Given his experience, if Kent thinks it's a myth, then he should have the ability to keep it to himself knowing that Vinny is wrong. Kent might be right substantively, but it's ultimately useless to take a shot at Vinny at this point.

1 - gotta agree with you on that. Kent's been around long enough to have known to keep quiet about this one.

But why should he. He's not going to be here in two months and he felt he was being disrespected. What's the consequence of speaking up?

I am glad Kent said what he said. It makes me think Kent might be a good manager, actually. It is rare to see a baseball player (or coach, manager, GM, announcer, analyst, etc. ...) actually understand the game - or at least understand the cause and effect aspect of it. Vin was wrong (as he often is on matter not relating to the number 2 or so-and-so's 12th cousin) and was propagating an accepted "truth" of baseball. He was then backed up by that idiot from New York we have deciding who bats where. It's nice to see someone in baseball call them on it.

The real question to me is why Vin's comment annoys Kent so much. If he didn't like Loney's "unprofessional" untucked jersey, Manny must be driving him up the wall--and Manny is immune to trash cans.

Jon, I have agreed with you since I came across this blog butttttt, kent is completely wrong here. Manny has given him much better pitch selection that he would not have experienced with Martin, Loney or anyone else in the lineup. Vinney is getting up in age but he knows his baseball and he is right on in this scenario.

4 P.S. - don't take me wrong about Vin. I think of announcers mostly the same way i think of Managers - the best you can hope for is that they do no harm, and Vin generally does no harm, stays quite and has some nice poetry to add to the background of the game. Like most announcers, however, when he actually starts analyzing the game, he gets it wrong. I'd still rather have him over any other announcer (well, I preferred Harry, but he is long passed).

6 Can you back that statement up?

I thought the point was not whether Jeff is right or wrong, but whether it Vinny deserved to get called out for it. He's a TV announcer and the stats support that Jeff is hitting better since Manny is here. He didn't say Jeff was not capable of this streak. Jeff just didn't want to get associated with Manny getting any credit for his hot streak. Whatever it was, to me there is no defending Jeff. He may be right about what he is trying to point out, but to lash out at Vin not visiting the players, etc. is, at the very least, boneheaded.

97 (last thread) ...and Jimmy Van Heusen. They won an Emmy for "Love and Marriage" in 1956. That song was written for a TV musical adaptation of the play "Our Town" that included Paul Newman, Eva Marie Saint and Frank Sinatra. (OK, I looked that up, but I did remember something about an Emmy.)

Apparently that Emmy was recently up for auction:
http://tinyurl.com/65b53o

6 Nope. you are just seeing the effects of an SSS. The historical data on "protection" is overwhelmingly clear that "protection" is largely a myth (the exception seemed to be Bonds - though focused on only one hitter, it is hard to know if that was a real effect). I'll search out and link to the SABRE article that best studies this if you are really interested.

(8) What do you mean? Manny or Loney? What do I need to back up? I think it's pretty obvious who the pitcher is going after don't you? So you think you know more baseball than Vin Scully?

9 - Kent's style is old news - hence the title of my post. Vin's stature is safe enough to survive Kent's impolitic words.

At this point, I'm more interested in the substance. Kent is often wrong, but since no one was defending him on this point, I thought I would.

By most accounts, Kent is actually quite personable at official appearances and the like. He just never got the lesson from Crash Davis about how to handle the press.

12 Studies have shown that lineup protection - being boosted by having a strong hitter behind you - is mostly a myth. That doesn't mean there aren't exceptions in the short or even long term, but certainly there's more than enough evidence to question whether Ramirez is really having the kind of effect Scully and others suggest, much less the only effect.

3 , 4 When did Vin disrespect Kent? All he did was reported things as they were. Since hitting in front of Manny, Kent is hitting better. Is that an insult to Kent? It is the truth. Show me where Vin points out that Kent is a bad hitter or that he would not have hit without Manny (which he wasn't). All he said is that Kent is hitting .500 with Manny behind him. Fact. End of story. That is the truth. That means Vin Scully talks too much? Or it diminished his entire career? Or my favorite, "How does Vin Scully know me? How does Vin Scully know Derek Lowe?"

There is such a thing as speaking your mind and attacking somebody who you know won't retaliate.

I really need to update my game parser to get pitch fx data, that would be useful.

12 - It raises the same question that Kent himself asked - essentially, how do you explain Ramirez having a .420 batting average if lineup protection is that important?

9 Good call Zak.

4
Jeff Kent isn't disagreeing with Vinny over some fact about a baseball myth, he simply doesn't want to see anyone get credit for his own success. This is the same guy who'd rather see a lousy veteran then a good rookie and could recite every baseball cliche ever uttered.

15 - Hey ... wait a minute ...

13 When this topic first arose, I thought a commenter here suggested that Kent could have made a reference to the studies that show (or at least attempt to show) that protection is a myth.

6 You comment too much.

seriously "You ____ too much" may be my new favorite dimwitted insult/comeback.

I almost got hit by a taxi on my bike on my way to work today. Instead of the rule violation, I should have just said "You drive too much."

23 *rule one

4 What? Kent's point was that just because Kent's batting in front of Manny, it doesn't make him a better player. Which is right I guess. What does make him a better player is the amount of pitches in the strike zone he is seeing from both men who are on base(Kemp and Ethier) and the batters behind him, guys with high average who don't strike out much.(Manny, Loney, Martin.)

Kent doesn't walk much before and after Manny came to the Dodgers this year, but the difference is that the type of pitches Kent is seeing is different. Kent's always been a free swinger and he'll swing at pitches outside of the strike zone if he saw a good pitch. Only now that Manny's hitting behind him, Kent's seeing more pitches in the strike zone to help avoid walking Kent so they don't face a Manny with men on bases.

Or taking it from another perspective. We know teams will walk guys, intentionally, or intentionally like Manny or Bonds. Couldn't the opposite be true that teams are less likely to intentionally walk a guy in front of Manny in fear of facing a premier hitter with little room for error?

16 - "that he would not have hit without Manny"

Vin in no way suggested that Kemp is a "bad" hitter, but I think it's been pretty clear that Vin believes that Manny has had a direct effect on Kent's batting average.

18 Jon, it just stands to reason, if the next hitter is a HOF and one of the top 5 in the game, you are going to be more careful about walking the batter.

15 Yeah, but in this case, what Vin said was true. Kent was hitting better since Manny arrived. Now Kent may be correct that Manny hitting behind him is unrelated to his hot streak, but how is Vin mentioning this grounds for lashing out at Vin?

20 Yeah. You are probably right on the motivation.

I think this is all about nothing, if you read the column, you see that Kent is making a point that in his career and certainly in a season, he will have hot and cold streaks and it could be for a lot of reasons.

The fact that for the last 10-12 games he is batting ahead of Manny may or may not mean that much, you also have to factor in that in Matt and Andre and also had a good August so far so that may also play into it.

Kent is not taking shots at Scully, it was Simers who brought it up and he's doing it to get a reaction.

When Vin is stating the stats showing how Jeff Kent is doing batting ahead of Manny, he is stating facts, when he is saying he is doing well because of Manny, he is stating his opinion.

I think both of them have a right to say what they did and certainly I wouldn't expect Scully to dignify Kent's opinion of what Vin says on the air.

28 That is a very generous approach. Vin was not merely stating facts. He did not just say "The sky is blue since Manny arrived." The very obvious implication of saying "X happened since Manny arrived" is that X was causally relating to Manny's arrival.

27 Lots of people smarter than me have tried to prove that protection exists, and they haven't found any real benefit to it. I'm willing to trust those people.

18 Isn't the question not what Manny can produce, but what Kent can produce with or without "Manny's" help?

I mean, the whole assumption here is that Manny's always going to be the type of hitter that he is. Its almost an distraction to argue what kind of protection Manny's getting. Manny is Manny's protection, its Manny's ability to hit the ball and his strike zone that protects him to an extent.

Manny, not surprisingly, has the highest batting average in Dodger history (minimum 72 PA), at .424.

Babe Herman's .393 in 1930 (in 699 PA) will be hard to beat.

http://www.bb-ref.com/pi/shareit/Kg3f

Clearly the Kent comment was payback for the night Vinny took Kent to task for seeing 5 pitches in 4 ab's.

27 Lots of things that are completely wrong "stand to reason." We don't have to guess or assume about these things. One of the nice things about baseball is 200 years of very detailed statistics. The entire history of baseball proves that what you say "stands to reason" is wrong.

I don't have stats to back up Vin's statement but who has stats to prove it's a myth? It is to complicated to prove. It's to logical for me to be more carefull about walking Kent with Manny next then with Loney or Martin.

27 - You didn't address my question in 18 at all.

In the meantime, here's another one. Martin got bumped out of the No. 3 spot because he was chasing bad pitches. Why was he even getting any bad pitches? Because they still worried about pitching to him, even with Manny on deck.

37 Then couldn't you argue that James Loney provides better protection than David Ortiz since Manny is hitting so well in LA?

33
I mean, the whole assumption here is that Manny's always going to be the type of hitter that he is

That's Kent's argument about himself.

30 - I agree with you, and like I said, I was perfectly prepared to ignore all this, until it seemed like the debate was getting too one-sided.

25 Sure, it could be true, but, again, 200 years of statistics says is isn't.

Also, Manny is really really good with the bat. But he is not Bonds. He is not really that close to Bonds. No one is. (and mind you, I do not like Bonds, the person, but there was simply no denying that for four years he was better - by a large margin - than anyone is now, including Manny).

31 OK, for one thing, X did happen since Manny arrived. Would you expect Vin to ignore that? He is commenting on it as he should. It's like saying Broxton has a 4.00 ERA as a closer, but a 2.00 ERA as a set up man. It's just facts and that's what his job is.. to tell us that. The implication is on you or Jeff to derive... you could say Broxton is not a good closer or you could say it's unrelated. Either way, you can't say that Vin should not mention this because he is implying causation. Kent did hit better since Manny is hitting behind him and Vinny should mention it. It's up to the listener to say, hey, protection matters or it doesn't. It certainly is not up to the listener to say, I don't believe protection matters so Vinny should not bring up my stats with Manny hitting behind me.

37, see 36. It's an empirical statement, easily tested with real data. Many have run the tests, and, as Paul says, it may sound completely reasonable, but it's false.

Actually I think Kent just got healthy and the bad luck he was having turned. Unless I'm mistaken most of these hits have been blistered but they have been singles with a double or two thrown in. The only home run I remember was a cripple pitch.

Or maybe it is not a typical hot/cold streak but a guy who is in his last year and figured he was playing out the string until Manny showed and realized that maybe just maybe he could make one more run at it. I mean he was the clean up hitter, and he must have know he stunk and they no chance for the post season. Then they add one of the best hitters in baseball and it changes the whole complexion of the team and the current future. Probably means nothing, just throwing it out there.

37 I agree with you on this one, while rate stats will not be affected too much, run production (which is representative of a player's team value) certainly has to have a positive correlation with the skill level of the hitter behind you.

44. He was joking, timm.

43 - Do you really believe that Vinny has not implied causation? And mind you, it doesn't bother me at all that he does. But more than once over the past week, I've remarked to the TV, "I'm not so sure about that, Vin," when he's talked about Kent.

My TV wonders why I'm talking to it, but that's another story.

37 It is actually not that complicated.

46 Actually I think Kent just got healthy and the bad luck he was having turned.

I don't know about is health, but I'm sure the 2nd part is right. For a couple weeks, it seemed like Kent was tattooing the ball, right into fielders' gloves. Those balls have started to drop. Now Loney's the one hitting into bad luck.

We can find if this is true if Torre moves Kent in the lineup. Kent can start leading off in one game, in the 2nd spot in the next game, 3rd, 4th, and so on until he's batting after the pitcher in the 9 spot. It'll be fun, and Kent might punch somebody in the process. We all win!

50 good to hear. Please post your stats.

This answers the opposite question (what happens when a good hitter is unprotected) but it's related.

The Book Says: If a pitcher is trying to avoid pitching to a hitter, the hitter is significantly more likely to draw a walk, and moderately more likely to strike out. Specifically, a good, unprotected hitter in a good intentional walk situation is about 25% more likely to walk than the same hitter in a bad intentional walk situation, as well as about 10% more likely to strike out. Even an average hitter, with an average hitter on deck, is 20% more likely to draw the walk if the situation is a common one for intentional walks, and about 5% more likely to strike out. However, if the ball is hit into play, the pitcher's approach (pitching to him, versus pitching around him) has no significant effect on the hitter's statistics.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/pitching-around-batters

Regardless of Kent's hitting, why is Kent insulted by Vin's comments? What a strange thing to be insulted about. Add it to the list of strange things that bother Jeff Kent.

And what does Vin "knowing" Kent have to do with anything? Okay, so Vinnie doesn't visit the clubhouse. As surprising as that is to me, they must all ride the same plane on NL West road trips, right? It's not like he's never met him. But so what anyway.

37 But isn't it just as logical that a pitcher sees Manny on-deck and does everything he can to get Kent out? Jeff Kent still does know how to hit a grooved fastball and I doubt a pitcher wants to throw him one intentionally.

In fact, studies have found that having a good hitter behind you actually hurts you, since the pitcher is trying harder to get you out.

Using MLB play-by-play data from 1984–1992, we are able to control for many factors, including the quality of the on-deck hitter, that influence the probability that a player reaches base. We find that the quality of the on-deck hitter negatively impacts the preceding hitter, which is consistent with pitchers using extra effort to minimize the damage of the batter who follows. This finding contradicts traditional baseball thinking that a good on-deck hitter protects the hitter who precedes him in the batting order. Though we find that a spillover does exist, its magnitude is very small. It takes a very large difference in the quality of the on-deck hitter to have only a minor impact on the current batter.

http://danagonistes.blogspot.com/2007/03/protectionism-and-its-effects.html

Whether Kent is making the correct argument or not, he should be more respectful of Scully.

Kent would be all over any of the kids if they questioned him in the press.

But he goes and does it to Scully, who's been in this game longer than Kent has been alive.

Scully is due that same PVL respect that Kent loves to hold over the kids' heads.

57- It's just as logical if Juan Pierre is on deck for the pitcher to do everything he can to get the batter out.

54 - violated rule seven.

I've deleted two comments in the past 10 minutes. I'm headed into a meeting, and I need to know you guys are going to keep things pleasant. This is certainly not a debate worth getting riled up over. Thanks.

I heard a great line on what Michael Phelps what do next, he will return to his old job as Mayor of Atlantis.

37 My point exactly. If Manny's on deck, does he not have if I walk Kent then I have to pitch to Manny in the back of his mind?

Baseball doesn't believe in baseball. ITS OBLITERATES IT! JOIN DARKMANE AND OUR CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE X GAMES, AND THE D'BACKS.

Also, lost in the discussion is the implication that Kent things he's doing better is because of the play of Matt Kemp too.

What's the methodology of these studies that prove line up protection is a myth? Does some one have stats from a parallel universe where McGwire didn't hit in front of Cansesco, or Ruth in front of Gerhig?

I have a very hard time accepting the notion that line up construction is meaningless. It makes no sense. You put Manny in the lead off spot and the pitcher hitting second, you're going to see fewer runs scored.

A hitter is affected both by the players in front of him in the line up and the players behind him. Kent is, it seems, seeing more fast balls (likely up) because he's got Ethier and Kemp in front of him (who both seem to have the ability to get on base an awful lot) and who are capable of stealing bases (at least Kemp). He's also seeing better pitches because pitchers are trying to get him out (or force double plays) so that runners are not on when Manny comes up.

Now, let's be clear, all of this still requires a hitter to actually execute and hit the ball in a particular at bat (which may or may not happen). It's simply not something, at least in my mind, that can be quantified by statistical analysis.

I think Berroa is the difference in Kents success.

49 Jon, I'm not saying whether he has implied causation or not. I think he has. And I am not even saying that he is correct in implying this. The point is that this is his job. He cannot ignore what has happened. He has commented about Kent's hitting since Manny is hitting behind him. He has to. It would be negligent if he didn't say anything. Do you agree with that? Because otherwise we disagree on what I am trying to say. However, I don't believe that whether he is right or wrong in his implications, a. Kent should react this way. and b. he really does not have a way to frame these stats without making them sound as they do.

I don't buy protection as a concept. Good hitters in a lineup will product more runs. That's all there is to it. Kent just got hot at the right time and Martin went cold at the same time. But as a commentator, you will comment that Martin did not fare well in the 3 spot and Kent did. I just don't see the comments as an insult to Kent's body of work.

I think a good inquiry would be the likelihood of a hitter seeing a fastball in the strike zone while ahead in the count with a "great hitter" on deck.

If you'll forgive the professor hat for a sec, I'll give you a non-sports example.

We've known for a long time, in every country that's been studied, that voter turnout increases in close elections. The question is why. The usual answer is that potential voters think that the probability that their vote will matter is higher, the closer the election is expected to be. Mathematically, that's true, but in any decent-sized polity, it's meaningless. Your chance of being pivotal (of the election going the other way if you don't vote) is indistinguishable from zero. So maybe voters just overestimate that probability - they have a zero chance of being pivotal, but they don't understand that. Nope. Lots of studies have been done, with surveys, and experiments, and it turns out that potential voters, if anything, underestimate their probability of being pivotal. Sure, there are some voters who are deluded about this, but not enough to matter.

So, although it seems completely reasonable that a person is more likely to vote in a close election because she thinks her vote is more likely to affect the outcome, in fact, it's false. Voters turn out in higher numbers despite being very well aware that their turning out won't matter.

If anyone actually cares, I'll explain why closeness does drive turnout, but my point here is simply that not all things that make perfect sense are in fact true. And sports is probably more filled with such myths than most walks of life. That's part of what makes them fun.

59 Why?

When Vin Scully is saying why Kent is doing beter because Manny is here, this isn't an fact, it's Vin's opinion.

Jeff Kent can disagree with someone's opinion especially when it concerns his play.

It's not like he's saying Vin is nuts or the old man doesn't know anything. It even said in the column that at the luncheon (where his remarks that Scully talks too much got laughs) he also said he loves Vin but he talks too much (with a smirk).

65 You could read the links.

No one's saying that lineup construction is meaningless. You'll see less runs scored when you go Manny, pitcher than Manny, Loney because you're giving the worst hitter on the team 160 more plate appearances. It's just that the performance of your teammates has no discernible effect on yours.

58 So the real answer is that we should field a team of 9 Berroa's?

63 If I don't get Kent OUT, I have to pitch to Manny with runners on. Here comes my nastiest slider that breaks outside - hit that Jeff.

Here a link to an article (that links to the full study):
http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/index.php/2004/09/the-protection-externality-it-doesnt-exist/
They write, among other things, this:
While having a good hitter batting behind you might put more balls in the strike-zone, it doesn't mean these pitches are of the same quality than with a poor hitter on-deck. It's not that the pitcher just wants to avoid walking a batter when a good hitter follows. The pitcher wants to keep the hitter off-base any way he can.

68 But in the end, that's irrelevant, all that matters is what happens to a pitched ball once it's put in play. Tango's study shows that when the ball is put in play by a hitter, there's no change in results with or without protection.

Even if they do get more fastballs, wouldn't a curve ball become more devastating in that situation because the hitter probably looking fastball?

65 Great point!!

67 - I would not expect Vin to ignore what has happened. However, he could mention other possible factors - just like I have above and others have above. Kent's ongoing streakiness. His health. Luck. I haven't seen Vin mention any of these.

I'll say it one more time - I think none of this is a big deal. And I certainly haven't at any time suggested that I thought Vin was intending to insult Kent, or that Kent needed to respond the way he did. I just think that Kent made some valid points that most people were dismissing.

71 - yeah, i posted that before I saw the links. there were 30 comments between when i started typing and hit submit.

You still have to see the ball & hit it... in this particular case I have to agree with Vinnie. I have to be honest though, I always believed in the myth but #'s don't lie.

If this were the Olympics, I'd give Kent a 10 on substance but a 0 on style, averaging out to a score of 5. Far from medal worthy on the 10 point scale. The Spanish judge might give him a 10 on style, not sure.
vr, Xei

65 See 58 and/or 73 .

[73[ What if you have trouble getting your nastiest slider over for a strike? Sliders aren't the easiest to get over for strikes.

81 It doesn't have to be a strike, it just has to look like it's going to be a strike. Jeff Kent (and most MLB batters) has chased plenty of outside breaking balls.

Or I'm just a bad pitcher who's going to get raked anyway.

74 I think Kent was snapping out of his season long funk regardless of the hitter behind him but do you think more fastballs in the strike zone to Kent is a bad or indifferent effect? It seems to me like Kent is an aggressive hitter early in the count, fastball are usually the easiest pitches in the game to square up on so wouldn't the conclusion that:
A. Kent will see more pitches in the strike zone and
B. The pitches in the strike zone will more likely be fastballs
be a good thing?

Jon,
You deleted my Sunny and Mild post. That was not sarcasm. I meant it. It is a great example of the fallacy of correlation as causation coupled with small sample size.

I think about the reverse of the timm/KG logic every time Kent comes up with Kemp or Ethier on 2nd and 1b open. That the pitcher must really be motivated to get Kent, so that he can still have a place to put Manny.

Ironically, the logic of the "protection" argues that the batter being protected benefits from the pitcher's greater desire to get him out - that throwing strikes (to avoid a BB) INCREASES the batter's chance of success. As though outs are always or uwually because batters are chasing bad pitches.

If that were so, why would there be a countervailing myth that pitchers who "throw a lot of strikes" are better pitchers? Why the premium on the first-pitch strike?

There are a lot of contradictions in baseball mythology. They can't all be right.

Somewhat related to lineup construction -
One of the "little things" I've always appreciated is an 8th hitter getting a 2-out hit. Is anyone aware of any studies that have shown whether this has any real significance?

73 Thanks Dave. that was the one I was looking for. I had it in my head (I really need a Bob-like memory) that it was on the SABR site. Thanks for finding it.

The crux of the matter is really this part of Simer's bait-fest:

Kent's batting average has increased by more than 20 points in the past 10 days since hitting third. Manny being Manny has rejuvenated Kent. It's so much fun telling him that.

"It's so pathetic," he said. "You guys write about things happening in a week's time. That's why we don't like you. Baseball is a six-month game."

Kent understands that in baseball anything can happen over a short span and just because things happen at the same time (Manny arrives, Kent is hot) that doesn't mean one is the cause of the other.

85 Less walks per 9 innings is good

73 But wouldn't that eventually put the pitcher at disadvantage? The Pitcher just had to show off his best pitch and while it may strike out Kent in his first at bat, in his 2nd one, Kent has more info going into knowing what the pitcher can and can do. And that aforementioned Slider may not be a strike every time its thrown.

Its up to the pitcher to execute, and like all things pitchers are a superstitious cowardly lot -- so I have to wear a disguise that will strike terror into their hearts! I must be a creature of the night, black, terrible, like a... a... a bat!

And thus Jeff Kent became Batman.

76 I see what you are saying, but that is really expecting perfection from Vinny. He can't come up with situational stats and then come up with all possible scenarios where the situation may not in fact apply. Anyway, the argument is endless. Just one last thing though... in this instance, it does seem like Kent is trying more to attack Vinny than make a valid point. Especially when he has made some awesomely invalid points in the past about kids and veterans and hitting and running the bases. This just seems personal and inadvertently along the way, he hit a statistically backed argument. I really am having trouble defending anything Kent is saying here and I have no trouble admitting that my rose-colored glasses are having trouble parsing the arguments he is making at this point.

89. Yes, and...?

Kent, early June 5-game streak:
.444 .474 .667 1.141
last June / early July 5-game streak:
.500 .619 .875 1.494
11 games in front of Manny:
.465 .511 .628 1.139

Sometimes he just gets hot.

92 And that is why they throw strikes to Kent so they don't have to face Manny with a man on? Pretty simple to me.

93 mid June, not "early June"

85 - not all strikes are created equal. A hanging curve that gets deposited in the seats is a strike. A swing and a miss on a slider running away from the hitter is also a strike. If you're the pitcher you want the second more than the first. The key, for pitchers, is to work the entire strike zone and expand it by inducing the hitter to swing at pitches that are close to the strike zone but are actually outside the zone. The premium on first pitch strikes is also important because a hitter has fewer strikes to work with than the pitcher has balls.

94 : 89 is reason to throw stikes period, irrespective of who's hitting, who's on, who's on deck, etc.

94 "Pretty simple to [you]"

Apparently so. As I also expected, you wanted the references and proff for the lack of protection, but once provided you did not want to actually discuss them and instead continue to rely on common myth - which, as you pointed out - certainly makes things simpler.

97 So that is why Kent is getting better pitches. Walk Kent without the threat of Manny is much more desirable than walking him with Manny on deck.

96 I agree with that. Wouldn't you use that same "key" if you wanted not to allow Kent to reach base in front of Ramirez?

Even if it's true that having a great hitter behind you increases the probability that the pitcher will throw you more strikes, where is the evidence that you are more likely to succeed if the pitcher is throwing you more strikes? For one thing, there's pretty much no hitter in the league who's a good enough hitter to be really productive (from an OBP perspective) without ever drawing a walk

Alex Stepheson to SC per the LA Times. Looks like Scott Wolf jumped the gun last month and finally got one right.

98 I guessed I missed the proof. Could you please post the stats to dispel the "myth".

Thanks,

Simple

99 Giving Kent a good pitch to hit without the threat of Manny is much more desirable than giving him a good pitch to hit with Manny on deck. (And I don't see how 99 follows from 97, or from 89.)

Can you be clutch at the same time as providing protection?

98 See, 55 , 58 and 73 .

103 You have to read the studies linked in 58 and/or 73 .

100 - yes, to an extent. I suspect there is also an issue as to whether a pitcher is trying to strike a hitter out or force him to make bad contact that turns into a ground ball to the short stop or a pop fly to the right fielder.

101 I agree with you here, hitting is a failing proposition but isn't a team in a better position when their biggest power threats are getting more hittable pitches? OBP aside wouldn't you rather have somebody with better run-producing potential seeing more hittable pitches?

But part of it is because Kent's willing to swing at pitches outside of the strike zone. If pitches in the strike zone are easier to hit, and pitches outside of the strike zone are harder to hit, if a person sees more strikes, then wouldn't he have an better chance to hit the ball?

And if a pitch inside the strike zone, and outside the strike zone has no difference, then why have a strike zone in the first place?

Not that hitters can't hit pitches outside of the strike zone and be successful, we seen Ethier smash three homeruns that was low and outside. Its amazing that all three homers were generally in the same spot.

I meant (of course):

103 see 55 , 58 and 73

timm/KG/Tripon,
Shouldn't you first be concerned with establishing that something exists, before discussing why something exists.

This feels a bit like discussing why the Pacific Ocean has completely frozen over.

Throwing strikes --> greater probability of getting batter out.

Throwing strikes --> greater probability of "protected" batter getting a hit.

Throwing balls --> greater probability of a BB.

So throwing strikes is higher risk/higher reward, whereas throwing balls is, for a batter who knows the difference, a low risk, low reward walk. The question is at what point (and for what batters, is the extra risk of giving up a hit worth the extra hope of getting an out?

And if "not all strikes are the same," and all pitchers can throw whichever kind they prefer, then any smart pitcher will throw the kind that lead to outs, not hits.

Right or wrong, I think it was Kent's further comments that added a palpable degree of uselessness to his ultimate point. If Kent wants to get into a doctrinal argument about batter protection issues and his career average, and/or the irrelevant nature of arguing whether someone is hitting better during a particular span of 10 games, that's fine. But what is the utility in then pointing out that Vin Scully hasn't ever been in the dugout, or that he doesn't really "know" Derrick Lowe? That type of commentary suggests to me, that beyond some sort of meritorious disagreement that he might have with Vinny, he's actually adding lighter fluid to the discussion by then impugning Vin for having no practical, interpersonal knowledge of the players he's speaking about. That, to me, seems excessive and needless under the circumstances. And that is the hallmark of Jeff Kent never being able to make a potentially valid point without tarnishing it with some inherent aire of stupidity.

In related news, I seem to remember reading at least one study that showed that opposing teams that walked Bonds all the time actually ended up hurting their chances of winning. If you take away the walks, what was the expected number of bases Bonds would get in a plate appearance? Basically, it'd be his slugging percentage, which, while historically fantastic, was less than 1. Add in the fact that his non-walk AB might drive in another runner, and sometimes (more often than for any other hitter ever) it made sense to walk Bonds, where it wouldn't have made sense for anyone else, but not as often as he WAS walked.

105 Since both are largely myths, I guess so.

but isn't a team in a better position when their biggest power threats are getting more hittable pitches? OBP aside wouldn't you rather have somebody with better run-producing potential seeing more hittable pitches?

But we're not talking about giving good hitters more hittable pitches: we're talking about giving the hitters in front of good hitters more hittable pitches.

101 See 55 .

Perhaps its now time to agree to disagree and move on.

119 Nah, that time is tomorrow, when there's actually a game going on. ;P

114
Interesting that he used Derek Lowe because back in the Spring, Andrew reported that he heard that Derek Lowe had been bad mouthing Vinny.
http://www.truebluela.com/2008/3/13/9441/89554

119 - agreed

114. Fair point.

110. This brings up a different, interesting point. Perhaps any "protection" effect is NOT an effect on the pitcher, but on the protectee. That is, if Kent is less willing to chase marginal pitches because he trusts the guy behind him, and doesn't feel the need to be a hero, he can limit his swings to hittable pitches. IN other words, protection makes KENT a better hitter (not just a luckier one who gets fastball strikes) because it lowers the opportunity costs of patience (in his mind).

That would be a comment about Kent, and it'd be worthwhile to ask why he's not always the most patient hitter he can be, regardless of protection. The studies that have been pointed to look at averages, and the fundamental conclusions is that hitters have a certain skill level, and the best prediction of their performance is their skill level, with all other factors such as protection just washing out. A good hitter will hit well, and a bad hitter won't (on average, in the long run). It's not impossible that there will be isolated exceptions.

117 From a raw power perspective (ignore the fact that Kent has stunk up until about a month ago) doesn't Kent have the most potential to go deep outside of Manny and Kemp? So doesn't it follow that it is beneficial for him to be hitting in a position where he'll get more opportunity to try to hit a HR?

If the Dodgers signed Dave Ross it would get my vote for 2008 Dodger Transaction of the Year.

When Martin was hitting ahead of Manny, Martin said something to the effect that he was chasing more pitches because he expected everything to be a strike, and it wasn't.

115 Bonds didn't have Manny hitting behind him so I fail to see your point with this comment.

124 I would think Andre Ethier moved past Kent on pure power potential.

126 Torre removed Martin because he was impatient in the number 3 spot.

Here's another point - isn't the protection myth not really about strikes, but about fastballs? I guess the implication is that fastballs are easier to control and therefore more likely to be strikes. And maybe that's what 96 meant about "not all strikes being equal."

That would be particularly easy to check - whether the probability of a fastball is correlated with the quality of the on-deck hitter, other things equal. Does a pitcher increase his percentage of FBs, and does the hitter increase his percentage of FBs seen? Presumably, it's been checked, and the answer is no (I don't remember the studies as well as others apparently do).

Looking for a fastball effect would allow us to de-link the question of what the pitcher does from the outcome of the PA. If a pitcher is altering his normal behavior, it will show up better in the pitches thrown than in the outcomes, which are much more affected by randomness.

115 - always thought walking Bonds as much as teams did was a huge mistake. I think his BA and SLG were inflated because of the fewer at bats he got. Plus, no one challenged him instead and tried to push him off the plate.

124
At this point I think Kent has the least home run potential of anyone in the lineup when Torre uses the correct lineup. Some might say Loney or Martin but I'd bet on Loney hitting more runs from this point on in the season. So maybe Martin is a stretch.

I think I will use regfair's criteria for evaluating the Manny trade.

If Kent hits .400 for the rest of the year, I will reconsider all arguments re lineup protection.

And I will do so happily.

131
I guess, but when he wasn't walked he sure seemed to wallop the ball. I can understand that walking him ultimately cost the team more runs but I'd have been afraid to throw him a strike during those years.

125 Phillies are interested in picking up David Ross.

127. 129. This is pointless. You have to actually want to understand. Rule 4 is on the ropes.

134 Yep, ask the Padres about pitching to Bonds. Funny how Boche moved over to the Giants after pitching to Bonds over the years.

136 Huh?????

133. I'd reconsider them too, but I doubt I'd be persuaded. That's why I made my point (which probably overlapped your post in the ether) that a true test would have to examine not outcomes, but actions (types of pitches thrown, etc.). Over a huge sample size (multiple seasons, whole leagues, you'd have enough degrees of freedom to try to control for nearly everything that affects outcomes (and have small confidence intervals around your estimates), but something as short as Kent's PA's over 2 months would not allow that.

I believe in 'protection' to an extent, mostly because nobody can tell me putting Michael Bourn or Angel Berroa behind Jeff Kent instead of Manny wouldn't affect Kent's numbers. But, Kent is red hot right now and deserves credit for that. With that said, this issue certainly should not be Vin v Kent and it's been massively blown out of proportion. I ignored it until now because I took it as a joke.

Oh, this is futile!
No it isn't.
I came here for a good argument.
No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.
An argument isn't just contradiction.
It can be.
No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
No it isn't.
Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.
Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'
Yes it is!
No it isn't!
Yes it is!
Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
(short pause)
No it isn't.

More important than any of this is that I have joined George Costanza as a hand model!

http://tinyurl.com/5vxtvm

This whole blog has me a little upset. First, Kent should have known better than to be baited by Simmer - so this is partly Kent's fault for this discussion even occuring. Second, I guess Bonds benefitted from having Kent hit behind him in SF. Third, I don't think Kent has got the respect he deserves over the last two years with no real support hitting around him. I do believe having Manny in the lineup takes away some of the pressure of having to hit a home run each at bat and lets him focus more on just crushing the ball. Forth, I think Jon stirred the pot on this one - I agree with Paul Scott with his analysis.

I feel it necessary to mention that Vin has discussed why he doesn't hang out in the clubhouse or get friendly with the players. He thinks it would hurt his objectivity.

Jeff Kent needs to be told that it's Vin's job to talk and it's Kent's job to shut up and hit the ball.

After rethinking this for a bit, Kent has a point. To even be in Kent's position of hitting in the three spot in front of Manny, you have to be a good hitter in the first place. You wouldn't ever put a player like Juan Pierre, or Angel Berroa in front of Manny because even if they see more strikes, they're not good enough hitters to capitalize on it on a regular basis.

141 - you're the guy behind xkcd, aren't you?

Just wanted to throw in my 2 pennies;

Let's just think about this logically,

Kent is hitting .250 the way we've been pitching him all year.

Now that we're pitching him different he's hitting over .400... So, let's keep letting Manny and Kent beat us instead of just Manny.

Let's say that this whole protection theroy is what other teams or pitchers are thinking they're really dumb. Why would you keep letting Kent beat you if you are in fact "piping" him fastballs, when all year you've made him useless. Managers and pitchers are just not that dumb. Kent is just a good hitter who's finally coming out of a slump and I think Reg was saying his PrOPS was pretty high all year so he's been hitting the ball well all year.

143 - "I think Jon stirred the pot on this one."

Did I do anything differently on this than I do in general?

114 Great points.

I am in the corner that believes Kent is getting just what Vin says he has been getting and benefiting from it--more fastballs.

Kent was a second half player last year and is again even though he waited longer this year to become one--long enough for Manny to arrive. If Kent didn't want anybody thinking that he is benefiting from Manny, maybe he should not have waited for Manny to arrive to get decent.

Vinny fills the air with conversation and that is what makes him special because he is talking with us and not to some guy sitting next to him trying to earn his paycheck.

Sometimes Vin says things that seem wrong to me but if I were to fill the air with my conversation, all sorts of mistakes would pour out of my mouth. In Kent's case, I enjoy Vin saying Kent is assisted by Manny and now that I know Kent does not agree, all the better. HOF dudes should be humble and let for they have received much praise from others.

so, should we be rooting for the Astros the next couple of days? Or should the focus just be on the division title?

Jon's an instigator. Like Woody Woodpecker.

125 Right now though as it stands "The Los Angeles Dodgers have purchased the contract of IF Terry Tiffee from Triple-A Las Vegas" stands to win by a wide margin.

123 - I think there may be something to your point about the effect of protection on the hitter being protected rather than the effect on the pitcher.

The problem I have, again, is that I'm not entirely sure there is a methodology that would answer the questions we all have.

151 How long have you been waiting to type that comment?

It made me laugh.

Okay, chuckle.

By the way, Pilot G2s, the extra fine black model. It's the best pen on earth. Period. Perfectly balanced for flipping, retractable, which is always fun, and the ink is blacker than any other mass produced pen I've ever used. It's a gel ink, dispensed by roller ball. Really fantastic.

Kent seems to swing at more unhittable pitches now that Manny is here as if to compete with Manny. If anything, Kent should walk more and let Manny pick up some of the veteran load. Kent approaches his atbats like a rookie more with Manny than before Manny. I think Kent is lucky pitchers are throwing any fastballs for strikes to him.

142 Nice red nail polish.

155 Andrew got a product placement deal for the DT picnic.

155 - I'm a fan of the staple opti-flow model, myself. and I have a cross pen that was a graduation present that I love, but it's a higher quality one.

154- I'm not entirely sure I haven't before. Or maybe someone else did, and I'm just recycling it.

Ah. Comment 771:

https://dodgerthoughts.baseballtoaster.com/archives/252465.html

Although, Steve really was an instigator, so I kind of flipped it.

155 Next year's quiz prizes include a Bob Carpenter Scorebook with a Pilot G2 pen.

146
No he isn't.

142 Not the one with the red nail polish?!?

Clearly, no one's going to prove or disprove, especially with a 10 game sample, that Manny's presence behind Kent has helped Kent or not. The point here is that Kent hasn't helped Kent. Instead, Kent once again displays his misanthropic sense of entitlement and raging insecurity to do a one-sided battle with a icon in his eighties. I've listened to Scully since Brooklyn. Lowe's point is not exactly a secret: over the last few years, Scully has relied on reading the Media Guide ad nauseum to the detriment of calling and analyizing the game. As far as I'm concerned, I'll take that and be grateful Vin's still in the booth. I wonder how Kent and Lowe would fare attempting to coherently order a Grand Slam breakfast at Denny's at 80? So when Vin states a ten game statistical fact, why can't Kent just keep quiet and move on? He's stil going to the HOF. (Probably in the Ty Cobb Wing.) A more critical announcer might have complained about Kent's 10th inning AB in the Brewer loss. Six pitches all out of the strike zone, Ramirez on deck, yet Kent felt compelled to swing at multiple terrible pitches, ultimately hitting a DP ball that if not for Hardy's error, Manny would've been left in the batter's box. That display of ego was almost as infuriating as losing the game. Leave Vin alone. And play to win, Jeff -- not for YOU to win.

157 Whoops, Dave beat me by plenty.

155 That is a great lie. The Namiki (also owned by Pilot) "vanishing point" is the finest everyday use pen on the market.

Greg Maddux.

You do the math.

If you've read Stefan Fatsis' new book, one of the major themes is that athletes hate the media. Columnists act like they know what the players are thinking and then take the moral high ground. Kent in particular gets a particularly bad rap. I could see him being sick of being criticized his whole career and then lashing out now that there's basically no consequence to doing so. He thought that Vinny wasn't giving him the respect he deserved for hitting well recently, and he said so.

And yes, I realize the irony in that. Please don't bother pointing it out.

167 LA Times published scuttle:
http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-maddux19-2008aug19,0,465488.story

Had a feeling the Maddux shoe was going to drop. I wonder what the parameters of the deal are.

167 Taking bets on whether we did something stupid? I'm guessing we did.

For anyone with the BP book Baseball Between The Numbers, James Click discusses 'protection' in depth on pages 38-42. The stats show that protection is indeed a myth. Here is the final table:

Relative Batting Performance by Following Batter Quality, 2004

Quality____AVG___OBP___SLG___BB____IBB
Low______.001___.006___.002__.004___.003
Med-low__-.003___.001__-.003__.000__-.001
Med_____-.001___.000__-.002__-.002__-.001
Med-high__.004___.008___.002__.001___.000
High_____-.005__-.003__-.010__-.003__-.002

Protection rates are near zero for all senarios.

169 Let's presume for the moment that this trade does not include anyone on the 40-man roster since any prospect would be claimed.

I went through a fountain pen stage when I was younger. I still like the idea, but it just doesn't seem practical. With a rollerball, you can press hard enough for a carbon paper receipt, or not so hard for normal writing. I wouldn't be surprised it fountain technology has advanced to the point that the ruined shirt quotient is now at a tolerable level, and I note that the vanishing point series has the clip at the business end, so that it stays pointed up, which is clever. Still, I lose enough pens to discourage putting real money into one.

Maddux back in Dodger Blue. Sounds good.

169 I guess if the choice is Maddux or Jason Johnson, I'd go with Maddux. I'm pretty sure James McDonald would be more effective at this point though.

I assume that McCourt finally bit the bullet and absorbed Maddux's salary. Odds are we traded away a low-A arm just because we seem to be filled with relief pitchers up the wazoo.

for the few games that he'll play, I don't mind having Maddux around. I am less than impressed with the lack of creativity on the part of the front office.

ugh, they just showed Sabathia's home run off of Park on ESPN.

hmmm, maybe the Dodgers sent Park to San Diego?

173 They would have to be claimed by someone in the NL with a worse record than the Padres. that would mean Washington, and only Washington, could stop the trade. Therefor, I think it is safe to assume that it could be anyone.

174
Just be sure to include a cover sheet with your TPS report from now on.

This can't be any more than a PBTNL.

176 I'm hoping that Greg Maddux does for the younger pitchers on the staff what Manny does for the younger hitters on the staff like Kemp and Ethier. Trying to learn and pick from a guy who's been in the game long and were successful for so long.

Its not as if its actually true, but if guys like Ethier and Kemp believe that learning from Manny is helping them as hitters, that's good enough for me.

177 we seem to be filled with relief pitchers up the wazoo

On the other hand, LA recently called up Tanyon Sturtze.

176 I am guessing that whatever we gave up, it will not be worth the difference between anyone in our organization and Maddux.

173. Claimed? Oh, you mean would have had to pass thru waivers?

I suppose it's possible that Maddux will be better than replacement (Stults/Park/McDonald), but I wouldn't bet on it. My best guess is that the net effect on the Dodgers this season will be zero, and just as easily bad as good.

The real question, as always, is the cost. What did the team give up?

Ned did see McDonald last night. McDonald was less than impressive. So, Ned probably was looking at all options before making the deal for Maddux.

Maddux has been lights out in August so far.

1.89 ERA 0.74 WHIP .197 BAA

178 That would be so messed up on the Dodgers to do that to Park.

We couldn't do a trade of Falkenborg for Maddux a week or two ago?

181 You are saying that because of a rule I am missing, or you are saying that because only PTBNL is potentially not a bad deal?

183 Let me rephrase, relief pitchers prospects up the wazoo that may or may not help us in 3 or 4 years.

Sounds like the US/China baseball game was eventful. China lost two catchers to collisions at the plate.

http://tinyurl.com/6lvllz

188 Potentially not.

Orenduff seems like a pretty likely candidate here. No future in LA, DePo connection, Petco would really help that unfortunate home run problem.

Oooh! Can we start a discussion on whether or not Greg Maddux makes all pitchers around him better?

187 - why would it be messed up? Park has been surprisingly good this year, but if the Dodgers felt that they could get better by trading Park for Maddux, there's nothing wrong with that. Also, I'm guessing Park would still get a playoff share if the team made the playoffs.

192 Penny believes that Maddux is God.

He also got substantially worse when Maddux joined the team.

194 Maddux is going to heal Penny's shoulder?

195 - who is "He"?

173
I'd be more worried about losing someone not on the 40 man, then the 40 man because I know they aren't trading DeJesus.

My favorite prospect was Carlos Santana even though he wasn't the Dodgers top prospect. For various reasons my new favorite is Victor Garate, so I will give even money that Victor Garate is now a Padre.

A Maddox/Kershaw combo every 5th day could be killer if we only give Maddux four and Kershaw 5 but I expect Maddux to fail miserably the 2nd time around with us.

Have the Manny dreadlocks sold enough for McCourt to loosen up the money strings?

193 Because Park came to the Dodgers just to play for the team one last try before he retired. It'll just be bad karma to trade a guy whose only desire is to finish his career with the Dodgers.

Just look at what happened with the Yankees when they traded Kyle Fransworth. =P

We should try to stay away from doing bad obvious karma like that.

Who gets DFAed for Maddux? Ozuna, or Transcoso?

Maddux has a 5.75 ERA outside of Petco this season, 12 starts, 67 1/3 IP.

194 - So does Maddux from what I've heard. I like Maddux though. I wish LA could keep him in the organization after he retires. He'd either be the best pitching coach ever or the worst. I think he'd be a good manager.

192. Sure, why not? (I know you were kidding, but heck, there's no game tonight.)

Last time he showed up, that was a hope. He said something like "I didn't come here to teach - I came here to pitch." But then Brad Penny in particular said he learned a lot from Maddux. It won't be Penny this time (if there's anything to it), but maybe someone will take advantage and pick his brain.

Or maybe the starter in the rotation before Maddux will benefit from knowing that he doesn't need to be a hero, and just relax and throw well.

197 Penny. I'm not saying it was the cause or anything, but he's not the best case for the genius of Greg Maddux.

198 Apparently, the Manny Dreads are a bust due to shoddy workmanship and the $25 price tag, and how late they came out. People are just making their own dreads for a few dollars and just wearing a regular Dodgers cap.

Although they did sell their Vero Beach franchise to Cal Ripkin, for about $3 million dollars, which can pay for Maddux's salary. o/~

203 - ok, thanks. I'm thinking the best case for the genius of Greg Maddux is a little thing called "the 1990's"

Maddux still doesn't walk anyone and he still has good command (3/1 k/bb), but his homer rate rising this year is a little less than comfortable. Still, his FIP on the year is 3.99, compared to 3.80 in 2006.

205 I'm not doubting he's great, but the idea of him making everyone better isn't best backed up with Penny.

Wily Aybar with the 900 plus OPS since replacing Longoria.

What would you make your own dreadlocks?

206 FIP doesn't account for the huge amounts of home runs outside of Petco he'd give up.

Basically, Maddux is going to let the guy put the ball in play. If you've got strong defense, this is probably a good thing, if you're the Dodgers, not so much.

202 Or maybe the starter in the rotation before Maddux will benefit from knowing that he doesn't need to be a hero, and just relax and throw well.

Of course Bills, Lowe, Kershaw, and Kuroda are all pitching fairly well lately. I like the move if only because it gives the organization an excuse to make sure that Kershaw's pitching out the bullpen in the playoffs, and is not starting. Gotta keep that low innings limit and all that.

So if you pitch behind Maddux, do you have to throw fewer strikes?

I feel very confident that Maddux can help this team. He won't pitch in Chase Field. He loves Dodger Stadium and pitches well here. His toughest start will be the first one in Philadelphia. He owns the Giants and is pitching very well lately. He'll be motivated in a pennant race. It's worth a shot and I don't believe for a second that we gave up anything at all. Win-win...win.

Im just glad Maddux wont be pitching against us when we play SD. We don't fare too well against him.

207 - eh, sorry, the joke didn't quite come across the intertubes correctly.

207
Greg taught him how to not give up home runs. A year ago Paul Scott and I were having a debate as to who was the current ace, Penny or Chad. I wish Penny had stayed good enough to make that debate again. We'd have a solid rotation if he had.

212 - If you pitch behind Maddux, you will throw opponents off enough by throwing a fastbal 10 mph faster.

If you pitch behind Maddux, you will throw opponents off enough by throwing an Eephus pitch 10 mph faster

Actually the pitcher who came on when Maddux came over was Derek Lowe.

Barry Zito won't reach 20 losses. This is depressing.

Actually, it helps the Dodgers already if Maddux was scheduled to pitch in Arizona this week, he's awful at that ballpark.

I know Rule 5 and all but this Helen Thomas doc. is kinda fun.

If he keeps this up, Sabbathia should consider to moving to first base four days a week.

Just out of curiosity, would that even be feasible? Let's take Ruth, as the best example of a pitcher/field player. Would it have been feasible for him to be a starting pitcher every 5th day and play right field the other four days? I guess the true modern day equivalent would be Owings in Arizona.

210 - true, and as good as he is defensively, he's not going to field 5 or 6 groundouts a game - maybe 1 or 2.

Still, I like his 1.53 BB/9 and 3.08 K/bb. Also, he's going based on a .292 BABIP, so he hasn't been going Andre Ethier early 2006 on us.

220 - Nope, first he has to tie Kip Wells level terrible and lose 18.

Just getting here; well leave it up to Kent to soil the punch bowl.

Jeff, we know how much you don't really like baseball and that its just a job. How you would rather be a champion motocross rider because your such a stud.....Now please just shut up and do the job you chose to do that leaves you living the life you want to lead....

Honestly, if he is going to be this ignorant, say what he says about Vinny--who mind you Kent can't even fill Vinny's jock strap, let alone put it on his gargantuan melon......

O.K., enough of me!

Glad to see Maddox back. He will undoubtedly be useful, and I think he always wanted to be back playing here anyway....

Whoa, came here to see reaction to Maddux's big return to Dodger blue, and stumbled onto a certifiable DT war!

My two cents on the Kent-protection debate: instead of the "Protection matters always!" camp and the "Protection never matters!" camp simply butting heads over and over, why not look at this particular case? Is Kent seeing different pitches, hitting in front of Manny? Is he seeing more fastballs? Is he seeing more strikes?

Anyways my point is: You can't just say that because studies have shown that protection is mostly a myth, that Kent isn't benefiting from Manny's presence in the lineup and have that be the definitive statement on the matter. Just because in the big picture something doesn't happen often does not mean that it doesn't happen in particular cases.

I will say I'm doubtful that Manny's been the main reason why Kent's been hot - he was heating up before Manny arrived, after all - but I can't be sure, and I don't think anybody can, sweeping statements aside, until one looks at the numbers in this particular case.

I'd love to do so myself, but am clueless on where to find this sort of information (i.e. the type of pitches Kent's been seeing before and after the Manny trade, etc). Any one care to point me in the right direction?

223 Ruth did it a little in 1919 when he played 111 games in the outfield and started 15 game as a pitcher. He led the league in home runs with 29.

He was then sold to the Yankees, he never regularly started as a pitcher again.

I wonder if Kemp is allowed to move when Maddux is peeing on him in the shower.

229 - Ruh?

223 I'd be worried about the unscheduleable throwing that occurs in the field. If he were really that good a hitter, he could go back to the AL, hit for himself and DH sometimes for the other pitchers - no throwing.

229 Er, that was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much information.

Brewers 6 - Astros 1. in the top of the 5th.

And the Astros hot streak has ended.

229 - Maddux can pee in the trash can.

78 I always believed in the myth but #'s don't lie.

Figures don't lie;
but liars figure. :-)

"As for Kent being rude or silly in calling out Scully ... well, Kent's personality quirks are hardly news, are they?"

Jon, It's no more rude or silly then sticking up for Kent, knowing what kind of a personality he is.

Come on, why on earth would he be making these kinds of comments about an LA sports icon knowing that something like this could cause some amount of disruption. ( to me disruption means problems and personalities not meshing with one another. We saw it with Pedro Guerrero in 1988.

I mean, after all, wasn't the purported rookies/young guys vs. vets problems of past seasons enough to know that Kent was possibly and probably at the root of those problems?

Jeffy, just hit the ball, throw the ball, play with the ball. Retirement is coming soon enough and you still have a world series to go win...

236 Just wondering, have you ever read a T.J. Simers piece? He does this all the time. Usually in a sarcastic, joking manner, but he loves to bait people, and sometimes he gets what a player truly thinks.

145 To even be in Kent's position of hitting in the three spot in front of Manny, you have to be a good hitter in the first place. You wouldn't ever put a player like Juan Pierre, or Angel Berroa in front of Manny because even if they see more strikes, they're not good enough hitters to capitalize on it on a regular basis.

You might if you were Jim Tracy. See Robles, Oscar.

236 I'm just as clueless about why people are getting so worked up about Kent speaking his mind as I am about Kent being angry about Vin speaking his. (And also, how does Kent know what Vin is saying? Does he have a pocket radio he listens to on the bench?) Can't the man voice his opinion? I didn't get the sense that he was slamming Scully, just that he was expressing his displeasure that people aren't giving him credit for his own hot streak. In the grand scheme of Kent-being-a-jerk moments, this is rather low on the scale, no?

236 Unless you are in the room, you have no idea the tone and context of the comments.

Vin Scully is certainly a big enough person to take whatever someone says about him (and if Vin can note that Kent has had a few more hits while hitting in front of Manny, Kent can certainly note that Vin has not specifically asked him if Kent thinks that it matters or is just a coincidence.)

Again, I think a lot of this fueled by how someone feels about the messenger rather the actual comments that were made.

There was one occasion, only, where Maddux called pitch location for Penny throughout a game and Penny was lights out. (This came to light during the past off-season, if I'm remembering correctly.) If this happened every time Penny came to the rotation (awfully unlikely, since Maddux has been acquired precisely since Penny is not expected to pitch again as a starter), and Penny were able to put his pitches where he wanted (also awfully unlikely now), that might be something.

Maybe he can tell Kuroda what goes wrong on the road.

Angels making a comeback in Tampa

173 169 Let's presume for the moment that this trade does not include anyone on the 40-man roster since any prospect would be claimed.

But in that case you would just make the prospect the PTBNL. Then complete the trade after the season.

Tony Jackson is saying that as of right now, the deal isn't done.

Anyone been watching Olympic trampoline? I enjoy it, it looks pretty and all, but the stakes seem so low compared to say, the balance beam. If you screw up, you fall onto a forgiving trampoline, and gently bounce up and down until you can walk off. I think the addition of sharp metal spikes on the out-of-bounds line of the tramp is just what this sports needs to transform into the adrenaline-pumping event that I so badly crave.

245
They jump/bounce ridiculously high.

Anyone post any additional pictures from the picnic?

Tony Jackson is saying the deal is in principle, Maddux has agreed to the deal but it's not finalized...yet.

But, that's inevitable.

237
Yes. I like T.J. and I am a fan of his, although I do have to say that I'm regretful that I only subscribe to the Times four days a week now. Especially in this Zell age.

I realize that most, well maybe 99.4% of you don't like Simers, but I find him to be more then apropos on several subjects, say like the McCourts, who are sometimes deserving targets. Mind you, this year I was fortunate to meet Jamie was was blown away how hot she was. This woman is a looker who had a personality to match. (I don't know, maybe I caught her on a off-night for some of you.)

Still, I had taken a friend's nephew to the game, and this kid is a victim to some extent--his father having been murdered some time ago in a gang-related shooting. He is more devouted Dodger fan then I am! Well, when we were leaving after a Blue victory, he saw Jamie McC and instantly wanted to get a picture with her but was sort of too shy to ask. I went up to her and she not only obliged, but was very open to any questions the boy had. He had a lot of them.

My entire opinion had changed about the McCourt's, especially Jamie McC. I then realized how T.J., was responsible for a lot of that perception; but then I've thought about the times I've heard her on his program, and honestly he is being controversial just to be controversial. T.J. in some ways is no different then Howard Stern. You need to play along with it--his schitck. Suddenly the writing doesn't become as tabloid, but more joking in a harmless sense.

Speaking of hand models: Nastia Liukin appears to have extremely long fingers.

I like how Jackson said the major hurdle, maddux agreeing to the deal, had been cleared. I'm pretty sure that wasn't a hurdle.

240 And the same can be said about Simers here no?

38 Jon, the story, as I heard it, on Martin getting bumped went like this... One of the coaches went to Torre and said "as long as I've been here, Martin has swung for the fences when batting third or fourth". The next day, Torre looked at the splits and apparently Martin's numbers rise (and strikeouts fall) as he move in either direction away from the three hole. The coach had gone on sight but the stats proved it out. That's how he landed sixth.

I've only skimmed the comments on this post so forgive me if what I say is repititious.
The only way Kent will be proven correct is if he has a terrible slump for a while, and I would hate to see that in this close a situation. Really this is a fascinating set-up and I can't figure out who has the advantage---LA or the Snakes. But I am ready to enjoy the horse race!

Considering that Maddux has been saying that he wanted to be in L.A. since mid-July, that hurdle has been long cleared. Wonder how the San Diego clubhouse feels when a player is clearly jockeying to leave for a contender like Maddux did.

As for Scully, it is a sweeping gererality but one with a lot of truth that the players don't like him nearly as much as the fans and many don't think much of him at all. Been true for many many years. I'm not quite sure I understand it but I think it has something to do with his lack of "homerness". When it's you that he's talking about, that comes across as insulting. I know it sounds childish but having your home announcer point out your flaws gets taken the wrong way somtimes. I'm not defending it but I believe it to be true.

Employing Bela Karoyli as a studio commentator for gymnastics was either a terrible decision or an inspired stroke of genius. I can't understand a word he says, but trying to is endlessly entertaining.

256 I can see that. I wonder if the Dodgers would ever employ a "homer" style announcer?

Or they could hire Rex Hudler.

Then I would buy a gun, take shooting lessons and shoot my tv.

256 If that true, that gets my goat. Being mad at him for not being 'rah-rah' enough is ludicrous - it's why he's such an incredible announcer and not a member of the D-Backs' announcing crew. Not to mention he's been a member of the Dodgers organization for decades longer than any of these guys.

256 Missed you at the festivities on Saturday.

And you missed Matt Luke. And both Andrews. The stars were aligned that day.

The language on ESPN.com has changed in the last 30 minutes. It now says that the Dodgers "are close to a deal" to acquire Maddux.

For whatever that's worth.

259 He said players in general, not just Jeff Kent.

249 I am not surprised, I am sure they are very personable and would have been happy to meet your friend.

The Padres just gave a non-denial denial.

262 I wasn't referring to Kent.

209 What would you make your own dreadlocks?

You would just pick up hair extensions at your local wig shop. In fact, in the last Dodgers Mailbag someone claimed that Manny's dreads were probably not his own hair. That he was likely using extensions. But I read somewhere that Manny said it took him three years to grow his dreads to their current length (before the recent clipping). So it's probably all his own hair.

http://tinyurl.com/68onmj

with all do respect but Maddux isn't a good pitcher anymore & from what I understand he has a horrendous playoff record.

Clearly the Dodgers would keep Scully 'till the end of time if they could and they would hire his clone as a second choice. That millions of fans him enjoy him if a lot more important than the players feeling he is their pal. It's very hard for any of us to put ourselves in the shoes of a player but imagine if there was a guy paid to critique and comment on your work every day. Might be hard for you to like that guy in the best of circumstances.

Sorry I missed you and all at the picnic BH! Couldn't make it but would have loved to have been there. I'll be sure to make the next one and hopefully catch a game before the year is up.

258 Charles Steiner and Steve Lyons are more rah-rah than Vin. But then Joe Buck and Tim McCarver are absolute homers on National TV.

And I don't think the homer thing doesn't work well in L.A. when you have announcers like Scully, Joel Myers, Chick Hearn, Bob Miller, and even Ralph Lawyer, etc.

Outside of Hudler and Physioc, we haven't really seen that 'Homer' style so popular outside the L.A. area. I really hate the 'good guys' vs. 'bad guys' talk and all that.

I guess my point is that if you're in L.A., you're never going to get that homer announcer, who's going to whitewash your flaws, and over praise your strengths. And why should you care? Its not as if Vin goes out of his way to criticize somebody.

And the Brewers go to 8-2 on a Cory Hart Brewers. Jeesh, they must be steamed on how bad they played in L.A. that they're taking it out on the Astros like this.

267 Any comments you hearing about Mattingly as the hitting coach?

Tampa Bay has clinched the season series against the Angels.

Padres radio is reporting that it's for a PTBNL.

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3541773&name=Neyer_Rob

Neyer comments on the Maddux trade. Basically says that Maddux is a league average pitcher, (which we're all asking of him), and that he'll likely bump Kershaw into the bullpen during the playoffs. (Which is what everyone wants.)

First, on homerism. Let's define our terms. Harry Caray was a homer if you define it as rooting for his team. But he also used to say he was the voice of a fan, and a fan roots but also rips. Skip Caray rooted for the Braves but would unload on them. The best example in LA probably was Chick Hearn, who obviously wanted the Lakers to win but could just tear them apart, too. The Angels guys don't rip, near as I can tell. They just root. Some announcers see no evil and never criticize, period. That's a form of homerism.

Los Angeles actually had a tradition of it. Bob Kelley did the Rams and the Angels (minor league and then the early expansion team) and was famously a rooter. The Dodgers talked with Vin and Jerry about it when the team came west because that seemed to be the LA style. Vin said they talked about it and reasoned that a lot of the fans would be like the Dodgers: transplants. They would be listening to hear their hometown team, and they would be offended if Vin and Jerry adopted a totally pro-Dodgers approach. It seems to have worked!

As to Kent ... I don't know whether I agree with Vin on how much Ramirez has helped Kent individually so much as that Ramirez has helped the whole lineup by making it stronger, forcing pitchers to be more careful with them. But, again, more history, this time about Kent:

1. He has been through this before with Barry Bonds, hitting behind him and ahead of him. And he despised the suggestion that Bonds helped him or the insult that Bonds would be walked intentionally to pitch to him. I could comment on the similarities between Bonds and Ramirez in attitudes or, especially, in pigmentation, but I will leave it at that.

2. When Vin came up to the big leagues, he was the kid announcer hanging around other young players. Today, he is a bigger legend than any of the players on this team will ever be. I have to wonder how much of that leads to jealousy, especially on the part of as lovely a specimen as Kent.

271
Next time you're deciding between staying home to listen to Padres radio and walking along the cliffs at Palos Verdes Peninsula, consider two words:

"soft" and "skin"

274 I'm stealing news from the Padres blogs.

273 Kent actually likes Manny as a person though.

271 -- And that probably means we are giving up somebody who wouldn't clear waivers if the name were announced now. You mentioned Orenduff's name before. I think there is no chance we are getting off that easy. We wouldn't have had any problem giving up Orenduff before the deadline, and the only thing that has changed now is that the Dodgers seem to be MORE desperate. Trust me, we have done something really stupid here.

275
Next time you're deciding between staying home to steal news from the Padres blogs and walking along the cliffs at Palos Verdes Peninsula, see 274

ESPN says the trade is official.

FINALLY, something new to talk about!! Who would have thought, Greg Maddux as a...oh wait.

223 - Isn't there already a pretty decent hitting 1B on the Brew Crew though? It's going to be cool enough watching Ned Yost decline to use the DH in Games 1 and 7 at the Trop though...

Here is a quote from fellow hall of famer Wade Boggs on Maddux.

Baseball Hall of Famer Wade Boggs said of Maddux, "It seems like he's inside your mind with you. When he knows you're not going to swing, he throws a straight one. He sees into the future. It's like he has a crystal ball hidden inside his glove."

272

some good will come out of it at least.

277 So our choices are: Alvarez, McDonald, Miller, Orenduff, May, DeWitt, Hu, Repko, and Paul. Who do you think goes?

Ryan Braun re-injured.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3541810

Lucas May or Xavier Paul? Padres know they're not getting anyone of great value.

Or it could be D. Young.

CC is about to throw another complete game here.

278 I'm at work.

283 That's not true, a player to be named later can come from anywhere, usually its someone not on the 40-man roster so that player does not have to clear waivers.

See Jhonny Nunez for Marlon Anderson.

Another J.J. Hardy error. Wow, I just had a good chuckle there.

We're the Dodgers, we're stultifingly stupid, so of course we gave up McDonald.

289 I was basing that off Canuck saying it was someone from the 40 man.

Clearly Steve Phillips is not in favor of CC still being on the mound.

I think its about time and definately appropriate that Kent be defended in this instance. Besides Simers obvisouly writes and portrays things as he so choose. o and fyi he's sort of an instigator right?

And bases are loaded for the Astros against the Brewers.

291 - Come on, you don't really believe they gave up McDonald.

285
I predict Jason Repko. The Pads are last in the league in stolen bases, and Repko plays a credible outfield and could play tomorrow.

If he isn't on the 40-man, this would seem to be a good fit.

If the Dodgers were not having to pick up the tab, then I would say that an Eric Stults might be a fit here.

lucking at Kershaw's #'s the last month is very incouraging (he's only 20 years old!) Chad Billingsley's #'s are pretty good as well. It's gonna be fun watching those two guys pitch the next few years.

o yea after watching CC kick more butt, i think he should be #1 signing priority

297 A PTBNL can't be on the active roster.

291 Come on, we're not that stupid. We clearly traded Bills for Maddux.

It could be somebody on the DL, like Proctor, or Aberu.

just for fun I'm gonna guess...

my guess is Lucas May.

CanuckDodger -- I have been reading here for a very long time and I know the fascination you have with prospects and your distrust of the organization.

I noticed you were in here on the day of the Manny trade predicting Doomsday. And now this.

The fact that the player is not named tells me that this move is what it is supposed to be: a salary dump. The Padres aren't going to get anything super back, even semi-super, otherwise the deal would have been made long ago. Right now, Colletti is on a good swing, let's give him the benefit of the doubt and if Lucas May goes, really -- will we survive? I think so.

In case anyone was wondering, I've been holding off making a new post until I see the deal is official. And I haven't seen that yet, 279 notwithstanding.

Hi everyone and a good evening to you wherever you may be.

I'm back after four+ days in the John Muir Wlderness. While I was mostly doing well withdrawing from techno-addiction, I couldn't resist listening to my little transistor radio in the evenings, after the sun had set and we were all bored of each other while standing around the campfire. I fiddled with the radio until I could pick up a station carrying the Dodgers game. But the station would fade in and out frustratingly, blending with talk radio stations and bad country music, so I'd hear "And the 1-2 pitch to Ethier is just a bit..." brzzzzttt "crazy ecoterrorists..." bzzzrttttt "if you want me you've got to show me you..." bzzzzztt "and now there's two away with Kemp still at 2nd."

But it was great to be able to keep tabs on the Dodgers and especially hear their big wins Thurs and Friday, then hear the results of Sunday's game later -- as you probably know, it's harder to pick up AM radio from a good distance away during the day than it is at night, and in the mountains you can't really hear any radio during the day. Also heard the end of Saturday's loss.

It's great to be back, and my sore feet could use a rest, my body needs a shower, I need a shave, and I'm desperately craving fresh green vegetables, but it was also good for the soul and spirit to be cut off from the world, to be forced away from the computer and cell phone for awhile, to re-learn how to live with total quiet except for hooting owls and a gurgling creek, to contemplate one's navel, etc. But still, happy to be home.

And to come home with the Dodgers in first place.

Hope those who made it had fun at the picnic. Am going to catch up on some Dodger Thoughts now and watch some highlights from the past few games via MLBTV.

277 A classic PTBNL is a player that comes from a list of minor leaguers, if that player is not on the 40-man roster, he does not need to pass through waivers.

That was how Travis Denker and Jhonny Nunez were traded after the deadline.

I'd be ecstatic if its Lucas May. Guy just dropped off the face of the earth offensively this year, and his defense is still sub par. Time to cut the cord, and see if the Dodgers can convert some more 3rd baseman/SS prospects into catchers.

lets see we gave up Jonothan Meloan & Carlos Santana this year, I wasn't a Meloan fan so that didn't hurt & Santana i never seen but Nate Purcell seemed to like him, your right Rick I'll give Ned Colletti the benefit of the doubt.

296 -- I don't know who we gave up, but I wouldn't be surprised if we did give up McDonald, if the Dodgers continued to insist that they not pay a cent of any new player's salary.

Face it, the "success" of the Manny and Blake trades has really made nobody off limits as long as the player isn't helping the big club now and is not somebody we figure to depend on in the near future. Chad and Clayton are the rotation youngsters now and next year, and is Joe Torre going to allow a "third kid" in his rotation, now or in 2009? Bottom line, I think the Dodgers see McDonald as expendable, and it doesn't matter, in a Dodger trade, if what we are giving up is a lot better than what we are getting, so long as the Dodgers tell themselves that they can afford to surrender what they are surrendering.

And no one noticed that Andruw Jones hit a home run in Fresno tonight.

310 -

1) The Dodgers have not traded anyone this year they were high on. LaRoche and McDonald are in two entirely different camps. Santana was far down the depth chart as well.

2) Chad will not be a kid next year. He is now accepted as the ace of the staff, to be surpassed only perhaps by Kershaw. McDonald will not break a kid quota. He might start the season in the minors like Chad and Kershaw did, but he won't finish there unless something goes horribly wrong.

3) The Dodgers know that McDonald is much too big a chip to use in a Maddux trade. His stock has shown no sign of falling this year.

I'm frankly surprised you don't see the clear distinction to be made between LaRoche/Santana and McDonald.

If the Dodgers traded McDonald today, I'll suspend myself from Dodger Thoughts for a month.

310 You're assuming that Bills and Kershaw never makes that vaunted jump from 'kid' to 'vet'. Its clear that Torre trusts both Bills and Martin from the start of the year. He's babying Kershaw to the point and has always spoke well of Kershaw. He fell in love with Kemp's play of late, and while he jerked Ethier around, he always made sure that Andre understood where he was coming from and kept on asking Andre to have patience with him and the situation, and not that Andre needed to sit for the good of the team, etc.

If McDonald doesn't start with the team next year when the 2009 baseball season starts, its not because Torre worries about having 3 young arms in the starting rotation, it'll be because of an similar innings count that Kershaw's on, and protecting his arm so they can use his starts for games in June to Sept, instead of April - June.

That or they resign Maddux, and pick up Penny's option. Either one.

311 Isn't Fresno near the new stadium the A's are trying to build in ...Freemont was it?

Aren't the Padres deep at catcher? They've still got the not-Todd Hundley, and it seems like there's another guy whose name I don't remember. I bet it's not May.

when it's all said & done I think McDonald would have benefited IN THE LONG RUN being promoted & something tells me McDonald could have done what the elder Maddux is going to do.

Ned Colletti & his veteran fetish continues.

Repko/Young are good bets, methinks.

312 If the Dodgers were not high on Santana, they are even stupider than I thought.

According to Gurnick:

"the Dodgers were close to acquiring the 42-year-old Maddux on Monday for two players to be named, although a club spokesman quoted Colletti as saying the deal was not complete. "

315 Josh Bard?

The Padres were rumored to move Kevin Kouzmanoff. Maybe they want a 3rd base prospect.

The Current Padres 40 man.
http://sandiego.padres.mlb.com/team/roster_40man.jsp?c_id=sd

320 They have Headley.

321
I was going to say the same, only in a more Harvey Korman-esque manner. I really wish you misspelled his name!

Colt Morton. I guess he's getting a little long in the tooth, though; I didn't know he was already 26. Bard's having a rough year. Anyway, they have several catchers. Assuming they're not going to have to play against team USA, they probably don't need another.

314. No. Fremont is in the Bay Area, south of Oakland, north of San Jose. Fresno is in the Central Valley, about halfway between LA and Sacramento.

They're close enough that the SF Giants had their AAA team in Fresno for a while, but not THAT close.

Fremont to Fresno, per Mapquest.

176 miles

http://tinyurl.com/6matyz

311 As if on cue, Andruw hits two!

Actually, that's not the route I'd take, but you get the idea.

318 - Santana is a 22 year old catcher playing in high-A. I'm not entirely sure why everyone was so worked up over a guy who hasn't been able to get to double-A after 4 years in the minors. Plus, it's not like the Dodgers are hurting for a catcher in the near future.

Getting a player like Casey Blake for Santana is the exactly what the team should have done with him.

Ussan Bolt is insanely fast.

328 Catchers often take longer to develop, especially converted ones. I do like Blake, however.

312 -- Jon,

1. Do we really know how "high" the Dodgers are on McDonald? He is no Billingsley, Kershaw, Broxton, or even Elbert: his fastball is ordinary, and his ceiling limited. He is a starting pitcher version of Cory Wade, but unlike Wade he hasn't proven himself in the majors. And don't think I am insulting McDonald: I, personally, really like Wade. McDonald is just similarly un-sexy as a pitcher, and while the Dodgers can like the "girl next door" pitching prospects, they really only love the centerfolds.

2. I'll bet you anything the Dodgers still consider Chad a "kid." Heck, Ethier is three years older than Chad and they still consider him a kid. The Dodgers are like my mother: if you are under 30, you're a kid.

3. Too big a chip to use for Maddux? I don't trust Colletti to have any sense of proportionality right now. He is fighting for his job, and with the Dodgers in the position they are in, and with the time of year being what it is, I can see Colletti telling himself he has to pay a "premium" to get what he wants. As for what San Diego wants, let's remember that two years ago, in August 2006, when the Dodgers tried to get David Wells from the Padres, we were told that the price is Matt Kemp.

Royals sign Kip Wells.

Phillies and Red Sox are looking at Dave Ross as a backup catcher .

just thought it deserved mention, but I'm still stumped by the puzzle at SOSG

331- If I gave you 2:1 odds against, would you bet money that McDonald was the (or one of the) PTBNL?

Bolt would make Pierre look as slow as Bengie Molina if the two raced.

He'd also probably run backward with his hands behind his head.

By the way, I hate to make controversial comments in an on-going discussion and then not stay around to respond to any comments or questions directed at me, but I have to do something else for at least the next couple of hours. Catch you guys later.

If its two PTBNL, no way its McDonald. This sounds like two low-A guys being dealt, or the Dodgers special.

Sports Illustrated, and the other Jon, reporting the deal is done.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/baseball/mlb/08/18/maddux.traded/index.html

314 It's Fremont, only about 15 miles south from where they are at now

I think Canuck is dealing with the grief of not having been able to attend the picnic by lashing out recklessly at the US military and Dodger FO. Maybe this wouldn't have had to happen if somebody would have just told him that they'd missed him.

336 - I don't have anything to add, so all's well :)

338 - I'm sure the deal will happen, but these guys are citing no sources on the record. Jon Heyman is also reporting that Dana Point is 60 miles southwest of Dodger Stadium. I can wait for something on the record.

[ 331 ] Yep, the price for Wells was Kemp...and did we trade him? Thats the point we are making about Mickey D. He will not be traded for Greg Maddux.

337

I agree. If its two players, McDonald is not being dealt.

I wonder if David Wells was considered, even a little bit.

335 - He'd also probably run backward with his hands behind his head

I'm actually expecting him to do that in the 200m final

What's the gestalt behind this trade's delay? Where the Padres holding out til the Dodgers finally gave up more, or were the Dodgers holding out until the Pads finally lowered their demands? It's a subtle distinction, but it might give a clue as to what we gave up.

Speaking of Fresno (and, good Lord, that's a boring if well-meaning little city), we stopped there on the way back today and I picked up a copy of the Bee while in a Starbuck's. There was a pretty good story on Andruw Jones in there today (sorry if this was posted earlier):

http://www.fresnobee.com/sports/grizzlies/story/803836.html

how in the world are May and Walsh the second seed in the beach volleyball tournament? that is just insanely nuts.

As for what San Diego wants, let's remember that two years ago, in August 2006, when the Dodgers tried to get David Wells from the Padres, we were told that the price is Matt Kemp

The Padres were very much alive in the race then - if you'll recall, they edged us for the division. It was a good way to say, no, we're not giving you guys a starting pitcher now.

Let's remember also the line that in the 06-07 offseason, that the BoSox wanted Billingsley, Kemp, Loney and Broxton for Ramirez. And for that matter, that Kemp was back in the minors then to work on pitch recognition.

342 - Goodness, he's right about the distance, according to MapQuest - but wrong about the direction. I didn't think they were so close.

331 It was the Red Sox that asked for Matt Kemp when we inquired about Wells not the Puds.

346

Coasting and holding out his arms at the end of the medal sprint while still setting a new world record was brash egotism made poetry.

351 - Using Google Earth, I got 51.77 miles (as the crow flies) to the southEAST.

and I think I figured out EK's puzzle

How about that women's discus final? Those ladies could crush my larynx with their bare hands if they so desired.

348

So you were hanging out in a Fresno Starbuck's reading the Bee...You sure you're doing alright? Did you miss civilization that much?

349 Because the host nation for the Olympics gets 1st seed ...both US mens (Dallhauser & Rogers) & womens (May & Walsh) beach volleyball teams would have been No. 1 seeds.

I went to college with Misty May!

And a million baseball players!

357 - Eh. Was just on the way back. My sister's b/f was driving and needed an iced coffee. In the middle of beautiful Clovis, Starbucks seemed the only safe bet. The paper was free. So was the john, my first running water in 4+ days.

I did impress my co-campers with my terrible Vin Scully impression.

359 - when were you at Long Beach State? I was class of 2000

359 - that seems a strange rule, but, ok, sure.

360

I'm not above a Java Chip Frappuccino now and then. Never in Fresno, but never say never.

that was a sick, sick rally

Phillies have announced their starters for our series:

Kendrick, Hamels, Blanton, Myers. That's right. The exact same four we faced at Dodger Stadium last week. As of now Kershaw, Maddux, Kuroda and Billingsley are slated to face them.

But, they could move Maddux forward, his last start was August 15th against Philadelphia (in S.D). He did well but Philadelphia is a whole different universe for all pitchers, as is Coors field and he's going to have to pitch in one of those stadiums.

361

Yeah, we talked about this before. I was class of '99 and '01. Worked there a few years after. Started there in '94.

I am watching History Detectives on KCET and the first story is about a book that turned out to be a gift between John Adams and his son Charles, they even went back and found the letter that accompanied the book and correspondence between John and Charles discussing the contents.

That's pretty cool.

367

I'm picturing Paul Giamatti now, of course.

College presidents from about 100 of the nation's best-known universities, including Duke, Dartmouth and Ohio State, are calling on lawmakers to consider lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18, saying current laws actually encourage dangerous binge drinking on campus.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080819/ap_on_re_us/college_presidents_drinking_age

368 - In Saving Private Ryan, I read more than a few reviews saying Ted Danson's cameo stopped the movie cold.
But knowing Paul Giamatti is in that same scene seems even weirder now.

Hey Nate what do you think of all this? I honestly see no need in getting Maddux & would rather see McDonald up here but that's just me.

369

If we raise the age one can get a license to drive to 21, I say fair trade.

155-YES. Pilot G2s are all I use. Ever. Unless something has gone terribly wrong.

371

It all depends on who we gave up. If Maddux can be league average for us, then it might work out okay.

373 - Black EraserMates. Been using them forever.

369

Binge drinking in college is a rite of passage.

Bear in mind the Dodgers are the ones in need NOT SD. SD will save about $2M in Maddux's salary.

In comparing the Padres and Dodgers the only area that SD leads the Dodgers is in the intelligence of their front office (sad, but true).

Remember, Ned inevitably gets fleeced in any transaction.

373 So are you catching the next flight to LA to cover the Greg Maddux press conference?

Or more likely, are you going down to Philly to see a game?

I can't remember if I mentioned this before on DT or not, but Maddux doesn't wear flip-flops in the shower and it freaks some people out.

He's a sage, but a zany one.

366 - we did? huh, don't seem to recall. what'd you study? or did we cover that as well?

I too am a member of the writers-who-use-nothing-but-G2 fan club, although I've been having a bit of a success (when I broke all my G2s) with my moleskin + micro uniball combo.

It's fatal flaw is the time it takes to dry compared to the G2, but it seems to have a smoother write--so when I tend to have the pages open long enough to dry anyhow, it's been working fairly well.

373

Hey Molly that quote of you being jealous of your future self gave me the giggles...

Idk how much Maddux has left in him but I trust the guy more than Park, Stults or Johnson. Not worth a serious prospect at this point but for filler and cash, not a bad boost. At least the Dodgers will have an advantage over the D'backs in the back of the rotation.

380

English. We even had some of the same creative writing profs.

377 He sure got fleeced in the Manny trade, yep yep. Who would trade for a guy of Manny caliber? Not like he hasn't posted post 1.000 OPS for the Dodgers,and hit 6 HRs already for us.

376 Passing from what?

374

but wouldn't it be more beneficial for the Dodgers long term success if they gave McDonald a taste of the big time? I guess I see were Ned is coming from but I just don't like his PVL leanings.

384 - interesting. it's a shame my mind ain't what it use to be, forgive me if we have this conversation again in a few months.

I'm a big Uniball micro guy, but the Pilot G2 pens are pretty sweet.

388

It's cool. I've long assumed that you were a habitual rule 11 breaker, anyway.

I know I am.

387 It isn't the time of the season to allow a guy like McDonald to take his lumps on the major league teams though. We need a guy who we know can give us 6-7 innings, and won't get run from an inning.

If this team wants to make the post season, it can't really afford McDonald going 7 innings in one inning, and then getting shelled by another team and go for 3 innings, and six runs. Better to bring McDonald as a reliever, and baby him until for next year where he can compete for a start. Just because he's 24 doesn't mean there isn't stamina concerns.

KCAL just asked Russell Martin to comment on the Jeff Kent/Vin Scully mess.

Martin: Jeff Kent is Jeff Kent.

Or words to that effect.

390 - heh. actually I don't tend to drink much when I'm on DT.

speaking of Long Beach State, you talk to anyone from there? I've only got one person that I still talk to, but we just found each other about a year ago.

Dodger site is saying it's 2 minor leaguers for Maddux.

Any chance it's Lindsey & Tiffee?

392 - Russell is a wise man.

from yahoo: This year, Los Angeles and San Diego discussed a deal for Maddux before the July 31 deadline, but talks fell through.

"I would say nothing ever got real close," Padres general manager Kevin Towers said then. "We let it be known with the Dodgers, that was the one ballclub he had interest in going to, that any deal we were going to do was going to be the best baseball deal we could do and it wasn't going to be a financial deal to try to move dollars. We just weren't happy with the prospect we would be getting back, and we chose to hold onto him."

does this comment make anyone think that the Padres had their way with Colletti and pryed a rough gem from us?

I do like Maddux over any other #5 starter option we have.

I volunteered to cover the Dodgers during the playoffs, but no one but me seems to think they're going to make it to the post-season.

So I'm penciled in for Anaheim, as if that's some sort of consolation.

391
Have you seen Maddux this year? He's been Jekyll & Hyde.

I don't mind the trade if we gave up something small, but Maddux is a much bigger gamble than you seem to note.

397 - Anaheim is a pretty good consolation (he says from behind the Orange Curtain).

Hey! According to MLBMagicNumbers.Com, the Dodgers is 39!!

Can we verify that?

391 If he can pitch seven innings in one inning that's pretty impresive. ;)

Dodgers'

Trampoline, while cool, seems like it should not be an Olympic sport.

400 huh? 39?

just checking B-R.Com & Maddux has been pretty impressive the last few starts with an overall ERA of 3.14. He's gone:

1.29
2.08
3.07

not bad at all, but from what I remember he gets shelled come playoff time. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

400
Dodgers and D-Backs are both 64-60. If Arizona wins their remaining games, they would be 102-60. To beat them, the Dodgers would need 39 wins (all their games, plus the one-game playoff) to be 103-60.

n'vr mnd. I checked out the link

406 If Arizona wins all their remaining games, then the Dodgers will have lost the games against Arizona and could not win all theirs.

406 And since they play each other 6 more times, the winner of that game knocks off 2 for each game.

398

Thanks E. Stephen :o)

408 That said, head to head wins against Arizona take 2 off the magic number.

409

off the top of my head the Dodgers play good ball in D-Back territory (so bring it on!) I'll be at the series here in L.A.

398 I haven't seen much of Maddux this year, but I seen his home and road splits. I'm assuming here that he's going struggle at places like Denver, and Philly but will be at least decent, and hopefully good at Dodgers Stadium. The only alternatives right now is Stults, JJJ, and McDonald.

Outside of McDonald(and I worry if he can carry the workload this year, he might not have the strict innings count Kershaw has, but he gotta have some sort of innings count.) And if its McDonald, he's also going to go through those rookies struggles that we seen with Kershaw(like his first start against the Rockies in Denver. Yikes.)

And yeah, this is all assuming the PTBNL is nobody special or semi-special. If it is, I like the trade a lot less.

408
I realize that...it's just the quick way to figure the magic number.

Let's look at the end of the 1996 NL West. Going into the final 3 games of the season (Padres at Dodger Stadium), the Dodgers held a 2 game lead, 90-69. The Padres were 88-71. At that point, the Padres' magic number was 6 (Dodgers could finish 93-69, so the Padres needed 6 wins to beat 93), meaning they had to sweep to win the division. Which of course they did.

Maddux will keep us in each game he starts. With our offense we will have a great chance of winning each game he pitches.

You have to remember how bad the Padres offense was for him? 14 starts without a win in which he gave up 2 earned runs or less in eight of those starts.

His numbers are inflated by four awful outings in which he gave up 9,8,6 and 6 earned runs. One was in Arizona where he has always been awful. Another was at Coors (excused). And in St. Louis. His only Petco disaster was against Minnesota (A.L team). Maddux has been pretty darn good this season. He'll be a great fit with this team.

The M's only need to go 16-22 to lose 100 games this year.

Stay frosty.

Anybody watching Olympic baseball? The Koreans are playing the Cubans, and with two on and two out, Yong Kyu Lee drag bunted - a decision that would be well received among DTers, I'm sure. Turned out well though, as the Cuban pitcher goofed on the throw to first and it rolled around 100-120 feet, thanks to these Olympic stadium's huge foul territory, allowing two runs to score.

Does Jim Tracy manage this team? Who decides to drag bunt in a tie game with two out and runners on first and second?

So, we're getting Greg Maddux.

Um...Yay?

393

I still talk to/see a few. I was a student or employee there for the better part of 12 years, so pretty much everyone I knew was connected to the place somehow.

I for one am willing to welcome back Maddux with Open Arms.

Kuroda feature:

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-kuroda19-2008aug19,0,5877582,full.story

420 Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

DodgerRama has a nice take on the Kent versus Vinnie dilemma [ http://dodgerama.blogspot.com/ ]

Every time I come back to San Luis Obispo County, I wonder why everybody in the world doesn't try to move here.

424 Because its the middle of nowhere?

You can't have dim sum in the middle of nowhere. And I want to have dim sum.

We used to call it San Luis Nabisco for some unknown reason.

425 San Luis has tons of stuff! Starbuckses and Apple Stores and Barneses and Nobleses. It's big time. And walking through downtown today...Lawdy Lawdy, I forget how much talent roams the streets of SLO Town. Choi Bless college towns.

Cambria, where I am, is truly nowhere.

418 Hey, you should be happy. Jon said DT is a Journey free Dodger blog.

424 - Yeah, SLO is super nice. The year I lived in Lompoc, I got up there about a half-dozen times.
A week from tomorrow, my wife and I will be honeymooning in Morro Bay as part of an LA-SF road trip. She's never been to that part of California, and I'm looking forward to playing tour guide.

427 - Indeed, Cambria is nowhere. Once you've seen Hearst Castle, then what?

http://www.dailynews.com/dodgers/ci_10241039

Tony Jackson confirms its two PTBNLs. Not that the trade itself is publicly confirmed yet.

428 Any Way Jon Wants It.

430 Not be around people, kayak, surf, hike, not have your cellphone work. Work on the coming school year. Feed deer.

365 But, they could move Maddux forward, his last start was August 15th against Philadelphia (in S.D). He did well but Philadelphia is a whole different universe for all pitchers, as is Coors field and he's going to have to pitch in one of those stadiums.

Why would he have to pitch at Coors? We've only got three more games there (in the middle of September).

Okay, gettin' ready for bed soon and didn't feel like waiting anymore. New post up top.

433 - Thanks. Confused vs. Colorado for @ Colorado. Home off days tend to throw me off because they're normally used for travel so I assume road games. The off day really should be on Thursday with the cross country flight to Philly.