woof! woof!

NL West and NL East have both become a four team dog fight. Meanwhile, the NL Central, minus the Cardinals have become... well, just dog food.

vr

Xeifrank

Great article/interview. Enjoyed reading it.

Cardinals, Braves, Dodgers... the three division leaders are the same from last year. Coincidence? I think not!

vr

Xei

Ok. Now someone else post.

vr

Xei

Xei falls short of the cycle...he got the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, but not 4th post.

The big picture is as Rich and Jon say, I think--Dodgers the strongest in a weak division, better by far than the two press darlings, SD and SF.

But in the short run, I think this week in St. Louis showed that the injuries have finally caught up with the Dodgers, and are beginning to eat us up from within, like termites. Tracy's poor bullpen management (as hinted above) could just be a guy who knows he doesn't have all the cards he needs, so he has to do a lot more inside-straight draws, banking on a wobbly pitcher to escape without more damage. The injuries to Werth and Valentin are costing LA playing time from probably its two weakest links offensively, so it doesn't seem like that big a deal, but it is, because replacing them has depleted the bench. Ultimately, the Valentin injury might cost us a real good prospect in return for a mediocre fill-in, which also will damage the team.

Obviously, the Dodgers have been lucky compared with the Giants, who've lost probably their three most important players. But I think we're going to see some tough times until the pitching staff and bench are at full strength.

Lederer's Law: First to 90 wins the division! It's the law!

Tooting my own horn, I was the guy who went through Erickson's box scores looking for Ks.

Eaton and Loaiza account for 3 of the 5 Ks. I forget the other two. One Padre (either Giles or Nevin) and some other nonentity

Regarding Werth -

Let's not forget that while he's struggling at LV, he's just now getting his strength, swing, and timing back. He only got that one AB in spring training and is very far behind everyone else as a result.

We should hopefully see a slow [but not too slow] return to the Finley-esque rate stats he was putting over the last half-season. A solid 6 hitter would be very nice.

Oh, and one of Erickson's Ks came when Eaton bunted foul on strike three. He wasn't exactly blowing it by him.

I was surprised to learn that the Dodgers' (!) defensive efficiency is so low. I remember checking it after 15-20 games, and it was 2nd or 3rd in the league. So it must have plummeted recently.

I was having some fun earlier with b-ref's college pages. I tried to figure out the best team I could put together with ex-UCLA people.
C - Don Slaught
1B - platoon Karros & Chambliss -- was Chambliss better than Karros? it doesn't really look like it
2B - Jackie Robinson
SS - Mike Gallego -- yes, he's the best one available
3B - Todd Zeile (Glaus?)
LF - Jeff Conine
CF - Shane Mack
RF - Bud Stewart (??)

The starting rotation is awful, though:
Tim Leary
Bill Bonham
Matt Young
Jim Parque
Dave Schmidt

Great stuff as usual, Jon. Hey guys - Rich thinks we're bright and level-headed.

One thing that I have found interesting, both with myself and with other fans (as witnessed on this board), is the constantly changing psyche of a Dodger fan. It has become even more apparent as the Dodgers have alternated wins and losses this entire month (before yesterday). When the Dodgers roll to a victory over the defending NL Champs via a 3 run blast from everybody's favorite underdog, I honestly feel that we have a legitimate shot at doing some real damage this year. My feelings are usually mirrored all over the place by other Dodger fans. This is followed by unhealthy frustration and depression less than 24 hours later when I watch the Cards look like they are hitting off a tee (most of the time with two outs), and we can't get anybody out. I then proceed to find numerous doomsday posts by the same faithful posters. I am smarter than this. I like to think of myself as an educated fan, and usually have a good sense of where my team stands in regards to bottom line talent and likely production, in turn giving me some sort of guideline on how much I should get my hopes up. This team is tough though. Exemplified by their 12-2 streak followed by their 8-14 streak, I think the team itself might be having the same confused feelings. Ahh.... such is baseball I suppose. And such is being a diehard fan. You live and die with them. I guess I would just like to have an idea if I will be living or dying ...

Erickson blamed the defense in Tuesday night's game. Great. I'm sure that endeared him to teammates. When you've given up 9 HR's and only gotten 5 K's, you have no room to point fingers.

The guy is toast. He has no out pitch. ST was a fluke. Is he going to be this year's Nomo, or will they wise up? I fully expect him to be tattooed on Sunday by Atlanta.

The Cardinals certainly exposed Dodger weaknesses. It is very disturbing when your pitchers cannot shake off poor defensive plays (ummm, Choi? I'm calling him "Redwood" from now on) and bad umpiring calls. Buckle down and get it done. Lowe has shown this in two consecutive starts, and Perez and Weaver also have a history of it. And of course, we have Erickson outwardly blaming the defense.

There is no excuse, either, to give up 0-2 hits, especially to pitchers or otherwise poor hitters. Similarly, having a guy 0-2, only to walk him, is not acceptable.

This series was so frustrating. Now they have Atlanta, Florida, and ANAHEIM to face. With the Dodgers' recent luck, Angel batters will suddenly find their sticks.

Come on, guys, get it going!

In case it isn't clear, I have also made this the game chat thread for tonight. So unleash your Random Dodger Callback, Fact of Choi and It's a Schmoll World if you have them, people.

Allow me to add my outrage over Erickson blaming the defense for his lousy pitching. Odalis Perez got fricaseed when he made the much fairer point about the LA offense in 2003, but Erickson seems to be escaping scorn for this idiotic, surreal alibi.

It must be that he's a dead man walking, so players figure "why bother?"

Random Dodger game callback (hope this didn't get posted twice)

May 13, 1975

Burt Hooton, who had had two bad starts since being acquired in a trade from the Cubs, threw a 2-hit, 5-0 shutout in St. Louis before a crowd of 18,519 at Busch Memorial Stadium. Backup shortstop Rick Auerbach, filling in for the injured Bill Russell, drove in 2 runs and center fielder Jim Wynn drove in 3. The win put the Dodgers, the defending National League champs, 4 ½ games in front of second place Cincinnati.

But come June the season would go south on the Dodgers while the Reds took off. The key contributors of 1974, Wynn and reliever Mike Marshall could not match their efforts from the previous year as they were plagued by injuries like the rest of the Dodgers in 1975. The Dodgers ended up 88-74 while Cincinnati rolled up a 108-54 record which would eventually earn them a World Series title.

Hooton was one of the two bright spots for the Dodgers in 1975. Acquired on May 2 from Chicago in exchange for Geoff Zahn and Eddie Solomon, Hooton finished with an 18-7 record and a 2.82 ERA. Hooton won 12 straight decisions to finish out the year. Steve Garvey hit a 2-run game-ending home run off of J.R. Richard on September 26 to give Hooton his last win. In his career, Richard was 15-4 against the Dodgers with a 1.86 ERA.

The other highlight for the Dodgers in 1975 was the performance of second baseman Davey Lopes. Lopes stole 77 bases to become the Dodger to lead the league in steals since Maury Wills in 1965.

The most important player on the 1975 Dodgers however was Andy Messersmith. Messersmith put up a 19-14 record and a 2.29 ERA. But more importantly, Messersmith played the 1975 season without signing a contract. Messersmith, along with Dave McNally, decided that they would test out the legality of baseball's reserve clause at the end of the season.

In 1976, Messersmith was on the Braves. And baseball was much different.

Thanks to the New York Times, BaseballReference.com and Retrosheet

Okay, I'm changing my mind. I'm gonna do a separate game chat. Bob, you're welcome to repost RDGC there. Please continue to comment at will on the chat between Rich and me here.

Fortunately, I have knowledge of the tools of "cut and paste"

Okay - look below for the game chat.

Thanks for letting us listen in on your conversation with Lederer, Jon. I agree that the Dodgers are the favorites to win the West, but will need to improve to do anything in the playoffs. I also would be willing to part with one of our 4 3rd base prospects (including Guzman), and/or one of our pitching prospects in exchange for a MLB-caliber 3rd baseman. Aubrey Huff springs to mind. Polanco if necessary, but at a lower price. I think LF is also in need of help, but Werth might be sufficient, and anyway, it's easier to patch together something in LF than at 3B (because it's an easier position to play defensively). I think I'd release Erickson now, and call up Mahomes for that next start, saving the young guys til September.

Finally, I too loved the "smokejumper" moniker, but remind myself that this would not be new, but a return to the way relievers used to be used, as it were. With Gagne holding down the back end, I don't think it's impossible that something like that could happen if DePo or (chuckle) Tracy were to think of it or read it here. It would maximize Yhency's value, but ironically probably lower his market price (insofar as such haphazard use would not bring him "setup man" or "closer" money. Only his agent would have reason to object. I'd also use Carrara that way.

Thanks, Bob. 1975 was one of those years I was more interested in wine, women and song (i.e. I was a college student, and sometimes the wine came in a green leafy form) than baseball, so my rememberances of that season are hazy. All I remember was that what Messersmith was doing seemed like an unwanted invasion of adult topics in the playground. I'd forgotten about Marshall's fast fade, and totally forgotten that Hooten came in a trade. Good trade! If DePodesta is half the dealer Al Campanis was, we'll have a good rest of the decade.

do we need to invent this "smokejumper" word? doesn't it mean the same thing as "fireman" used to? that seems like a clearer image. he comes in, he puts out the fire.

No, people now equate "fireman" with "closer." We want a word that makes the middle innings glamorous. And "smokejumper" - the first guy into the fire, as opposed to the last guy putting it out - could do that.

ah, i see what you're saying. i guess people do equate the two now. i really don't think a 3-run lead with nobody on in the 9th inning sounds like much of a fire, though.

Jon and Rich, thanks for allowing the eavesdrop.

I'm with GoBears... willing to exchange a few prospects for a proven third sacker in a Finley-esque rental then let one of the kids have it in 2006. As much as I want Griffey to right his career and by association the Big Red ship, I have a stronger desire to see them tank so the Dodgers can get their hands on Joe Randa in July. He should have been signed in the offseason anyway. This type of move is exactly why prospects are stockpiled. Playoff years are a rarity and the West is weak. The team should (and will) equip itself for a run this year.

In regards to the pitching staff, the performance of the 4-headed #5 (Erickson/Dessens/Alvarez/Jackson?) doesn't concern me as much as the Splitsville lines of the first four. Every team has a gaping hole at number five that they keep shoving bodies into. So far, none of our four have consistently displayed an ability to rebound from a bad inning. Tracy deserves some of our criticism but the reality is that his starters don't just lose steam, they stop dead in their tracks and lay down. Until two of the four starters show that they can limit bad innings to 1-2 runs, this is big trouble. Looking forward to the test of the next ten games...will the real 2005 Dodgers please stand up.

joe randa?! why joe randa?

hey-- i've got 2 reserve level tickets for tonight that I can't use. if anyone from here wants them, just drop me an e-mail and you can pick them up in Hollywood.

thebump@earthlink.net

Sorry--

Disregard previous post. Somone's using them.

go dodgers.

thomas

May 1975 was when I saw the Dodgers inperson for the first time, on May 28 at Shea. Doug Rau lost to Jon Matlack, 4-3. One odd thing about the game was that Messersmith came in to relieve Rau in the eighth, after having pitched a complete game loss to Seaver two days before.

Randa...one year rental for the Reds. I don't think the Astros will get rid of Ensberg. Don't want to move someone from the AL and can't really find anyone else that a losing team will part with and fits the offense/defense that Randa brings. Not saying the guy is a star, just that he would take care of the 3B problem on the field and in the lineup immediately.

It would be quite foolish to give up any prospects of real value to patch a non-existent "hole." Our third bagger who was hitting .194 goes down and now we have a "hole?" We never expected much production from that position anyway with a 2B who is our clean-up hitter. It is for situations like the one we have now that Triple A exists. Mike Edwards is hitting close to .400, albeit in limited action. Aubrey Huff is a lousy 3B and is not hitting well anyway, but of course the punters want the "name" player instead of somebody who just does the job. Impatient, short-term thinking is something we have to get away from.

There is a "hole" when a starter is lost and the back-ups don't cut it. The toughest part about prospects is knowing which have "real value" in the long run. My recommendation to swap prospects for a rent-a-vet is contigent on the condition that there still is a perceived offensive/defensive hole at 3B when the deadline approaches because the other options haven't panned out.

The discussion has been about trading one of our few "elite" prospects. I know who those guys are, what they can do. Their "real value" is not a mystery. None of them should be traded for a "hole filler." Now if a deal at the deadline can be made in which we give up the kind of expendable prospects that got us Steve Finley last year, great, I would be fine with that.

That was awesome, thanks Jon.

Now if a deal at the deadline...I would be fine with that.

We're in agreement. I'm not advocating giving up the crown jewels for a three month rental, just the fools gold.

Has anyone seen any mention in the local media about how two players that the Dodgers let leave -- and DePo has been criticized repeatedly for -- haven't hit well at all? Obviously it's early, but if you're going to rake the front office over the coals about dissing Finley and Beltre, at least acknowledge that, so far, it's money well unspent.

"if you're going to rake the front office over the coals about dissing Finley and Beltre, at least acknowledge that, so far, it's money well unspent."

Easily explained: Joe Morgan says that it is totally unfair to compare how the players are doing for their present team with how they would have done with the Dodgers.

God I hate Joe Morgan. Oh, by the way, I have a question. Will somebody tell me how to bold the quoted text on internet explorer so that I can present quotes like everybody else?

*32: The discussion has been about trading one of our few "elite" prospects. I know who those guys are, what they can do. Their "real value" is not a mystery. None of them should be traded for a "hole filler."

That's impressive. Because GMs and scouts often DON'T know which guys are going to make it, even after AAA success. And if we DO have info on who is really good and who is likely a career minor-leaguer, and if that info isn't completely consistent with reputations, then we can win by trading the guys with better reps than they deserve. The Yankees are famous for this - hyping their prospects to trade them for better value. Besides, we have 4 3rd base prospects. We don't need all of them. Trading from strength is the whole point. Now, of course, not for 3 months of junk. Only if something worthwhile comes up.

Victor Diaz was widely seen as filler when we traded him to the Mets for Ventura, and he's been looking really good. It's hard to tell with prospects.

I want to see Placido Polanco in Dodger Blue. Pretty cheap, really versatile, good defender, won't be that hard to pry away because Charlie Manuel is angry he's still on the team. They might bite on a B-list prospect and reliever. Something like Broxton and Sanchez? We can also give him arbitration next year, with this year's brouhaha I find it hard to imagine he'd take it, but if he did, he's a solid player at 3B, SS, and 2B.

A more radical path would be trading Izturis, perhaps to the Cubs, and get back a prospect and a 3B like Polanco. Have Valentin come back and play SS, and he wouldn't need to hit all that well to justify a starting spot because of his great defense. Then the IF is Choi-Kent-Valentin-Polanco, and doesn't block any of our prospects. Sell Izturis when his value is high!

I should also mention Aubrey Huff seems like a guy likely to be traded. D-Rays would want a premier prospect for him, but an elite hitter making $4.75 million this year and $6.75 million in 2006 is worth it. Next year, he'd move to 1B or the corner outfield to clear up 3B for a prospect if ready.

Sameer, just put asterisks at the start and at the end of the text you want bolded (no spaces) like *this*.

was at the game last night...a few thoughts...

what the hell was Tracy thinking in leaving Weaver in so long? ok, a great 7 innings, but he pitches to the Brave cleanup hitter with the bases loaded and 110 pitches thrown? no one even warming up til chipper comes to the plate with second and third...

kudos to Bradley, but it should have been cushion, not come from behind...

last year Tracy worked the staff well, this year, he leaves the starters in an inning too long almost every game...

Thanks, Jim

Great interview. When you do these Jon, I think they are some of the best times for the blog.

Can anyone say differently, but I think Tracy usually is decent with the bullpen. I've been watching him his entire time with the Dodgers, and I can't remember him being this bad so consistently. I'm of the opinion that perhaps his father's illness is getting to him, because there's just no other reason why he should all of the sudden be doing so poorly. Or has he always been this bad? I'm convinced he used to be good with the hook.

Regarding our 5th starter situation, Carlyle just pitched well for the 51s last night, but then Lopez blew the lead in the 9th. Buddy's line was 5IP 2H 1R 1ER 3BB 8K 0HR. We'll still need quite a few more performances like that before getting excited, considering his earlier performance in the majors. A lot of people on this board were hopeful that Buddy would be able to contribute. Perhaps his potential will best be realized as a 5th starter?

#43: It doesn't seem like Tracy trusts his bullpen like he has in previous seasons. On one hand, I understand how a few performances from Carlyle, Schmoll and Houlton would make any manager gun-shy. Yet, Alvarez, Carrara, and Wunsch have all pitched well, and Brazoban has been outstanding. Overall, our bullpen, even without Gagne, has been a strength, especially relative to our late-inning starting pitching. I'm hopeful that Tracy's bullpen management problems will be alleviated by Gagne's return tonight. Certainly, Gagne = 9th, Brazoban = 8th, Sanchez / Alvarez / Carrara / Wunsch = 6th & 7th is an easier equation to follow in close games.

As an aside, isn't it odd how all of our pitchers spontaneously implode after 5 or 6 innings? It seems like we have a "Grabowski" through 5 every other day.

Wow, is that what intelligent baseball talk sounds like? Thanks for the conversation, Jon.

There is nothing I like better than "listening" to folks who know what they're talking about casually discussing baseball. Which is precisely why I enjoy this blog so much. Thanks, Jon, for sharing your conversation with us.

Regarding some of our holes, isn't it amazing how fast a little production can shut us all up? Just ask Mr. Choi.

Being out here on the East Coast (DC), it is often difficult to catch the late Dodgers games on the West Coast (e.g., 10:40 start last night), so of course I Tivo™ the game to watch the next morning.

After faithfully watching the first 7 2/3 innings and feeling pretty good about a nice start to a Saturday, of course my heart is ripped out by Tracy again leaving in the SP too long. I immediately kick it into three arrow mode to just confirm my suspicion that Tracy will again be the goat. Well of course Milton comes back and saves his bacon and re-energizes my Saturday. Anyways, I just wanted to say how much fun it is to re-create the game by wading through 500+ posts knowing how things turned out. One of my first thoughts after LaRoche's slam was, "I gotta know what Steve had to say about that." To see the tenor of the posts turn from despair to elation was a great joy to me today...

If a no-no is a Grabowski, is a perfect game a Big Grabowski?

Great chat; thanks for posting it. Is Wunsch really a LOOGy? Looking at his splits over the last three years, he's faced about 2/3 as many RHs as LHs. His OPS allowed jumps against the RHs but is still lower than Duaner's career OPS allowed against RHs.

I'm all for the smokejumper concept! why let the game get away from you. that's why you have 6 guys in the pen. it should be how skillfully you play your cards that count.

remember when Worrell was our closer. that is when I realized how overrated that role was. He was complaining that the manager was not using him properly. he only wanted to pitch the ninth inning and never wanted to be brought in with anyone on base. I was suprised that he didn't demand to be only brought in with two out in the ninth with none on base. Oh, and a three run lead.

bokonon,

If you go over to The Hardball Times, there is a two-parter on "What is a LOOGY and why in the world did they get that way?" One of the things he found is that even the most dedicated of the LOOGYs, Mike Myers, pitches about equally to righties and lefties, and then most loogys have a split sort of like you're looking at for Wunsch. I expected an ending to the story like LOOGYs are good or LOOGYs are bad, and the conclusion was more like "LOOGys are there" and so you can draw your own conclusions.

Re: #48

Denezin, I echo your feelings. I have the opposite problem to yours. I'm on the west coast but I work nights. When the Dodgers are on an eastern trip I can usually see the whole game. But tonight I'll probably see three or four innings before I go to work. I really look forward to reading the comments when I get home. It's a great way to unwind after work. My thanks to everybody.