in San Diego, and I didn't really watch the postgame anyway.

17 "sizing up", eh?

Does anybody know if MLB2K8 or The Show have old stadiums you can play with?

dont we think its a little early to call a 25 year old with a career 141 ops+ a flop?

I was thinking about this a couple of weeks ago, and since we are in Detroit it's semi-relevant:

Who were the greatest pair of outfield teammates ever? I'm thinking a decade or so together, with each player holding his own (i.e. 140+ OPS+ from each guy, not just Ted Williams and anybody).

Tigers, 1916-1926
Ty Cobb: 161 OPS+ in 6147 PA
Harry Heilman: 149 OPS+ in 6424 PA

Yankees, 1939-1949
Joe DiMaggio: 165 OPS+ in 4563 PA
Charlie Keller: 153 OPS+ in 4465 PA

The Tiger duo gets points for quantity, although the difference in PA is pretty much due to WWII.

Some other notable teammates:

Pirates, 1962-1972
Roberto Clemente: 146 OPS+ in 6418 PA
Willie Stargell: 144 OPS+ in 5265 PA

Yankees, 1960-1966
Mickey Mantle: 178 OPS+ in 3400 PA
Roger Maris: 140 OPS+ in 3475 PA

Braves, 1962-1972
Henry Aaron: 162 OPS+ in 6374 PA
Rico Carty: 143 OPS+ in 3098 PA (missed 1968 & 1971)

Most painful loss and it wasn't even my team so to speak was the Angels losing to Boston in 1986.

My favorite player, Bobby Grich was a strike away from going to the World Series and in moments, it was gone.

The Angels were the first team to win the first 2 games in a best out of 5 Championship Series and then lose. When they won 3 out of 4, it was now a best out of 7, and they never won a game.

After that, sure the Lakers won 5 more times, the Dodgers had 1988 but I think that loss made me a little less invested in sports.

So while losses are annoying (all I said to myself last night was get to a 100, get to a 100), I realize that especially with the NBA, I really can't complain too much.

5 - Would people here be OK if losing Kemp meant Gaining Bay?

Um, no. Kemp is already as good as (if not better than) Bay, younger, and cheaper.

23 You might want to consider Cobb and Wahoo Sam Crawford (1905-1917).

Crawford tells a story of how he and Walter Johnson were friends so when a game was out of reach, the Senator's catcher would say to Crawford, "Walter likes you today" and he would lay a fastball down the middle for Sam to get a hit. This used to get Cobb all riled up because Johnson always wanted to get Cobb out.

Woah. I left the room momentarily after Romania scored, then came back to find that Italy had scored in the few minutes I was away.

14 - Funny, the only game I've ever cried after was when the UCLA men's basketball team lost to Idaho State in the 1977 West Region semifinals. I was 9 years old.

24 - and don't forget 1995. Biggest collapse by any team to hold a division lead on September 1 (7.5 game lead melted away). Despite all the noise made last year about the Mets' collapse, they only had a three-game lead on September 1, and that's historically fairly iffy. What made it really remarkable was they had the lead ramped up to seven games by September 12, and while I haven't researched, I would be willing to bet that is probably the worst late collapse in major league history with so few games to play with so large a lead.

26
Excellent call! Here are Cobb & Crawford together (removing 1905 & 1917 since there was limited playing time for one of them)

Tigers, 1906-1916
Ty Cobb: 185 OPS+ in 6430 PA
Sam Crawford: 147 OPS+ in 6907 PA

The worst loss for me was probably the Rams-Patriots Super Bowl. Course, I can now rest peacefully knowing the Patriots had to cheat to win.

21 MVP Baseball 2005 (best baseball game I've ever played) has some old stadiums. It's a shame EA lost their MLB license.

29
1964 Phillies were up 6.5 games with 12 to play.

2007 Mets were up 7 games with 17 to play.

29 - yup, the Metsies' collapse was historic: no team ever had lost so large a lead with so few games remaining:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/recap?gid=270930121

32 I agree. So good, we didn't even call it MVP Baseball 2005. We just called it "Manny."

24 - 1984 loss was much more brutal to me. I was in my early 20's and totally into the Lakers and the Magic era. Worthy's bad pass, and Magic's missteps with the clock at the end of Games 2 and 4 regulation without getting a shot off to win the game outright were tough to take. That team was jut a couple plays away from possible sweeping the series in 4 instead they lost in 7. Thankfully, they learned their lessons the next year. This year's team was a pleasant surprise after the off-season turmoil and despite the disappointment of this Finals series, this year has been a resounding success. Take heart Lakers fans, this team will learn from this adversity. "That which doesn't kill you makes you stronger." This year's team just may be a little too young and not battle tested enough yet and are getting schooled by the grittier Celtic players. I have loved the Lakers all my life like the Dodgers but it's time to give this Celtics team their due!

Just catching up here.

Yeah, yesterday was one of the more depressing sports days in recent memory for any LA fan. The Dodgers game wasn't super important but was a downer nonetheless, and then the Lakers game, for any Lakers fan, ended in stunningly awful fashion after such a great half+.

I like this Lakers team more than other Lakers teams in recent years so it hits a little harder. But I do think this won't be the last time they make it to the finals in the next few years. And hey, it's not over yet! (Sigh)

Luckily the Dodgers have a day game in Cincinnati next Thursday, so there will be no conflict with Game 7 of the Finals.

The Princeton loss was tough. I really liked that group of players (Charles O, Toby Bailey, JR Henderson, etc). I can't remember who the seniors were on that team though, so the bulk of them probably came back the next year. Still losing in the 1st round while defending the title was bad.

I included the word "nonetheless" for Eric S.

--

Nice analysis on Penny, Tom, and Eric. Interesting stuff.

I think it should be passed on to their staff.

Otherwise... So whom can we trade him for?

Your American League OPS leaders:

#1. Milton Bradley- .333/.454/.629
#2. JD Drew- .324/.430/.562

Thanks Ned.

37 - The fact that they shape up to be so much better next year is reassuring, and takes the edge off this loss. They came so far this year, that making it to the Finals was really unexpected (despite their #1 seed).

Next year, with Bynum back (right?), a full season of Odom and Gasol together, and the continued development of the young players like Farmar and Ariza, they'll be the class of the league.

41
Which GM acquired those guys in the first place...?

41 hahahahhaha. Today, that is adding insult to injury.

41 You mean, thanks JD, for screwing us over and bailing.

So Italy vs. Romania talk forbidden?

46
What, you've got no partisan grandparents involved...?

I'd be very surprised if Odom/Gasol/Bynum/Kobe/Fisher start together.

Gasol/Bynum are too similar. They both are centers, with Gasol having a tiny bit more range.

If you put Odom/Gasol/Bynum on the floor---it's going to be a tough matchup defensively. Odom'll have a tough time guarding 3's, and Gasol wont be able to guard the perimeter oriented power forwards.

I think Bynum/Gasol split time. But having that big of lineup on the floor I'd be very susprised. Not too mention, there isnt much outside shooting there.

45--How'd Drew screw the Dodgers? He wanted another 5yr deal and got the Red Sox to acquire him.

Ned could have made an offer after Drew opted out. He could have gave him 5 years.

Instead, those 5 years went to Juan Pierre.

Drew made the right career move because the Red Sox organization values his skills much more than the Dodgers.

Other painful losses:

1978 World Series
Nettles glove in Game 3
Reggie's hip/thigh in Game 4 turned the series around.

USC v. Texas National Championship game Reggie Bush's ill advised pitch in the open field in the first half when SC had the momentum really hurt. 4th and 2 run by White - no Bush in the backfield as a decoy-big mistake. I hurt for my friend who was involved in a bitter custody battle with his ex-wife who grew up in Austin, Texas. She was forcing my friend into bankruptcy because my friend wanted to be a good father and a part of his son's life, so that game meant everything to him-a Symbolic victory if SC would have won.

1974 NCAA Semifinal hoops - UCLA loses in Double OT to NC State breaking 7 year winning streak. My first experience with UCLA basketball losing a chance at a title since I started following sports.

1972 Olympic Men Basketball Final - The Biggest Fix there ever was in any team sporting event!! Enough said. I was eleven or twelve and I was livid for weeks. That started in earnest my distrust and hate for referees.

47
The other grandparents are English and Irish and not involved in Euro 2008.

48 I'm sure Bynum/Gasol will play at least 5 minutes a game together, but yeah, they'll probably split most of the time and Phil will probably make sure at least one of them is in the game at all times.

48
Next year's Bynum integration will certainly be interesting. I think it could work, but Odom might be the new 6th man. Bynum will primarily be in the low post, and Gasol can man the high post. Put Vujacic as the SG (Kobe at SF), and I still think the offense can function at a high level.

It doesn't get any worse for me than 1966 Dodgers and 1969 Lakers.

48 - You don't think Odom can handle the 3? Other 3's in the league are Josh Howard, Ron Artest, Kirilenko, Carmelo. Odom can stay with those guys as well as anyone else on the team. I think he creates matchup problems against a lot of those guys.

And they can always go small against the quick teams like Golden State, and put Odom at the 4.

49 Probably no need to rehash that whole scenario for everyone, but Drew was in the 2nd year of a five year deal. The fact that there was an opt-out clause in that contract after two years gave Drew the option, sure, but it was a) dumb to have that 2 year opt out in the contract in the first place and b) still very surprising to everyone on the Dodgers that he chose to bail after two. So the idea that they should have offered him a 5 year deal during the 2nd year of a five year contract seems ridiculous to me. I also though Colletti did offer him something but that it was so out of the blue and last minute and they were so p'o'd at him they let him go. So in that respect, yes, they probably should've done more to keep him, but I don't think it would've mattered from everything I've heard about Drew and that situation.

Seriously, I don't really want to defend Colletti but in that situation to not at least be able to look at Drew critically at all in it seems really blind to me.

I felt bad for Sasha at the end of the game last night when Ray Allen went by him. Sasha had played really well this series up to that point.

54
You mean 1966 was worse than 1962?

Not being around for either, but 1962 was a good team choking and choking hard and 1966 was a good, but flawed, team running out of gas at the end.

56
The thing I didn't like about the Drew affair was the complaining by Colletti. There's no way he shouldn't have been prepared for Drew opting out, regardless of what J.D. may have said during the season or up to that point.

59
Yeah. Ned acted like Drew broke a promise or something and Ned got his feewings hurt.

I used to root for the Lakers in those epic Lakers/Celtics matchups of the 80s, but I think Kobe Bryant is a slimy individual (and lousy teammate), so I find myself cheering on the Celtics this time around.

agree with Eric. It's on the GM to cover the bases, put some new language in a new deal during the year, and not just take a guy's word halfway through the season. Basically Colletti hoped Drew would stay, assumed it, and didn't plan any other way.

haha, and this coming from a guy who worked in PR? Didn't see a spin coming.

56-It wasnt dumb. It was perfect because the Dodgers got a very good player at 2yrs/22mils. It would have been fine if he opts out, bc it likely meant he played really well. If he didnt opt out, then at least you still got him for a reasonable contract.

They'd still have an option to resigning him even if he opted out.

And when did Ned offer him anything? I do recall reading in the papers Ned being angry, but you'd think a GM would know that if there's an option that a player may opt out, he should have another contract offer waiting on the table if he does. I dont think there was one.

If you dont want to give JD Drew a 5yr deal. Ok, I buy that. But that logic flys out the window when in the same off-season, you sign Juan Pierre to 5 yrs.

59 I think that's true, too. Colletti came off as a little hurt and naiive as a result of that. My point is more that it shouldn't be overlooked that JD Drew isn't exactly heroic for how he bailed.

I'm not sure it was a bad decision to let him leave. He'll be earning $15M for his ages 33-35 seasons, and has proven to be pretty brittle. He's having an excellent season this year, but so is Aaron Rowand. Who wants Rowand for the next 4 years? And Drew had a poor year last year.

All in all, I don't blame him for opting out, but I also am happy that Ned didn't break the bank for him.

And, of course, the real crime was the knee-jerk Pierre signing. But I don't think that decision should be used as justification for signing Drew to his desired extension.

http://tinyurl.com/3wfyhg
is the official story on that Drew opt-out. Basically proves everything everyone has just said, in some way or another. :-)

Yeah, it sounds like they didn't offer him anything. "If he doesn't want to be here..." etc.

Part of that is Boras' negotiation strategy, something the Dodgers probably didn't want to be a player in. I still feel like, ultimately, Drew was gone, but yeah, they should've still negotiated with him, sucked it up a bit. You can never let emotions get in the way of being a GM.

65 - Heroic, no. But well within his rights, and Colletti's pouting and posturing afterwards seemed like an attempt to distract from the fact that he dropped the ball. Was it Drew's job to report his plans/feelings to the front office, or should a proactive front office (headed by a Great Communicator) stay in touch with a very productive player who holds an opt-out clause in the coming offseason?

Colletti screwed up and blamed it on Drew and Boras, two guys with questionable-to-lousy reputations within the game. All too easy.

58 I remember 1966 just barely and it was painful at my house. My grandmother, God bless her, decided that the O's wore eye black simply because they were evil.

He'll be earning $15M for his ages 33-35 seasons, and has proven to be pretty brittle.

But he really hasnt.
He hasnt been on the DL (other than a broken wrist in 2005), since 2003.

I'd rather pay a good player, and hope he stays healthy---rather than pay a bad player that plays everyday.

70 - Not in terms of DL time, but I remembered his power disappearing similar to Shawn Green. It seemed like his body was breaking down on him.

We'd all like to have JD Drew's 2008 production, but lets not forget that he pretty much stunk the joint up last year. Post season heroics notwithstanding.

Colletti screwed up and blamed it on

Some things never change.

J.D. Drew stinking up the joint > a "hot" Juan Pierre.

I agree with most of what was said about the Drew affair, but I find it almost criminal that the clause existed in the first place.

J.D. Drew 2007 OPS+: 105

Drew didn't suck last year. He got on base well, but he didn't have any power.

Which is better than not getting on base and not having power, if you know what I mean.

1986 Angels, 1978 Dodgers and 1984 Lakers are the tough ones for me. Everything else pales in comparison. That loss last night was tough, and I took it harder than I thought I would, but there weren't memorable plays where the Lakers just choked. They got slowly squeezed and outplayed. I really don't like the Celtics and their style of play, but the Lakers haven't adjusted well.

I find it almost criminal that the clause existed in the first place

Drew presumably wouldn't have signed without the clause. The choice wasn't "sign Drew with clause or sign Drew without clause," but rather "sign Drew with clause or don't sign Drew at all".

Keep in mind: Drew's agent is Boras.

76 which is better than any 2008 Dodger OF at the moment.

The headline on the Dodgers.com Fathers Day story cracked me up for some reason:

"Dad Built Backyard Cage For Loney"

Isn't that illegal?

75 - The cost of getting Drew to come and play for your team. At the time, I figured if he:

- opted-out, it means they got two great years from Drew (which they kinda did, broken wrist aside)
- remains, a 3/$33M contract for a player of Drew's caliber is pretty sweet.

81 - Did he at least feed him, throw him some meat or something?

If only we could have known at the time that the other cost of the opt-out clause was paying for 5 years of Juan Pierre.

81 - Any father would've done the same thing. That kid's got crazy eyes, I tells ya.

80 - But signing Drew to a 5/$75M contract and signing Pierre to his deal are two separate decisions. I don't penalize Ned for passing on JD, but give him -1000 marks for signing Pierre.

Shane Victorino would be a pretty good option for CF right now too. That's a bigger mistake than letting Drew walk, IMO.

Did he at least feed him, throw him some meat or something?

Did his younger brother at least pour one glass of water a day through the hole in the floor?

Matt Kemp is ONLY 23 years old & has not even entered his prime years, I'd keep him if I were the Dodgers, plus I'm not to inamored (sp?) with Bays swing...

Did you see this note on MLBTraderumors?

>>According to MLB.com's Scott Merkin, the White Sox will release Esteban Loaiza prior to today's game.

It was a short-lived experiment; only three innings. The Sun-Times may have the reasoning behind it in today's article. Joe Cowley says Loaiza hadn't been working out or throwing before the Sox signed him, which may be one of the reasons he can barely crack 80 mph.<<

87 Having childhood flashbacks, too, are we?

89 - Previous thread.

J.D. Drew, Milton Bradley, Shane Victorino, and Jayson Werth are a nice set of outfielders.

Just another Rule 8 Violation morning at DT.

92 - You know who would've made a heck of an outfielder?

Hee Seop Choi.

91 - Yah, never mind, just scanned and saw Ken's post about it. Well, it was too exciting not to post twice.

In other news, I'm going to try to get David Beckham to sub for my Sunday co-ed team, since he's in town for the weekend. Think I have a shot?

94 - Do you have $250M pro-rated to one game handy?

92 Maybe in 15 or 20 years, the Dodgers can do an "old-timers" game and play that outfield together.

95 No but we have a Starbuck's gift card!

But I have special sway; you see, I used to be one of the Spice Girls. Little known fact...

The worst thing about revisiting our recent, Colletti-ized past is dreading what he will do between now and the trading deadline to save his job. Because unless the LADs start winning, or else he is shackled already, he will trade some part of the future for the wrong guy in hopes of catching the Snakes.

Frankly, had JD Drew had the same season for the Dodgers he had last year with the Red Sox, some might have gotten their wish because Ned would have been roasted by the media for giving Drew an extension.

I don't remember Underdog Spice.

98 Here's my usual, when he does it, let me know but until he does it, it is just not worth getting riled up about something he has not done in 3 and half years.

41 To be fair, I don't blame Colletti for either of those player's being elsewhere.

I'm not an Angels fan, but I imagine 1986 must have been excruciating.

Four straight gut-wrenching Dodger seasons from 1995-98, followed by the UCLA-Miami debacle, is what almost made me give up on following sports altogether. I stuck with it, but after days like yesterday, I really question whether I made the right call.

92 At least we still have Repko!

101 Yeah I'm in the same boat. No point being all doom and gloom just yet.

98 The worst part about the Dodgers play this year has been the current play of the D-backs. Had the D-backs stayed hot and the Dodgers were say 10-15 games out now, we wouldn't have to worry about that.

Of course fans prefer to watch their team make a run at the playoffs, despite what their record may be. Even if it is below .500

Sports today! What fun!

58 Sorry for the delay. I don't count 1962 because I wasn't following the team. I had more important concerns at 6 years old. Like why do I have to go to school?

102 - I think any Dodger GM would've been under orders to get rid of Bradley, so I think you're right in that regard.

108 And we did get Ethier.

Yeah, I don't know why people keep bringing up Bradley. We all know he can be incredibly productive, that is never in question. We also know that this is only when he's not a) imploding emotionally or (more likely b) injured. When he's both, it's even more fun. we'd all like several months of Bradley's OPS, but I can't imagine many former teams miss him all that much either.

If the rangers are smart they'll trade him - for pitching - soon when his value is at its highest and while he's un-injured.

105
I actually am looking forward to the trade deadline. I think that Kershaw, Martin, Brox, and Loney are safe, but I would welcome a bit of change.

I love the Bison, but if we could package him or Ethier for someone like Magglio Ordonez, it might be fun to have a run producer again.

Not sure that I would have said that early this year before the season started, but I get mad enough watching the Dodgers get shut out or sacrifice-fly our way to a single run that I am ready to see an entertaining team on the field.

This team just seems dead. No life, no vigor (save for Russ), no runs. I end up watching reruns of Good Eats on my DVR and switching back and forth from the game.

At least LSU is playing on Sunday and will put up some runs...

110 - Maybe they can send him to Cincy for Edinson Volquez.

101 105 OK, I always worry this time of year. Goes back to Piazza at least. But when I read all these comments about 'underachieving' and 'entitled' young players from "club officials," yes, I can't help but wonder if what we're seeing is the laying of groundwork.

110
After Daniels and Washington held him back from beating the snot out of that announcer, he went back down to the locker room and CRIED according to an ESPN report that I read.

Talk about unstable...

111 There's a Maza joke somewhere there, but I'm not going to make it.

103 - it didn't help that Mike Port was the Angels' GM at the time; Port had a habit of calling out underperforming players in the press, which no doubt contributed to Donnie Moore's suicide. Moore was pitching with a busted shoulder and a bad back at the time he gave up that home run. Bill Stoneman's and Tony Reagins' silence is really the best thing you can do in those cases.

112 Hah hah. That would be awesome, for them. Beautifully full-circle, but, yeah...unlikely.

111 - Maybe the Dodgers can trade for LSU.

I don't blame Colletti for trading Bradley. Bradley is insane and is already with his 3rd team after the Dodgers traded him. It will be like winning the lottery if he goes the rest of the year without landing on the DL.

113 But why don't the terms underacheiving, entitlement, along with injury-prone apply to the veterans?

And if it should, why isn't that used as reason for not acquiring more of them?

I love the Bison, but if we could package him or Ethier for someone like Magglio Ordonez, it might be fun to have a run producer again.

Maggs is 34!

For me, last night's loss pales in comparison to Ozzie and Clark in '85.

I'm 37 and still really care about the Lakers so last night SHOULD bug me more than it does. I honestly believe that the Celtics' particular talents make for such dreadfully boring basketball that I'm actually only tuning in half-heartedly. If they would have lost to the Jazz in exciting games I would be much more depressed plus I would have had to listen to all the Jazz fans around me. At any rate it's baseball season so basketball only means so much.

120 Maggs is 34!

Are you implying you wouldn't want to trade a player who is a couple of years away from his prime for a player who is on the wrong side of his prime and should start to decline?

Well, why?

120 But that Sampson mane makes him younger, stronger, indestructible!

jeez. I'm going to assume the last/most recent comment on Tony Jackson's blog was written very tongue in cheek. Otherwise it's depressing. It's kind of depressing even if it is facetious.

Maybe Ned will surprise us all and ship Pierre out at the deadline. Cincy could stick him in center, and shift Bruce to a corner spot.

By the way, I was thinking more about Rule 8 and I decided the standard boils down to when your comment makes me sick of you or the topic.

In other words, I know Rule 8 when I feel it. I think the Supreme Court would understand.

(No comments on the Supreme Court, please.)

125 That's been my dream for awhile. And from what little murmurings we've heard it does sound like the Dodgers were trying to trade Pierre at the beginning of the season. What killed that was Jones' awfulness. And then Furcal's injury. Now it all seems less likely. Though I personally still think they should try.

Keith Law thinks the Giants might have a top five farm system after signings happen:

http://tinyurl.com/6fc3c4

And we thought they were dead . . .

I don't see how one draft could bump a team up from the lower half to the top five, but they did appear to have a good draft. But outside of that draft, I still see only a few top notch prospects and others that have talent but question marks (and I'm not even sold on Madison Baumgarner). But Law would know better than I...

129

Bumgarner is proving me wrong as he is doing excellent right now in the midwest league. Giants are also signing really expensive international FAs.

My two gripes about the Drew saga are these:

1) It's one thing to give Boras the opt-out clause, but to also give Drew the ability to opt out without the Dodgers being able to get compensatory draft picks, well, that's just poor negotiating by the Dodgers and great negotiating by Boras. As a result, even though the Dodgers knew Drew was out the door to Boston, they got no draft-pick compensation. Had Depo not conceded on this point, I believe the Dodgers would have gained a second-round pick and a sandwich pick. Instead they got nothing.

2) Colletti's boorish response to Drew's departure revealed: 1) Colletti hadn't been doing his due diligence and anticipating that a talented, if fragile Boras client could seek a more lucrative deal elsewhere; 2) Colletti publicly attacked Drew's spirituality. This is not how a GM should conduct business.

128 - With the exception of Posey and the Mueller-clone they got in the 2nd round, the bulk of their prospects are a long ways off.

Even Angel Villalona, the crown jewel of the system, isn't 18 until August.

My two gripes about the Drew saga are these:

1) It's one thing to give Boras the opt-out clause, but to also give Drew the ability to opt out without the Dodgers being able to get compensatory draft picks, well, that's just poor negotiating by the Dodgers and great negotiating by Boras. As a result, even though the Dodgers knew Drew was out the door to Boston, they got no draft-pick compensation. Had Depo not conceded on this point, I believe the Dodgers would have gained a second-round pick and a sandwich pick. Instead they got nothing.

2) Colletti's boorish response to Drew's departure revealed: 1) Colletti hadn't been doing his due diligence and anticipating that a talented, if fragile Boras client could seek a more lucrative deal elsewhere; 2) Colletti publicly attacked Drew's spirituality. This is not how a GM should conduct business.

sorry about repeat.

131 - but to also give Drew the ability to opt out without the Dodgers being able to get compensatory draft picks

Was that a negotiated point, or is it that just how opt-outs work? It doesn't really make sense that they could offer him arbitration after he opts out of a contract.

135
It was negotiated into the contract. Under normal circumstances, the Dodgers could have offered Drew arbitration.

130 True. I still have my doubts about him though. We'll see. How are the Dodgers doing on the international front these days - do you know? I'd hate to lose ground to the Giants in that arena, one the Dodgers have always excelled at.

135 - That's really odd then. What leverage did Boras gain by winning that point? The only affect it would have is any team competing for his services after the opt-out might have to give up a pick or two. It doesn't directly impact the player at all.

101 Not to dwell on it, but are you kidding? Colletti was only hired two and a half years ago, he clearly made several deals of that nature in his first season, and he made one in 2007 (Denker for Sweeney). Maybe your comment is just splitting hairs on what "the future" means, but if so I feel those hairs should be left intact.

On a happier note, we leave two weeks from today for my wife's conference in Anaheim. Hard to believe that I've been rooting for the Dodgers most of my life but will see my first games in DS that Saturday and Sunday against the Angels. I have a feeling that the overall record won't matter so much to me that weekend.

On CNN, they just cut from an Army Reservist urging Iowa citizens to stay out of the water to a news anchor standing pointlessly in the water while filing her report.

140
Don't forget to stop at L.A.'s lone Civil War historical site.

It should keep you busy for about 5 minutes.

http://www.drumbarracks.org/

It's not all that from Anaheim.

Drew was only a Type B free agent?

138 It impacts the player for exactly the reason you state -- any team signing Drew would have to give up the picks. That might deter them from signing Drew. That's the whole reason compensatory picks exist in the first place -- as a restraint on the ability of wealthy teams to hoard the best players without paying some sort of penalty, and also to slightly stack the deck in favor of a free agent re-signing with his current team.

One of the reasons the Jones signing was such a great idea (and yes, it was a great idea) was the fact that the Braves didn't offer him arbitration, so the Dodgers didn't sacrifice any drat picks.

142 I actually looked it up after you mentioned it last spring. Who knows?

Oh, and the reason why Boras negotiated the 'Dodgers cannot offer arbitration' clause into Drew's contract is that teams will pay less for a free agent if it costs them picks. Again, I've never understood the furor against the initial contract. Boras basically wanted Drew to be able to get a clean free agent slate if his first two years went well, and DePodesta rightly saw that two years of Drew without opportunity to recoup anything after that was something worth having at the same time that he was willing to get the whole five years at $55mm. It is silly to say that it's a clause that hurt the Dodgers. Of course it was if you're not willing to consider that Drew's price would have gone up by several millions without it. The only argument against the deal is an opportunity cost argument that Drew could have been successfully signed on better terms. I look at the money the Tigers gave Magglio Ordonez, who was certainly not a better bet than Drew at the time, and I'm pretty convinced that giving in to the opt-out demands to get Drew was quite reasonable.

143 - Well, bravo to Mr Boras then. To even think to include that is quite impressive.

144
Make sure you know how to get to it before you go looking for it. It's not in the greatest part of town.

Farewell, Charlie Jones

http://www.insidesocal.com/tomhoffarth/archives/2008/06/charlie-jones.html

More:

http://tinyurl.com/47spos

"Drew originally asked then Dodgers GM Paul DePodesta for a no-trade clause prior to 2005, and he sought them again this month before opting out of his contract with the Dodgers, suggesting that he couldn't have been all that unhappy in Los Angeles after all. 'J.D. has the ability now to get a no-trade clause,' Boras said. 'That's something Paul wouldn't do (two years ago). Because he wouldn't, I got the opt-out option in the contract. Paul felt he wanted flexibility. I felt I'll take the flexibility, too.' Boras said clubs are offering five years for Drew. The Red Sox, Padres, Orioles and Indians are believed to be interested."

I think most will agree that giving Drew full no-trade would have a) been a bad move for a 5-year deal and b) been harped on excesssively by DePodesta's critics (the extra s is for excess). If the choice is between having no ability to move a 5-year deal and losing any right to control years 3-5, my take is that DePodesta clearly made the right choice, but your mileage may vary.

RIP, Tim Russert.

150 - OMG!

145 - I can't look back at the Drew story without mentioning that I correctly called the outcome. I'm not 100% happy with what Drew did for the Dodgers, but I think the Dodgers got out of it about what they would have hoped for: one partially useful year and a very good year. Without Drew's 2006, the Dodgers aren't in the postseason that year. They got there on one of the best free agency contracts anybody has written in recent memory.

Drew's hitting .324/.430/.562 this year, but I'm betting that won't last, as his BABIP is an earthshattering .365, leading the team and second in the AL after Milton Bradley (to whom, hullo!). He'll come back down to earth, I guarantee it.

152
(Balloons drop from ceiling)

120
It was just a suggestion, but it is one that has merit. Kent, Garciaparra, Furcal, and Lowe are all going away this offseason and the team will spend the money somewhere. Someone will be flipped for pieces this offseason because the FA pool is just not deep enough to fill our needs, and that $40 mil we have coming off the payroll will be reinvested somewhere.

If/when a deal is made, my point is simply that I want the team to be watchable again. I personally am just more attached to LaRoche/Kershaw/Bills/Brox than Kemp.

Shocking news, very sad.

I was really looking forward to his coverage this fall as he's my favorite on-air political analyst.

That's just really sad, especially considering the timing of it all.

124 I hope it was fake, but man, I haven't laughed so hard at work in a long time...

153 - thank you, Bob. Where do I go to collect my door prize? :-)

143 "so the Dodgers didn't sacrifice any drat picks."

Er, make that draft picks.

A drat pick must be somebody like Bill Bene or Erik Sonberg. Fortunately we haven't had any of those for a while.

98 Do you think Colletti would avoid making youth for PVL type deadline deals if the McCourts extended his contract?

My feeling is:

a) This Dodger team will not win a championship. If we trade anybody at the deadline, it should be Brad Penny or Derek Lowe for prospects.

b) The reason this Dodger team will not win is not that it isn't good or talented. It's that it is inexperienced, combined with the loss of Furcal, and the decline of Penny, Kent and (sadly) Saito leaving too many holes to fill even with deadline deals.

c) Everyone needs to be patient. We have more than a nucleus of great talent, with a few more good prospects still on the way. It might not click in 2009, although it's more likely than 2008, but we are set up for a great second decade of this century.

d) Colletti has been patient, but his contract status gives him a huge incentive to abandon that strategy in a futile and destructive rampage, like a dying elephant. Thus the problem is squarely on McCourt to resolve by either firing Colletti now, or extending his contract with the proviso that he expects Colletti to deliver a winner by 2010.

e) Then we can all relax, and watch this team cook itself into greatness. We can dismiss games like yesterday's as trivial setbacks on a long, historic journey.

f) The Dodgers owe Jeff Kent and Derek Lowe nothing. They are stuck on a team that's rebuilding, not a contender. They might go off into retirement without any more World Series appearances. Deal with it cheerfully or get lost. Kent, you're going to the HOF in a Giants uniform. Lowe, you've still got a couple good years left, and if you are reasonable about this, you might get re-signed to share in the coming glory.

It's all on McCourt. This next six weeks is his biggest test as an owner. Is he a big-picture, long-view guy? I think maybe he is. If not, then he can go on the Wall of Idiots along with everyone else in Dodger ownership and management since 1989.

150
I was hoping it was a different person. And that is why 12 is so true.

I turned off the Laker game last night and then did some gardening. 20 years ago I would have put my fist through a wall. 40 years ago I would have cried like a baby. This will be the toughest lost in their lifetime for the current generation of Laker fans.

(For those unfamiliar with the Erik Sonberg reference, here's a Peter Gammons excerpt...)
--------------

He set up another stack of folders as two more pitchers went at 15 and 16. Erik Sonberg.

When the Dodgers selected Sonberg with the 18th pick, Kasko took the folder on top of his pile, opened and scanned it, paused, then leaned forward to the speaker phone.

"Boston selects Roger Clemens, right-handed pitcher, University of Texas."

160 - agree wholeheartedly, especially with the last graf.

150 - Goodness. Wow.

Thus the problem is squarely on McCourt to resolve by either firing Colletti now, or extending his contract with the proviso that he expects Colletti to deliver a winner by 2010

Or by simply vetoing any myopic trades that Ned proposes.

160
Definitely agree, but I tend to be impatient and games last night send me over the edge. I don't mind losing, but losing badly and scoring no runs for a month takes me to an impatient place.

You really have a problem with trading a single infielder A with about a zero chance of being more then a utility infielder for a solid pinch hitter. Sweeny may not have worked out but if you can't trade your 40th top prospect for a major league baseball player when can you do it?

Denker was only promoted due to desperation not because he did anything to earn it.

I'm really tired of people bringing up an AL DH as a reason for Ned's incompetence. We have so many more examples to choose from, trading Milton Bradley is not one of them.

150 - Stunned.

That Russert news is indeed sad and shocking. Purty darned young, really.

Does anyone remember his cameo as himself in an episode of Homicide? (He was supposedly the cousin of one of the characters, I think.) Oddly, I just re-watched that one not that long ago...

The Dutch are in top form. Wow, just an amazing display.

165 Things I'd love to know and never will--did that "front office conflict" last year involve just such restrictions. And what will adding Torre to the mix mean?

169 As someone who doesn't watch TV news, the Homicide appearance is actually mostly what I remember Russert for.

167 - I'm inclined to agree with you. And at the time I didn't think Denker was much of a prospect, and frankly I still don't think he's going to be anything great. The Dodgers needed to strengthen their bench. Sweeney was productive last year. He's been awful this year and looks like he's done. But at the time I thought there was nothing wrong with that move specifically, and if it wasn't the Giants, who think anyone who is more productive at the plate than Brian Bocock looks fab, I wouldn't expect would be seeing a lot of Denker this season.

That doesn't change the fact that Colletti doesn't seem able to make trades in reverse, where he acquires young players in exchange for older players, which is a concern for me overall. But there are times where the farm system needs to be used in trade to acquire someone who fills a need. (It's just that some of those need-fillers haven't been worth any prospect.)

170 Clockwork Orange! I'm watching some of that too. (Love work-at-home Fridays.) Most impressive run so far.

I always liked Tim Russert. This is so sad.

For some reason, I've always thought Russert and braodcaster Rory Markas sound alike. I can't hear one without thinking of the other.

160 "d) Colletti has been patient, but his contract status gives him a huge incentive to abandon that strategy in a futile and destructive rampage, like a dying elephant. Thus the problem is squarely on McCourt to resolve by either firing Colletti now, or extending his contract with the proviso that he expects Colletti to deliver a winner by 2010."

This is a really important point. Given a choice between two courses of action, one of which is better for the team in the long run, and the other which is likelier to preserve his job, a GM will always choose the latter.

Tim Russert died of a coronary embolism. Which is not something most people ever get twice in their life.

I would much rather Frank fire Ned, then give him an extension. I'll take my chance with the devil I don't know, instead of the Devil I do know.

Yah, 160 was perfectly said. Kudos.

The dying elephant analogy is spot-on, and a bit scary. I hope someone puts the poor critter out of his misery, or gives him a new lease on life that extends it with less pressure to do something stupid. The first hope is probably the better one for the team, though like someone else said in different words yesterday, I also fear that the elephant will be replaced by an even more incompetent dinosaur.

Hey, that "other guy" in the Gillette commercial is good!

But it was short-lived for Les Bleu

We follow elections pretty closely in my line of work. Election coverage will definitely be missing something this year.

What a football match.

173 I don't think the Sweeney trade will turn out to be a disaster or anything, but it was completely unnecessary. It was another example of a mistake that was made because the team doesn't trust young players to do anything more important than taking out the garbage. If you need a pinch hitter that badly, call up Delwyn Young or Andy LaRoche.

167 Denker was a 21-year-old second baseman and his hitting was top 5 in the california league for players 21 and under. He had been a superb hitter in each season prior. He hadn't moved through the Dodgers' organization that quickly, but he also wasn't showing that he would be incapable of doing so in the near future. I'm not basing my assessment on his rapid promotion or Sweeney's awful play as a Dodger. I'm basing it on the move not being worthwhile at all. Colletti traded for Sweeney to replace Delwyn Young on the roster. Trading a perfectly viable prospect for nothing more than PVL, and that is not a charge I throw around as easily as others. Sweeney was not a better hitter than Young at that point and Young is also a switch hitter. It couldn't have been for depth at first base since Nomar and Loney were both still playing at that point, and even when Garciaparra was injured a few days later Sweeney only logged 12 innings at first base over the course of the season. Just a nonsensical move, and I'm quite surprised that you're defending it (I like your work a lot).

180
I went to make a sandwich and came back to see that I had missed 2 goals.

150 For many reasons, I am stunned too.

Since February 2005, Baseball America has published 4 Dodger Top Ten Prospect lists, there have been 22 different players on that list. Also Dionner Navarro and Andre Ethier appeared on their parent team's list at the time of their deals to the Dodgers.

Of those 24 players, 4 have been dealt (2 are not eligible to be traded until later this summer). Those four are Edwin Jackson (2005), Chuck Tiffany (2005), Joel Guzman (2005-2006), and Dionner Navarro.

Other prospects that have been on the Dodgers Top 30 prospects as published by Baseball America since 2005 include Willy Aybar, Julio Pimentel, Blake Johnson, Sergio Pedroza, Justin Ruggiano, Travis Denker and Juan Rivera.

I write this not to judge whether or not that Ned has made good deals or bad deals but only to say that he has not dealt the farm away.

BTW, of the other 20, 9 are on the Dodgers, 1 is on the DL, and 10 are spread out in the minors.

The day after tomorrow is Father's Day. Tim Russert's two books are Big Russ and Me: Father and Son: Lessons of Life and Wisdom of Our Fathers: Lessons and Letters from Daughters and Sons . I hope he was able to impart enough wisdom to his son who just graduated from college. Too young - turned 58 last month - and very sad indeed.

183 They didn't have to call up Young - he is who they sent down! I don't remember whether LaRoche was playing at that particular point since I think he missed some time in August.

180 Lol, that comment was classic.

185 D4P has been pretty unlucky today.

I've seen every goal live!

Was it a good sandwich?

184 Would Travis Denker been protected on the 40-man roster, apparently not since he was going to have to be after the 2007 season. Now, maybe no one takes him on Rule V draft but that we will never know.

I think this was a deal where you have to look at the whole organization not just Ned Colletti and examine whether or not they liked Denker's skill set.

This is my problem with some of the criticism Ned's gets, sure he is the top guy but he is basing his decisions on what others in the organization tell him (and some of those others are people that people want to be GM of the Dodgers)

So while he ultimately makes the decision, to solely throw this on him is not right.

191
Nothing to write home about, but (apparently) worth writing about on the internet.

That would have been pretty Ruud.

It's good xeifrank doesn't know Dutch. The Dutch surname often have mutliple spelllings.

Like van Nistelrooy or van Nistelrooij

And the French are toast.

192 Even if Denker was hated with a passion by Dodger insiders, swapping him for Sweeney was a bad move. Fine, Colletti may not deserve all of the blame, not that you have any evidence. But the idea that Denker was some sort of non-prospect is absurd. And the idea that Sweeney improved or should have been expected to improve the 2007 Dodgers in any tangible way is absurd as well.

And to ward off the potential uproar, I'll clarify that technically it was Houlton who was sent down after the Sweeney trade, and then Young was sent down when Nomar was injured a few days later so that Hillenbrand (sigh) could be called up; when Nomar was subsequently sent to the DL, Hull was brought up, so the net effect was Shea for Nomar, Hull for Houlton, Sweeney for Young.

196 So pour syrup on them and dust them with powdered sugar?

If Croatia makes the final, I'm wearing the checkerboard jersey to work.

198 Yep, maybe stuff em with a lil mascarpone, too.

I was going to say that if we ever end up missing Denker, I'd eat my hat, but then I remembered Luis Maza is our utility guy.

150-

:(

!!!! No!

199 You're Croatian too?

197 That is my point, all we have is conjecture but often it gets thrust upon Ned when and especially I think when the team is dealing lower level players like Denker, it has to come from others within the organization who have seen him play more than the few times Ned tours the minor leagues.

I'll come up with a recipe for Croatian toast involving peaches and send it to Bob for lunch if Croatia makes the final.

The anti-Denker sentiment is just so thoroughly puzzling I don't know what to say. He was clearly, by his statistical record, a decent prospect. Maybe "prospect" only refers to future stars now or something, but I see someone with around a 40% or so chance of being an average to moderately above average regular 2B. I don't know why you would want to give that up.

And in what world could Sweeney reasonably have been expected to be more valuable to the Dodgers than just the $50,000 they would get from Denker being taken in the Rule 5 draft (if that's what you're afraid of)? Certainly not one where the Dodgers were paying his salary AND sent cash to the Giants.

178 - I would much rather Frank fire Ned, then give him an extension. I'll take my chance with the devil I don't know, instead of the Devil I do know.

For that to happen, it would seem to have to be done in reverse.

206 It is weird how quickly people gave up on Denker. He was a fairly highly rated prospect, had an admiteddly terrible 200 PA in high A, but then bounced back fine on his second try. That 200 PA caused people to give up really quickly on a guy that was a bit young for his level, and for some reason he never got his value back.

203
I guess you didn't read the long Mother's Day post I had on the Griddle about my grandmother.

Did you read in the LAT today that Furcal has a bulging disk? This season is shot, and Ned is going to do something stupid. I just know it....

206 You made some good points above, but "anti-Denker sentiment" seems a bit of an exaggeration. As I said, I'm never a fan of trading prospects for older players especially when it is Colletti involved, but besides the fact that you can't hold on to everyone, while, yes, Denker was a "prospect" as you define it, he wasn't a top prospect. I don't think it was just Colletti but their scouts who found him expendable. They also saw a need for an experienced pinch hitter after Olmedo Saenz was clearly toast. I feel like we're mixing in a lot of different things into one argument here.

But I love Delwyn Young of course so anything that gets in his way I'm not entirely in favor of. So you have me there. At least Pee Wee is with the club this season and despite our worries earlier doesn't appear to be going anywhere.

197
Thanks for the compliment, I think I was reading your blog before I ever read DT and was bummed when you stopped writing.

I think your are being a little to lenient by stating Denkers 5 professional seasons were superb. I was a big fan of his power and plate discipline early in his professional career but when he couldn't carry that to the next level I lost some of my initial interest. I know Nate and I were quite high on him at one time. Last summer I started writing a story comparing Denker and DeWitt with DeWitt being the number one draft pick and Denker being the pick nobody cared about and how their minor league careers were progressing at the same level as they flip flopped postions. By the time I was ready to publish it, they traded him another story got shelved.

Yes, going into the pennant race last season I'd rather have Sweeney then D Young in that situation. We aren't talking some Justin Upton talent whose skills could carry him over, we are talking about a guy who had to hit every ladder on the way up and sometimes consolidate his skills at the same level for more then a year. I would have had little faith that he was ready for a major league pennant race in LA with Jeff Kent analyzing his every move. I'm not saying I would have made the deal, but I also don't think it is a deal that should go on the wrong side of Ned's ledger. I have much more faith then Andrew that PeeWee will be a productive Major Leaguer but I also feel that the pressure that Jeff Kent is excerting on these youngsters to provide him with a ring is not healthy for their development.

Wow, rewatching the last few minutes of that game... the French defense looked about like the Lakers defense late in the game last night.

There was sentiment either way about Travis Denker? I guess I'm not sentimental.

Denker was always a guy who the stat guys loved and the scouts disliked, particularly since they didn't think he could stick at second base. It didn't help that it took him three tries to conquer High A ball.

But whether you think Denker was worth anything or not, the larger point is: Neither was Sweeney. There is no reason to make that trade. You don't trade a guy who might be worth something and might not for a guy who you already know isn't worth anything. It was not only a waste of Denker, but a failure to recognize that far better major league players than Sweeney were already in the organization.

Speaking of Mark Sweeney... I pray he does not DH for us tonight. Otherwise we may have another day full of venting about the line-up, and this time I will be a part of it.

Does this also mean that when Juan Rivera hits a HR for Kansas City three years from now we'll revisit this same conversation?

195. You better not pop up to me at the DT softball game is all I can say! :)
vr, Xei

214 How soon you forget my infatuations, Bob. How soon you forget.

214
When you added Maza to your top 5 current list, it proved without a doubt that you are sentimental.

If Furcal is indeed done, then at least Nomar will not be blocked:)

218
It was "V. Nistelrooy" today. But my nephew has a t-shirt with "van Nistelrooij" on it.

Because I bought it for him.

I, for one, think it's very cool that we're having Travis Denker Thoughts. I would bet that he would be amazed.

I just did the dishes with my laptop showing the US Open on the counter next to me.

Thanks to Daniel for technology.

219
I can't keep track of such things unless I use Microsoft Obelisk.

Will the Dodgers become the first team ever to employ three different Rookies of the Year as their regular shortstop, all in the same season?

BTW: Chris Berman is a terrible golf announcer.

If Mark Sweeney starts at DH tonight, Vin Scully will start off his talk at the Nokia Theater with a string of expletives.

226
You didn't need to qualify that statement with "golf."

226 contains an extraneous word: "golf."

Ten seconds. Sheesh.

223 - They're playing the U.S. Open on the counter next to you? Holy cow... Daniel invented the shrink ray!

214
Why are we saying that the 2007 version of Mark Sweeney was not worth anything? For years the Tomato had been our goto guy for pinch hitting. In 2007 he couldn't do it and it was hurting the team. We traded for a pinch hitter, when I think back at the great pinch hitters in baseball rarely do I see one who did it coming out of AAA. These were all guys who didn't make it for whatever reason as a regular and then became a successful pinch hitter several years into their major league career. Lynch, Burgess, Mota, Hansen, Harris, Sharperson, and the Tomato.

I also think it's cool that your laptop does dishes. Another hat tip to Daniel.

226 - I wonder if he'd try to find a way to throw in a "Back, Back, Back". I don't even know how that would work. Berman will find a way!

10 second yes--but it shows great minds think alike.

203 Nice to see someone else on here represent the checkerboard. Did you grandmother live in San Pedro when she moved out here?

I had thought about putting "golf" in parentheses, but thought I'd tee one up for someone else instead.

Got lineup?

236
Nope. St. Louis.

https://griddle.baseballtoaster.com/archives/981907.html

BTW: Chris Berman is a terrible . . . announcer.

239 Mother I meant.

224 I much prefer iObelisk. Less buggy.

232 First of all, you and I probably differ on whether pinch hitting is actually a skill. My view is that anyone who can hit can also pinch hit, and that the special ability to hit coming off the bench does not exist.

Second, your examples are mostly not valid. Lenny Harris, for instance, batted .400 as a pinch hitter when he was a rookie. Dave Hansen batted .313 as a pinch hitter when he was a rookie. The notion that it takes a veteran to pinch hit is as false as it gets.

223 On the behalf of Computer Science faculty around the world, you're welcome.

241
The answer is St. Louis for both. They came out to L.A. in 1960 as part of a package deal.

232 That's kind of what i was trying to get at earlier (before I realized I didn't care that much anymore). Sweeney v.08 is obsolete and should be upgraded; but Sweeney v07 did contribute.

But I think 243 is true, too. (But that doesn't erase that Sweeney was a good pinch hitter.) But that's a good point. It is clear to me that DY is a good pinch hitter. On the other hand...

argh, I don't care anymore! Bring on the line-up Joe so we have something else to argue about.

Wow I was really late on the Berman thump. The DT Widget just kills my work computer.

233 Next up, a cell phone that feeds pills to your cat. I want to form a company that replicates Bob's strengths. Surely this is a path to success.

245 I'm just curious if you crossed paths with my dad or another one of my relatives since my dad lived out in San Pedro until the early 70's and most of my dad's side still lives out there to this day.

250
Nope, I come from Midwestern transplants and I've spent my whole life living in a Valley with "San" in the title.

I never even set foot in San Pedro until I was 30.

Jay Jaffe at BP:
"Fool Rushes In Without Fearing Where Angel Treads: The Dodgers are just 13-21 since Rafael Furcal went on the DL, and in the face of his latest setback and a dearth of other options--unless you count Chin-Lung Hu, Luis Maza, and about 10,000 other professional ballplayers--the Ned Colletti regime reaches a new low by trading precious organic matter for the undead Angel Berroa. Since winning 2003 AL Rookie of the Year honors, Berroa has hit just .255/.292/.364 while fielding at a clip 55 runs below average, showing so much promise that the Royals chose to have him spend his age-29 season in Triple-A so that they could avoid another 100-loss season. Stupid Flanders may not be done wreaking havoc, as there's word via the grapevine that he's considering trading Matt Kemp again."

For the record, I have nothing against San Pedro. I just never had been there.

I liked it when I was there.

Just one of those things.

BP uses "Flanders". There is something I didn't know!
No line-up yet?

249 - Make sure it also places random crank calls to Frank Robinson, and you've got something.

Tiger starts out Bogey, Par, Bogey, Eagle.

207 178 - I would much rather Frank fire Ned, then give him an extension. I'll take my chance with the devil I don't know, instead of the Devil I do know.

For that to happen, it would seem to have to be done in reverse.

I suspect this is just a case of Toycannon using then when he really means than, which he does often. :-)

I've seen the lineup....

I'm out of here.

252 Hah hah! Flanders... yeah, I wonder if he reads Dodger Thoughts? Not that it's the most clever thing in the world.

I do kind of like "the undead Berroa." I wonder if Zombie Flanders would win vs. Zombie Berroa?

(Homer: "He was a zombie?")

As much as I enjoyed that from Jaffe, and as much as I loathe to bring up the Berroa debate again, the fact that they did trade organic matter for him but little more still makes me think he's making too big a deal out of it. What other options are out there, is the question? (And maybe there are other options, but I don't see what they are.) Ivan DeJesus, I guess.

Lineup posted. Sweeney at DH. Dodgers lose.

259 I'm sure there's some random no hit 27 year old in AAA with a solid glove.

260 - Isn't it, Dodgers play, Dodgers lose lately?

How can you have a designated HITTER who is batting .125 with three RBIs? Can someone, just once, please make the right decision for this frackin' team?

Things Sweeney should not be designated for:

Hitting

Things Sweeney should be designated for:

Assignment

BTW: Where are people seeing the lineup? I didn't see it in any of the usual places...

Sweeney at DH represents the difference between a boneheaded error, and just a vexing one.

Sweeney? Seriously?

I'm starting to think Jim Tracy is wearing a Joe Torre costume, much like those bad guys from Scooby Doo.

Sweeney will now tie Jayson Werth, Kenny Lofton, Marquis Grissom, Jim Eisenreich, and Mike Edwards on the Dodgers all-time list for games played as a DH with 2.

Olmedo Saenz is the leader with 20.

If you're gonna talk about the lineup, you really should post it for the rest of us.

Teases.

Pierre 8
Young 7
Ethier 9
Kent 4
Martin 2
Loney 3
LaRoche 5
Sweeney DH
Berroa 6

Lowe 1

256
He started on hole 10 today.

265
I think you should re-watch "The Sixth Sense" to get an idea of what's happening.

Sigh. I give up.

The best game to follow right now is soccer. It's a beautiful game. And I don't have much of a rooting interest in anyone so it's not that painful. It's the Lord's Game! No DH or anything.

264
Very nice.

For the record, Esteban Loiaza was not released today. He was put on the DL.

272 - Should we also watch The Happening to get an idea of a sixth sense?

Yay, Andy. I guess if you figure they want to give DeWitt the night off, Sweeney is the best option with a four man bench. I'd rather see him than Maza or Ardoin there.

276
It's your funeral, pal.

Here's one sad stab at a positive side: Either Sweeney surprises us and does well; or he flails about pathetically and is soon released. (I choose not to consider the third possibility.)

Never should a DH bat 8th, that alone proves he's not that great of a hitter. The sad thing is that even if Kemp weren't suspended, Sweeney would still probably be the DH and still batting 8th.

This is late but, as I recall, the (perceived) need for Sweeney was created (at least partially) by DFAing Marlon Anderson a couple weeks earlier. Management thrashing of this nature (e.g., DFA Hull to make room for Angel Chavez for three days) is what I find irritating.

267
I'm starting to think Jim Tracy is wearing a Joe Torre costume, much like those bad guys from Scooby Doo

Do you realize how perfect that analogy is??? Torre thus gets to utter the phrase, "I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you pesky kids "

Actually, Sweeney is DHing by default. Kemp is suspended and DeWitt has the day off.

Sweeney = Stinky

NPUT

273. My lack of rooting interest in any European team makes the Euro one of the easiest major sporting events to watch.

Galarraga's a righty though. Why can't DeWitt and LaRoche both play? I guess that would cause the world to cave in and all to turn to dust.

Of course, I WILL say that with Kemp done with his suspension tomorrow, that will give the team better options, too.

282 Haha, I didn't even realize that. It is perfect, isn't it?

And here's a Scooby villain that might fit the description of Tracy in Torre gear:

http://tinyurl.com/5ogxu9

277 I agree. I wasn't expecting DeWitt to get his much-needed day off until Sunday vs. Nate Robertson.

DeWitt has to get a day off today? If he plays today, Kemp is back tomorrow and we could have avoided this Sweeney catastrophe.

290 And DeWitt could take a day off tomorrow.

You have these choices since you are down to 12 position players (Kemp is still serving his suspension).

Backup catcher, backup middle infielder, DeWitt or Sweeney.

Okay use DeWitt then, but one he is only available backup at 3B and also, he has played basically everyday so a total day off is not a bad thing.

What I both like and hate about the current situation is that it is very clear. Several times recently in the national media and at least once from the mouth of an NL manger, the Dodgers are credited with having perhaps the best core of young talent in baseball. It is mentioned as a mixed blessing because it may take a while to "ripen". This means that three things are important.
1) how they play-- this is usually considered a function of the coaching staff.
2)How they are played--this means what players receive what playing time--and is layed at the feet of "the Manager".
3) how they are supplemented from without---this is the job of the GM.

Now this is good because on the national stage there won't be much chance for for laying blame on some of the usual suspects: inexperienced players, lack of chemistry, etc. As a matter of fact due to the expansion of new media there are only a handful of perk saturated writers who can't tell the truth without losing their "franchise"

On the other hand it could lead a few of the people responsible into desperate actions to try and obfuscate realities here.
And the reality is with Furc seriously wounded, and no contrabutions from the "suppliments", we may have to wait until next year.

Ditto on 265 -- where are people seeing this?