My word, what ghastly "reporting" that is. Wouldn't have a stretch run? Without those players you mention, they'd be the laughing stock of the National League.

Has Roberto Hernandez actually recorded eight outs? That seems a high estimate indeed.

The reporter also notes that Kemp is a "rookie." He isn't.

"The youngsters have provided a boost as well." Hah hah, that cracked me up. Really? Do tell. Man, that's so poorly reported I don't know where to start...

3 - He says more about the kids than that, but I'm not wrong about where the emphasis went.

This dude makes Ken sound positively Shakespearean.

This article, when considered with Plashke's Grady piece, smells funny to me. The timing with the Dodger Talk brouhaha is also.. hmm.

Or maybe I'm just a cynical bastard.

Where is Bob Harvey when you need him?

From the last thread:

104. Bob Timmermann 2007-09-17 14:33:34
I think Richard Dawson could get a boost if he marries a younger woman.
http://tinyurl.com/2hd9e7

His current wife is 22 years his junior, a relatively young 53. Does he have to go even younger?

Who is Arizona relying on? Tony Clark?

I hate this spin, but it's par for the course. We can blame the reporters but this is the attitude of dodger management. Both in words and in actions..

7
I think he needs to go for a Tony Randall-type situation.

The youngsters have provided a boost as well. Loney, who has been on a torrid hitting streak, hit .542 (13-for-24) with two homers and 10 RBIs in the last six games.

If Loney wasn't an untested rookie who was "pressing and trying to do too much", he'd have been 20-24, with 4 HRs and 15 RBIs. If those were Kent's or Nomar's numbers, the article would (rightfully) be about how he was "carrying a team down the stretch."

(Loved Kent's veteran leadership in getting thrown out on the basepaths while down two runs with two outs and the base in front of him occupied.)

9 He is just about that age.

My grandfather was thirty years older than my grandmother. I wonder if I inherited any good old-goat genes? (Probably just the bad ones - the "hey you punk kids, get offa my lawn" variety.)

The thing about Nomar, Jeff Kent and Gonzalez and Hernandez is that you know they are temporary guys. If only Pierre was their age.

Off days = bad writing days

8 I heard a radio guy, maybe Steiner, used "veteran leadership" as a term in connection with Tony Clark. And don't forget Livan Hernandez - he's been there before!

I have never seen nor heard that money was a factor in not signing a free agent for this current regime at Chavez Ravine.

Eric Gagne?

I'm sure if the Dodgers had a larger budget, they would have been more willing to give him 5-6 mils.

If the Dodgers cant afford A-Rod---the veteran riff raff accumulated will take alot of the blame, and rightfully so.

You would think the Dodgers would do all they can to promote the players coming out of their farm system, but I guess they rather try to make their bad decisions look good.

I think the Dodger braintrust believes that marketing the vets over the kids is profitable. Its why articles like the one at MLB get written. Most fans come to see Nomar and Kent and Ganzo not realizing they are not what they once were. A marketing campaign focused on James Loney and Matt Kemp is not going to sell nearly as many seats. Plus, if the Dodgers lose after using all this famous vet talent most fans think "well it just wasn't our year" and move on to Laker talk. I think you have to be paying attention to know that Nomar, LuGo, JP and Furcal have hurt the team badly this year. Likewise you have to be paying close attention to know that Loney, Kemp Martin and Billingsly are responsible for the Dodgers having any playoff chance at all.

The marketing of the vets is not arbitrary. It is deliberate and intended to sell seats to the casual fan.

I doubt most casual fans know or care who Roberto Hernandez is.

Okay, so I thought I'd spend a little bit of time trying to figure out exactly how many games the suppression of Matt Kemp has cost the Dodgers in the standings.

Kemp has been on the active roster for 96 of the Dodgers' 149 games this year. The average Dodger player this year has had 4.31 plate appearances per game, so we'll use this figure to hypothesize that playing full time since his recall, Kemp would have accumulated 413 plate appearances by now. Had he been on the team all year and playing full time, he'd have 642 plate appearances. In reality, he has 265.

In his 265 plate appearances, Kemp has accumulated 47 Runs Created, for 0.177 RC per plate appearance. At that rate, he would have accumulated 67 more RC if he'd been playing all year, or 26 more RC if the Dodgers had simply played him once he got called up.

How does that compare to the guys who were playing instead? For purposes of this exercise, we'll assume that two-thirds of Kemp's playing time would come at the expense of Juan Pierre, and the other one-third at the expense of Luis Gonzalez. This means the Dodgers would have lost 17 Runs Created posted by Gonzalez and 28 by Pierre. So by playing Kemp, the Dodgers would lose 45 runs and gain 67 for a net gain of 22 runs.

So we know the answer: The Dodgers would have scored about 22 more runs this year if they had decided to play Matt Kemp full-time. At a very conservative estimate, they also would have given up about 5 fewer runs due to the difference between Kemp and Gonzo/Pierre defensively. So all in all, the decision not to play Kemp this year probably cost the Dodgers 27 runs. This assumes that Kemp's performance level would have stayed the same with more playing time, which is admittedly an unknowable assumption.

So, 27 runs. How much has that cost the Dodgers in games won and lost? The Bisonian Dodgers hypothetically would have scored 700 runs and allowed 636. This comes out to a Pythagorean record of 81-68. So far this year the Dodgers' actual record of 79-70 coincides exactly with their Pythagorean record. So in the final analysis, it's fair to conclude that a Dodger team with Kemp playing full-time would have won only two more games over the course of the season.

Will two fewer wins mean the difference between making the playoffs and not making it? I guess we'll see.

Maybe if I have time tonight I'll do a similar calculation for Loney.

17 - I agree with that and can't wait for the marketing emhpasis to focus on Martn,Billz,Loney,Kemp and Andre. Then one day people will question any over the hill veteran acquisition.

4 Oh, I know, he expands on it there, but, you're right in saying the emphasis of the piece is all backwards.

5- Can you bring me into the loop?...I have been very busy lately, and away from the Dodgers lately....what is this DodgerTalk stuff you speak of?.....Did they finally get tired of Bob Harvey being honest?

Gonzo does not appreciate the Clarissa reference - a mere rookie at life shouldn't be explaining it all, that's a job for veteran parents like Marshall and Janet.

BTW, Melissa Joan Hart turned 31 earlier this year.

17
I disagree, because Russell Martin is our most popular player. There is a reason why he was the starting All-Star catcher.

The team just does not market the other youngsters as well.

19 That's well-thought out and convincing, to me.

I assume you took into account his injury at the beginning of the season and subsequent DL and recovery time?

And his baserunning errors! (I'm kidding. We probably lost a couple of games in the standings on veteran baserunning errors, and another few on the noodle arm of the centerfielder.)

Hi, I am Luis Gonzalez and I am completely bitter about the Diamondbacks getting rid of me for young players.

Reading this article reminds me of the Iraqi Disinformation Minister.

"Proven Veteran Leaders will carry the day. Young players are unworthy to carry their jock straps!"

Please don't do this for Loney. I don't want my head to explode.

28 is in reference to 19

Okay, so I thought I'd spend a little bit of time trying to figure out exactly how many games the suppression of Matt Kemp has cost the Dodgers in the standings.

Kemp has been on the active roster for 96 of the Dodgers' 149 games this year. The average Dodger player this year has had 4.31 plate appearances per game, so we'll use this figure to hypothesize that playing full time since his recall, Kemp would have accumulated 413 plate appearances by now. Had he been on the team all year and playing full time, he'd have 642 plate appearances. In reality, he has 265.

In his 265 plate appearances, Kemp has accumulated 47 Runs Created, for 0.177 RC per plate appearance. At that rate, he would have accumulated 67 more RC if he'd been playing all year, or 26 more RC if the Dodgers had simply played him once he got called up.

How does that compare to the guys who were playing instead? For purposes of this exercise, we'll assume that two-thirds of Kemp's playing time would come at the expense of Juan Pierre, and the other one-third at the expense of Luis Gonzalez. This means the Dodgers would have lost 17 Runs Created posted by Gonzalez and 28 by Pierre. So by playing Kemp, the Dodgers would lose 45 runs and gain 67 for a net gain of 22 runs.

So we know the answer: The Dodgers would have scored about 22 more runs this year if they had decided to play Matt Kemp full-time. At a very conservative estimate, they also would have given up about 5 fewer runs due to the difference between Kemp and Gonzo/Pierre defensively. So all in all, the decision not to play Kemp this year probably cost the Dodgers 27 runs. This assumes that Kemp's performance level would have stayed the same with more playing time, which is admittedly an unknowable assumption.

So, 27 runs. How much has that cost the Dodgers in games won and lost? The Bisonian Dodgers hypothetically would have scored 700 runs and allowed 636. This comes out to a Pythagorean record of 81-68. So far this year the Dodgers' actual record of 79-70 coincides exactly with their Pythagorean record. So in the final analysis, it's fair to conclude that a Dodger team with Kemp playing full-time would have won only two more games over the course of the season.

Will two fewer wins mean the difference between making the playoffs and not making it? I guess we'll see.

Maybe if I have time tonight I'll do a similar calculation for Loney.

OK, problems with the Back button there. Sorry.

30
Since you had time to run the numbers on Kemp twice, why didn't you just do Loney the second time...?

Honestly.. is it that people arn't giving the younguns credit or is it more that people just arn't watching Dodger baseball on the east coast? Watching Dodger games on Fox normally make me cringe with their love for "everything" Nomar, Pierre and Gonzo are doing and the side note of rookies and sophs hitting OPSing over 800. I really think its less vet love than it is people just not knowing what the hell they are talking about.

25 The above calculation is done as if Kemp had played all year. I also ran it with the time missed due to injury and it still came out the same -- two wins -- since Kemp actually missed only eight games due to the injury.

23 caught it before me, but all I really have to contribute to this one is this:

Melissa Joan Hart = awesome.

and totally waved at me the one time I got to go to Nick Studios and we saw her getting hair/makeup done.

That is all. Carry on.

19 You do point out the one big flaw there, that Matt Kemp would continue to play the way he has all year. I think the analysis would be far more fair if you assumed he would hit his PECOTA projection (something like .290/.350/.500, I forgot the exact number) for the rest of the season, especially considering how high his BABIP is right now.

I assume you took into account how many times Kemp would be thrown out running the bases....lol

I assume you took into account how many times Kemp would be thrown out running the bases....lol

24. Sorry, I disagree and in fact that is the point. How can Martin NOT be the focus of every marketing campagin undertaken by the Dodgers? The only answer is selling what people know. Unfortunatly, That's Nomar, not Martin. I would guess that if you went "Jaywalking" you would find a lot more Angelinos who know Nomar is a Dodger than Martin. BTW, Frank and the marketing folks know they are going to get Martin's fans out to the Park. They are using Nomar as recognition bait for the casual fan.

33 I think word has spread about guys like Kemp and Loney, even to the (New)EnglandSPN and the like. Plus, it's just more distressing when a Dodgers beat writer seems to ignore the facts too.

The Dodgers did "market" the kids, at least to the media last year.

The cover of last season's Dodgers postseason media guide was a painting of six of the "kids" overlooking the Stadium field -- Ethier, Kemp, Broxton, Billingsley, Martin and Loney.

It was an interesting choice at the time. It seemed like a message from the Dodgers front office saying, "We may not be ready to do damage in the playoffs now, but wait until next year when our kids arrive."

The Dodgers had the correct answer for 2007 last October. But they (namely, Ned) got nervous, played it "safe" and unnecessarily blocked most of those kids with veterans.

I used to look at that painting and smile. Now it just makes me sad, because the Dodgers have no one to blame but themselves if (when?) they miss out on the playoffs this year.

36 Admittedly, regression to the mean is the fly in this particular ointment. However, I tend to believe that BABIP for hitters is less telling than it is for pitchers, and for reasons we've discussed before (that he hits lots of grounders that are really more like line drives), I don't necessarily believe Kemp's BABIP is too artificially high anyway.

39
I think winning is what gets the casual fan or the fairweather fan or people who just go for the scene.

22 - If you mosey on over to ItD, Josh tries to get his side of the story out. From what I've heard, Dodger Talk has been much more unforgiving of management (as of late), and openly criticizing Grady/Ned.

41 That painting is still my computer desktop at work. At least it looks like they'll all have starting roles (aside from Brox being the setup man) next year, so there's room for optimism! (Plus, the artist is gone, so that's something.)

The difference in what a casual fan knows about Luis Gonzalez or Matt Kemp is practically negligible.

But I believe from reading the comments that the Dodgers haven't played their younger players enough.

I was unsure of that until today.

I figure the day dodgers.com starts selling Martin/Kemp/Loney jerseys (as opposed to customizable ones) is when they'll be actively supported by the management/organization.

46
Go buy yourself a smoothie. It looks like you could use one.

19 I know what the suppression of Kemp AND Loney cost. It cost Eddie Murray his job. Can you imagine this offense without Kemp and Loney? Well, that's the offense that Murray had to work with. And HE was the one who got fired?

Randy Hills offers a differing viewpoint in "Youngsters could have saved Dodgers":
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7235996

Unfortunately, franchise management failed to trust the development capacity of its own minor-league system.... Lining up for most of the credit are general manager Ned Colletti and dugout skipper Grady Little, two guys who still walk 12 miles to old school.

While this article discusses decisions regarding Loney and Billingsley, it is noticeably absent of the word "Kemp". Eric Enders, among others here, could make/have made this same point in more convincing fashion.

In direct contrast to the dodgers.com article

Youngsters could have saved Dodgers

http://tinyurl.com/yskkqv

41 45 Brett Tomko painted that.

48
But I won't get one sponsored by Nike.

50 - Durnit. I blame tinyurl :)

48
And why can't I be grouchy? Everybody else gets to be grouchy? Why do I have to be pleasant all the time? It wears on you. I want to wake up some morning spitting nails.

"Clarissa Explains It All" made me want to get a pet alligator, then I found out it was illegal in CA.

47 - For my birthday in june I asked for a Billingsley jersey. One could not be found unless it was special ordered online. While at the Dodger store at the universal city walk the store employee did not even know who Billingsley was and suggested either a Gonzalez jersey or a throwback Koufax jersey, I almost opted for the Sandy but ended up getting one of those big puffy wind breaker jackets instead.

I still haven't worn the jacket.

To be fair, everyone on the Dodgers except Martin and Furcal have been stinging the ball this September.

I'm listening to the podcast now- whoa. In my mind Harvey has beaten around the bush most of the year, but he's pretty direct in his criticism here. Even more telling is he not offering the slightest defense of the org to the series of disgusted callers. I think Harvey is doing the Dennis Hopper scene in True Romance when he realizes he's about to get whacked so figures why not have some fun with it.

57 When I went to the Dodgers shop in Vero Beach this spring, by far the highest quantity of jerseys available was good ol' No. 9. I have no idea if it was because that's what was in demand, or that's what was left over because nobody was buying them.

The second-easiest to find jersey was Nomar and after that it was Lowe. There was no Martin or Ethier or Penny to be found and certainly no Kemp, Loney, or Billingsley.

47 and 57
I saw Dodgers name-and-number T-shirts featuring Loney 7 and Kemp 27 at the Top Of The Park store for the first time last week.

Back on Opening Day, I noticed they had T-shirts for Billingsley.

They read "BILLINGSLY 58"

61 There are probably a few posters here who would buy that last one. ;)

They had Kemp and Loney t-shirts at the loge level left field store a month ago.

I'll be buying a Kemp shirt when I attend my last game.

51 - I didn't realize that the D-backs had a losing run differential. They're on the opposite end of the luck scale of the Indians last year.

55 Meh, spitting nails is overrated. I did it at Burning Man and found it incredibly unsatisfying. And I had to get a tetanus shot, too.

Just get a Jamba Juice smoothie with a free Bad Mood Boost.

Add bobbleheads to that. The only reason why Martin got one is because the fans voted for him. When they get the kids get their own bobbleheads, they'll be everyday players.

Has Pierre had one? I wonder if they're to scale...

(Loved Kent's veteran leadership in getting thrown out on the basepaths while down two runs with two outs and the base in front of him occupied.)

That's exactly what popped into my head when reading Jons opening to the thread.

63 "when I attend my last game"

Um, of the season, or have you got an unnamed illness?

As to the original article quoted in the post, conventional wisdom is not solely the province of political pundits.

66 - Ugh, grammar isn't my strong suit today.

I was actually wondering why they didn't do a Martin bobblehead in 2006. I know they make up the schedule before the season starts, but they had a bobblehead date that was "TBA" for a long time and later turned out to be somebody other than Martin.

Of course, in fairness, there were Kemp and Loney bobbleheads given away this year. Problem is they were given away in Jacksonville.

67 I haven't looked at the game thread, but can I presume there was also consternation when Kent almost got himself thrown out trying to go first to third, down by five runs in the bottom of the ninth? A situation in which you should never, ever, ever try for the extra base?

The guy has turned into a one-man baserunning blunder machine. I don't remember that being a problem of his in previous years, except for the infamous play against the Mets.

It's strange, we were all pretty optimistic at the beginning of the season about the Dodgers, given the make up of the team and the division. The vets have under performed, the pitching rotation has been hurt, and the kids have been blocked.

Meanwhile, the D-Backs have played well above what the numbers would suggest (that, as they say, is why they play the game). The Padres have continued to play just above average baseball and dominate within the division (incredibly important with the unbalanced schedule).

While I know it ain't over until it's over... I'm looking ahead to next year and I think we can figure the Padres will be good again next year and the Rockies and D-Backs are going to continue to improve. That means that the Dodgers are going to have to improve a great deal.

Two projected wins aren't going to be enough.

Third base is going to have to be addressed. Center field should be addressed. And someone has to have a sit down with Kent to discuss just exactly what his future is going to be.

As far as marketing goes, I think the Dodgers were once pretty good at marketing their kids. They did it in the 90s, they probably did it in the 70s. Of course, these Dodgers aren't at all like those Dodgers when it comes to the front office. When it comes to the old guys, I'm guessing Nomar is the only one that casual fans would know of the vets because he's got a certain celebrity value (from the A-Rod/Jeter/Nomar triumvirate days)

I missed out on the "chemistry" conversation. I agree with most here that it is overrated and that winning fixes everything including chemistry. That said, there is little to no camaraderie on this team (can't speak for other teams). I listened to one veteran left fielder (who used to play for AZ and his initials are L.G) bemoan the fact that in his day he had to get beers and light cigarettes for the vets while they sat in the clubhouse and talked baseball. On this team, everyone is out of the clubhouse ASAP and not to hang out with each other. Perhaps that's all teams in 2007 but it is definitely this one.

46 I'm going to agree with Bob and take it a step further.

Who has the most influence over what fans think of the Dodgers? It's not a newspaper writer, not a blogger, not a front-office person. It's Vin Scully, by about 1,000 miles.

Scully is even-handed, perhaps a little too fair at times, but entirely credible and honest. He is old but he is not old school in the sense that Joe Morgan or Rex Hudler are active proponents of an old-school set of beliefs. He goes game by game. He will tell you when someone's hot and when someone's not, and doesn't seem to ever play favorites.

The Dodger marketing people might believe the fans worship Nomar and Kent (the commercials produced in the pre-season but still on the air obviously show that), but Vin Scully has cued the fans to support players I think most of the commenters here also support: Martin, Loney, Billingsley (as long as he keeps his pitch count low!), Broxton, Saito, Ethier, Penny.

Okay, he doesn't hate Pierre, but that's explainable by the fact that Pierre is exciting, if he gets on base, and all broadcasters are drawn to drama. But Scully has been critical of Pierre's arm and pointed on on many occasions that opposing teams go from first to third on him and LuGo.

When Gonzalez, Nomar, Kent and for that matter Saenz and Hendrickson do good things, he shares in the excitement. But he never shies away from criticizing them, and he never questions their absence from a particular game.

I can easily imagine another broadcaster taking a different tack. But Scully lets performance speak for itself, and then uses his broadcasting magic to transform talented performers into stars. So now, in part thanks to Scully just doing his job, the crowds cheer Martin, Loney and Billingsley at least equally as loud as they do Nomar and much more than the other veterans.

If Colletti and Little are looking for reasons not to play the kids and to let the PVL's take the reigns now that the games are crucial, they are doing so in the face of public opinion opposing them. I truly believe the fans know a lot more than we give them credit for about Loney, Kemp, Martin, etc., and want to see them because they are great players for today, not just the future.

Shorter version: If Colletti and McCourt think playing the veterans is better PR/marketing, they are demonstrably wrong and way out of touch with the messages fans are getting from the broadcasts. This is perhaps why Josh is so shocked at the tone of Dodger Talk. The callers are probably a good representation of the current beliefs of fans.

74
You mean you agree that I'm in a bad mood?

55 Today the role of Bob is being played by his understudy, Steve.

73 I thought some of the younger players hung out with each other, if not in large groups then at least in smaller pairs and trios? At least that's what I've heard from a couple of sources. (And, hey, Penny and Martin used to be roomies. Though maybe they got sick of each other.) But if you mean, the younger players don't hang around the older ones much, then I wouldn't be surprised. (Yah, read the previous thread for more discussion on this, if you're bored.)

74. As usual, you are dean on with this post. Scully tells everyone what to think and everyone is probably right for listening to him. His influence is greater than all of the rest of the media combined.

I wish Scully would tell me if the promotion in Ontario is worth the extra commmute.

75 I was so busy writing my novel in