Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
Jon's other site:
Screen Jam
TV and more ...
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
Things that my father and I said at Monday night's Dodger game.
"Chad Billingsley is going to mow these guys down." - me.
"Luis Gonzalez looked overmatched on that swing." - me.
"I can't believe I've never caught a foul ball." - him.
And then Billingsley allowed two inherited runners and three of his own to score, Gonzalez homered on the next pitch and a foul ball came screaming at my father, through his fearless hands, off his 72-year-old stomach and into the possession of a man two rows in front of him.
* * *
People worry too much about batting order. All the talk about whether Russell Martin should bat higher in the lineup and Juan Pierre should bat lower is just a smokescreen. It hardly matters. What's important is that the right guys play. Martin can bat eighth in my lineup if the guy batting second deserves to be in the game.
Fooling with the batting order is just a stall tactic. Though a new batting order might help a little, if it allows a team to postpone making critical decisions about the regular eight to begin with, it actually can be a negative.
Now, all that comes without any sort of thorough examination of the idea that moving Pierre to the leadoff spot or Andre Ethier to the No. 8 spot would somehow ignite the offense. To me, it's 52-pickup. If we make the conversation about batting order, even if it's framed in the context of making lemons out of lemonade, we're doing a disservice.
No one knows better than me that Pierre is here to play, which is why I try to spend as little time as possible talking about him. But batting him eighth won't help enough to make a difference. If we have to talk about Pierre at all, let's save our energy for what really matters. There are no consolation prizes.
* * *
Milwaukee whacked the ball Monday night. Whacked it. You forget what it's like sometimes. Now, this was a night that the Dodgers hit two home runs themselves and send a couple of balls to the warning track, which all in all is good for this team. But the Brewer bats had the snap of a great Italian sausage. They clobbbered the ball. And that's with their leading hitter, J.J. Hardy, going 0 for 5.
And still, the Brewers almost lost. Manager Ned Yost left Jeff Suppan in too long, and despite trailing, 8-0, at one point, the Dodgers put the tying run in the on-deck circle with none out in the bottom of the seventh inning.
Even in what appears to be a rout, the margin between winning and losing can be so thin. Team fortunes can reverse so quickly. We see it happen all the time, yet the primal need to anticipate the future can suck us into seeing only what will validate our beliefs. This week, I've heard the Dodgers called hopeless. Does that make sense?
It may get worse before it gets better, if tonight's starting pitcher for Milwaukee, Ben Sheets, has any say about it. But Sheets will face other teams this season, too. The Dodgers' rivals will face adversity. It goes around.
A week ago, we were talking about how, beyond all logic, the Dodgers could not beat St. Louis. Then they beat the Cardinals twice in a row.
The dynamic of the Dodgers hasn't changed. They're still a team strong in parts and weak in parts, and when you add it all together, you have a contender.
* * *
But the Dodgers do seem paralyzed by a belief system.
The initial analysis of Monday's pitching debacle was that Chad Billingsley didn't prove himself ready to take Brett Tomko's starting job.
But that ignores the question of why it's Tomko's job to lose in the first place? Why shouldn't Tomko have to prove himself worthy of keeping Billingsley out of the rotation?
Gonzalez homered and walked and Nomar Garciaparra singled in a run, which in theory means that we don't get to talk today about Matt Kemp or James Loney, which in theory is good because Kemp has holes in his game and Loney hasn't been hitting well himself. Meanwhile, home runs for Gonzalez and Garciaparra remain blue-moon occurences, and Pierre's on-base percentage fell below .300. Why do they get dibs?
Because they're veterans.
There isn't a doubt in my mind that if Billingsley, Kemp or Loney were promoted into bigger roles, they'd struggle at various times and turn in some downright horrible performances. Odds are, at least one of them could outright fail. That makes them no different from the vets. Not a stitch.
Meanwhile, if it clicks for the kids, you've got something spectacular. The vets, on the other hand, are out of clicks.
Wilson Betemit lost his grip on the third base job before Andy LaRoche appeared ready to take it. Is there anyone now unhappy that LaRoche is on the team? But the only reason it happened is because the Dodgers were willing to let Betemit lose the job. It was a debatable choice, but if that's what you're willing to do, why not do it with Tomko or Pierre? Heck, if it makes you feel better, follow Tony Jackson's suggestion in the Daily News and let D.J. Houlton, "who overhauled his mechanics in spring training and as a result is 5-2 with a 3.28 ERA for the 51s," have a shot.
The kids are better bets than the vets. They just are. I know the reality; I know vets have tenure. But the reality is wrong. And even if the Dodgers kick off a winning streak tonight, that won't change anything. The best bets are sitting and waiting.
The team's fortunes do not depend on these decisions, because in many spots, the right guys are playing. Most of the starting rotation and the bullpen is the best it can be. The Dodgers can win a division even if Pierre starts 160 games. This isn't about Pierre. It's about a belief system.
Not, as the opening to this post indicates, that I haven't been wrong before, but after the Dodgers forced us to be open-minded about so many uninspiring vets, now it's their turn to be open-minded about the youth.
From your keyboard to Colletti's ears. I hope.
At some point the pitching component will straighthen itself out, Chad and Hong-Chih are already here and Schmidt was fine yesterday after his bullpen session so I think in about a month we may see the pitching staff that a lot of us wanted out there every day.
As for the offense, I am worried that what we may have is a similar issue with Nomar that the Angels had with Steve Finley in 2005. But for an entirely different reason.
I am sure no studies have been done on this but let's examine the facts, Nomar hits better at home and at night. He hits worse on the road and in the daytime.
He is the father of twin girls. They are Nomar and Mia's first kids. By all accounts, at least in L.A., familiar surroundings and family have played a big role in his deciding to play here.
I just wonder if he is having some difficulty adjusting to the life as a father and as a professional baseball player.
I am not trying to be glib here but I don't think he is hurt, though that could be but his legs and knees seem fine.
Any thoughts on this possibility.
He is struggling. An on base percentage that is the LOWEST on the team and he's leading off? Remember when Furcal was dropped in the line-up last year? Remember how he responded?
It has to be more about winning than about veterans and their pride. Pierre isn't setting the table and he will get more at-bats than anyone else on the team at the top of the order. I'd rather have Furcal coming up with two outs and runners on base from the bottom of the line-up than Pierre. It doesn't always work out, but Pierre has been inconsistent and can use a wake-up call. I'd gladly move him back up there after a few games of getting it together. A day off won't hurt either, and I'm not talking about Thursday. I'll leave out my daily Matt Kemp diatribe, but...
Yesterday's game:
1. If Furcal put the ball in play last night with a runner on third and one out, we inch that much closer. Matt Wise had some nasty breaking stuff.
2. Tomko was at 100 pitches. Why not pinch hit for him in the bottom of the fifth if you aren't going to let him pitch to the bottom of the order after a dink hit and a walk to the guy hitting sixth who can bash the ball? Billingsley seems to be pitching well out of the pen, but seems to be having more success when he starts an inning than when he inherits runners.
Have I mentioned Matt Kemp yet today?
I really think some tweaking is in order rather than out and out panicking or overhaul. But whether it's Bills, Kuo or sure, Houlton, one of them should be given the chance over Tomko. We already know what he can and will do. Some of what an infusion of youth brings you, even if it's no more consistent, is making it more fun to watch the team and root for them. As you say, for the most part the right guys are starting, but in a few key places that may not be the case. A little bit of tinkering with some more youth will at least make this team more fun to watch.
Pierre's not going anywhere, it's true, and I expect his numbers to perk up at least a little bit as we go along, but I do hope Grady can see that sitting him once in awhile won't be such a bad thing.
More importantly, sorry y'all just missed the foul ball.
I think you are on to something. Nomar is probably not sleeping as well, and he certainly looks like he could use some rest. Honestly, it looks like some of the pitches he is missing would have been out of the park last year...sometimes he even looks surprised by it.
I agree with what you say, I am not sure why that it is though they were certainly ready to let Martin and Ethier play even after the vets (in Russell case, it wasn't a veteran) came back from their injuries.
This year it seemed like they were really prepared on the position player side for what always appeared to be the annual variety of injuries that would sit a number of the vets down. That way, Loney, Kemp, LaRoche, etc. would get the chance to play and if they happened to "take the job" then that could be taken into account if and when the incumbent returned.
Now that hasn't happened as yet.
Betemit was in easier call because he was in a battle for 3B in spring and had LaRoche not forgetten how to field in Vero Beach, perhaps the outcome would have been different in April.
But once Nomar and Gonzalez were signed over the winter, was there ever a chance that Loney and Kemp could compete for a starting job, even when Kemp made the team, it was because they wanted a RH bat and also Ethier was a little shaky out of Spring Training.
But there was never a chance that Kemp was going split time with Gonzalez or Pierre.
Now the season still has over 4 months to go and things could happen in a blink in the eye. Just look at the Yankees, everytime a pitcher starts, he finds a new way to hurt himself.
But short of some type of run of injuries, it would take bold steps to fix the everyday lineup because it would involve bringing guys up and that really can't happen unless those other guys are moved somewhere.
It can just as easily make things worse as better - if it has any meaningful effect at all.
Letting Tomko bat didn't make much sense except for the fact that, with two outs, bases empty and Juan Pierre on deck, there wasn't much upside. But yeah, I was surprised he batted.
He is stiking out a lot more this year. So is Pierre. Maybe Vin will stop with the "among the hardest guys in the league to strike-out" bit soon. It just isn't true this year.
I have to keep reminding myself to be patient but that requires trust in Colleti and Little. My trust level hasn't quite made me comfortable in this area. It's true that on a day-to-day, game-to-game basis that lineup construction is not all that important. We are talking about tenths of runs or sometimes even less. Over the aggregate of a full season of 162 games, it could easily make the difference in a win or two depending on the change. I would welcome a move out of the #2 hole from Pierre into the #8 hole, as it would reduce his plate appearances by over 100, but it's not worth losing any sleep over. The Dodgers are what they are, a team built around depth, or lots of spare parts... and some of those spare parts can't be replaced because we overpayed for them out of a Macy's catalog. (/ramble)
vr, Xei
It is often said that Tiger Woods accomplished a lot of his golf achievements as a single then as a married man but unlike Nicklaus, who started having kids around the same time he started his pro career, Tiger will begin that journey this summer.
And even then, given his status, money and scheduling flexibility, he will be able to plan out his golf and family life much better than pro athletes in team sports.
I am not saying that all the other guys who play baseball and have kids don't make the same adjustments, I am just saying that it might be a situation that Nomar is still getting used too.
He's going to play, and play often. I just want the best Pierre possible, regardless of where he's hitting.
The good, Jason Schmidt could head out on a rehab assignment by next week. If so, he's about three weeks away from returning, well ahead of most predictions.
The bad, Derrick Lee is probably going to start playing again, maybe even today in San Diego. (Why is it that these things happen just before they play the Dodgers.)
Sometimes it seems the appearance of trying something different can get something going. It can be the Hawthorne effect for all I care, I was just glad to see something change. That doesn't fix the offensive issues (nor defensive lapses), but it lets everyone know that things will change if necessary.
Regarding Tomko's hitting in the fifth, Kevin Kennedy said that in the organization it was taught to him that if a pitcher had given up three runs or less through five, you let him hit and try to get the win. That has to be old school and no longer relavent. We are trying to win as a team, not as an individual.
I would still like to see how it would shake out with just one day of Pierre, Martin, Furcal, Kent, Nomar being the top five.
And Gonzo got a day off on Sunday, but Pierre needs a day off too. Brady Clark is a fine 5th outfielder, but that other guy we have in AAA can steal a job from all three of our starters if we gave him a shot to do it. He must still be having more trouble with the off speed stuff than we realize. Or he's having maturity issues. Or he isn't 100% from the shoulder injury. Or Ned doesn't see what we see?
Being a parent changed my life entirely. It matured and motivated me to be better and more efficient.
It also made me want to be at home as much as possible. It made other things seem so much less important than they were before my first child was born.
Getting to the level that Nomar is at though, he has to block out everything and can disconnect when playing the game.
He seems to not be driving the ball lately. He's pulling some grounders through to left field and pushing some to right, but I haven't seen him nail a ball to the gap or to the outfield wall in a while. One homer? Something is not clicking, but I have much less of a concern about him than Gonzo and Gonzo has 24 walks and 5 homers. It isn't logical, but I just have more confidence seeing Nomar up with runners on base than just about anyone else on the squad.
For me, this is beyond frustrating. The Dodgers front office seems content with just building a contender, rather than a real World Series threat. The best analogy I can think of is a sprained wrist. In terms of Championship contenders, the Dodgers weren't broken, but we were obviously sprained. When you sprain a wrist, at some point you have to take off the splint and let it get stronger naturally. It may hurt a little more at first, but it'll be stronger in the long run. Gonzalez, Pierre, and the like are the splint that's been left on too long. The youngsters may hurt a little more right now, but we'll be better off in long run.
100 less Abs for Pierre is a good thing, no matter how marginalized some make it seem.
If Martin batted 8th and Pierre batted 1st the whole season---or they flip flopped--that would make a difference. To pretend that it doesnt make enough of a difference to warrant a change, is ignoring an opportunity to improve.
Even in what appears to be a rout, the margin between winning and losing can be so thin.
So with such thin margins, wouldnt it be better to position the lineup in the best way possible, rather than just throw up your hands and say "It wont make much of a difference anyway."
Now we are still less than 50 games in the 2007 season but without looking, how many "rookies" of the position player variety have enough plate appearances to qualify for the batting title. I am talking the entrie MLB.
I'll be back soon with the answer.
Let's not totally disregard how the lineup is set. It matters.
I don't think that's true. I just think they have blind spots about how to build a real threat.
27 - "So with such thin margins, wouldnt it be better to position the lineup in the best way possible, rather than just throw up your hands and say "It wont make much of a difference anyway." "
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that changing batting order might make a difference, but not enough of a difference to compensate for not making the real decision that needs to be made.
I said I understand the reality that Pierre is here to play. That doesn't change the fact that if moving Pierre down to eighth makes it easier for Matt Kemp to remain in Las Vegas, by mollifying Pierre critics, than the fixation on the batting order is a net negative.
If, on the other hand, the goal is getting Pierre out of the lineup or bust - if that's the platform, if batting him eighth isn't tolerated as a solution, than if the Dodgers do fall out of first place, the important change can come more quickly.
Tolerating Pierre at the No. 8 slot gives the Dodgers more excuses to play him at the expense of a better player.
I'm basically saying, if we're going to fight, let's fight the bigger fight.
That being said, Gonzo managed some of his best years with newborn triplets, so it doesn't have to be so. I just know for me, my batting average and slugging would be down.
That is, if there is something less than .000 which is probably what I would be hitting if I played major league baseball.
As long as he hits north of .270, I don't see any way he gets pushed out of the lineup. It's hard to admit a mistake that horrendous.
The only thing I can infer from this is that Colletti has zero faith in Loney, I just have to figure out why.
It's strange, in that Loney would seem to be Ned's kinda player/person in a lot of ways. Other than the obvious fact that he's young, of course.
Thanks for the headsup.
We start 4 outfielders and have Raffy cover both Short and Third.
What do you think?
I don't think there's a possibility that Pierre will be traded this year, as some have floated, but I do think that if the guy continues as he is doing and Kemp plays well, Pierre could find himself on the bench.
For example, some have pointed out that Pierre keeps hitting the ball in the air. If he can't stop it, that's the kind of visual thing that could grate on Grady.
No doubt, there would be the typical cycle - he gets a day off but pinch-runs, then he plays some more. But yes, I think it could happen.
Whatever the difference between Pierre batting first or eighth is, there are way more important things to worry about.
I know this comment room pretty well. I know how worked up people get. I'm just suggesting that if you're going to expend any energy on Pierre, expend it where it can help the most. For my part, I hope to not talk about Pierre for a while after yesterday and today. But I know others will keep talking about him. Pierre batting eighth is small potatoes.
But the answer is five:
Chris B. Young, ARI .268/.307/.465/.772
Troy Tulowitzki, COL .258/.348/.361/.710
Delmon Young, TAM, .234/.279/.377/.657
Elijah Dukes, TAM, .222/.338/.452/.790
Alex Gordon, KAN .177/.297/.270/.566
There a few others who have played quite a bit:
Josh Hamilton
Adam Lind
Kevin Kouzmanoff
Carlos Ruiz
Reggie Willits
Alberto Callaspo
Travis Buck
Dustin Pedroia
Hunter Pence
Pence and Willits have had the biggest impact thus far, Kouzmanoff, who was probably only saved from being exiled by the lack of any other viable replacements in San Diego and in the last week has begun to hit a little. Buck has filled in the injury-plagued Oakland outfield. Pedroia is splitting time with Alex Cora in Boston.
And while the Youngs, Delmon and Chris, and Alex Gordon have all been mentioned among the best prospects in the game, we will see if they can fulfill those lofty words as the season goes on.
The #3 spot is usually reserved for the team's best hitter. Nomar is the team's 5th best hitter, at best.
To be fair, I'm not sure anyone who has suggested moving Pierre down in the lineup preferred that option over benching him.
I never cheer an injury, but I wasn't heartbroken to see Pierre hit in the ninth last night. It might take that to sit him down for a while.
The Pierre signing isn't looking great right now but it can still work.
I understand Jon's point that moving Pierre around the line-up isn't addressing the issue of whether or not they'd consider taking him out of the starting line-up. If he doesn't produce in the 8th spot, I think that increases the chances of making a move to platoon him or let him be the 4th outfielder rather than doing it that now.
To include him in a trade would be the best case scenario, but we'd eat some dollars and have to give up someone else to get someone to take him.
I'm not sure we can taken as given that Management thinks Nomar is struggling.
Pierre
LaRoche
Furcal
Kent
Martin
Gonzalves
Nomar (Sure wish it was Loney)
Ethier
Pitcher
When Furcal/Kent cool down, and they will, replace them in the 3/4 slot with whomever is going well. Until the overall level of player proficiency improves, a set lineup is impossible. A different lineup hole wouldn't bother a real professional and nobody has a contractual right to one.
Jon is right. The bigger question is not about 1 PA per game, but about 5 PAs per game (starting vs. not starting).
I've actually been wondering if part of Little's reluctance to rest Nomar or Gonzales is to get as much as possible out of them before FA-signees can be traded, and if they break down, so what? Run them into the ground. Their replacements are better anyway. This would be the politic way to let Colletti's choices play until they can't play any more, and let the kids take over when there's no other choice.
The only fly in that ointment, of course, would be if Colletti were to respond to injuries with more lousy trades.
Now that Pierre seems to have exorcised his defensive demons, I bet that Colletti is quite happy with him. Under oath, with truth serum, he'd say he thinks Pierre is worth the money. The problem isn't Colletti's pride getting in the way of correcting an error - it's that his player evaluation skills keep him from seeing that it was an error.
I'm only going to say this once more so that I don't violate my own rules: If you compromise on batting Pierre eighth, you give the Dodgers the excuse they need to keep playing him.
An unanswerable question, since Colletti would never be truly honest about it, but I wonder what he thinks about with respect to The Player these days. It's not as though he wasn't warned.
And where was Kim Ng to stop this insanity? I wonder what input she had on this.
I think it is fair to day that without those plate appearances, the team does not get to the playoffs.
Four of those players are still with the team plus we have a new third basemen to make up for Aybar.
But the question is, will the Dodgers get anywhere close to that level of participation by prospects and/or rookies this year.
Plus, with the excuse of Loney's mediocre AAA stats this year, it requires a bigger leap of faith to play Loney ahead of him.
When push comes to shove, I'm sure that the Dodgers still see third base as their biggest problem to solve.
I agree. Let's leave it at this:
Pierre on bench >>>>> Pierre batting 8th > Pierre batting leadoff
In a truth seeking way, not in a Marathon Man torture type way. I promise!
I'm fine with it, though I also like "The Vulture"
I don't throw my weight around on nicknames, but it's just going to be hard to see that used on a regular basis.
I love the kids to but it is hard to clamor for the kids when they are all performing at forgettable levels based on their historical performances in the same league.
Ned did not want to start the season with only Ethier left who had over 400 plate appearances on the team from the prior year.
He also wanted someone who basically he could not worry about going down with an injury (to the extent you can rely on past history) and then given his known qualities, someone who was consistent in what he does do.
I would be shocked if he expected Pierre to become some new player, all he wanted was basically the guy who has been playing for the past 6 years.
Last year he had one guy who they thought 130 games would be great (Drew), another guy where 110, maybe 120, would be outstanding (Lofton) and then the other spot would be filled in by Cruz, Ledee or Repko. But there would be a lot of work for the 4th, 5th guys.
But GMs and managers like playing with the same lineup as much as they can and once Drew left and he didn't get Soriano or Lee, he wanted someone who was going to be there everyday, where he wouldn't be looking an outfield of rookies, guys coming off injuries or second year guys.
That is why he signed Pierre. Dave Roberts, cheaper but more injury prone, is on the DL right now, Alou, strong hitter but too is injury prone and is on the DL right now.
I also looked at the ages of players in MLB right now, just a quick glance tells me that the youngster the Mets called up is the only player younger than Matt Kemp in the league, just not too many 22 years old play everyday.
And yet, Kemp was on the opening day roster so he must still be a big part of the future. But I don't think Ned Colletti had any illusions about Pierre, whether or not that is a problem is an another issue.
Smush Parker is a better basketball player than Kevin Durant because Smush has averaged double figures in the NBA, and Durant hasn't.
How about "The Alabama Ant"?
I think thats a real concern. A hitters park, in one of the most hitter frienedly divisions in the minors, against... well, AAA pitching.
If youre at a table with Ned, how to you convince him to call up Loney and sit Nomar- if that's what you want.
Some to some extent with Kemp- although his ability to get XBHs is still an upgrade, all of the above not withstanding.
http://draft.mlblogs.com/
oh well.
I think Ned was pleased with Kenny Lofton and wanted to replace him with a younger Lofton in his prime.
Pierre doesn't drive the ball as well as Kenny and while neither has an arm, Lofton had range and could catch a ball he got to. Pierre is one of the worst gloves I've ever watched. I'm frankly surprised at how poor of an outfielder he is. Goes to show how having zero errors last year is an ignorable stat.
I think he could have gotten to the ball in the sixth last night. Estrada dinked it and Ethier almost got to it, but a good jump by Pierre and I think he can catch it.
They ARE playing though. And not all that well.
Chad is not in AAA so I don't think he's part of the question but Kemp is and I'm unimpressed with his production. If I'm unimpressed then he sure isn't going to make Ned make a move. 8 walks in 100 ab's for a guy who was suppossed to work on his plate discipline. The power is okay but again were talking Vegas and there are plenty of PCL hitters who are banging the door down and our Vegas boys(Loney, La Roche, Kemp) are not part of the parade.
A bit more seriously, if JP persists in popping up when he's urged to hit the ball on the ground, Grady has all he needs to introduce JP to Mr. Bench.
Seems like if you swing down on the ball you're not too likely to pop it up?
Then, let's completely judge their entire worth on that one month.
as for Billingsly, dont you think a WHIP < 1.50 at some point is needed in order to say he deserves a shot at the rotation? He hasn't really had that since 2005. Although if Tomdrickson is the alternative maybe not ;)
I guess the only solution to having Juan Pierre in center field is to replace him with a platoon of two guys named Izzy and Moe.
I dont think anyone has suggested they are not worth while. Just that they need to play their way into roles. Closer to 2 months, which is well about 1/3 of a season. Not nothing.
Kemp I think has made the case to some extent, Loney has not.
Ain't nothing fair in baseball. If it was Roberto Petagine would have been given as many chances as Cust before he fled to Japan and became the star he could of been here.
I agree with ToyCannon, though, that whatever happened last year, Loney has made it easy for the Dodgers to keep him in AAA this year. If he played third base, he'd be up here already, but to unseat a guy with Nomar's rep, he's going to have to do better.
Epstein, Friedman, and Daniels are probably not his favorite people. Whippersnappers and their sense of entitlement!
Get off my lawn.
Its odd to have an entire starting OF thats left handed. Either, LuGo, Pierre- none of those guys are playing at a level where they couldn't share time with Kemp.
Do better? He played well with a series of call ups last year, had four hits in game 3 of the NLDS, and hit .440 in spring training this year.
Result? AAA. How can he do better?
He's ready. He might be having a hitting stretch in the minors like all players have at every level, but "has to do better" to unseat Nomar is not the issue. Nomar isn't going anywhere unless injured or he finds himself with Chone Figgins numbers, so Loney is simply odd man out. He isn't able to win the job regardless of what he does. Unless he hits ten homers a month or something, then they might platoon him, but Nomar is your everyday first baseman for two years I think.
The only player of note, fortunately, was his first round pick, Mark Teixeira out of Georgia Tech. He went 5th and signed a MLB player contract for approximately 9.5 million as he was represented by Scott Boras.
Hallgren was the Dodgers national cross-checker since 2003 so he has been part of all but one of Logan White's drafts and since you have to believe White had a big say in who took this job, I would think that they would share the same philosophy.
One -- I get too emotional about this team, which leads me to post irrationally. This happened during last year's playoffs, where I found myself as disappointed in this team's performance as I did back in 1995 (and before that, 1985 and 1983).
Two -- Every time I have a well-thought-out point to make about the state of this team, there's usually a fantastic write-up here covering nearly everything I wanted to say. Thanks, Jon, for saying exactly what I was thinking during the game last night. Fantastic, as always.
Awesome link I came across today, will help with the 5 more hours till game time boredom. Worth the 8 min, I think.
I don't see how you from the idea that since Colletti had to wait a long time for a front office job to assuming that he thinks players have to play in the minors for a long time.
Front office jobs on field jobs
If Loney starts raking again in AAA, with an OPS way higher than Nomar's, then you might see the Dodgers at least call him up and let him spot Nomar in the lineup. And the better Loney did, the more he would play.
But the way Loney is playing right now, the Dodgers don't even need to have the converstation.
http://tinyurl.com/2aothg
right next to each other.
As far as benching Pierre, I can't see it happening unless hiss batting average really starts to drop. You don't pay $44 million for a guy to sit on the bench unless he is clearly hurting the team. "Clearly" in this case being the kind of stats that even LA Times sportswriters know are crummy.
And maybe this is irrelevant, but Pierre has a consecutive games played streak going back a few years, right? Streaks like that turn into sacred cows after a certain point, so that's working against a potential benching as well.
totally agree, i mean it's not as if ned is promoting general managers
New post up top.
That is a kid who knocked the door down. Strange that they would call him up now instead of when they called up La Roche. Ned and his shortstops. Kind of makes you do a crazy giggle.
Ned is a proven/experience guy. I believe it may be colored by his own experiences.
1. Chad
2. Hong-Chih
3. Tsao
4. Broxton (okay, just kidding)
5. Saito (now I am really kidding)
6. Ethier (uhh nope)
7. LaRoche
Straight out DFA
1. Rudy Seanez (don't see it until Yhency comes up)
2. Ramon Martinez
Safely attached to the team
1. Martin
2. Lieberthal
3. Nomar
4. Kent
5. Furcal
6. Betemit, only because he has trade value.
7. Saenz
8. Gonzalez
9. Pierre
10. Clark
11. Lowe
12. Wolf
13. Penny
14. Tomko
15. Hendrickson
16. Beimel
If I had to guess, I would say Hong-Chih, with all the off days, they probably feel that their pitching depth is okay for now.
As for the 40-man roster move, when they DFAed Valdez, they effectively opened up one spot on that roster, otherwise they could put Repko on the 60-day DL and do it that way.
Not many people get into management positions in baseball today if they are that hidebound about whom they hire. You have to be creative within your budget.
Maybe that will serve as a message to Loney and Kemp. Hit and we will call you up.
Colletti is overvaluing his veterans.
In case anyone missed it.
BTW, at the game last night! Fielder's prodigious 2nd inning drive was a thing of beauty. He really crushed it!! Tomko seems to have already hit the wall that he hit in Mid-June last year.
It seemed like last year Grady and Ned were willing to shake things up if they weren't working, but not this year. If Ned can let Odalis Perez get sent to the pen with his contract where are those cajones this year?
I no longer care what Ned's reasons for signing Pierre were. There's no reason good enough to mitigate against the damage it has done. That Pierre doesn't get hurt is immaterial. It's the joke about a restaurant where the food is bad, and, what's worse, the portions are chinsy. Fine, but so what? It's explanation without exculpation.
I also don't care if Kemp isn't knocking down the door in AAA. Unless somebody wants to mount a defense, on the merits, of Pierre's being likely better than Kemp, it's onanism.
If picking the right players were a matter of seeing who had the highest batting average, or lowest ERA, at the moment and plugging him in to the spot, we wouldn't need human management. These people are supposed to exercise expert judgment. That's the only reason they have jobs. They are failing; and I'm afraid I can't be swayed to pity them over Kemp's refusing to hit .400 to convince them not to make the wrong choices.
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.