
Jon's other site:
Screen Jam
TV and more ...
Dodger Thoughts T-Shirts
On sale through February 16, 2008


Click here to order.
* * *
The Best of Dodger Thoughts
A 325-page book featuring the top selections from this website from 2002-2005.
Click here for more information.
* * *
Or, just make a donation to support the site. Many thanks.
"Dodger Thoughts, like TiVo, is one of those things you can completely do without until you start using it."
- Fanerman
SI.com
NL West Preview
Evaluating Defense
Colletti and Depo
World Baseball Classic
Minor League Broadcasters
Slow Starts
Eric Gagne
Groundball Pitchers
Dodger Prospects
Albert Pujols
Humbled Angels
You Be the Manager
Eric Gagne II
Unreliable Relievers
Revived Angels
It's Okay To Sell
Dodger Turnaround
Andre Ethier
Padres-Dodgers Showdown
NL Final Weekend
Mets-Dodgers NLDS
Postseason ratings
NL Wish Lists
Manny vs. J.D.
McGwire Controversy
Dodger Offense
Trainers Matter
Variety
Will Arnett
John C. McGinley
Laura Dern
Imelda Staunton
SAG Awards
Ellen Pompeo
Grey's Anatomy
2004-05 Rookie Dramas
Anthony Hopkins
NATPE
Scrubs
Award Shows
Topher Grace
Ashton Kutcher
Writing on Improv Shows
Rainn Wilson
T.R. Knight
Guest Actors
Animation Guests
Joey Carson and Tennis
Donald Trump and Golf
2006 Emmys Nominees*
*Comedy Series
*Comedy Director
*Comedy Writer
*Comedy Actor
*Comedy Supporting Actor
Blue's Clues
Lizzy Caplan
Ann Donahue
CMT: Giants
CMA Awards
Little Miss Sunshine
Actor-Directors
Freshman Series
Clint Eastwood
Showrunners vs. Censors
Little Children
Breaking and Entering
Tartikoff Legacy Awards
Jackie Earle Haley
Knights of Prosperity
Office Online
2007 Screenplay Noms
Friday Night Lights
Robert Benton
ABC Fridays
Rookie Actors
Global Casting
2007 Pilot Casting
Sublime Slime
Also ...
A Season in Savannah (Stanford Magazine)
Five Questions: Los Angeles Dodgers (2005) (Hardball Times)
Rick Monday (Baseball Analysts)
Baseball's Odd Couple (Baseball Prospectus)
Five Questions: Los Angeles Dodgers (2006) (Hardball Times)
Five Questions: Los Angeles Dodgers (2007) (Hardball Times)
Dodger home record: 40-30 (.571)
When Jon attended: 6-3 (.667)
When Jon didn't: 34-27 (.557)
Dodgers at home: 745-600 (.554)
Jon attended: 293-233 (.557)*
Jon didn't: 457-374 (.550)
* includes road games attended
Current Roster with Estimated 2008 Salaries
(updated March 28)
Most figures are estimates (some are wild estimates) but will be updated as information comes in. Corrections welcome.
More contract details here.
Starting Pitchers (5)
$12,300,000 Hiroki Kuroda
$10,000,000 Derek Lowe
$9,500,000 Brad Penny
$7,000,000 Esteban Loaiza
*$500,000 Chad Billingsley
Total: $39,300,000
Bullpen (6)
$2,000,000 Takashi Saito
$1,925,000 Joe Beimel
$1,125,000 Scott Proctor
*$500,000 Jonathan Broxton
$500,000 Chan Ho Park
*$400,000 Hong-Chih Kuo
Total: $6,450,000
Starting Lineup (8)
$14,100,000 Andruw Jones
$13,000,000 Rafael Furcal
$9,000,000 Jeff Kent
$8,500,000 Nomar Garciaparra
$8,000,000 Juan Pierre
$500,000 Russell Martin
*$400,000 James Loney
*$400,000 Matt Kemp
Total: $53,900,000
Bench (6)
$875,000 Gary Bennett
$600,000 Mark Sweeney
$424,500 Andre Ethier
$391,000 Delwyn Young
$390,000 Chin-Lung Hu
$390,000 Blake DeWitt
Total: $3,071,000
Disabled List
$12,000,000 Jason Schmidt
*$400,000 Tony Abreu
*$390,000 Andy LaRoche
Total: $12,790,000
Also Paying ...
$1,000,000 Brett Tomko
$750,000 Odalis Perez
$540,000 Yhency Brazoban
$500,000 Randy Wolf
$487,500 Jason Repko
$135,225 Rudy Seanez
$100,000 Mike Lieberthal
$50,000 Ramon Martinez
Total: $3,562,725
Working total: *$113,268,725
*Rough salary estimate
ESPN BR
BP
Cube Alvarez
ESPN BR
BP
Cube Abreu
ESPN
BR
BP
Cube Beimel
ESPN
BR
BP
Cube Bennett
ESPN
BR
BP
Cube Billingsley
ESPN
BR
BP
Cube Brazoban
ESPN
BR
BP
Cube Broxton
ESPN
BR
BP
Cube DeWitt
ESPN
BR
BP
Cube Ethier
ESPN
BR
BP
Cube Furcal
ESPN BR BP Cube Garciaparra
ESPN BR BP Cube Hu
ESPN BR BP Cube Jones
ESPN BR BP Cube Kemp
ESPN BR BP Cube Kent
ESPN BR BP Cube Kuo
ESPN BR BP Cube Kuroda
ESPN BR BP Cube LaRoche
ESPN BR BP Cube Loaiza
ESPN BR BP Cube Loney
ESPN BR BP Cube Lowe
ESPN BR BP Cube Martin
ESPN BR BP Cube May
ESPN BR BP Cube McDonald
ESPN BR BP Cube Meloan
ESPN BR BP Cube Miller
ESPN BR BP Cube Orenduff
ESPN BR BP Cube Park
ESPN BR BP Cube Paul
ESPN BR BP Cube Penny
ESPN BR BP Cube Pierre
ESPN BR BP Cube Proctor
ESPN BR BP Cube Repko
ESPN BR BP Cube Saito
ESPN BR BP Cube Schmidt
ESPN BR BP Cube Stults
ESPN BR BP Cube Sweeney
ESPN BR BP Cube Troncoso
ESPN BR BP Cube Wade
ESPN BR BP Cube Young
ESPN BR BP Cube Alomar
ESPN BR BP Cube Alvarez
ESPN BR BP Cube Aybar
ESPN BR BP Cube Baez
ESPN BR BP Cube Bako
ESPN BR BP Cube Beltre
ESPN BR BP Cube Bradley
ESPN BR BP Cube Cabrera
ESPN BR BP Cube Carrara
ESPN BR BP Cube Carter
ESPN BR BP Cube Chen
ESPN BR BP Cube Choi
ESPN BR BP Cube Cora
ESPN BR BP Cube Crosby
ESPN BR BP Cube Cruz
ESPN BR BP Cube Dessens
ESPN BR BP Cube Dreifort
ESPN BR BP Cube Drew
ESPN BR BP Cube Encarnacion
ESPN BR BP Cube Edwards
ESPN BR BP Cube Erickson
ESPN BR BP Cube Falkenborg
ESPN BR BP Cube Finley
ESPN BR BP Cube Flores
ESPN BR BP Cube Gagne
ESPN BR BP Cube Grabowski
ESPN BR BP Cube Green
ESPN BR BP Cube Guzman
ESPN BR BP Cube Hanrahan
ESPN BR BP Cube Hernandez
ESPN BR BP Cube Hundley
ESPN BR BP Cube Ishii
ESPN BR BP Cube Izturis
ESPN BR BP Cube Jackson
ESPN BR BP Cube Karros
ESPN BR BP Cube Ketchner
ESPN BR BP Cube Ledee
ESPN BR BP Cube Lima
ESPN BR BP Cube Lo Duca
ESPN BR BP Cube Lofton
ESPN BR BP Cube T. Martin
ESPN BR BP Cube Mayne
ESPN BR BP Cube G. Mota
ESPN BR BP Cube Mueller
ESPN BR BP Cube Myrow
ESPN BR BP Cube Nakamura
ESPN BR BP Cube Navarro
ESPN BR BP Cube Nomo
ESPN BR BP Cube Osoria
ESPN BR BP Cube A. Perez
ESPN BR BP Cube O. Perez
ESPN BR BP Cube Phillips
ESPN BR BP Cube Proctor
ESPN BR BP Cube Roberts
ESPN BR BP Cube Robles
ESPN BR BP Cube Romano
ESPN BR BP Cube C. Ross
ESPN BR BP Cube D. Ross
ESPN BR BP Cube Sanchez
ESPN BR BP Cube Schmoll
ESPN BR BP Cube Sele
ESPN BR BP Cube Seo
ESPN BR BP Cube Shuey
ESPN BR BP Cube Stanley
ESPN BR BP Cube S. Stewart
ESPN BR BP Cube Thompson
ESPN BR BP Cube Thurston
ESPN BR BP Cube Valentin
ESPN BR BP Cube Venafro
ESPN BR BP Cube Ventura
ESPN BR BP Cube Weaver
ESPN BR BP Cube Werth
ESPN BR BP Cube Wilson
ESPN BR BP Cube Wunsch
1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with
Baseball Toaster runs on some experimental software called Fairpole. It's still under development.
For more information, please visit the Fairpole blog, or read the FAQ.
There's usually a moment, about three seconds into a conversation about the Dodgers, when you discern whether you are talking to a receptive listener. You could be generally supportive of general manager Paul DePodesta or not. Either way, you're going to find passionate opponents.
In those three seconds, on the occasions when I realize the person is not receptive, I cannot end the conversation fast enough.
It's depressing because there are a lot of people whom I like, and whom I like talking baseball with, and whom I have long talked baseball with, that I can't currently talk about the Dodgers with, because it's too exhausting and fruitless.
As long as there has been baseball there have been debates about baseball, but I can't remember one that so resembled the divide between Democrats and Republicans - where each side was so sure that the other side was not only wrong but blindly jeopardizing the future - as the debate over the state of the Dodgers. It's one reason I don't allow political debate on this site, because it's just more than I can take.
When I write something that I'm trying to sell, my philosophy is that I have to make it bulletproof. It's not enough for me to be personally satisfied. I can't allow others any reason to want to make changes or reject the work completely. If I fail to make my writing bulletproof, it doesn't mean I'm not a good writer. But it could mean writing that is A-minus quality will ultimately be no more successful than writing that is D-minus.
DePodesta has written some great pieces for the Dodgers, but he hasn't been bulletproof. Of course, few general managers are, but that's beside the point for a lot of folks. So some see a promising future for the Dodgers and some see a dire one. Not because they are by nature optimists or pessimists - it's just all that they see in this case.
I can't talk to those people who see things so differently from me - in such an entrenched fashion - except at a place where if someone disagrees with me, I can take the time to say what I want to say, the way I want to say it.
I can only talk to those people here.
Even the best filmmakers have had box-office flops, and DePodesta is weathering his. And so am I.
And also one for "Republican Singles". I should go check it out to see if Harriet Miers has her picture posted.
I look at the Dodgers as if the glass is half full, but it would be easy for someone to knock it over and spill everything out.
A couple of months back i invited a friend over to my place and he brought a friend of his to my house.
He said he was studying to be a major league umpire. Long story-short, by the end of the night we were both having a dodgers discussion about were the team was headed. He was against all the stuff Depo and Mccourt were doing. I was trying to reason with him and have an intellectual conversation about it and he was just trying to out shout me.
He was trying to talk over me in MY HOME.
That was the last time ive seen that guy.
After 30 minutes of debating i just gave up and walked away because no matter what i wouldve said I wouldve been wrong in his eyes.
And this is why i hate the LA Times and sports radio, because they keep feeding these clowns misinformation or not the whole info and they past it off as truths.
a) Root for the Giants, Angels or some other team, and just aren't that interested in the Dodgers or actively hate them. When I tell them good things, they don't challenge me. They just plug their ears;
b) If they are Dodger fans, expended so much energy hating the Fox regime, Kevin Malone and the various other characters of that time that this era seems like glasnost. Their worries, if any, are about McCourt's financial standing.
I mean, let's face it. There's not much for McCourt and DePodesta to ruin. We're at the "15 Years of Lousy Football is Enough" stage. The team has wavered from mediocrity to crappiness for most of the past 17 seasons, with a few exceptions that seem, in retrospect, to have not meant much. We're not "contenders" like the Giants or Angels. We occasionally fall upward near the top, but no one's been fooled in a long time. This organization was cast adrift in the wake of Campanis' departure.
DePodesta, Logan White, the legacy of Dan Evans and the Jacksonville Suns give me hope that the Dodger storyline is about to change. So that makes me a member of your party, Jon. But I don't think voter turnout is very high either way.
In a nutshell, what is Barthes' definition of myth?
My sister-in-law doesn't like DePodesta and she adored Paul Lo Duca, but I'm not much in the mood to argue with her because she's family and a nice person and a longtime Dodgers fan.
But if you read the BTF thread on the Tim Brown column, there is a deep division between those who think DePodesta is horrible and those who think that you can't judge. (I'm in the latter category).
And while Frank McCourt doesn't seem like the easiest boss to work for, I really don't see him as a man bent on the destruction of the franchise as some speculated yesterday. McCourt may do it out of incompetence rather than direct action.
And remember that other franchises with horrible owners have been winners (such as the Marlins, TWICE!)
So in the case of the Dodgers, there's the apparently dominant idea that DePo and Moneyball are destroying the proud history of the franchise, which the media keeps going on and on about with the "right way to play" and "Dodger tradition", etc., despite any stats, arguments, or anecdotes about Branch Rickey using sabermetrics to the contrary.
I still may be the only one who loved the Milton Bradley deal and I still feel Bradley can contribute on the field as well as the community. Jeff Kent has 1 year left and I would be willing to give Bradley the same time frame and hopefully they can work things out on a personal standpoint.
I think we all felt this team was not as strong character wise as 2004's but now DePo has learned his lesson that the make-up of a team is another big part of the process along with OPS and OBP. I think he will make great strides this offseason if given the resources to pursue who he needs to.
Anyway, the thing that really puzzles me is why people are so impatient with DePodesta. The last 17 years have been pretty awful. I DO NOT want another manager or GM that evaluates talent and assembles a team like the ones we've had the last 17 years have done. I hope DePodesta gets a fair amount of time to put a program together and 3 years won't do it.
I also don't want another owner that is willing to let the team slide because he's afraid it MAY cut into his family fortune. I kinda like the maverick that is risking his neck and trying to make a place for himself. I hope he sticks with what he's started. Vindication will be won by staying the course, not by flopping from one philosophy to another because the dolts in MSM have a megaphone in their hands they haven't earned.
DePodesta's plan may not work, but I want different results than the Dodgers have been getting, so it is obviously going to take a different plan than the one they've been using.
If we would have just come in 2nd or 3rd place as we always had then all this change, tough change, would be viewed at as a good thing.
This refers to the concept of sabermetrics which is merely the interpretation of baseball statistics in a different way from the traditional counting and rate statistics. There is no one sabermetric way. Bill James coined the term (or at least popularized it) because many of the statistics developed in the field came from people who were members of SABR, the Society for American Baseball Research (the organization rarely spells out the name anymore for a variety of reason.)
However, not all members of SABR are particularly experts in statistical analysis. I would say about nearly half aren't. Many are baseball historians, as Eric Enders would likely describe himself. I would fall into that category too. However the statistical analysis people and the historical people are not disjoint sets.
Unfortunately, this site won't allow me to enter my really cool Venn diagram of the membership of SABR.
I am a Levinas fan myself.
The Dictator
"The point isn't to play baseball, the point is to change it!" -Marx and Engels as baseball fans
"Join together you sabermetrics, the time is at hand!" -Marx and Engels again
"Throw off the oppressive baseball tradtionalists (besides they are all republicans!)" -Marx and Engels again
Just having some fun! Please don't blacklist me for my political statements.
The Dictator
The Pirates have reportedly been turned down by Tim Wallach and Robin Ventura as they look to hire a hitting coach.
Not everybody who gets turned down for a promotion takes it out on the company by destroying all the good work that he had done before. It's not a good way to get another job.
If Collins gets so upset over not getting the manager's job, his best recourse would be to look elsewhere for a job.
I have stopped arguing with prople. I can't win for two reasons. One, I am not as sold on the Sabr approach as I am on the idea that we need to try something new and if we are going to try something new we should give it our all. The second reason is those who object to Depo's approach have the ultimite trump card; results, losing 91 games, we had the 6th worst record in MLB.
Just wait a year or two and we will see if we are right or wrong. All you can do is agree to disagree.
Finally, I don't get the push for Orel. Big deal he's a former Dodger great. So what? It might make us feel all warm and cozy but is he qualified? That's all I care about.
The sabermetric approach would be a lot different.
It would entirely be possible to blame the GM if the team's injuries were foreseeable. J.D. Drew's hit-by-pitch was an injury that couldn't have been foreseen, certainly. Milton Bradley's fragility was, but then you have to ask yourself the question, would the team have been better off keeping Franklin Gutierrez (the main part of the trade)? Would they have been better with Andrew Brown, who posted a 10.46 K/9 with Buffalo this year?
http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/G/franklin-gutierrez.shtml
http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/B/andrew-brown.shtml
Bradley was a key part of the 2004 squad, but the old demons of injury and temprament came back to bite him -- and the Dodgers. I don't honestly know how to grade DePodesta just yet -- and I keep waffling on several topics, the amount of blame to assign to him over injuries being one of them -- but, as with Dan Evans when he was in the GM's chair, I see the same pernicious tendency in the media to hurl javelins even though the supporting arguments are rather flimsy.
I kept wanting to shout "ANTITRUST EXEMPTION!"
I guess there's a little something in the back of my brain that worries me about a hero coming back to a place of past glory in a high-pressure position. His return is billed as the solution to all ills, if not the Second Coming, with the expectations all out of joint. Maybe Alan Trammell is a better example?
In the end I think the manager issue is not that important (which isn't to say we shouldn't go with the best canidate) becasue I assume Depo learned his lesson and will be calling the shots.
46- How are being a teams Hero and great pitcher not qualifications?
However, though I guess I don't express it well, my real point is:
Take the time to work out a different approach that works and ignore people who think 20 years of bad management can be fixed overnight.
Let's be honest. Even the '88 victory was more good fortune than astute planning.
I can't tell you that Paul DePodesta is the "right man for this job (thus my reference to not being up-to-speed on the statistical approach to baseball or whatever it should be called), but I am almost certain that the right person to develop an improved approach is NOT SOME RETREAD TRADITIONALIST.
Personally, I thought Dan Evans might be the right guy. I liked what he was doing. But, watching DePodesta is fun too. His GM years have been just as successful as Malone's, Lasorda's (brief, thank goodness), and even Clare's for my money and he is only just getting started.
I love seeing guys we drafted come up out of the minors and succeed at the major league level. Much more satisfying to me than signing big-time free agents, even on the rare occasion that they turn out to be worth the contract.
And, never forget, I don't claim to be a subject matter expert. I just have my opinions and preferences.
I'm not doubting you, but I'm curious to know which of Depo's ideas you think are "genius."
On to other matters, it is interesting that the MSM and alot of Dodger fans have selective memories from 89-03. When DePo was hired (I was already familiar with him from Moneyball), I told all my friends and family to stop pretending that the Dodgers have been a great team and to give this new guy a chance. The old approach wasn't working.
Really, when was the last time a Dodger team was put together using the "Dodger Way" or whatever Plaschke and his minions keep harping on?
Perhaps they want to go back to the days when Branch Rickey ran the team. Rickey, a man who liked to use statistical analysis and keep a low payroll.
Once baseball's economic picture changed forever in the late 1980s and early 1990s with the advent of cable, the Dodgers, among large media market teams, have shown themselves singularly inept at being able to exploit their advantages. The 1970s Dodgers model won't work today. It can't. It's impossible.
The good Brooklyn teams had many traits that are found among good teams today: they hit lots of homers and drew lots of walks. And they had one or two guys who could steal bases and some solid pitching.
Once the Dodgers moved to L.A. and moved into Dodger Stadium, the team adapted to its new environment. Pitching was emphasized and the ability to generate one or two runs. That's what would work.
In the 1970s, while speed was still a big thing, the Dodgers realized that they could hit home runs in Dodger Stadium and players like Reggie Smith and Rick Monday were aquired.
But since 1981, with the exception of the 1988 aberration, the Dodgers front office had no clue about what to do, who to give free agent contracts to, whom to draft. It's all been very disheartening.
Some people want the Dodgers problem fixed by using a time machine. Personally, I would rather have someone who can just try to work with the assets available while keeping an eye on the future. I'll let Bill Plaschke go on sentimental journeys to a period that never existed.
I completely emphathize with your point of view, and share it. Also, I am firmly in the pro-Depo camp, and think that canning him after a season that proved nothing (other than the value of having a manager and a GM on the same page) is ridiculous. As far as Orel as manager is concerned, based on a five minute conversation with him over a decade ago at a Dodger media event, he seemed very bright and focused. How is that for small sample analysis?
People call the World Series the "Fall Classic" and classics like the first two games of this "Fall Classic" make it clear why they call it the "Fall Classic." We have seen great fundamental baseball by the Chicago White Sox, maybe the best bunting team in the American League since the early '60s. But the White Sox don't need to bunt to score which is the difference between them and the Houston Astros who don't play fundamental baseball and who are now down two games as a result.
Loney- 3 HRs, 20 ABs
Laroche, Kemp, Abreu- 0 HRs, 145 ABs
I know exactly what you mean. None of my friends who are fellow Dodger fans agree with Depodesta's philosophy (except you guys, of course).That just kills me. You say you can't talk with your friends about this, well, once we get just a tiny bit of alcohol in us it has led to some very heated debates.
I have gotten some to agree on certain things and I even got one of my friends to read moneyball. But for the most part I have reffered everyone to this site, I figure maybe some intelligent conversation will get rid of some of their ignorance on the subject. :)
I find I spend a lot of time telling other Dodger fans in these conversations to "be patient".
This is what I expected of him:
1.Trade Gagne for a young power hitting outfielder/infielder while he was at peak value.
2. Replace Gagne with someone like a Jenk/Turnbow or someone like that. Every year they are available just the names change. I had hoped that Depo was going to be smarter then the other GM's and those pitchers would end up Dodgers. Don't tell me these are flukes. EVERY year some pitcher who is not on anyone's radar becomes a savior of a bullpen. Todd Jones / Dempsey / Turnbow / Jenks / Politte / M Batista , I could go on and on. None of them are Gagne, but I'll take an average closer and a kick butt hitter any day over a 10 million-dollar closer and I'd hoped that Depo felt the same. I know it would have been hard to trade Gagne considering he's the face of the franchise but come on. He traded LaDuca. He let Beltre go. He traded Green. He should have gone the whole way. It is not like the media and fans could hate him anymore then they currently do. Only winning is going to change that.
3. Trade Izzy after 2005 during his peak value.
4. Make trades where he wins a little each time.
5. Make smart free agent signings.
Instead he signs Gagne to a 2 year deal and Izzy to a 3 year deal. Now they are worthless as trade material. He should have known better. He could not have predicted the injury to Izzy but with Gagne, history shows that most closers have very small life spans. Maybe Gagne could have pulled a Mariano but the odds are higher that he would pull a Robb Nenn. I expected Depo's numbers to tell him such things and I'm sure they did but he ignored them.
I've liked all his trades I just wish he had done more of them. He has proven by acquiring Werth/M Bradley/Penny/Navarro/A Perez that he can make a deal that usually comes out on our side.
His free agent pickups have not inspired me. He spent a lot of money on Kent/Drew/Lowe/OP but the results are mixed. I've been on record as saying the OP signing was ill-advised and I'm not surprised how it has turned out. I know that JD Drew is a favorite here and his wrist injury was a fluke but all the other surgery they had to do on him this fall were not flukes. This man has to many physical problems to have that much money spent on him. I'm not saying that JD Drew isn't a solid ballplayer, I'm saying he's the type of player that no one other then the Yankee's should be giving a 5 year deal to. I would have said th