Thanks bigly to the big efforts of TheBigGrabowski, we have 8 of the 14 AL starting rotations detailed.

Red Sox - Benaiah
Yankees - TheBigGrabowski

Tigers - TheBigGrabowski
Indians - MCSafety
Twins - TheBigGrabowski

Angels - Scareduck
Mariners - TheBigGrabowski
Athletics - TheBigGrabowski

Any volunteers for the remaining six?

Devil Rays -
Blue Jays -
Orioles -
White Sox -
Royals - Eric Stephen
Rangers -

If you're willing, please put your results with the others in this thread:

http://dodgerthoughts.baseballtoaster.com/archives/881690.html

Positions where Dodgers have unambiguous advantage:

C
CL
R2

Positions where DBacks have unambiguous advantage:

LF

After a quick glance, I like the D's chances against the Snakes this year.
So much depends on healthy pitchers, however.

Don't the Snakes have an umambiguous advantage at third base? I like LaRoche's potential, but I have to go with Tracy/Reynolds there.

Looking at those comparisons, I like our chances.

Positions where I would unquestionably swap our guy for theirs, even: 2B, P1, P5

4 You like Reynolds potential over LaRoche's?

4
Not unambiguous enough for me. If LaRoche is allowed to play, I don't see the DBacks necessarily being ahead. If Nomar plays "too much", then the DBacks win.

LaRoche has better potential than Reynolds. Loney is better than Jackson. In fact, as long as Nomar doesn't get the 3B job, LF is probably the only place we are at a disadvantage when it comes to position players. The Diamondbacks really NEEDED Haren to have any HOPE of contending with us.

Of course LaRoche is better than Reynolds. But I'm not convinced that management or his back will let LaRoche play enough, and Nomar is worse than anyone the Snakes run out there. But maybe it's not unambiguous ...

The OBP of both CF's last year were really awful. Jones actually won with a 0.311.

If the Dodgers are close to signing Koruda, it would push Schmidt to the 5 slot.

And while Upton has a huge ceiling, at age 20, in 2008, I am sure he has no chance of being as productive as Kemp in RF. I wouldn't be surprised if Upton is outright "bad," though it's no guarantee.

To me, Upton is the only guy on that team, and one of the few in the league, with an upside that may be higher than Kemp's. It will be interesting over the next few years to see who reaches their potential quicker and stays there longer.

10 Yeah, but I like the Schmidt/Johnson comparison. Both are former aces, aged and coming off of injuries, so they both have the same question marks next to their name.

I think that second base is pretty unambiguously in the Snakes favor. Hudson VORPed eight points less in 40 more plate appearances, but he's one of the best defensive second basemen in the league against one of the worst.

Plus Kent has the whole "could fall of a cliff at any time because he's 40" thing.

5 jeff kent, 2007 OPS+ : 121, career OPS+: 124
orlando hudson, 2007 OPS+: 106, career OPS+: 97

yeah, kent's a statue on defense, and hudson is very good, but we've got abreu, nomar, and laroche to spell him, and kent's gone after this year. hudson, meanwhile, had a career year, and is just 2 years removed from a .315 OBP

Actually, I think this ends up being fairly even if we were just picking teams for this year. Not that anyone cares, but my list of people I would take for this year:

Martin, Loney, Hudson, Furcal, LaRoche, Byrnes, Young, Kemp, Webb, Haren, Lowe, Johnson, Owings, Saito, Broxton, Qualls

It's an 8-8 split right there.

I aggree with that, its just that they will be in the 5 slot. Or I guess you would then match up Koruda with Micha Owings, assuming we can get Koruda. My point is that Loiza will then not be part of the starting 5, I know I just threw out a lot of IFs there...sorry.

from the last thread, i couldn't resist:

*345. D4P
But what of my legendary effect on the fairer sex...? *

you must induce quite a lot of nausea to describe it as "legendary" :)

The UCLA-Idaho State game ended relatively late (around 9 pm I recall) so for a 5-year old, you were up too late, Jon.

Since it was an early round NCAA tournament game, it was shown on a syndicated network back to LA (probably TVS) and was shown on Channel 5.

I should go check the newspaper to see if I'm right.

18
Learn how to use the asterisks properly before you take on the Dizzle 4 Pizzle...

20 it didn't detract from my larger point.

21
I was distracted!

I was way off.

The game was on Channel 4. And it started at 8:15 PT.

So, young man, you were up way past your bedtime. No wonder you were crying.

22 you would be.

19 - I was 9 1/2.

Why do I have this feeling that the NL West is going to be really competitive and the team that wins will have less than 90 wins (because everyone plays each other so much) and all we will hear late in the season is that the NL West just isn't that good. Even though most of the teams will have winning records against the other divisions?

24- He'd better be.

25
Really, I'm unfamiliar with your age. ;-)

OK, 9 1/2 I can understand. I believe the game ended even later because I had to listen to the end of the game on the radio, which in my parents' view, was acceptable rather than staying up watching TV.

In reading the previews of the game in the LA Times, Idaho State was expected to be a very tough opponent for UCLA, which had not played well in its first round win against Louisville. The Brett Vroman-Steve Hayes matchup was not expeted to favor UCLA and it didn't.

Brett Vroman matchups against anyone rarely favored UCLA.

Gig Sims was certainly no help.

I'd like someone to give their take on Upton v. Kemp and Furcal v. Drew.

28 I believe the game ended even later because I had to listen to the end of the game on the radio, which in my parents' view, was acceptable rather than staying up watching TV.

What was their reasoning (or substitute for reasoning)?

Fun With Stats:

2006-2007 (per 9 IP)

Dan Haren: 8.85 H, 4.04 R, 3.59 ER, 2.02 BB, 7.43 K, 1.11 HR, .252/.296/.412 opp, 120 ERA+
C.Billingsley: 8.47 H, 3.76 R, 3.49 ER, 4.63 BB, 7.59 K, 0.84 HR, .253/.346/.381 opp, 130 ERA+

32

So what you're saying is that we could have gotten a comparable package for Billingsley?

GIT ER DONE NED!

31- I'd bet the radio he listened to the end of the game was in his bedroom. Parents make up all kinds of funny rules to get kids out of the way.

Ironically, one of my favorite sports moments was when Adam Morrison was writheing on the floor when UCLA beat Gonzaga. Everytime I watch it on youtube, it gives me a warm feeling.

33
Ha! Very nice.

The key for me in 2008 is to not waste our advantage of the top three starters. If we can get roughly league average numbers from the other 65-70 starts, we will win the division.

The Rockies got 155 starts last year from pitchers whose lowest ERA+ was 97 (Fogg was 97, no one else was lower than 100).

After the 85 starts by the Dodgers' big three in 2007, the best ERA+ of anyone making a start was 97 (Wolf), and no one else was higher than 89.

35
I hated that game because if Gonzaga would have won that game (which they seemed to have in hand) I would have won three different office pools (none of which involved Rick Neuheisel).

The Irony Commission rejects that submission.

32 Why is it that Haren had a higher H/9 but a lower BAA? Oh, wait, I got it! Because Chad has fewer ABs/9 because he induces more double plays.

34
Andrew has the essence of the policy correct. My older brothers continued to watch the game on TV in the kitchen.

According to the boxscore in the LA Times, Bartow started Gig Sims at center and brought Vroman off the bench, but they played a combined 14 minutes. Greenwood played 40 minutes, Johnson played 39 minutes, and Kiki Vandeweghe played the balance of the time in the front court.

I have a feeling that the Bruins would have been run off the court in the next round by UNLV if they had won.

At #327 in the previous thread Andrew typed a single-sentence paean: "there should be a holiday devoted to pastrami."

So who's bought a block of the stuff from the grocery store and been able to cook it in such a way that it comes out the way you get it at a deli? And if you've succeeded, what cooking method did you use?

39.
There were several reports that the A's were having a "medical meeting" last week, to decide their trading directions on team players. That would make me a little nervous, if we were trading with them 2 days later. Well, alot nervous.

The importance of having non-crap after Penny/Billingsley/Lowe:

2007 Starts Not Made By The Big 3™
77 starts
398.2 IP (5.18 per start)
10.45 H/9
3.52 BB/9
6.84 K/9
1.15 HR/9
5.71 ERA
80 ERA+
Team Record: 30-47

If Kuroda, Schmidt, Loaiza, etc can provide anything close to league average (4.57 ERA in Dodger Stadium in 2007) the Dodgers will be in great shape.

I know its a long shot, but if we could get an allowance for payroll, a handshake deal with Furcal on a 2-3 year extension would allow us to go for the gold.

Santana wants an extension in order to waive his no-trade. If he agrees to come here, trade Kershaw with Hu, Dewitt, Pierre and fillers to Minnesota.

Santana is what we hope Minetaur will be. Santana would be locked up for 6 years while the following contracts expire
Lowe, Loaiza after 2008
Penny, Schmidt after 2009
Kuroda after 2010...
Santana, Bills constant and Elbert/Mcdonald can help replace two of the three spots over the next couple of years.

I'm of the belief that Kershaw will never be more highly rated than he is right now and therefore his downside risk due to injury or lack of final development.

(continued) is huge. He's the best LHP in the game. Its only down from here.

(ducks under table).

LHP=LH prospect.

Are we not past the "Let's Get Santana!" stuff yet? Really, part of me is surprised nobody is pushing to get Miguel Cabrera in a trade anymore (notwithstanding that he has already been traded), so accustomed had I become to wading through those kinds of posts.

Immense respect for your contributions here CanuckD, but MCAB was not rumored to go to Detroit. I'm just being logical here on December 15th. With Kuroda and AJones in place, the Dodgers would be in position to offer the best package with the least disruption to our big league squad.

The Danny Haren deal is setting the market in motion. It wouldn't surprise me if it did go down. Its a bit more thought through than "Lets get Santana"...

Following up a bit on 44 , the Dodgers are bound to improve their pitching just by having Billinsgley start for a full season.

I looked at all five NL West teams, and separated each starting staff by the top 3 starters (measured by 2007 IP) and the rest. The Dodgers had the least starts and IP among the top 3 starters, even though they collectively were the best:

Top 3 Starters
D-Backs: 100 GS (58-42, .580), 633.1 IP, 4.01 ERA, 117 ERA+
Padres: 98 GS (58-40, .592), 594.1 IP, 3.24 ERA, 125 ERA+
Giants: 91 GS (39-52, .429), 551.2 IP, 4.05 ERA, 110 ERA+
Rockies: 88 GS (47-41, 534), 545 IP, 4.43 ERA, 108 ERA+
Dodgers: 85 GS (52-33, .612), 518.1 IP, 3.44 ERA, 133 ERA+

Compounding the Dodgers' problems in 2007 was the fact that they had really bad pitching from "the rest" of the rotation (San Diego was worse) in the most IP:

The Rest
Dodgers: 77 GS (30-47, .390), 398.2 IP, 5.71 ERA, 80 ERA+
Rockies: 75 GS (43-32, .573), 398.1 IP, 4.79 ERA, 100 ERA+
Giants: 71 GS (32-39, 451), 417 IP, 4.49 ERA, 99 ERA+
Padres: 65 GS (31-34, .477), 340.2 IP, 5.63 ERA, 72 ERA+
D-Backs: 62 GS (32-30, .516), 324.2 IP, 4.66 ERA, 101 ERA+

Looking at the NL West rotations has really underscored the purpose of including more than five pitchers in the analysis of starting rotations. The 5 NL West teams employed the following (Byung-Hyun Kim gets counted twice as both a D-Back & Rockie) in 2007:

53 different starting pitchers
40 with 5+ starts
29 with 10+ starts
20 with 20+ starts
10 with 30+ starts

50
David Wells & Brett Tomko also each counted twice in 2007, as they each pitched for SD & LA.

49 -- I don't want to insult you, but I really believe that calls to "Get the Best Pitcher (or Hitter) In baseball!" just smack of fantasy baseball fanboyism, especially in the absence of any talk that one's favorite team is actually considering such a move. When the Dodgers were showing interest in Cabrera, I didn't say anything about the "Cabrera chatter," though I made my own feelings about Cabrera known. But now, Santana is clearly the last player on the Dodgers' minds, so it's irksome to see a Dodger fan barking up that tree. I expect that sort of thing out of Plaschke, frankly. "Oooh, Arizona, got Haren! The Dodgers have to 'one-up them' now or they don't wanna win! Who one-ups Haren? Santana!" The Dodgers say they're going to stay the course? Then stay the course, which means the opposite of cashing in young talent with their best years ahead of them for celebrity ball players who became celebrities with greater years behind them than they probably have in front of them. Honestly, Kershaw's next six years are apt to be better than Santana's next six. You obviously don't believe that, but I do.

We got Kuroda per Jackson.

http://www.insidesocal.com/dodgers/archives/2007/12/kuroda_agrees_t.html

I can't wait to see how this new theory of handling Canuck works. Does the offense (favoring a big trade) get forgiven for a few nice words, or is that interpreted as a sign of weakness?

I'm on pins and needles, here.

Rats. Should have refreshed.

Looks like a little of each. Interesting.

Re: 53

I'm a happy man, now. Hopefully Torre will realize during ST that Pierre playing as a regular LF is preposterous.

WWSH

52 Kershaw's next six years are apt to be better than Santana's next six

I don't believe that at all, however I agree with your overall point.

If Kershaw is somewhere close to Santana's neighborhood in performance, he'll be so cheap (making likely $100 million less than Santana), the extra money saved will (in theory) allow the Dodgers to upgrade in other areas (other players, international scouting, etc).

More NL starting rotation depth numbers...

In 2007, the average NL team used:

10.7 starters
8 pitchers with 5+ starts
6 pitchers with 10+ starts
3.8 pitchers with 20+ starts
2.3 pitchers with 30+ starts

Has Camille johnson's firing (resignation) been discussed already?

I'm glad Kuroda is in the fold.

The Arms build up in the NL West continues!

How is it that these other teams (Detroit,DBacks)can accomplish these trades for upper level talent without giving up anything significant from their 25 man roster.

VICTORY! VICTORY!

Penny
Bills
Lowe
Kuroda
Schmidt/Loaiza

61
Because the Dodgers don't have an OF prospect outside of Xavier Paul, and the teams wanted an OF in return is my only guess. As a result, Kemp had to be included for the other teams (Florida, Baltimore) to trade their star.

61 we're the dodgers. we have to overpay for everything, naturally.

30
I'd take Upton over Kemp. The only season where Kemp would have an advantage is 2008 and I wouldn't even be betting on that. Pecota should bear this out come Jan when they show their future forecasts. I'm just not convinced that Kemp is going to be something special while I'm convinced Upton is. One thing for certain the Diamondbacks have 3 legitimate centerfielders playing in the outfield. Each has a strong arm, each has speed, and each has power. OBP is achilles heal.

I see more of a comparison between Kemp and Young, then Kemp and Upton. Kemp can match Young in speed, and possibly power while Young is head and tails above him as a defensive center fielder. Kemp should get on base at a much higher clip. I'd rather have Young or Upton then Kemp.

I'd also rather have Young then A Jones from this point on.

If anyone is unimpressed with Upton because of his major league stats at the age of 19/20 they are looking at him with blinders.

For 2008 I'd take Furcal but you have to hope that Furcal plays like 2006 and Drew plays like 2007 instead of 2006. Furcal has the defense, the speed, while Drew has the power and the low cost contract. This will probably be the last year that Drew falls short of Furcal.

I don't get the arguement that others have put forth that the Diamondbacks window is now because our kids will blow by them. We have nothing like a Justin Upton. Kemp and Young should be even over the next 4 years but Upton will be a super star after 2008.
For a guy with an excellent eye, Conor Jackson gets short shift around here. It is no slam dunk that Loney is the better hitter. Before everyone gets to giddy about Loney's Sept, just take a look at what Steven Drew did in Sept of 06 and then what he followed that up with.
Why does everyone think a future infield of Loney/Abreu/Hu/LaRoche/Martin and an outfield of Kemp/Jones/Pierre,Ethier has more upside then Jackson/Hudson/Drew/Reynolds/Montero and Upton/Young/Byrnes?

Nailing down Haren for the next 3 years will go a long way in addressing their pitching needs.

And I'll take Orlando Hudson 7 days a week over Jeff Kent in 2008.

For 2008
1st - Push
2nd - Arizona
SS - Dodgers
3rd - If LaRoche then Dodgers, if Nomar then Dodgers because he'll only keep the job if he is dealing
C - Dodgers in a landslide
RF - Dodgers
CF - Push
LF - Push if it is Ethier but it swings substantially to the Diamonbacks if it is Pierre.

52 That might be going a bit too far. I agree with most of your posts, but Kershaw is hardly gauranteed to become Santana. Obviously i might get my head bitten off here, but arent there some control issues with Kershaw? Add that to not having pitched in AAA yet, and that conclusion is a little outlandish. Santana has been nothing short of dominating in a much tougher AL. Santana only gets better with a switch to the NL imo.

64

Apparently including Carp!

We have nothing like a Justin Upton.

They don't have any mythical beasts!

67
Seriously. "$36 to $40 million" is more than the $30 million I was expecting.

Maybe Kuroda got mad when he realized last season was the Dodgers' 50th year in LA, and that 2008 only celebrates the anniversary.

The crux of my point was when you hear a 20 year old is "the best pitching prospect in 25 years" or whatever, and he's not scratched AAA, he's fully priced and has significant downside.

Canuck, frankly your argument regarding Kershaw only holds water if he was only reasonably valued for what he is. A prospect. He ain't undervalued and therefore must accomplish an awful lot just to justify his PRESENT DAY value.

Someone's gonna get Santana. He's seriously on the block. And the main players can't get a deal done. We've spoken to Minnesota, Baltimore. For every reason why someone has to go to the AL or the two East powerhouses, I can give you benefits for sending him to the opposite league in a town with the biggest Hispanic population.

Its a rational idea and possible, not a Plaschke-like knee jerk response to Haren, and therefore, wrong idea. I think the market is setting in at a more reasonable level given the Fla and Oak deals.

Although finding a closer is not a hard thing to do, Arizona's strength was in their "good" bullpen pitchers holding on to very small leads last year.

While Lyon maybe able to do the job, now everyone else moves up one spot, that does not always work out.

I'm sure the D-Backs feel that their offense will score more runs next year but it remains to be seen if they will do so well in close games as they did in 2007.

70
It is a moot point. With the signings of Jones and Kuroda, the Dodgers could not afford Johan Santana unless they unloaded Lowe and Pierre.

I'd rather take the chance on the next 6 years of Kershaw and Kemp/LaRoche instead of paying Santana 25 Million over the next 6 years from the ages of 30-35. I understand that Santana is a sure thing compared to Kershaw, but sometimes the surprise is better then the known quantity.
That said I understand the thinking of those who want Santana and I don't see the need for anyone to be chastised for such an opinion.

It is not like were discussing the Mitchell report.

JON:::I notice you have Ethier in left field with Pierre and Kemp in LF alone. Are you assuming that Ethier is now the 4th OF?

The chance that the 2007 D'backs bullpen could do the same thing ever again was somewhere in between the chances of D4P's getting a Nobel prize for Fashion and five or more of Zappala's kids doing serious federal time for racketeering.

So who gets Santana?

We'll see how it plays out.

With or without Pierre, its been a good off season if you like our youth, like not losing draft picks and such.

Nate wanted AJones and Kuroda, so its good with me.

I would not be the least bit surprised if Schmidt is best served for the bullpen when/if he comes back. But Canuck is right, a rotation with Santana and Kuroda as the 5 is fantasy-esque. Maybe Ned panicks who knows, but so far this offseason he has made it quite clear ML guys arent getting traded. I would love to see it done at the right price obviously, but at this point its a pipe dream.

71
Qualls keeps Lyons from moving up. The GM would not have dealt Velverde if he didn't think Pena/Qualls couldn't do the same job Valverde/Pena did. I think it was a great deal, if Hudson walks during his FA year they now have his replacement. The GM knows he can find another relief pitcher, finding another 2nd baseman won't be so easy.
Burks may not work out but before they screwed him up with the Biggio crap he looked ready to be a solid major league 2nd baseman.
I'm getting a lot of respect for the Arizona GM.

77- He's the second coolest Byrnes associated with the team.

If I had written 10 weeks ago that the Dodger roster will add a probable 20-30 HR legit CF and another starter(not named Silva/Lohse), withstood trade offers, and replaced Grady with a pretty good manager, would most here sign off on that kind of off-season.

73 - I'm assuming that Kemp will get more playing time than Ethier, but I really don't know how Torre would deploy them.

42 Linkmeister, what's the best deli in Hawaii? When was the last time you had "pastrami?" Just curious.

Ken Gurnick makes it look ALMOST like a sure thing that Kuroda will sign with us. I sure hope he's right. It would save a lot trouble AND players down the line.

82 That's old news. Kuroda agreed to terms this morning.

Thank you for #80

79
Other then not having MCAB on the roster after seeing what Detroit gave up for him I am still very happy with this off season.
1. A Jones is our center fielder, I can't even describe how happy that made me. Back in the winter of 1974 the Dodgers traded for my favorite player and in the winter of 2007 they just signed one of my favorite players. Jon asked once who was going to be our Jimmy Wynn, and I stand here before you saying he is here.
2. LaRoche is still here and destined to be our 3rd baseman at some point in 2008.
3. Kershaw is still here
4. Kuo has so far survived

If we go into the season with the current team, we are loaded with chips if we need to improve the team. We can only hope that Elbert repairs his reputation, McDonald continues his rapid ascent, and that Morris can come back 100%.

I got my Dodger Invoice today for 2008. There will not be any hesitation this year in sending out that check.

Also this off-season shows that right now, the injuries to Scott Elbert and Bryan Morris have affected the Dodgers ability to make moves.

If Elbert had another good year, while he would have been in the mix for the Dodger's staff (heck, he could have pitched in LA in 2007 had he been healthy), he certainly would have been a tempting player to counter the non-tradeable Kershaw. Also, a fine year for Morris would have given him trade value.

It also seems that the glut of 3B prospects, LaRoche, DeWitt, and Bell was not has appealing as young outfielders.

75 Basically, I agree with Canuck in that I don't believe we'll get Santana.

But I do agree the market is getting more reasonable. If the Twins find themselves looking for a suitor in the next two months and come to Ned with a favorable offer, I hope he listens. Santana is a known quantity, a difference-making pitcher.

Haren's trade only signals to me that the market is not as steep as it looked three weeks ag