...in which he gave up 7 earned runs in 4 innings, including 2 HRs. He did, however, have 4 Ks.

I knew the Lakers wouldn't get "equal value" by trading him, and that they would suffer in the immediate future following the trade, but I also knew they'd eventually be very glad they weren't paying him the maximum for not-so-maximum performance.

Twice around the Park with Chan Ho... Fernando Tatis, Bases Loaded, same inning.

Anyone else catch that?

I heartily endorse your selection, though.

I may not want to be in the same section if you have too much kimchee though.

Nice.

Explain to me how Winnie Cooper and Dodger Thoughts are connected.

Life's the same I'm moving in stereo
Life's the same except for my shoes
Life's the same youre shakin like tremolo
Life's the same its all inside you

And I am so with you as well DL 19 as that pause and her look in the walk like an egyptian video got me everytime.

550 in the last thread is worth a read, for those who were in on the Cabrera conversation.

On the downside, Cabrera is a terrible defensive player who belongs in left field, and his work ethic and off-field behavior are questionable, although new Yankees skipper Joe Girardi vouched for Cabrera's makeup the other day. Cabrera has two years to go until free agency, and will probably earn $26-30 million over those two years in arbitration unless he's signed to a long-term deal. If the acquiring team doesn't sign him, it'll be able to get two draft picks for him when he leaves, which probably isn't true for anyone else on this list. "

TC, you know... if we could somehow include Pierre in that trade, this might not be so bad.

The big difference between Arod and Cabrera is age. Cabrera is almost 10 years younger. So if you're gonna trade, it might as well be for a stud like Cabrera.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/sotd/archives/411

AROD
Pros:
1) Best player in MLB
2) Don't need to trade any talent to get him.
3) Breaks Bonds record on your team.

Cons:
1) Too expensive.
2) Too many years.
3) In his late prime.

M.Cabrera
Pros:
1) Top 5 players in MLB
2) Fairly cheap for one more year.
3) Prime years ahead of him.
4) Won't be quite as expensive as AROD when he hits free agency.

Cons:
1) Must trade 3 young talented players.
2) conditioning concerns
3) will be expensive as a free agent or expensive if signed to an immediate long-term deal.

With the unbalanced schedule and see each of those teams 15-20 times (at least that's what it feels like), I'm not sure the Dodgers can risk bad defense in the outfield next year. Well, I'm not sure they can risk bad defense anywhere next year, and if we are stuck with Pierre, then I think we've reached our limit on bad defensive outfielders... no matter what Caberra gives us on offense.

And to back that up, bad defense in the outfield means more runners getting on (at least in theory), which means more "pitcher's jams", which increases the likelihood that the Dodgers will have to go to the bullpen. That is a prospect I don't like until the 8th and 9th innings.

I'm hoping for the latter, meself...

And Billingsley's off the table. He (and Martin, it goes without saying) would be my dealbreakers.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/sports/articles/0327asufoot0327.html

Mike Nixon, Vero Beach/Las Vegas/Jacksonville, 6-3, 210, 8/17/83: Was rushed from Vero Beach to Las Vegas as a domino effect from the Dodgers' Paul Bako injury, and his OPS tumbled from .751 to .579. Ended the year with a 3-for-20 performance in Jacksonville, his likely destination in 2006.

Col: 1.218 / 1.513
Ari: 1.112 / 2.524
LAD: 1.052 / 0.583
SF: 0.808 / 1.364
SD: 0.685 / 1.042

The cavernous parks will be the ones with a high number of triples (lots of ground to cover and wierd angles). The one that sticks out is the triples at the park in Arizona, along with the way triples are supressed at Dodger Stadium.

I don't see Joe giving the same deference that Tracy gave Erickson or Sele.

The school voucher scheme in Utah failed. Here's what the "leading supporter of the voucher effort" had to say about people like Daniel who voted against it:

"They don't care enough about their kids. They care an awful lot about this system, this bureaucracy, but they don't care enough about their kids to think outside the box"

http://www.flickr.com/photos/91066300@N00/sets/72157600947040609/

The 2006 DT game

http://www.flickr.com/photos/91066300@N00/sets/72157600935039622/

We won both games.

Helmets make you look uncool but your right I rather look dorky then dead.

http://tinyurl.com/2du2mk

Or people who are otherwise interested in such matters, but I think we are the only two.

It is tangentially baseball related.

I arrived late to this years DT gathering but ScareDuck/Rob McMullin got me on the group picture he took late in the game. It's cool though cause DT'rs are 2 & 0 (MOJO!) when we're all gathered at the same time.

Arms race!

Then the tide went out. Way way out.

CLACK!

So true.

And there has got to be a better way to phrase that question.

How many rules did I just break.

Seriously, it was due to Jon's relationship with Josh R. (head Dodger PR guy), who does lurk here, and their respect for the site.

May gets devastating news, but decides not to cancel her therapy appointments. Jamie and Hugo reconnect, for better or for worse. Palek's blunt revelation at May's office shocks Carolyn. Having confronted the crossroads and challenges of their marriage for some time, Dave and Katie finally make a breakthrough.

1. I'm guessing May's news has to do with John. Maybe he died. Maybe he committed suicide because she rejected him. BTW: How long ago did their indiscretions supposedly take place?

2. From what I hear, the finale is great.

As I missed the meeting, it was my understanding that everyone glad handed McCourt and somehow swallowed their tongues when compared to how they write with their quills. Being good guests that is how it should have been but I've often wondered how it would have gone if they had verbalized what they wanted to ask.

The Dodgers were indeed in 1st place on that day, and ended the day with the best record in the NL at 55-43, a half game ahead of both the Brewers and Mets.

The lineup featured Loney, Kemp, Martin, Ethier, and Betemit. And we rejoiced.

And bhsportsguy's cookies were great too.

Otherwise, you're right.

However, I no longer "hate" the show. I hate myself for watching it. The show's improved, but I haven't.

80 For Jon's take of the day go to,

http://dodgerthoughts.baseballtoaster.com/archives/740691.html

To McCourt's credit, he did seem sincere in person even though it was probably just stock material.

Why?

Is he bringing Ismael Valdez and Antonio Osuna with him to Spring Training?

I think the group showed due deference to McCourt mostly because they wanted to make Josh look good. Josh really extended himself and was the mensch of all mensches.

I do wish we had gotten more pointed questions across.

It also seemed like Josh got most of the Juan Pierre talk.

Speaking of that, on the BB thread this was my response:
What can I say. It was the 1st "adult" TV show I ever saw and at the age of 7 I was bewitched by Elizabeth Montgomery while eating ice cream after having my tonsils removed.

"Segui, who acknowledges he has used a synthetic form of HGH under a doctor's supervision since being diagnosed with a growth hormone deficiency in 2003 [SHOULD BE 2001], says he thought nothing of the exchange until a few months later, when Grimsley was busted and his affidavit sped through baseball circles faster than a Josh Beckett heater."

I found myself rooting for the Anaheim forward Parros, or as we were calling him, "The 'Stache". That made even a blowout entertaining.

Also, I had no idea that essentially cheerleaders come out every 5 game minutes or so (every timeout) to clean the ice. That was a nice surprise! :)

The only downside was not getting home until 11:30. NHL is definitely better in person though.

Why is it "OK" to use steroids/HGH/etc. to address physical problems when you're under doctor's order, but not otherwise? Don't you get an "unfair advantage" under either scenario? Why is it less unfair if a doctor prescribed the drugs?