These comments from Evan Grant:

GMs that hold on to top prospects in lieu of making a trade for an elite, difference-making talent are abusing their positions

good as Loney is, he won't make a difference in the pennant race this year. Teixeira will

I hear that Mark Teixeira once single-handedly won a game for the Rangers by the sheer force of his magnetic personality.

This was LATed (and sorry for the length):

486. Hythloday
I stop paying attention to a blowout and a miss a discussion of empire and philosophy. I guess it serves me right.

No love for Thomas More? But I suppose my bias is evidenced by my handle here. Anyway of the conservative philosophers he is my favorite. Though I enjoy Burke too, but more for his discussion of aesthetics.

In the end rejecting the Enlightenment on the grounds of the preeminence that it gives reason (whether because it leads to a marginalization of god or the unnecessary inhibitions of philosophical inquiry) seems problematic to me. You can't reject "human reason" because we have no insight into any other types of reason. Left as such any conclusions we reach are either reasoned or faithfully accepted. Neither is inherently wrong, but the latter can never lead to a progressive mode of scientific inquiry (i.e. can you reject the centrality of reason on a blog the very existence of which is engineered around scientifically deduced principles?). As I see it we live in a world of reason that allows you the luxury of rejecting it. From this point of view the Enlightenment didn't so much reject the centrality of god as relegate god to his appropriate realm (the metaphysical) in order to simplify the understanding of the physical. If this move isn't made then you constantly have to contend with the slippery slope that leads to al-Ghazali. We all know how that turned out for the Islamic world.

Again I don't mean this to be combative, merely inquisitive.

2 Did the other team choose not to play, or did his magnetic personality somehow short out the scoreboard in such a way as to give Texas more runs than the other team?

I forgot today's game was an afternoon one. That's a relief. Now I don't have to stew over last night until 10. I wonder what St. Augustine would think about baseball. Even more interesting, I wonder what Bob Dylan would sing about St. Augustine and baseball. Doubtless he would misuse "whom" in there somewhere.

As to the latest rumor-mongering the effect of it so far has been to like Ned a bit more. He seems to realize the folly of that reasoning and is acting accordingly. Last year made me worry that Ned was a complete idiot. This year is having the opposite effect. On the other hand Evan Grant is a complete idiot. I am pretty sure on that account.

4. Building on your posts from the last thread, I'm just curious as to how you think people should be governed. It appeared from your posts that you don't care for democracy or other modern forms of government. I just found your post on the belief that the classical thinkers are much smarter than we are very interesting.

Teixiera came up to mlb looking for a spot at either third or first and the opening came at first. Perhaps he could play third if he were to become a Dodger but I would rather not pay him $20 Million a year to do it for the next 7 years to keep him.

If he is only a rental I would not want to lose any long-term pieces / prospects so my offer of Betemit and Young wouldn't be enough. See ya in pinstripes Tex.

"When Mark Teixeira travelled through time
To the year 3010,
He fought the evil robot king,
And saved the human race again."

It really is annoying when these guys just make stuff up.

6 - Plato is probably my favorite philosopher as well, but (without speaking for mr pellam?) I've always thought that he a more entertaining and elegant writer than say Rawls or Habermas. Rawls and Habermas are closer to right though. Heck, Nozick is closer to right than Plato, but the lack of elegance takes some of the fun out of it.

3 -- I don't "reject reason," merely the notion of its preeminence. A Christian has to ascribe preeminence to God and revelation. I believe in deductive reasoning, but I liken it to Euclidean geometry: the theorems are logically deduced, but you have to start with unprovable axioms. Revelation is the Christian's axiom. As for inductive reasoning, the very foundation of scientific inquiry, well, that I don't believe in as a means of ascertaining truth, and neither did Augustine, who seems to be very popular at DT. Induction, or reasoning from the part to the whole, is logically specious. But science doesn't need to be "true" to be efficacious, to be useful.

6 I have been trying for the past two years or so to figure out how I think people should be governed. I think democracy is neither possible (my practical concern) nor preferable (my ideological concern). Perhaps if I had my way, professors and grad students would rule (and get paid more).

I think the big problem is not the form the government should take, though I find these discussions the most interesting, but rather that human society has advanced to a point where discussions of the good life are overwhelmed by the speed of the advancements in technology and the shrinking of the world.

What I mean to say is that I think people should govern themselves in small communities, with an educated and conscientious aristocracy at the lead. This ideology is very Platonic in structure, but the lifestyle I envision is much different.

These things are impossible, though. When someone figures out how to turn off the world's electricity, then I will start to preach my ideas.

9 I don't know what could be positively asserted to be wrong about Plato. Certainly he uses logical fallacies to make his points at times, but the primary problem for me with his ideas is only aesthetic.

I think Plato is right that, in its essence, virtue is only the knowledge of what is right. What he thinks episteme and sophia are is where I begin to have problems.

Man, would I love to jump into this discussion, but I really don't have time to catch up on last night's thread and I'd really rather just turn my Pierre bashing on Hendrickson. :-)

I wonder if GMs purposefuly initiate "off-the-record" gossip just to be misleading. As I much as I might be suspect of Coletti and the organization about trades (see CMC, Lugo, etc) some rumors just seem so outlandish as to be laughable.

Perhaps if I had my way, professors and grad students would rule (and get paid more)

Are you still accepting subscriptions to your newsletter...?

My head hurts.

11. I'm sure you were being tongue in cheek with the grad students and professors line, but I don't know if I could live in a world like that. It really speaks to how in the world you would be able to determine who would be this educated and conscientious aristocracy to lead these communities, I would certainly not pick professors and grad students to fill that role.

It really speaks to how in the world you would be able to determine who would be this educated and conscientious aristocracy to lead these communities

Does "voting" produce a more qualified aristocracy?

My favorite quote:

Ah, but as I mentioned before, I am simpleton.

What a genius! He hammers home the point that he "is simpleton" by using poor grammar.

Anyway, I call Evan Grant on rules 3, 8 and possibly 11.

16 I think you've hit the problem. Tell me where to find an educated and conscientious aristocracy, and I'll take it from there.

What kind of sicko news organization or blog would post odds of baseball games!!? That's just sick! :)
vr, Xei

17. More qualified than what? Than picking professors and grad students?

I can picture it. My first day in grad school, if professors and grad students ruled the world.

"Alright, Greg, it's your first day of grad school. You have a Sallust seminar at 130 and ancient history seminar at 330, but before that, you have to teach your first western civ class, for which we have provided you with no training, and can you get on the energy crisis?"

19. Yeah, that's always the problem, basically with every organization, how do you create the rules of an institution to ensure that it is run well, how do you figure out who enforces the rules, and how do you place controls on the enforcers so that they don't abuse their power.

So the Dodgers "have" a 1st baseman in James Loney ? But what exactly do they have ? They for sure have a very good fielder. They also have a guy capable of hitting over .300. But he's also a youngster whose power has still not come around (4 HR's in 380 PA's this yr, 12 HR's in 511 PA's last year)at a power position. So his value to the team is based almost entirely on his Bat Avg.. If he hits like he did in that 2 week stretch in June, that's great. But what if he hits like he has these past 2.5 weeks (719 OPS) ? Or the first 2.5 mos of the season (727 OPS in Vegas)? This could be a fairly weak solution at 1b for the remainder of 2007 unless his Bat Avg is in .315+ territory.
Yes, James Loney could develop power in the next year or two and we wouldn't want to miss out on that. But the fact remains that he's 23 and the power hasn't come yet, and Mark Teixeira is a proven power hitter. At age 23, Teixeira hit 26 HR's in the majors, not the 8-10 that Loney will likely record this year. In fact will Loney ever be as good as Teixeira ? Very doubtful. Loney has shown no indication of becoming 35-40 HR hitter that Tex has.
So the question in my view isn't whether Dodgers should trade Loney for Teixeira. If the budget can afford it for next two seasons , Tex is the better solution. The real issue is the second player required to get the deal done. If it means a Kershaw, that's a tough decision. If it's Elbert, pull the trigger.

More qualified than what? Than picking professors and grad students?

Yes. In other words, does the current system produce better/more qualified/whatever leaders than would be produced by picking professors and grad students?

Trading Loney straight up for Teixeira in itself is not a bad idea considering Tex has already begun mashing and if you haven't seen what he did in the 2nd half last year you should (24 homers, .998 OPS). Sure we give up a few future years of Loney for only two from Tex, but I think it's worth the risk in the short-term to rely on the proven power hitter. Giving up Kershaw, however, would be extremely foolish and totally ruins the deal for me.

Just another day when I totally agree with Jon, although simpleton doesn't begin to go far enough.This guys desire to unload Tex makes it clearly an unfair deal. I also don't think we want to deal with Boras right now. I've come to realize it is impracticle that we would never again deal with him in a situation of great worth to the D's. But this doesn't approach that situation, and I think Boras and his clients must realize there is some penalty for ruthlessly always "winning for your client.

4 G I'd forgoten you must be an Eastoner

As to much of this conversation my response, at least in the morning is -huh.......What!

10 I believe in truth, whether obtained via reason or revelation.

I reject the notion that communities should be ruled by professors and grad students. I'm already far too busy!

Over the last 3 years Tex has hit an average of 21 home runs with an OPS over 950 after the all-star break.
Even with those number I've come to the same conclusion as Jon in that I wouldn't trade Loney for an expensive rental when Loney will be a cheap and productive solution for years. We might live to regret that decision this year but we won't from 2008-2012.

I believe in the notion of no more days off for Russell Martin. Bad things happen.

Teixeira is under contract for next year too, so he wouldn't be just a 1/2 season rental. Not that I'm advocating such a thing...

Los Angeles Dodgers: The last time the Dodgers won a playoff series was 1988. They are locked into an annual fight-to-the-finish with San Diego. They have a young, very talented first baseman in James Loney, who will very possibly be Teixeira's equal some day. Maybe even within the next two years, but, good as Loney is, he won't make a difference in the pennant race this year. Teixeira will. Yes, the Rangers will demand a high price for Teixeira: Loney and Highland Park-ex Clayton Kershaw. If you are Dodgers GM Ned Colletti, you have to ask yourself: Is one World Series ring worth that? What about two?

-Evan Grant: Dallas Morning News.

Very simplistic view on things Mr.Grant. Problem is, if life was that simple the Rangers would have won at least 2 W/S with Mr. Tex.

Much to your chagrin, Loney has made a difference so far in this year's pennant race for the Dodgers. His experience during this season, would only garner him much needed pennant race pressure experience, that you speak of down the road. BTW, how many pennant races has Tex been able to significantly alter with his prescence...hmmmm..maybe he is lacking that needed intangible pennant race experience himself. I understand Texiara is an All-star caliber player...but in time so will Loney. Ned's best move is no move on this matter.

I reject the notion that communities should be ruled by professors and grad students. I'm already far too busy!

Good point. Let's drop the "ruling communities" thing and just focus on the "get paid more" part.

Give me Millwood that is all I ask. At the end of the trading period and these guys are still in the organization I'll be happy.
Kemp
Loney
La Roche
Kershaw
Billingsley
Martin - goes without saying
Kershaw
J Bell
Kershaw

34
What if we just trade 1 of the Kershaws?

Ok, so I botched..the spelling of one Mark Teixeira.. that's another reason we should not trade Loney (I can spell that right)for him. "James Loney" is much more simple to spell ;-)

34 - Isn't Millwood a little expensive, long-term?

25. Oh completely, almost every academic department I have seen up close and personal is more disfunctional than even the worst government bureaucracy already is. The atmostphere is almost uniformly poinsonous, a large portion of the people there are socially retarded, and most departments are dominated by borderline sociopaths, Professors and Grad students are among the lower tiers of groups of people I would pick to be the leaders of any community.

37 - Millwood: 6M in 2006, 7.5M in 2007, 8.5M in 2008, 11M in 2009 and 12M in 2010 (last year can be voided if certain IP goals aren't reached)

Professors and Grad students are among the lower tiers of groups of people I would pick to be the leaders of any community

Are they above or below oil company executives...?

Yes, which is why he shouldn't cost much. I'd rather pony up the money then the players. He's miscast as an ace but he'd look fine every 5th day at DS. Since his dead arm this year he's been solid so don't look at his 2007 year numbers without the context of his history and what he's done since coming off the DL.

ESPN has a headline that reads "Player alleges that steroids already are in golf". I clicked on the link, partly to see which player was making the allegations.

Turns out it was Gary.

Jon Heyman at si.com jumped on the Dallas Morning News bus and countered Loney/ Kershaw with Loney/ Meloan. He also mentioned Dye possibly to LA.

I hate this time of year.

36
Just call him "the Texas first baseman". He's closely related to "the Colorado center fielder" and "the Chicago White Sox left-handed starter."

40 - We are starting to tread into rule 5 territory here. It is difficult to discuss the philosophy of politics without discussing the activity of the polis itself.

Yes, the Rangers will demand a high price for Teixeira: Loney and Highland Park-ex Clayton Kershaw. If you are Dodgers GM Ned Colletti, you have to ask yourself: Is one World Series ring worth that? What about two?

Mark Teixeira is worth two World Series rings? I want him on my team!

I have to disagree with you Jon. If Teixiera could be had for Loney and a lesser prospect than Kershaw (say, Meloan or Dewitt) you have to do it.

Teixiera is an elite player, and as the Dodgers payroll slims down with more and more young players, they'll have more and more money to play with. Loney is a good player, but unless he develops some power, he'll never be a superstar at first.

With the lack of power in the organization, the Dodgers might be better served by going for Teixiera, then filling first base with the best hitter on the market after 2008.

44
I should say that you can call me "The guy who blogs at The Griddle."

I should say that you can call me "The guy who blogs at The Griddle."

What about "Bob"...? (A terrible movie, BTW)

Am I reading this right that Teixeira will be a free agent at the end of the 2007 season AND his agent is Scott Boras? Or did Teix recently sign a new extension?
vr, Xei

40. I would take oil company executives for 8 years over professors forever.

36 I don't know. I've heard and read a lot of people saying and writing "James Looney". It's a little infuriating, and I don't know why.

gpellamjr want Philosopher Kings to rule the world.

That should make certain baseball bloggers happy.

50 - It is my understanding that he has one more year of arbitration prior to free agency after '08.

51
It cuts like a knife.

54. So, it would likely be a 1-1/2 year rental? hmmmmmm... Tough call, glad I don't have to make it. vr, Xei

I hate it when journalists play fantasy baseball with real players. Everyone thinks they're a GM...

47 Interesting. It brings a couple of questions into focus. Without even getting into the dollars involved (let's assume that the Dodgers can afford him)...

Short term questions:

What is the expected difference between Loney's production and Teixeira's?

What is the expected difference between Meloan's production, and, say, Eric Stults', or whoever Meloan would replace on the Dodgers?

Does the fact that Meloan is a relief pitcher make him the Guillermo Mota of this deal, if you will? Is he, by his nature, a fungible commodity?

Long term question:

A nice part about having Loney is that if he continues to produce at his current pace, he'll be locked in as a quite serviceable first baseman until, what, 2012n If the Dodgers fail to sign Teixeira to a long-term deal after the 2008 season, what other free agents or Dodger prospects could be available?

Anyone want to play "Pick on Plaschke" today?

And I quote: "How does a guy with a career slugging percentage of .367 fall so suddenly to .333?"

Um, that'd be ON-BASE percentage, Bill. Sorry all those anti-DePo columns didn't teach you the difference.

56 - At worst, yes, 1 1/2 seasons. And Teixeira is a stud too. We're not talking about an Adam Dunn, or someone else with noticeable weaknesses. Teixeira is a terrfic hitter and very good defensive player (albeit at first).

I certainly wouldn't give up Loney and Kershaw, but Loney and anyone else not from the group of [Billingsley, Kemp, Martin, Kershaw] is rather tempting.

58 According to PECOTA's 2008 numbers

Loney: .294/.352/.479
Tex: .289/.385/.547(in Texas, adjust accordingly)

Usual PECOTA disclaimers apply, but those look like decent estimates. (I'd probably give Loney a higher average and keep the slug the same).

If you do look at the PECOTA numbers, this trade suddenly doesn't seem that great. Going by VORP, which is park adjusted, Teixiera is worth only about a win more than Loney next year. Now, a win is a win, but is it worth sacrificing Loney for it?

It might be better to hold onto Loney for now, then trade him if you can get a hold of Miguel Cabrera (in 2009) or A-Rod (after this year), or someone similar.

From ItD:

Furcal, SS
Pierre, CF
Martin, C
Gonzo, LF
Betemit, 3B
Loney, 1B
Ethier, RF
Martinez, 2B
Billingsley, P

62 We keep getting so close to the lineup I want.

62 Martinez? Really?

64 No word on a roster move involving Abreu, but if he's still on the team, I'd rather start Abreu than Martinez if Kent needs a day off.

Questions for Grittle:

1. Which player contributes more on offense: Kemp or Pierre?

2. Which player is the better centerfielder: Kemp or Pierre?

3. If "Kemp, Kemp", why is Pierre playing centerfield everyday?

4. If "Pierre, Pierre", please retire now.

5. If "Pierre, Kemp", please retire now.

6. If "Kemp, Pierre", do you really think "Pierre offense + Pierre defense" is larger than "Kemp offense + Kemp defense"? If so, please retire now.

Nomar now has almost the exact same number of at bats between home and away. I don't think I've ever seen such a discrepancy between home and away splits. No wonder he still gets cheered at home, he's still productive at home.
Home-332/392/396/788
Away-217/246/271/517
All I can say is wow.

61
That is interesting. I started doing the research to back up my initial thought that I would trade Loney for Tex and was surprised to see that I agreed with Jon after the research.

Boom Boom moves upto the 5th spot. I always find it interesting when the backup hits higher in the order then the regular. Wish I was going to the game today, I smell a convincing win.

Bad move trading any significant prospect for Tex. He's a rental. Period. There'll be no way to sign him early as Boras clients always test the market.

What're the thoughts on Ken Gurnick's suggestion of trading D. Young?

Notes: Ethier flourishing under Mueller

Interesting article about Andre Ethier's improvement since Bill Mueller took over as batting coach for those who haven't checked Dodgers.com yet.

http://tinyurl.com/2cy6v6

61 and 67

Agreed that it's interesting. Next question: Teixeira brings an additional "win" over Loney in that he'll provide about 10 runs more in offense, on average, right?

But is there reason to believe that because he represents such an upgrade in slugging percentage -- 75 points or so -- and this is where the Dodgers are lacking, does it stand to reason that he might be an especially good fit for the Dodgers? Is it possible that for that reason, for the Dodgers specifically, Teixeira might represent an upgrade of more than one win?

If yes -- if it could be two wins this year -- I think I could get on board. If not -- if it's just a one-win upgrade -- I'm not a fan of it.

71 is worded poorly. Sorry for being sloppy.

67

Nomar Garciaparra, meet Ervin Santana.

Even 788 OPS isn't that good for a third baseman, though, is it?

-----------------------

I think, as a general rule, it's a bad idea to trade cheap, young good players for older more expensive players, even if they're slightly better. But if the older player is significantly better ... maybe.

I wouldn't be horrified at a trade of Loney for Teixeira straight up, though I wouldn't like it, in large part for irrational reasons. I sure would be horrified if a real prospect was included in such a deal.

51s' Hernandez, 42, still at it long after life-threatening issue

>>> "Hopefully I'll have a couple more outings and go from there," he said. "(The Dodgers) told my agent and myself to 'get your arm ready and we'll try to get you up as soon as possible.' " <<<

http://www.lvrj.com/sports/8569482.html

71 The difference is that Tex would be moving from a launching pad to Dodger Stadium. That could cost him power and drop his average down.

69 Again, signed through 2008.

73 Do you consider Meloan a real prospect?

Has Mark Teixeira personally told Evan Grant to get him traded? Holy smokes, the man has made it his life's work to get the guy traded to the Dodgers?

I think I need to write another e-mail. This guy is a tool. Kershaw and Loney?

Since Matt Kemp's return to the big club June 8, the Dodgers have played 34 games (Dodgers have gone 19-15 in those games). Here is how the OF playing time has been distributed:

Pierre: 34 starts, 157 PA, .317/.349/.379
Gonzo: 30 starts (+1 at DH; 33 games total), 132 PA, .284/.371/.457
Kemp: 19 starts (33 games), 93 PA, .368/.409/.575
Ethier: 19 starts (33 games), 93 PA, .364/.473/.506

75 I didn't think about that.

OK, since Tex represents an upgrade of only (about) one win, I am officially off the Loney-for-Teixeira train. Alert the media.

76-For me, absolutely. I saw Meloan in the Freeway Series and he showed off quite possibly the nastiest curveball I've ever seen. He will be a great reliever along the lines of Broxton.

76

Meloan, yes, I guess I consider him a real prosect, because of all the buzz about him being able to help this year, but maybe better to ask a real prospect maven. He is only a relief pitcher ... but if they traded Meloan it would be awful if they turned around and traded for Dotel or something ... well that would be awful anyway.

If Loney played in Texas, could he hit 30-40 homeruns/yr? If the answer is some form of no, then I want Teixeira.

80 I've never seen Meloan pitch, but I have seen Broxton.

I love the Bull as much as anyone -- but if Jonathan Broxton was the key player for any game-changing talent, I would make that trade in a heartbeat.

Broxton is great at his job, fun to watch, has a great nickname, and if you emptied out his body cavity, you could fit three of me inside of him, but he is a relief pitcher. Unless he pitches like Gagne v. 2003, he is tradable.

82-He'd probably hit 20+ homers with around 50 doubles.

47 - If you're suggesting a trade that's not the Loney-Kershaw trade that Grant keeps pushing, then you're not disagreeing with me per se. It's the package that I think is over-the-top.
</