
|
Quotebook Quibbles
2008-05-18 09:11
There's hyperbole, and then there's just being fascinatingly wrong. I just read Mark Whicker's column in the Register from Saturday, which someone previously mentioned in the comments. But I don't think they mentioned this quote from general manager Ned Colletti: "We could have eight Furcals out there and it wouldn't help us, with the (starting) pitching the way it's been," he said. Putting aside what it would mean to have eight Rafael Furcals, I really think the complaining about the starting pitching has become overwrought. There are disappointments and there are concerns, but when your worst starting pitcher of late has been Brad Penny (whose next start will come at least a day later than scheduled), when your team ERA is fifth in the National League, when your team fielding independent ERA is second in the NL, when your 12th pitcher has hardly needed to be used, when you have the luxury of bringing Hong-Chih Kuo out of the bullpen, doesn't that start to overshadow the fact that your starting pitchers average 5 1/3 innings instead of six? I'd rather the Dodgers carried 11 pitchers instead of 12, but either way, the 25th man on the roster doesn't make or break a team's fortunes. And there's nothing wrong with using pitching depth as an asset. In seven weeks this season, Takashi Saito has thrown 17 1/3 innings, Jonathan Broxton 17, Joe Beimel 13 2/3 and Scott Proctor 20 1/3. None is averaging more than three innings per week, nor are they having an overload of pitches wasted in the bullpen - when they warm up, they usually have to come in. This does not meet the definition of being overworked. Sucking up innings are Hong-Chih Kuo (who has not pitched with fewer than two days rest), Chan Ho Park (never used on consecutive days) and Cory Wade (used on consecutive days once, in April). Should any of these falter, there are plenty of candidates in the system to replace them. The Dodgers' starting pitching has been mediocre overall, but the bullpen has mitigated that. Meanwhile, the Dodger starting left fielder has an equivalent average of .269 and falling (.271 on-base percentage and .228 slugging percentage since leaving Denver), the center fielder has an EQA of .201 and the starting second baseman is at .228. I'm sure Colletti didn't mean for his "eight Furcals" comment to be taken literally or even seriously, but the fact that he could even say it as a throwaway line is kind of strange. The Dodgers have had incredible performances from some players, good performances from others, inconsistent performances from others and downright dreck from a few. The starting pitching should be better than it is, but it's not killing the team - not by itself, anyway. * * * Juan Pierre went 0 for 4 with a hit-by-pitch Saturday. Still, he was worthy of sidebar praise in the eyes of Tony Jackson of the Daily News. After using his speed to reach base on a momentary bobble by Angels second baseman Maicer Izturis ... He's fast, but he still reached first base only because of an error ... Pierre stole second by sliding headfirst into the back of the bag, even though the throw from catcher Jeff Mathis had beaten him badly. ... He should have been out a second time, but he wasn't. Seriously, credit him with a good slide ... He then tagged and took third on Andre Ethier's fly ball to deep center, after which the Angels intentionally walked Russell Martin. Then on a 3-1 pitch to James Loney, Martin broke for second, only to have Mathis' throw beat him by some 45 feet. At that point, Martin engaged the Angels in a rundown, and Pierre waited for his moment. When it took a second throw to get Martin - shortstop Erick Aybar to first baseman Casey Kotchman to Izturis - Pierre scampered home uncontested ... The key to Pierre scoring was that the Angels blew a rundown play, as manager Mike Scioscia would acknowledge in his postgame comments ... ... scoring what turned out to be a crucial run in the Dodgers' 6-3 victory. The crucial run? The team led by two already ... At that point, the Dodgers clung to a 4-2 lead they had seemed destined to blow just a couple of innings earlier. But Pierre's run - his second in a game in which he had no hits in five plate appearances - made it 5-2 and seemed to erase any doubt for the Dodgers. Yes, Pierre's speed helped the Dodgers get a run. Still, I don't see how that can be more impressive than Andre Ethier, who after his two-run homer Friday, singled in the Dodgers' third run off Ervin Santana, helping to hasten the departure of a pitcher whose ERA entering the game was 2.63. I'm looking at Ethier's 2008 gamelog and still trying to figure out where the slump is. * * *
|
I am likewise shocked to discover that more and more fans are getting their sports news/analysis from sources outside the traditional media.
When you're right, you're right.
Andruw Jones borrowed it and hasn't given it back.
As for analysis, however, they can't compare to "alternative sources" outside traditional media. :)
It seems that no matter what JP does, he's the goat. Never mind that many of the overpaid "stars" in the game given the same sort of disrespect that JP has this season would be sulking and causing club house problems along with sucking in the field, not JP. He straps it on, plays his game the same way he's played it for years for better or worse.
If you don't think JP's game is not being noticed by other teams, you'd be wrong. He will be traded sometime this year to a team that wants his game and then who will people have to slag?
There is a lot of JP bashing for sure, but I don't think Jon's post did that so much as it tried to debunk arguments in favor of Pierre's "type of play."
I wasn't making him the goat. I was pointing out that he was getting praised for doing very little. When the same thing happens with Kent and if it ever happens with Jones, I point it out too.
You don't need me to point out that Jones is doing poorly. Everyone does that.
And by the way, Pierre was sulking when he was on the bench.
Pierre is the biggest closet I GUY on the club.
...don't forget to tune into the Sunday night show on KABC 790 from 7-10 p.m. tonight. Wes Parker is the 60s guest of the week...
Sounds interesting, but I think I'd rather have Jon and Steve Lyons guest host again...
"Sulking on the bench", YIKES. I watched JP last year, every shot the TV coverage gave of him. JP usually sits up by camera well, usually by himself, maybe that is the sulking you are reporting.
But face facts, there is story there for the media types to sell, including TV directors, the fourth outfielder sulking in the dugout. Quick, get me a shot of JP sitting by himself sulking, cut to it, that's the "story" we are selling. Any shots of Ether when he's sitting, any story line of him "sulking", somehow I doubt it.
Maybe JP can get together with Andruw and learn how to have that little smirk on his face when ever things don't go right, like chasing low and outside. I can see it now, JP gets this goofy smirk every time a ball gets fouled off, people will think he's happy, happy, happy, joy, joy, joy that he did not get a chance to steal a bag.
Ethier has definitely gotten worse treatment. Please.
And remember, you're the one who brought up the sulking issue regarding players being benched, not us.
I found the discussion about DeWitt and LaRoche compelling in previous thread, though it sort of bothers me a bit because there's some misconceptions being bandied about, about what DT posters "want" or "don't want." I've been reading the comments here pretty consistently every day and don't recall anyone advocating LaRoche because of his lineage. That seriously made me laugh.
I also -- and I won't presume to speak for everyone here -- but I'm just tickled to death about how surprisingly solid DeWitt has been for the Dodgers so far. I really appreciate it and respect the heck out of how he's handled himself. I don't know where we'd be without him, given all the other injuries.
Like many people here at this point, I don't see sending him down either, and have been asking about the concept of having LaRoche play some second to give the team more of a reason to call him up.
My liking of and expections for LaRoche have zero to do with my liking of DeWitt and hopes for him.
I just don't like the idea of LaRoche being Wally Pipped before he even knew what hit him. My expectations and hopes for him have everything to do with observing him as a player in LA and Las Vegas (and little to do with his batting average in a pretty short stint in the majors, but in his patience at the plate, his power potential, and his eye. Again, this has NOTHING to do with DeWitt, whom I also really like at this point.
I don't like the idea of pitting one of them against the other any more than I like the idea of pitting one DT poster against another, beyond all reason.
There's room for them both. But it's up to the Dodger brass to really see things a little differently than they've been seeing things. That is MY opinion, but I may speak for a few others here at least.
I did indeed bring the topic up, and you responded, I guess we disagree and would like to see "The hunt for Ether sulking" go just as forcefully.
Putting on my Oliver Stone hat, perhaps some of the positive coverage in the media is part of the media subtlety helping package JP for a trade, who knows.
As to Ether and worse treatment, that's part of the game really. Veterans with big contracts are always given the nod over younger players, unless the veteran player is really terrible, and unless the team goes completely young, aka Diamondbacks. I'd go as far as saying Grady lost the club house last year because of that tension, and a refusal to make the hard facts clear to everyone. Joe T. is playing who he thinks are the best 9 players every day, and I doubt ether veteran players or "the kids" are going to challenge Joe.
That's exactly what disturbs me so much about Torre so far this year...
I'm not so sure that Joe knows these guys all that well. He's been with most of them sense what, Spring training. It's not like he knows these guys like he knew the boys in pin stripes but that will change over the season.
Teams won't complain so much about Pierre's high price if they are receiving such a hot prospect. I love both DeWitt and LaRoche and wish they could both play every day for the Dodgers, but it does not seem feasible. Also, we could probably get something very nice in return with a trade like that.
I'm not sure I trust Ned to make a trade. He seems at his best when he is, um, not really dealing. His best moves as GM so far have been not making trades.
Not a lot of thought involved there.
The only reason there will be competition for 3B of Kemp/Ethier in the OF, is their salaries.
Jones plays, Pierre plays, Nomar when healthy plays, Kent if he feels like it plays, Furcal plays (ok, at least he deserves it)...after that Joe has to evaluate the players because none of them make anything (figuratively speaking in relation to others).
Does anyone here really believe Bennett catching and Martin at third is a better option than Martin catching and anyone else at 3B?
What is the longest period of time Nomar has been injury free sense coming to the Dodgers?
A month or is it six weeks?
Nomar is not a durable 162 game player, and needs to be gone when his contract is up.
Let's please not make the same move that we did a couple of years ago. Navarro could be Martin's back up right now. Instead we have Bennet and his lob.
There is no reason to purge the team of DeWitt or LaRoche. Third base has been a gaping hole for us since Beltre, why then would we send one of our 2 promising stars packing? I should stop myself now... that definitely sounds like a Colletti move.
For clubhouse atmosphere concerns, I hope a trade is coming soon.
By the way, wouldn't it be worth trading one away if it rid the team of Pierre at the same time?
Also, given the small major league sample size for both players, who would you choose to get rid of? Would you flip a coin? DeWitt has been fielding balls at short, he's obviously willing to play other positions. Kent is gone next year. Raffy's back is troublesome. We need both DeWitt and LaRoche on this team and we need them both now.
The DT mantra is dead.
Everyone is traceable, if the deal is right and the Dodgers are willing to eat some salary. After all, ARod before his big mistake was being paid a big chunk of change in part by the Texas Rangers, deferred salary and all that.
Ned just has be willing to admit to Parking King Frank that he goofed up on the JP signing.
I understand we need healthy young players this year and even more importantly next year, but we do have a lot of players that can play many infield positions. (Hu, DeWitt, LaRoche, Abreu, Young) Trading away one wont hurt the teams future.
DeWitts value has got to be very high right now, and like you said it is a small sample size, he would be my first choice to trade away.
Send Pierre with Delwyn (we never play the poor guy) and a pitching prospect.
>>Jason Schmidt made his second rehab start fr Single-A Inland Empire last night against Lake Elsinore and did very well, getting 2 1/3 innings out of his allotted 30-45 pitches (he threw 34). He gave up one hit, walked one batter and struck out three. Not sure yet what the next step is. ... <<
Keep him and use him. How can the dodgers use him and not bench another player who fans will be asking to see? Average fans want to see DeWitt, Kent, and even a healthy Nomar play.
But a more far reaching question, will the Dodgers go full youth movement or stay with this mixed Youth/Vet hybrid?
My lengthy contribution to the LaRoche-DeWitt debate was LAT'ed in the last post, but I will refrain from cut-and-pasting it here unless I notice the discussion steering heavily towards that avenue. I'll just assume anyone interested in that discussion will go to the last thread and start with Dodger Jack's catalyst at 381 . I will say though, that I'd much prefer to have this discussion be less about pitting Blake vs. Andy and more about how to incorporate both in the lineup over the likes of Kent and Mr. Hamm.
Maybe Ned and Joe can get upset with all this old versus young talk, and in an attempt to shut up all the young-wanting fans goes with an exclusively young lineup till the All-star break to show they cannot win.
No wait, because of injuries a few years back, the Dodgers were forced to go with youth (Kemp, Martin, etc) and the Dodgers rattled off like 18 wins in 19 games.
Scratch that! Bad idea!
"We added two proven leaders to our team today, "said Colletti. "Both of these top of the tier players are winners and they know what it's like to win a championship ring. Their experience will help guide our younger players."
Hardly.
http://griddle.baseballtoaster.com/archives/988515.html
I'm not saying that most of our answers aren't in our farm system, but it's no guarantee that calling them up will produce results, even if they are better players.
I don't disagree that he potentially is a better ML player than DeWitt.
That is, IF LaRoche could stay healthy...which I don't think he can.
A friend who was a Roto junkie in the late '70s used an expression that I believe applies to LaRoche:
injuries are part of his card.
I would not trade either of them away unless and until LaRoche demonstrates over at least a hundred or so games that his brittleness--unprecedented in my memory in such a highly regarded Dodger prosepect--is just an ugly coincidence.
I really want to know how you pronounce "Hoffpauir".
According to Dodgers Dot Com Pierre is 5'11
So, he never has played 2nd, but having played SS, is it inconceivable he could at least try 2nd in the minors?
I don't see DeWitt continuing this current streak anyway, so LaRoche should end up at 3rd in the long run, providing he can stay healthy.
A couple of injuries and all of a sudden he's fragile guy?
Also, it's kind of interesting that when LaRoche and DeWitt were drafted, each was mentioned as a possible candidate for conversion to catcher.
Anyway, put me down in favor of the idea of having one of them play second base. Particularly DeWitt, since he's played the position already, and his bat in the long term is likely to be more of a second baseman's than a third baseman's. Yeah, he might stink, but so what? We've had a second baseman who stinks defensively for a while. It hasn't wrecked the team or anything.
DH Pierre
LF Ethier
C Martin
2B Kent
1B Loney
RF Kemp
3B DeWitt
CF Jones
SS Hu
Let's sum up, shall we:
Game 1: Your DH, ladies and gents, is 10-time Gold Glove winner Andruw Jones. Brilliant! Especially since it enables Juan Pierre to play in the field.
Game 2: Your DH is Mark Sweeney, he of the fork marks in his back, who goes 0-for-4 as his average plummets from .143 to .125.
Game 3: Juan Freaking Pierre.
Meanwhile, a guy who would probably be one of the better DHs in baseball, Delwyn Young, doesn't have an at bat in the series. It makes me want to claw my eyes out. No, check that, it makes me want to claw Joe Torre's eyes out.
I understand Ned must love him, but what if Frank M. tires of Ned and a new GM wants a new Manager. Then could Torre be fired or is that still impossible because he is Joe Torre?
I think point 3 should also note that our DH has a .178/.229/.200/.429 as our leadoff guy.
Btw that lineup is about as good as i couldve hoped for - except for dh. Agree with eric about the waste that is dh spot this wknd.
Oy. Don't know why I'm so grouchy today. Anyway, I will now commence relaxing and enjoying our one-game winning streak.
Jackson says Nomar has hit a wall, needs more tests. Looks like they're building up to retirement. Think we could help that along by starting a movement to make him a coach? It would be an easy out for everyone.
And baseball is set up against young players anyway, the way teams hold your rights for 4-5 years until you have to be on the MLB roster and then they you cannot be free agent for another 6 years.
Weaver's fastball has always had a little jump to it. It just seems that halfway to the plate it gains some velocity and hits another gear. It is similar to Saito's. Straight, but with good velo and that little jump.
Kids play for the Dodgers. It mighttake longer than we like, but they play, and they're still kids.
ABC caught a shot of Tom Brady at today's Celtics game sporting a Giants baseball Cap. Just for that, Brady has scored 1000 brownie pts for me! I am very pleased to see Brady stay true to his homeland in NorCal and not bandwagon onto the C's the way, say, Curt Schilling would.
Exhibit A: James Loney
Anyone think Lowe is tradable?
Do they get to keep the bat?
Loney is not the answer.
And DePo's probably right when he said the Dodgers would probably regret Lowe's 2008 season when he was signed to that 4yr deal in 2005.
Not Lowe, at least not anymore.
18-3 at the end of one quarter, you say? Ouch.
#2 starter stuff? I guess by default, but not by talent!
The reason Penny has been so good is his mysterious skill at preventing homers, despite not being that much of a ground ball pitcher. Not sure if he can keep up that skill.
Things that James Loney is not the answer to:
1) Who kidnapped the Lindbergh baby?
2) Who killed Davey Moore?
3) Boxers or briefs?
4) What was the name of the fifth vice-president of the United States?
End of list.
This could be a long (or short) game.
Sooooo....
I'm actually starting to miss the drunken hordes at Bay to Breakers.
That's just the kind of Scrappy McDribbler hustle-bustle we expect from our battlin' DH!
Nope, that was Scrappy, McSlappy Happy's aura of on baseness effecting Weaver. JP appealed to Jobu before the game to put the fog over Weaver.
Chapter 1: Loney Must Go!
Chapter 2: Hurrah for Loney!
He must be because he cant catch up to any fastball. Its not just Weaver, who has a good fastball. He hasnt hit fastballs all year this year.
(OK, bad nickname)
Despite the Celtics hot play, its still a 10 point game so it will still be a game in the 2nd half.
Napoli has 35hrs in 574 career ABs.
---
Ah well, there was some hope for this game for a brief period of time but now, not so much. So perhaps we will see Yhency today?
I know Jon does not like the focus on the starting pitching and perhaps it will even out as the season goes on but the reason the pitchers are still averaging 5+ innings a start is basically Torre not wanting to blow out the pen, both Lowe and Penny pitched 5 and 6 innings despite giving up a number of runs.
The Dodgers' SP have allowed 5.23 runs per 9. Only the Phillies, Rockies, and Pirates have allowed more. The league average is 4.89. However, this seems to be about timing, not talent. Using any run estimator shows the Dodgers' SP, by components, have been among the best in the league. The run estimator at tangotiger.net/markov.html is dead on in getting NL starters as a whole with a 4.89 RA. It gives us 4.44 for the Dodgers, which suggests that they've given up an extra 20 runs relative to the amount you'd expect from the hits, walks, etc. that they have allowed. So the Dodgers' SP components indicate a .544 winning% with average offense, but in practice they have been .469. This early in the season, the significance is just under 2 wins.
Instead of using Tango's estimator for each individual team, I just used linear weights to do a quick estimate of who was outperforming/underperforming their components. (SP lwts + (lg R/PA)*(SP PA)). I then compared that to actual runs allowed. The Dodgers are the worst by this measure, at +18, and the Dbacks are +17. After them, no one else is above +6. The Astros and Brewers have been -14 and -10, respectively.
So before even talking about the defense, we have a solid case that the Dodgers' SP have endured bad luck.
The Dodgers' szERA, which is simply (K - BB) per plate appearance scaled for ERA (the equation is 5.4 - 12*(K-BB)/BFP), is 4.51 against a league average of 4.49. However, if we add the third "true outcome" to our analysis, the Dodgers skyrocket, as they've allowed the fewest SP HR in the league. The league gives up 1.052 HR/G. The Dodgers have yielded .674 HR/39 PA, or .669 per 29 batted balls. The Braves are second with .786/.803, and the Marlins third with .906/.874. So the Dodgers are way ahead of the competition in HR allowed, giving them the third-best SP FIP in the league at 3.93 (ARI 3.86, ATL 3.89, league 4.48, MIL 5.19). That implies a win% of .560 with league average offense.
Let's check out a couple more simple run estimators that will moderate the impact of the Dodgers' luck on HR as well as take into account the expected value of their balls in play. Nate Silver's QERA and Tango's siERA (my name for it) both use K, BB, GB, and FB to estimate ERA - the former is exponential and the latter linear. In QERA, the Dodgers beat the league, 4.38 to 4.47. In siERA, it's 4.28 against 4.48.
Looking at balls in play, it is clear that the defense has been a problem. The Dodgers' SP have a BABIP of .311, lower only than the Pirates'. What is more is that the Dodgers have a below average number of XBH per ball in play. So the issue with the defense has been singles (and times reached on error). The league average for (1B + ROE)/(BIP - XBH) is .218, and the only teams north of .228 are LA (.240) and PIT (.248).
However, we would expect the Dodgers to yield more singles since they have a GB-heavy staff. Let's compare the Dodgers' SP to rest of the league on balls in play (relievers included, unfortunately, but Dodger SP excluded). For every 1000 BIP, the NL has 450 GB, 333 FB, 189 LD, and 28 bunts. The Dodgers SP are 497/317/168/18 thus far, so they have many more GB overall and a slightly low LD/FB ratio (a good thing). Here are the singles per BIP for the league first and then LA:
GB: .241, .258
FB: .059, .091
LD: .519, .590
Bu: .184, .308
So, across the board, the Dodgers have yielded more singles, which suggests a combination of poor defense and bad luck. Had they equaled the league average in singles/BIP for each type, they would give up 6 fewer GB 1B, 7 FB 1B, 8 LD 1B, and 2 Bu 1B. The run value of the difference between those singles and converting them into outs is 17 runs.
The obvious knock on the Dodger SP is that they don't last long enough into games, averaging only 5.4 IP/GS and 23.83 BFP/GS. The former is last in the league, the latter second to last. However, the Dodgers have also employed a tandem starter arrangement 7 times, with the nominal SP going a total of 22 innings. The rest of the staff has started 35 times and gone 205 innings, for 5.86 IP/GS, which is well above the league average of 5.69. The tandem starters have faced only 119 batters - meaning on average they haven't faced the #9 slot a second time. The big 4 is thus 25.2 BFP/GS against a league average of 24.8. What's more is that part of the reason the pitchers are being pulled and not accumulating innings is because the fielding has been poor. If we were to give the pitchers an extra 7 IP for the 22 singles that could have been converted into outs, then the IP/GS increases to 5.57, or 6.03 for the big 4.
Colletti's statement does not make sense regardless of how good the starting pitching has been, but his implied assessment of the starting pitching is thoroughly ridiculous.
I don't know what Colletti means by a team of Furcals, so let's try to answer a different question. Let's say the goal is 93 wins, which would pretty safely assure a playoff spot. If we remove relievers from the equation entirely, how good does LA need to hit to be a .574 team with the performance it has gotten from its SP? Below are the runs per game as well as the winning percentage that such an offense would have if paired with a .500 defense and a rough avg/obp/slg.
Actual RA: 6.13, .603, .290/.365/.480
Markov RA: 5.23, .531, .270/.340/.440
FIP: 5.05, .515, .267/.338/.430
siERA: 5.50, .554, .280/.348/.448
So if Colletti means "If Furcal was our only hitter and got the results he's had thus far this season, our SP is so lousy it wouldn't matter," he is clearly wrong. If he means actual Furcal, which is basically 4.9 to 5.0 runs per game, then he's only of "no help" in the sense that they would be a 76-win team with the SP's actual R/G; they're between 84 and 91 wins with run estimators and normal Furcal. Given the team's excellent bullpen, I don't know what universe Colletti's statement makes sense in. In fact, the Dodgers' offense has hit just like we expect Furcal to hit - .273/.347/.405.
Seriously:
"I want to see us win six out of 10, seven out of 10. We're not playing consistent baseball, mainly because our starters aren't pitching consistently."
What kind of complaint is this? Is he flat out expecting his team to win six of ten on average?
I'm not looking for snark, here. I'm serious. A $36 million loss is better than a $36 million loss and an an automatic out in the line-up.
I get the feeling Jones benefits from having Mattingly around.
But otherwise...yeah, I think Torre will bench him sometime in June, assuming the Dodgers' place in the standings is roughly like it is now -- still in contention, but with ground to make up.
Ugh.
Once the season started and they had those 4 guys, it seem destined that they were periods of time when one would sit and while the other 3 played.
Now, had Furcal been available, I don't think Pierre would have played non-stop for the last 3 weeks. But Kemp and Ethier platoon splits could allow Torre to sit them occasionally against certain pitchers.
I always thought Pierre was untradeable until at least next year where the Dodgers might be more favorable to eat some salary and he's now a 3 year contract as opposed to a 4.
The Dodgers and Dodger fans simply do not hate Anaheim enough. Most of the fans are like me: I kind of like the Angels. I root for them in the American League. I like it when they beat the Yankees in the playoffs, and the Giants in the Series. If the Dodgers couldn't get Guerrero, I'm glad the Angels did. Etc. etc.
Interleague play probably means we have reconsider this appeasement policy against Anaheim. We play them almost as much as we play some NL East teams. We can't afford to be charmed by their scrappiness anymore. We need to HATE what is happening to the Dodgers today, and swear revenge.
Maybe we should throw Juan Pierre into a live volcano in expiation.
But only then! Otherwise, no you cannot survive it!
Sigh.
Revenge when they come to LA -- the real LA -- in June would be nice, at least.
One thing for sure, Juandruw would lose some of that weight.
So the Ned Colleti dead pool starts about All Star break when Andru fails to break the Mendoza line?
The Angels outside of this series were averaging less than 2000 a game than last year, the Dodgers are down about a 1000 right now.
But Moreno has not had to put any money into the Angel Stadium since he took over, he's been involved in litigation with the City of Anaheim over the name change, he's pulls the Angels onto a station that is hardly doing any advertising to publicize that fact.
The Dodgers could finish in last and Ned Colletti will still be the GM. But he will be a lame duck GM in 2009.
Sadly yes.
Parking Lot Frank needs time to get rilled up about Jones and Schmidt. I doubt Frank gets as riled up at JP as DT does, as JP is delivering the same game he has for years.
At the All Star game while all the other owners are picking on Parking Lot Frank, he'll get mad enough to do something about Ned, and there will be an opportunity to do a little GM shopping while everyone and their dog is at Yankee stadium and surrounding hotels.
Why does anyone care what Bill Plaschke writes about the Dodgers or Angels? If the McCourts choose to heed Plaschke's "advice" that's their funeral.
After McCourt dumped DePo even when DePo had a 5yr deal...what is stopping him from doing the same thing to Ned?
Even Frank has to look at how his money is being spent and be upset.
89-88 Celtics with 2 minutes left.