Football is providing a pretty good distraction right now.

Harbaughs on boths sides of the field? Who knew.

But that 2006 team actually won 88 games.

Such a dumb play by OSU receiver.

Boy, that's just a killer ending for Oregon State.

2 - Yes, I know.

When you saw him not go for the sidelines, one could sense this was going to end badly for him.

Where'd you guys find the Pac 10 game on tv? I had a game on ESPN, and the Angels game...

ESPN2

Those new clock rules seemed to be a pretty big change. But this game still almost took four hours? Were those in affect the whole game?

Yeah. The first quarter and third quarter took a lot of time, because of the three and outs and not moving the ball.

How in the world did they get Kate Walsh to be a judge on the Gong Show?

Can someone explain what happened at the end of the game for OSU? Was unable to see it and the ESPN applet description was garbled.

WR caught pass and was about 5 yards away from end zone and instead of running out of bounds tried to go for end zone and stretched out arm and fumbled ball into the end zone causing a safety.

http://minors.baseball-reference.com/players.cgi?pid=3726

Ivan DeJesus currently has 73 walks at Jacksonville. That's an eye opener.

13 Thanks.

Asked if he felt snakebitten by the Dodgers' recent woes. here's James Loney at his finest...

"I've never been bit by a snake, but this might feel a little bit worse."

http://www.beloblog.com/Pe_Blogs/prosports/mlb/dodgers/

I think the Dodgers played much better teams during the 2006 stretch than they did during this stretch. In the 1-13 stretch in July 2006, they played the Cardinals twice, and that team nearly made the World Series.

In addition, they played the eventual NL West Winner San Diego Padres.

Meanwhile, the Dodgers in the 2008 skid played a pretty good Phillies team, but far worse, a then-woeful Colorado Rockies and the worst team in MLB. There's no excuse for being this bad against the latter two teams.

17 Didn't the Cards win the World Series in 2006?

On to good news...

Andrew Lambo is really playing well in Jacksonville. Another HR tonight as well as a double with 6 RBI's. We still have another year until we would have to protect him correct? Lindblom also made his AA debut tonight giving up 2 runs in 5 innings with 4 K's and 1 BB.

In AAA, Chin-lung Hu got his first HR and PeeWee Young hit his 2nd HR in as many days.

Also, I don't understand the Dodgers not just giving either DeJesus or Hu a chance to stick considering our IF defense of Nomar and Kent is atrocious. Besides Jaime Pedroza really needed to move up to AA. He has been solid for the most part this year and he was great last year. I wonder if Hu becomes trade bait this off-season whether we re-sign Furcal or not.

18

They did! That's right. I was confusing them with the 2002 Cardinals who the Giants defeated. It's not like me to forget that.

19 He might get fast tracked to the big club by 2010. If the team is willing to let Kemp learn everyday in the majors, they should let Lambo do it. Although it likely means that either Loney or Ethier is gone due to Lambo only able to play 1st base/RF/LF.

DeJesus had 3 errors tonight. Hope Ned et. al. weren't watching.

17 - They played the Diamondbacks, who were 76-86, so that matches up with the Rockies. The '06 Padres or Cardinals match up with the '08 Phillies. The only real difference is the three games with Washington.

The average Southern Californian knows more about the Dodgers than I know about football. I might have to start paying more attention, if only for the diversion it provides :(

22 1B - Loney
LF - Lambo
CF - Kemp
RF - Ethier

No problem! (Jones is gone after '09 and Pierre's contract is 60% complete.)

I can honestly say that I believe Lambo is just as good defensively as Loney at 1B and will hit better than him (which is saying an awful lot). I don't know how you choose between the two since they are so comparable but I would think that Lambo projects as just as good if not better. Again, they aren't very far apart in age and are very comparable.

22
So you are assuming we re-sign Manny?

26. for 2010 I would rather see:
1B Loney
LF Manny
CF Kemp
RF Lambo

26 That doesn't work if Manny is resigned. Although I'd believe that if Manny isn't resigned, we'd do stopgap for a guy like Fernado Tatis for a couple for 1-2 years, or even resign Casey Blake to be a super utility guy. He can play 1st/3rd/RF/LF. Might as well rotate the guy and make the most of his abilities.

29 Unless Manny's in the last year of his contract in 2010, I'd prefer an OF of Ethier, Kemp and Lambo.

25
Just pick one team to follow then it won't be such a problem.

I had to explain the entire game of football to my friend in about 20 minutes before his interview at the Raider Image. Plus, get him to remember some players on the team.

27 You'd choose Lambo over Loney because Loney would be hitting his heavy Arbitration years, and would have value to other teams like say the Braves, who seem to constantly be in search of a first baseman. (Casey Kotchman might be having an even worse post-trade career than Andy LaRoche right now.)

Of course, the big argument against this is that Loney doesn't fit FA until 2012, he has a great dry wit, and he'd be entering his prime. Personally, its the dry wit I'll miss the most.

Elbert is the 4th player from the Dodgers 2004 draft to make the majors. Blake DeWitt and Cory Wade made their debuts this season, while Justin Ruggiano (Hendrickson trade) made his debut last year.

Another player drafted by the Dodgers that year figures to be called up by sometime next week. His name: David Price.

For reference, here are the major leaguers producers by other recent Dodger drafts:

2002: 6 (Loney, Broxton, Pee Wee, McDonald, Stults, Martin)
2003: 6 (Billingsley, Kemp, Wesley Wright, A.J. Ellis, Travis Denker, LaRoche)
2004: 4
2005: 1 (Meloan)

bold = likely to be called up next week. I didn't include Greg Miller (2002) or Xavier Paul (2003), but they certainly could add the total as well.

Luke Hochevar was drafted by the club in 2002 & 2005, but didn't sign either time so I didn't include him.

32 When I was watching my first football game (or paying attention for the first time), I actually asked, "Why is the home team cheering when one of their players was knocked down?"

I'm not sure what team I should follow. I feel like such a.. er.. girl.

35 If you pick USC without an some connection with the team, you're a frontrunner/bandwagoner. If you pick UCLA, you're a masochist. If you pick OSU, you support a choke artist. So the real answer is to support USC. :)

Aren't you guys getting a liiiiitle ahead of yourselves with the Lambo fantasies? He was in single A like 2 weeks ago.

35
Yeah, since you are going to UCLA might as well go with them. By the time you get and like the sport, we may be good.

34 Greg Miller was drafted in 2002? Funny, since it seemed forever that he was talked about in the local newspapers.

Football is boring. For purposes of diversion, I recommend rooting for the D'backs. Or posting reviews on Pellam's ratemyprofessor.com page. Now that his actual students have gotten around to doing it, you don't have to bother guessing which units he's teaching.

36 38 Well, since I am a Dodger fan, what's one more masochistic fan allegiance?

Now I need to choose an NFL team.

All I know is that I dislike the Patriots. I went to school in New England, and good god, were their fans obnoxious. At least I made $100 off them from the Superbowl.

41 If it's good, wholesome, salt-of-the-earth fans you're looking for, why not give the Raiders a try? (shiv not included)

I could never root for the D'Backs with those broadcasters.

USC... Sporky I'd go for it. It was much easier when I was in high school. I chose USC over UCLA on recommendation of a friend. At the time USC might have been the worst team in the Pac 10. Remember the Paul Hackett era? Ooh, they were bad. But I picked the perfect time to become a fan. I wasn't in college yet, I needed to watch someone. I'm glad the decision worked out.

I didn't get a degree at USC, so I stick with only the football program. If USC lacrosse plays Stanford lacrosse, I'll just hope it goes into overtime.

37 Lambo is a couple of years away, but it's nice having a legit OF prospect to follow.

Speaking of the Raiders, I drafted Justin Fargas as my #3 RB. Obviously, I hope he holds off Run DMC. :)

45 The NFL is in full duo RB's fad, so Fargas still has some fantasy value.

41
Hating the Patriots is a great first step for anyone wanting to become a football fan.

Pick a team based off colors or logos. That's an easy way.

Hear Hear! If the Patriots go 0-16, I would be dancing in the streets.

One day, a sports team will be manly enough to wear neon pink as their team colors. And on that day, I know we have reached the American dream.

35 - Why not pick the team with the best record in college football - Stanford! Also the school of Jody Gerut!

Also the school of Jody Gerut!

Must... resist...

Man, if you like pain, go with Stanford. USC is totally going to look for revenge there.

Football... sigh.

I'd like the Chargers if their blue wasn't so... baby.

It is wise to not root for the Chargers.

If you want to keep up with being a masochist, there is no better choice than the Buffalo Bills.

I'm going to need some reprieve.

Vikings? Their logo is just so goofy.

Vikings are cool. They have Adrian Peterson and a great defense.

You would make Nate very happy.

If I wasn't a Raiders fan, I wouldn't mind being a Charger fan. When I first started college at UCSD, it was during the Chargers' 1994 run to the Super Bowl, and I grew to hate the team and its fans.

However, in recent years I have grown to respect the organization. I like a lot of their players (Tomlinson* and Rivers to name a few) and their uniforms are awesome, especially the powder blues (I'm also a sucker for most 1980s baseball road uniforms).

It's hard to imagine jumping ship on a team, but if someone told me Al Davis would live for another 20 years, I'd probably resign as a Raider fan right now. I would have abandoned the club if it had drafted Brady Quinn. Thank Jeebus that didn't happen.

*Only Lawrence Taylor is "LT"

59
What the fudge, Eric?

What the fudge?!!!

The Lament of a Raiders fan.

Well, considering that the Raiders and Rams left in 94, before I heavily got in sports, I don't have a girl to take in this dance, so I can just laugh at everyone on the sidelines.

May Al Davis clone himself, and his clone rule the Raiders for the next 100 years.

I'll root for Minnesota, but watch most of the Charger games, since I don't want to pay for any subscription service.

Speaking of bandwagons, I was doing errands in a LAD cap, and some stranger was remarking how the Dodger fans were coming out of the woodwork following the Manny trade. I felt the need to publicly profess my love for Andy.

I believe Sporky should be a Broncos fan, because they're fun and underdog is a fan and their stadium was in the news today and stuff and things.

--

Btw, wasn't sure if this was posted earlier but it was just put up line less than an hour ago. Speaking of Elbert... Neat little story in his (near) hometown newspaper about his imminent call-up:

http://tinyurl.com/5bbjdj

--The telephone rang late Thursday afternoon at the Tim Elbert home.

"I've gotten the call," Scott Elbert told his mother, Tracie. "I'm going to the big leagues. It finally has happened. Can I talk to Dad?"

Elbert then told his father the good news.

"I told him congratulations, and we'll be seeing you in Arizona," Tim Elbert said.--

63
It would have been better if the Dad said "Can you call back? I gotta guy on the other line who wants to buy a set of whitewalls."

Also, I would rank the AFC West as follows, in terms of soullessness and evilosity:

1) Broncos (As I typed this, Mike Shanahan had his guard cut block me below the knee)
2) Chiefs (Has anyone looked into Gunther Cunningham's eyes and lived to tell about it?)
3) Chargers (Barry Bonds + steroids = baseball pariah; Shawne Merriman + steroids = Pro Bowl)
4) Raiders (just a good wholesome team and fan base)

64 But seriously folks...

65
Yup

You can see the desperation with these Bronco fans pleading for you to join their fan base.

Yes, yes, no other NFL team practices cut blocks. And other fabulous myths of our time. ;-)

--
Btw, I still, 20 years later, or whatever it is, can't get over the fact that there's no NFL team in LA. What sort of parallel universe is the NFL living in? I will root for an expansion LA team, maybe not as much for a team that moves there.

66
The Broncos would easily move into 3rd place if they'd go back to the Orange uniforms (I even like the new style orange unis, but the Orange Crush would be great).

Believe me, having me as a fan can only be bad for a football team.

68 One of us! One of us!

69
I will say this about Shanahan: If I went through a few weeks of training camp even I could rush for 1,000 yards in his offense.

70 - I believe they are slated to wear orange unis this season at least twice, despite Shanahan's protests (they are a kind of jinx). I even named my destined-for-6th-place fantasy team Orange Crush.

http://tinyurl.com/6xt5qc

Sigh, I wish we didn't have to talk about football so early. :-(

The NFL has such mathematically sensible divisions. And then I find out they have wild cards.

70
Eric, you are killing me with this stuff.

Did they get to you?

What the fudge?!!

76
That is why there won't be an expansion team in LA. It will probably be either the Chargers, Raiders, or Jaguars.

Jaguars, I'm telling ya, it'll be the Jaguars in '09.

They can change their name from the Jaguars to another cat, the Cougars.

Double meaning - Nate'll love it!

Okay, my download of the game "The Movies" is complete, so I'm outta here. Night.

79 Can Alyssa Milano be their cheerleader?

MJD and Marcedes can return to the great state of California.

80 She's too young to be a Cougar cheerleader. Maybe Mary Louise Parker or Marcia Gay Harden.

Diane Lane, Jamie Lee Curtis, Raquel Welch.

Heck, Raquel Welch should be the picture of a cougar in the dictionary.

Zsa Zsa Gabor!

I hope Hallux shows up during or before the MNF game.

84
Is she alive?

Wikipedia says yes, so perhaps not. But it's still a great mental image, no?

Also, Paris Hilton will be the ultimate cougar in 10, 15 years.

35 - the first professional football game I attended was a USC game in, oh, 1998 or so.

87
To me, she is not attractive.

89 I'm not sure which one you're referring to, but I agree either way.

They're both rich enough, and that's all that seems to really matter.

Cougars are for looks.

Sugar mommas are for money.

89
And I meant Paris Hilton by the way.

Money ain't a thing.

If you pick to root for UCLA, not only can you ride the wave of the basketball team, you can proudly cheer any number of other sports teams (volleyball, soccer, tennis, golf and especially the latest dynasty, women's water polo).

In a few hours, I'll be having the annual drink the kool aid breakfast with Rick and a few of the players.

93
Do they just try to sell you on this season or long-term?

Whoopie, I am getting NY Jets ads again.

Whoopie, I am getting NY Jets ads again.

If I mention Zsa Zsa Gabor or Paris Hilton a few more times...

94 Probably a little bit of both.

95 I see Circuit City ads.

95
We will get Valtrex ads if you mention Paris Hilton some more.

will kershaw be required to be in uniform down in vegas or will he pull a laroche/young and hang out at a hermosa beach condo for a few days?

98
I wonder if he will even leave the team. I wouldn't be surprised to see him in the dugout in Arizona.

25 Don't waste your time. American football is crap. Try out European football, the athletes are of a much better quality (far less oafish), and the game is far more civilized. There is also much more parity in European football.

E Jackson pitches a gem and Wily Aybar provides the offense as the Dodger Rays take out the White Sox and push their lead to 4.5 games over the East Coast Bullies.

How about that Lambo? My hope of seeing him in the Cal League is fading fast.

100. I might be wrong, but I think you're an Arsenal fan. You should ask Eduardo how civilized soccer can be.

I much prefer soccer over football, but one of the American arguments against it is that it's too civilized.

Was Oregon State favored?

Is that a stupid question?

102 Yep, that's me. You make a good point. Americans are a weird lot. And yeah, injuries happen in European football, sure. But in the grand scheme of things, a broken leg is nothing compared to a broken spine/neck.

The US will either have its first female vice president or its first black president.

Which is great for me on a personal level, because members of my family (who are members of a particular demographic) don't think women or non-whites are qualified to be in those positions.

105 I am so excited that I get to vote for Palin! I mean, finally, someone who has been around the world many times, seems to make friends easily, can really make me laugh.....wait, its not Michael Palin?... oh...

Details of Palin's personal life have contributed to her political image. She hunts, eats moose hamburger, ice fishes, rides snowmobiles, and owns a float plane. Palin holds a lifetime membership with the National Rifle Association. She admits that she used marijuana when it was legal in Alaska, but says that she did not like it.

No word on whether she inhaled.

So a guy whose % of dying is higher then anyone who would become president since Roosevelt picks someone with the least amount of experience you could find to be his running mate while running a campaign against his competitions inexperience. Interesting.

The Vice Presidential debates should prove to be as interesting a contrast as the presidential ones.

Ok, it's official, we're in trouble. I'll be watching all 3 games this weekend with rally cap on and rubbing the bill before each pitch. Time to pull out all the stops.

109
Also interesting that a guy who supposedly opposes drilling in the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge would choose as a running mate the Governor of Alaska who supports drilling.

Um, I'm as interested in the campaign as many of you, but rule 5 still exists.

I just don't understand. I feel that over the past week or so, the rules are really getting flaunted. Are people just rebelling?

It's not that every rule violation is harmful. But the cascade they can cause can be harmful, and it weakens my ability to enforce the rules if I start trying to pick and choose the times they're allowed to be broken.

I'm not mad - I just need to understand what's going on here.

113

20 years and 7 games of pent up frustration?

The latest post from the Juice would be a perfect place to put the political comments.

114 - Well, as I've said before, that's not an excuse.

112

That Paula abdul song is dancing in my brain now D4P. Thanks.

114 Yes, but that doesn't mean you should ignore them, I would have a lot to say about this week's events but this is not the place to do it.

117
Which Paula Abdul song...?

114 118 116

Obviously, yes. I wasn't speaking for myself personally.

119
I'm guessing Opposites Attract, you know, the one with DJ Skat Kat.

I can never remember which video Arsenio Hall was in (Straight Up?).

121

Oh man... now I have that Paula Abdul song stuck in my head! :)

121
Oh yeah, forgot about that one.

So when the last time the Dodgers didn't go into a long losing streak after the all star break? It seems to be an annual tradition.

I just lost a game of Life to my nephew and also finished behind my niece. The game has new rules. I don't like them.

But the kids have all been quiet and behaved around me.

So far.

It's kinda like the Dodgers too...

Two steps foward (ah!) Two steps back...
We come together... oooopposites attract.

113 - I just don't understand. I feel that over the past week or so, the rules are really getting flaunted. Are people just rebelling?

The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers. (j/k)

A day after promising that the Yankees will be busy in the offseason addressing their needs, Hank Steinbrenner yesterday named two pitchers in whom the Yankees have interest.

"Everybody's looking at [CC] Sabathia and [A.J.] Burnett, not just us," Steinbrenner said during yesterday's game against the Red Sox. "We'll see. The main concern is, are their arms going to be OK after this season?"

http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/hank_has_eyes_on_sabathia_burnett_for_offseason_newsdaycom/

Isn't that tampering?

125. Those darned kids are always trying to take over. I hope you brought a lot of heart to the game at least.

My apologies, sometimes I can't resist the temptation to comment no matter what the subject. I'll reign myself in, though I am bubbling to talk about this historic election.

128 - interesting question. I suspect not, since it's widely known both will become free agents at the end of the season, and in Sabathia's case especially, it's supposed he won't return to the Brewers.

113 -- "...the rules are really getting flaunted."

Your rules are getting "flouted" because there seems to be a lot of new people and DT's comment section is no longer as exclusive a club as it once was. Also, it is not always easy to live within all of your rules, and I know I haven't always done so, but I make an effort. Other baseball blog comment sections -- like that at McCovey Chronicles -- are practically unreadable because they are so foul, so it it for the best that we have some rules.

132

I hope I didn't violate any rules in the last week or so. I'm really sorry Jon, just in case.

Um, the first time I knew about rule violations was when a commenter pointed it out. The list of rules is really far down the sidebar, so a new commenter probably doesn't even know about them until we speak about it in the comments.

132 Given that it was D4P and myself I don't think you can lay the blame on newcomers.

134
I blame Gary Bennett.

125 Lemme guess. You skipped college.

I imagine a win would do a lot for helping DT psyche.

hah. A win by the Dodgers. Might as well wish for the moon.

113 I can certainly understand Jon's concern here.
I try to come here to talk Dodgers and elsewhere for othe stuff. But I admit to occasionally bending the rules
But to Jon it must feel like trying to keep a dam from bursting, and his rules and efforts have kept this a great place, when so many blogs become unreadable and then worthless due to bad language and and lawlessness.

Jon-You are right about rule 5. I am sure lots of folks here have strong opinions.

I love the way the discussion can go to many topics but it's always civil (with the possible exception of Pierre). If we head off into the land of politics it can get ugly.

I appreciate the rules.

132 - In the spirit of the Dodgers, the rules are being broken by both veterans and rookies alike.

138 - What would you say
If I strung out some wins
Would you stand up and walk out on me?
Lend me an ear
And I'll play some good games
And I'll try not to win too ugly

It's been four months since my last confession. Forgive me Father, for I have rule-violated. I used sarcasm when referring to a former player. I also violated the unwritten rule 13, though only in my head.

Father: Only in your head me son?

Yes, but still.

Father: Say four "hail Lasordas" and do several hours of community service, and try not to watch the Dodgers this weekend.

Yes, Father. {makes the mark of "LA" on his chest} I'll try.

Father: There is no 'try,' only do or do not.

141 Was well done, sir, well done.

I also violated the unwritten rule 13, though only in my head

When I violate the unwritten rule 13, it's only in my mouth.

On the subject of baseball:

I went to the game Tuesday-my 1st trip to Nationals Stadium-some observations:

Nice stadium. Clean, bright, great scoreboard and video board. Stadium was about 1/2 full.

In LA you have Dodger Dogs. Believe it or not they have Nat Dogs. They aren't as good as Dodger Dogs but not as bad as they sound.

Stadium is convenient. 2 minute walk from the Metro.

Lots of folks wearing Dodger hats and shirts (even saw a fan wearing a Torre shirt). No flak from the Nats fans at all.

Lots of USC fans at the game. They are in town for the game at UVA Saturday.

Lowe looked great. Lots of ground balls.

Lots of wasted opportunities. Bleah.

Speaking of the Raiders n Broncos (10 hours ago), the Raiders are lucky and still won't have to face 'em with Brandon Marshall the first time, but fortunately he'll be back after that one now. In time to face our beloved Chargers.

145 I finally understand what that's referring to. I've found the light switch.

Some Mitch Jones love today:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3554767

141 -- Rule-breaking is contagious, Jon. The "atmosphere" around here has changed, and only partially because of an influx of new people. Frankly (and this is in no way a complaint or a criticism of you), you don't seem to be as much of a "guiding presence" here as you used to, which was no doubt inevitable with more of your time having to go to your expanding family and your professional responsibilities (like writing a book).

Posted by Joey P in the last thread:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08241/907642-63.stm

See: '"He wasn't moving," Johnson said of third baseman Andy LaRoche, well back on the play.'

The kid is putting up an OPS+ of 20, has 6 errors in 19 games, and is not hustling in the field or at the plate. He is blowing his first legit chance in MLB. It's sad, really.

Just wondering: were there always questions about LaRoche's motor? Does he has a history of leg problems, or does he take the Kent mentality that if he can't make a play, he won't reach for it? Just seems interesting that a guy seems to be blowing his first and may be only chance at a regular starting job in the majors, due to the Pirates just signed Alverez(all the saber rattling in that whole case notwithstanding.) Who plays 3rd base, and the Pirates want to fast track him. LaRoche doesn't have much of a window to prove that he's a starting 3rd baseman.

I would also like to suggest moving up that list of rules higher up so newcomers can see them more readily, and to remind non-newbies of them in times of great duress.

I would also like to suggest the Dodgers give us less times of great duress.

I would also like to suggest people spend a few moments in a different sports blog/discussion board just to see how it could be here without rules or moderation.

Poor Juan, from today's Times:

Headline:
Dodgers' Juan Pierre is at his best in September
Unfortunately for the backup outfielder, there are no plans to use him next month.

"The Dodgers have one of the premier September hitters in the major leagues on their roster, but he figures to watch this September from the bench..."

151 - I'm saddened to be reading those things about him. I know the Dodgers had similar concerns, but I have to admit I didn't see it from him on the field -- when he actually played (and was healthy) -- but again that was a rather small sample size. Wake up, Andy!

I don't think there would be any rule breaking if everyone would just like the correct things, like USC, the Raiders, the Lakers, and Journey. :)

That article doesn't mention Juan's ability to drive in runners in scoring position, or to pitch in the clutch - because he can't do either of those things which is what the Dodgers need right now. Plus he'll give up a run or two with his arm in the outfield. But other than that... (I'd still rather see him then Sweeney as a sub/PH, tho.)

"I'm not sure if Ardoin and Berroa are going to add to the probability of getting people on base," Torre said.

This made me chuckle. But I expect to see Casey Blake batting 9th soon, since he's seems to be the default 8th hitter when we field our best lineup.

0
I had not realized how badly the 62 Dodgers bungled the season. I'd rather have this losing streak then be in the lead and blow it big time the last two weeks of the season.

I scanned the list and could not find any of our World Series teams on it. I guess long losing streaks and World Series teams don't go hand in hand.

The biggest problem with the current losing streak is who we are losing to. The pitchers who are stifling this offense are like facing 10 Brett Tomko's.

Pierre's OPS by Month, 2005-7:

April: 661
May: 586
June: 669
July: 768
August: 725
September: 732

159 Posting JP's OPS is kinda redundant. I'm more concerned about his OPB numbers, if he actually gets on base more in Sept. over say, July. I know JP's bat is made out of toenails, what I really want to know if Juan Pierre is a big fan of Christopher Walken.

158 We haven't faced a string of great pitchers, it's true, but the Tomko comparison seems an exaggeration. There were a few pitchers who were better than their numbers indicated, and a few good pitchers, and then yeah at least 2-3 who aren't very good.

I'm just glad we got all these painfully hard to watch losses out of the way now. It will be much more fun to watch our team come from behind, starting this weekend, in the standings. Looks like an easy sweep this weekend and then we'll be well on our way to the playoffs. My wife has been telling me to quit being so negative. How am I doing?

161
Really? Other then Hamels and Myers the rest are dreck.

162 Cool beans. I haven't watched a Dodger game since the beginning of August. I'll hopefully be able to catch this weekend's games (at least in part). Maybe that will bring a change of luck.

We can win this game today, but we got to do something different. For the last couple of games, we seem to be scoring our runs in the first inning, and then our offense goes cold and the opposing starting pitcher gets into a groove, and nobody can get on base, Manny included.

Kent needs to drop to 6th or 7th, and move Loney up to 3rd or 4th, with Manny batting the other slot. Martin needs to bat 5th, and Casey Blake 6th. I'd actually would like to see Ethier leadoff for a couple of games, he doesn't have Kemp's speed but he's not a slug, and he knows how to work a count and if you're not getting on base, the next best thing is to work the pitcher so the rest of the team can see what he has. Kemp's a free swinger, and at times will swing at the 1st and 2nd pitch, and he's been pressing this whole trip. Does this mean that Kemp should bat 2nd, or drop behind the Manny/Loney/Martin group? I don't know, but right now batting him leadoff isn't helping his development. Kemp keeps on swinging early in the count, and at pitches that seem out of the zone more often than not.

Also, I'd like to see Blake DeWitt more often than not to give Kent some days off, he needs it.

On the Nats broadcast last night (Bob Carpenter and Don Sutton) they remarked on how much talent is on the Dodger bench and then said that if LA doesn't have plans for JP there will be lots of teams who would love to have him.

Then they talked about how many runs he scores and stolen bases, etc.

Is it really possible that someone will take him, salary and all?

I'm going to do my best to resist temptation and not watch any TV this weekend.

Philosophical question-

Would you rather
A)Win the West and go 3 and out or;
B)Finish second?

The 3 and out is more painful but I would take it over 2nd place.

166
I think so, it would surprise me if he is a Dodger this spring. His agent will do everything he can to get him traded to a team who will play him. We will probably exchange bad contracts with some team.

166 Please let it be the Nats. Please let it be the nats. Heck, I'd do it straight up for Hararahan. Somebody who knows the Dodgers Way. Supposedly. What else do they learn in the Dodgers minor leagues?

168
Always option one for me. Why would anyone want to finish 2nd? Now if you asked me if my choice was finish 1st and go 3 and out, or finish last and get a top 5 pick, then I have to think a little.

168 Better draft picks comes from the team who finish 2nd?

Actually, that wouldn't matter much because there's a good chance that the team who wins the NLWest will still have a bottom 15th record, so they get to protect their 1st round pick, so we can still go on a spending spree and keep say, pick 14 of the 2009 draft.

168 Is Ned still GM in both cases?

168
I'd always take option A

Option A, baby!

Now THIS (comments 165-175) is the Dodger Thoughts I know and love.

163 Let's put it this way, Tim Redding isn't great but he also stifled the Phillies and isn't bad - he's not Tomko. Balestar's considered a decent prospect with better stuff than his record would indicate.

Your point overall is still valid, they should've done more against these guys, but they're not all dreck. Yesterday should've produced more runs though, that was just pathetic. Even if scoring 12 runs may have been a tall order.

Whether Ned is GM or not I think Pierre will be traded, tho even more likely if he's not GM, and it also depends on the Jones Question and on whether they resign Manny, or find another OF to take all of their places.

My guess is that Pierre is gone, the Dodgers re-sign Manny, and we get Manny-Kemp-Ethier plus Manny-Jones-Kemp, depending on whether Jones ever shows he can hit again.

If you were really in a cave none of this would be happening.

David Price picked up his first AAA victory last night for Durham in Norfolk. If I had know he was pitching I would have gone to see it.

No Manny, No way, No how

I'll buy the beer at the next Dodger picnic if Manny is wearing Dodger Blue on April 1st, 2009.

I'll be following the Dodgers from the Russian River this weekend for my stepmom's 60th birthday gathering, only keeping half an eye on them. Perhaps that will bring them some good luck, me being away again, less obsessed with them and more distracted. You can thank me if they win. (Will tape Sunday night's game so I can FF through it when coming back. Less pain that way.)

181 - Another hollow rule-breaking gesture with no beer being allowed :)

181 No Alcohol in Elysian Park.

We are going to win tonight. These guys have been thinking about this since the Phillies series and even though they're down, they know the best way to break out is against AZ.

Kemp is batting .533 against Davis with an .800 OBP. He really is the key to this team, it seems. When he's hitting, they're winning.

Unfortunately, Kent doesn't seem to have success against Davis at all, perhaps tonight is his rest night, although I'm not sure if Torre would want the L vs L by using DeWitt.

Davis isn't the Tough Lefty. Well, he shouldn't be.

181 You're going to have to offer me something more enticing than beer, anyway.

181 Ok, what bar can we meet you at if this happens?

187 Dim Sum?

181 I agree, and the better Ethier and Kemp do down the stretch, the less likely Manny becomes. I just don't see McCourt competing with the Yankees, not with both Pierre and Jones eating up big $$$.

With most of the talk concerning the Dodgers vs the D'Backs this weekend, I can't help but think of Satchel Paige (& Colorado Rockies)! They are playing pretty good right now; less you forget about last year.

189 Now that would do it!

Honestly, the Dodgers have been so depressing lately, I don't know what to say about them other than to speculate about next year.

183
I'm nothing if not hollow.

181.
2$ PBR at the Shortstop should help your wallet. Mannys a Dodger next year. Done and done..

195
We are not allowed to bet here and again I'm sorry I said anything but if you want to take this up over at True Blue feel free to post. With Scott Boras involved the odds are in my favor.

168 - I'm probably in the minority when I say I'd rather the team finish in second place rather than win the division and get swept, but it's because of the Dodgers' recent history I say this. Either way there is a temptation to believe (wrongly) that the team is Just One Piece Away from contention, the same disease that really clobbered the Mariners this year. I just think the scope of the repairs is more obvious if the team doesn't make the postseason, and it's less likely they'll make a really stupid move. Of course, that didn't stop Bill Bavasi this last offseason after the M's stumbled to a second-place finish last year, and I have a feeling it won't stop Frank McCourt with whoever the next GM will be.

As to that ... I can see a scenario playing out where Ned gets a second chance and Frank extends him because of all the unforeseen injuries to the players. After all, he did assuage Frank's itch to get former (and in the case of Manny, current) Red Sox greats, and probably in the opinion of many people in the organization, he didn't give up that much to get them.

113

To my knowledge, this group only meets here, correct? (I guess not counting DT picnics)
I think rule 5 concerns a darn important topic in our lives right now that is impossible to ignore. For those that post frequently and respect eachothers knowledge about baseball and beyond (especially your opinion, Jon)there is a palpable interest in understanding eachothers opinions about recent events. This is a fairly respectful and cordial group here, and I think we could handle the discussion well.
But I will stay away from it, Jon, if you think that kind of discussion could be poisonness.

197 - elaborating: 1988 was a short-term joy, but over the longer haul it wrecked the organization, because it started them believing their own press releases.

http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/alvarez_deadlock_affects_hosmer_royals/

The Pedro Alvarez talks are affecting Hosmer. Boras really screwed the pooch on this one.

185 Also consider that Doug Davis owns us.

196.
Understandable..to back up my point though; the Dodgers have Nomar($ 8.5mil), Raffy($13 mil), Kent ($9 mil), and Lowe ($10 mil) all coming off the books after this year correct? Thats roughly $40 million to play with. Plus with only 1 more year left on the Jones contract it lends to some flexibility in the near future. I know it's been rehashed again and again but McCourt is indeed looking over his shoulder at the team down south (not the Padres) and is going to do what he has to to keep up with the Joneses (pun intended).

199 This is something I've always wondered. Being 23 and never experiencing a WS, I think when I do want to enjoy that season I'd much rather have a year where the team is one of the elite teams from start to finish rather than you spend most of the year wondering if this is even a good team or not.

I was a much bigger Rams fan than ever a Dodger fan, and '99 was the most enjoyful year I could possibly imagine.

That being said, sure I'd take a world series this year, but a year without much fresturation from April to October would be very sweet.

200 - I cannot wait to see Boras take a howitzer to his own foot on this one. He's made some pretty drastic miscalculations in the draft recently (Jered Weaver comes to mind, but there have been others), but this one takes the cake.

202 1 more year of Jason Schmidt at $12 million.

203 - but then you have to look at what happened to the early/mid-2000's Cardinals. They appeared in the postseason six times out of seven, had two seasons of winning 100+ games and ran away with the division, but their World Series winning team barely limped into the postseason.

I've been buried in, um... work (yeah, that'll do) the last few days, so I haven't really been paying attention. Something tells me that's probably a good thing. But I want to weigh in on a couple of points:

1. playoffs over finishing second. always. every year. playoffs over getting a high draft pick. playoffs over every other choice.

2. i'll take the beer bet on Manny. It seems too much like a move McCourt would actually make.

3. The Nats broadcasters are right. There are teams that will want Pierre and he will get moved in the off season. I don't know what it will be the other end of the equation and I don't really care. Jones won't be back either. He'll either retire or be moved to a team looking to take a chance (I could see the Yankees trading a couple of lower tier prospects for him, actually, if Manny re-ups here).

202 Once you factor in aribtration the number's closer to 30 million.

207 I was actually saying last night that the Tigers should trade for Jones. They need all the upside they can get. There's no way we're going to be off the hook for his salary, but he's certainly tradeable.

209
And there's no way Jones is retiring.

202 - factor in the Angels will have their own arb cases to deal with, have their own free agents leaving (K-Rod, Garland, Anderson unless they take the 2009 option, and Teixeira), have their own bad contracts (GMJ right here and now, and Torii Hunter in the future), and will be suffering from a lack of pitching depth (heaven only knows if Nick Adenhart is ready, but the betting runs against it). The Angels' decline starts immediately after the last game they play in 2008.

If we weren't in the same division with the Giants, I'd bet they'd take a chance on Jones. A straight swap of either Wynn or Roberts would do it.

207 - you're joking, right? They've got plenty of ineffective old players on that squad already (Sheffield comes immediately to mind).

213 Yeah, but they have to do everything they can to improve without adding salary or having any trade chips. It's the only way.

199 - The only thing is that 1988 wasn't a short-term joy. I'm still enjoying it 20 years later.

Winning shouldn't prevent you from winning again. It's not like losing 91 games in 2005 transformed the Dodgers into some savvy organization.

211 - I should also add Juan Rivera to the list of FA's departing Anaheim de Los Angeles. That's too bad because he's a useful player.

206 I know, you take it anyway you can get it and I'm with you on that. But in a perfect world my I would want my 1st time to be special.

I would gladly miss the playoffs today if Ned were fired by Thursday.

This is my latest stage of fretting about Ned's botching the Dodgers' chances for dynasty. I don't know if it makes any sense, but here goes.

Although he's preserved a core of the prospects, he's still been too cavalier with them as a group. Baseball experts can't tell even with players in the high minors exactly which ones will really have effective careers. Laroche is a case in point. I believe the experts (scouts, etc.) were raving about him last year. This year for whatever reason, injuries, laziness, he appears to be on the verge of washing out. Yet it's still far from certain which direction his career will head.

You have to have quite a pool of good-looking (not in a GQ way) prospects to eventually form the core of a good team. What you DON'T want to do is trade Navarro for Hendrickson or Jackson for Baez (can't remember exactly how those went). You have to treasure those guys a little more than that. You can trade a couple of valued prospects for a Manny rental or for vets you KNOW are good and in their primes. A couple of seasons ago, or last season, I can't remember, we might have traded Loney plus some for Texiera. More recently, by the same line of thinking, I'd criticize trading Santana for Blake. Blake's a rental and no great difference maker in any case.

If we had kept Navarro he'd probably be squatting behind the dish with Martin settling in permanently at third. Santana would still be developing within our organization. If we'd kept Jackson we wouldn't have Maddux pouring gas all over the place. We might not be doing a whole lot better in the standings at the moment, but we'd be looking a lot better going forward, I think.

What I'm gonna do when I'm GM is I'm gonna bring up all those prospects I can. I'm not gonna worry about them blocking each other. You can give them extended tryouts and move them around some. It's been done in the past.

208.
Good point..

181 183 O'Douls?

209 How much salary would the Dodgers have to eat to trade Jones? All of it?

I dont think the Dodgers will trade Jones in the offseason. No one will touch him. Maybe at the deadline next year.

218 Prospects are pretty projectable these days, sure you get the rare miss but if you look at BAs top 50 from 2005 there are only six guys that were complete misses.

215 - Winning shouldn't prevent you from winning again.

I quote from DePo's Legg Mason presentation:

http://tinyurl.com/5rvspq

The problem itself wasn't the people. Our scouts were very loyal, passionate, industrious people. The problem was the operating system. The industrial inertia was leading them further and further away from the truth. The operating system at the time, which I'll refer to as Subjective 1.0, was incapable of providing solutions to all the new problems the game was facing. Former Red Sox pitcher Bill Lee may have summed up the baseball operating system when he said, "In baseball you're supposed to sit on your a$s, spit tobacco, and nod at stupid things." That's America's pastime right there.

Despite this situation, I was grappling with a significant issue: the Indians were very successful at this time. We kept winning the division year after year, selling out every game in our stadium and the owner took the team public at one point and was making more money than any other owner. Thomas Kuhn wrote in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, "As in manufacture so in science—retooling is an extravagance to be reserved for the occasion that demands it." There was no crisis in Cleveland, at least not on the surface.

How was I supposed to innovate a supposedly smooth running machine? There was, however, a crisis underlying our success. Our lofty expectations had stifled our innovative spirit. Everything we had done to be successful, we stopped doing. We were hanging on instead of trying to move forward. We signed veteran, big name players who everybody knew. Our team got a lot more expensive and started growing older. Though I was seeing all this, I didn't have much of an audience in Cleveland.

=======================================
It's not like losing 91 games in 2005 transformed the Dodgers into some savvy organization.

No. But the poisonous effects of winning are not necessarily reflexive upon losing; it's just that the losers have more motivation to change. The idea of highly mobile, mechanized warfare was much bandied about by military theorists after the Great War, but we know the strategy by its German name: blitzkrieg.

I notice that at BA Tony Jackson reports Logan White saying something interesting about Chris Withrow, whose 2008 has been a lost season because of a hand injury, a sore elbow, and what White says is a lot of caution on the organization's part: "I was there last week [with the 66ers], and Charlie Hough [the 66ers' pitching coach] told me this was the best arm he has ever seen, even better than Kershaw's." A better arm than Kershaw's? That's just a little bit exciting.

It's funny. Last year at this time we were 3.5 games out of the wild card and behind two teams. Now we're looking straight up at the division leader. But I feel so different . . .

Flags fly forever.

223 - I understand what you're saying, but it's still about the leadership. You saw where the motivation to change led the post-2005 Dodgers.

Since McCourt is going to be around for a while, I don't see any reason to root against the Dodgers, because even if losing leads to Colletti being fired, I have no assurance that good things will follow.

218 Martin would make a mediocre 3rd baseman. His greatest value is that he's a good hitting catcher who calls a good game. That he can log so many innings behind the plate is what makes him an all star, not just his hitting stats. If he was a full time 3rd baseman, people would be wondering why we're starting Martin over more heralded prospects like LaRoche, or DeWitt.

202
While that is money coming off the table it has to be spent again. We will need a 2nd baseman, a SS, a 3rd baseman, and a pitcher. Some of that can be done internally but I don't see this current admin giving more then one job to a rookie next year. They certainly will not go into the season with Kershaw/McDonald as part of the rotation. I'd think we'd have a better shot at CC then we do for Manny

Boras did not talk Manny into removing the options without a goal of a 5 year/100 Millon dollar deal in mind. Now he miscalculated with Arod and he does make mistakes so maybe we can get Manny with a 3/60 deal but I just don't see Manny preferring the West Coast to the East Coast.

In just his first game back, this was what was written about Withrow:

"Chris Withrow had been with the team for a couple months but was activated this week after working with Pitching Coach Charlie Hough on his mechanics. Withrow worked an inning, allowed a hit, a walk and a run, but was helped by a double play ground ball to get out of the frame. His breaking ball had a remarkable sink and fool the Mavericks badly."

That was a 2+ weeks ago.

Overall he's allowed 2 ER in 4IP, but opponents have a .182 BAA. Of course, he's also walked 6 and only K'd one. But given what they've been saying about his stuff and then that White/Hough quote above, I'm pretty excited too.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-simers29-2008aug29,0,4781680.column

The latest Simers article reads like a FJM hit piece. Ken Tremendous must be spinning in his grave!

223
You are making me sad. I was never happier in a baseball sense then the day my favorite team decided to go with a forward thinker like Depo.

231 Ken Tremendous is dead?

229 "We will need a 2nd baseman, a SS, a 3rd baseman, and a pitcher. Some of that can be done internally but I don't see this current admin giving more then one job to a rookie next year. They certainly will not go into the season with Kershaw/McDonald as part of the rotation."

But with Logan White/Kim Ng at the helm, however...

;-)

227 - I would go further than that and just cut that sentence off to read, "I don't see any reason to root against the Dodgers". You (being the generic "you") root for the team regardless of the incompetence at the top.

Agreed about a Colletti firing leading to more of the same. Though I would posit that if the Yanks let go of Cashman, the Dodgers could end up with a halfway decent GM, with the caveat that Torre might defect under that circumstance. So be it; I'd rather have a good GM than a manager whose reputation was built on the players that GM acquired.

229 - I actually give the probability of Manny re-signing as 40%. By all accounts, the thing he hated about Boston (and would hate about New York) is the fishbowl existence he had there. He might have to fire Boras first, though.

233 'twas a joke.

230 & 224
That is nice to hear. Just looking at his box scores I was going to give him a raspberry for his lack of control or strike out pitch. I'll wait to see some results from this "golden arm" before I get to interested. I've heard the same thing about Millers arm for 5 years but with little tangible results.

197 "Once piece away..." This gets at something I've been thinking about over the last few days.

What I'm about to say is going to sound like a knock on the kids, but I swear it isn't. The Dodgers did the right thing by showing faith in them, and they are all getting more face time this year than they ever have before... but Kemp, Loney, Martin, and Ethier, not to mention Hu, LaRoche, and DeWitt, all have OPS+ of 110 or under.

That's fine for now. They're young and developing and that's good work for their age. But it's also necessary that all of them -- especially Kemp and Loney -- build on their work this year and take a step forward next year.

If they don't, then the Dodgers kids will represent simply a solid core -- a good thing to have, to be sure -- but lack the superstar they need.

Superstars rarely hit the free agent market. They are hard to find. And when they do, they are expensive. And if they break down, they're albatrosses.

For the most part -- with the exceptions of Manny and, maybe, Furcal -- the Dodgers have gone after additional core pieces in recent years. Garciaparra, Blake, even Pierre -- none of these guys was expected to be the center of the team, but a side piece.

Maybe the Dodgers will get Manny back, and maybe Furcal will be healthy and they'll get him back. (And we can all have a good argument about whether Manny is worth the money, given his defense, and how likely is it that Furcal will be healthy?) Aside from that, it's likeliest that the Dodgers will pick up more side pieces... Orlando Hudson, maybe.

In that sense -- and I know this has been a long comment and I'm only now getting to the point -- I don't care who the Dodgers get this offseason, which additional marginal talents they pick up. The Dodgers' chances to do anything will rest on the continued development of the kids. If Kemp and Loney have OPS+ of 125 in 500 AB each next year, the team can go places, and if they're at 108ish again, they can't.

Unless I'm wrong. That's very possible. I'll stop typing now.

And even if Ned decides we need one more piece for 2009, is that that bad? We have enough holes already that Ned can't trade any of the 2009 lineup and we really don't have any "do not trade at all costs" prospects. We need to bring a lot of talent into the organization if we don't want to punt 2009.

238 - absolutely agreed. The Dodger kids are good, the Dodger kids are nice, but they so far haven't been great, with maybe the exception of Billingsley, and post-centerfield, Matt Kemp (whose bat gets a boost there).

223 - but change and turnover for the sake of change and turnover is not worth much either. There is a balance to be struck between what I'll call the "Yankee Approach" and what I'll call the "Oakland A's Approach". There's nothing wrong with a team "getting older", by definition, every team gets older every year, unless you replace every single player on the roster with someone younger every single year. That is ineffective both on the field and from a PR stand point. Nor is there anything wrong with going out and getting the highly touted (and very expensive) free agent.

The key is to do all these things with a sense of balance. You use the farm system to build a core, then you use free agency to supplement the core, then you use the farm system to supplement the entire roster. And the beauty is that the core will slowly change over. If you do it right, you can build a team that is quite successful for quite a while. But if you eschew any avenue, for whatever reason, you'll have a very small window in which to win. That is what has happened to the Yankees and the A's. As much as I hate to say it, I think Boston has found the right balance, at least for now. They're not afraid to sign free agents or to call up young players from the minors. I've got other problems with how the Red Sox manage their roster, but it's more on the PR side.

Call it the zen of rosters

237 -- The accolades for Miller preceded the two shoulder surgeries, so unless Withrow is derailed by an injury more serious than a little elbow soreness, I see no reason to bring Miller up when talking about Withrow. That serious injury could prevent Withrow from ever fulfilling his potential goes without saying.

238
Quite true, Kemp, Loney, Martin, Billingsley, and Kershaw need to be near all-star level players for us to have future World Series aspirations.

238 Our superstars are going to come from the pitching staff. Bills is already one of the best players in baseball, and Kershaw can join him. Is this enough? Probably not with what we have but if you give them a good supporting cast it's a nice team.

Plus Russ is the third or fourth best catcher in baseball, can't ignore that.

244 - it was good enough for Arizona in 2001.

242
Please, people have still talked about his arm long after his surgeries. Every Dodger spring they talk about his arm, the same people who just got done talking about Withrow's arm. It was just a few months ago you were telling us he was going to have a better career then Jesse Orosco because of that left handed arm.

245 They had Luis Gonzalez too.

In theory, having a bunch of "good" kids who are also cheap should free up money for superstars.

Unfortunately, Ned has given our superstar money to players who are worse than the kids.

245
Gonzo was a bit of a superstar in 2001.

248
Ding Ding

Yeah, well we had Luis Gonzalez too!

How the heck did he hit 51 homers that year?

244 You're right. I lumped in Martin with the others, and I shouldn't have done that. His performance, at catcher, is more than acceptable already -- it's all-star quality.

Kemp is sort of different, too, because he plays CF, as scareduck points out in 240 ... but playing him in center puts Ethier in RF and I think we know his level of play will be solid-not-spectacular.

If Billingsley, Kershaw, and McDonald are all superstars -- and that's still a big, big if -- maybe you're right and a slightly above average offense can win enough games to get us to the postseason, where pitching rules. You're right to point that out. But Kershaw and McDonald still have work to do, and even if all goes spectaularly with them, I think we'd all be more comfortable if the offense could give them consistent run support. (Consistent? Gawrsh, I sound like Joe Morgan.)

So you're right, but I'm still rooting for Bison and Weird Game James to be the big bats I hope they might be.

248 That's absolutely true.

222

Too bad one of those six was Joel Guzman.

Those shaving commercials with Tiger, Federer, and the soccer player now include Tiger, Federer, and Derek Jeter.

248 I thought the punchline was "Unfortunately, there aren't that many superstars to buy these days."

252 - but playing [Kemp] in center puts Ethier in RF and I think we know his level of play will be solid-not-spectacular.

Kemp in center and Ethier in right allows for a thumper with questionable defensive skills to be brought in and fill LF.

If RFer Andre Ethier is your 3rd best OFer, you should be in good shape.

256
That's probably true, but it doesn't let Ned off the hook.

238 . Superstars rarely hit the free agent market. They are hard to find. And when they do, they are expensive. And if they break down, they're albatrosses.

How 'bout Texiera. He's a big impact player. He's in his prime, not about to leave it, presumably, as Manny is. Loney's one of the "side" or "core" pieces you're talking about, of which the Dodgers have several, while they lack a "superstar" (for next season and onward). Bet the farm on Tex, trade Loney for some middle infield help.

Texiera isn't even in the top five of 1st basemen. And he wants a budget busting contract of ten years/$200 million. Pass. Please let it pass because seriously. Pass.

So, what are the realistic options for SS, LF, 2B, AND 3B next year? What can be done? What would a good GM do?

The only thing I can think of is Mark Ellis at second, and it's not like he alone would make us a contender. What can we do to fix this team?

261
Pray, wish, hope, make sacrifices to something.

260 - Texiera isn't even in the top five of 1st basemen

Pujols, Miggy Cabrera, Berkman, Howard, Fielder, Morneau, AGonz? Am I missing anyone? Teixeira can't get in the top-5 that group? I'd say Tex is at worst 3rd on that list.

263

Man, I'm beginning to think that this team is pretty much going to suck again next year, unless something dramatic happens.

261
Getting a new GM that is good would be key.

261 Well, that's the point I was trying to make. The idea of "fixing" the team is, in my opinion, the wrong way to think about things for now, because the team isn't broken -- it's developing. They have put their faith in the kids. If one of them becomes a superstar, and a couple of others become all-stars, and the rest become solid players, the team will win.

The problem here, of course, is that it might not happen. The kids might not develop into all-stars and a superstar. Then we can start talking about fixing things.

266
They have put their faith in the kids? We got 4 position players and 3 pitchers that I would define as the kids.

264 You should absolutely prepare yourself for the fact that the team might be mediocre next year, too.

264

That was for 262 .

263

You're missing Youkilis as well, and Carlos Pena. Not as good as tex, but they're probably better deals then Tex as well.

Even if you can't go out and buy the superstars, you can put together prospect packages to get them and afford to add payroll to the young core.

If the Dodgers hadn't wasted so many prospects in meaningless trades, maybe they could have put together a package to get Jason Bay for example. Of course, the current admin might actually prefer Manny over Bay both short-term and long-term...

263 Yourkalis, Berkman, Howard, Fielder, Lee, Morneau, Pujols are all players I'd put before Texiera. Partly because of Texiera's contract demands, partly because you can get simply production out of guys like Fielder or Yourkalis and pay less.

As for entering his prime of his career, Texiera wants a contract so long that we'd be paying him $20 mil a year until he's 38. The guy wants something similar to A-Rod, and he's no way near the player A-Rod is.

267 Yes, and they've opened two more roster spots -- 2B and SS -- for next year, and another starting pitching position for McDonald.

Besides, with the exception of LaRoche (and we see how he's doing in Pittsburgh*), at what position have they shown impatience? For all our griping at how long it took for them to cut bait on Jones and Pierre, the fact is that they HAVE cut bait on Jones and Pierre. When Furcal went down, Hu was given every chance to earn the job. They stuck with DeWitt, too.

*I root for LaRoche and hope for his sake that he's something someday.

If Tex is so great, how does he end up on three teams in three years?

246 -- I thought it would have been clear at the time that the Jesse Orosco thing was hyperbole, but apparently not, and my initial comment was based on Orosco hanging around baseball forever for no other reason than that he scratches his buttocks with his left hand. I still say Miller will get a million chances in baseball because of his combination of left-handedness and mid-90's velocity. Seriously, he can be a AAAA player working from minor league contract to minor league contract for many years -- if he keeps his velocity. You say people still talk about Miller's arm, but what people keep talking about is that it can't throw straight, because of the injuries/surgeries.

272
I will wait to see them give those jobs to young guys. Especially, McDonald.

You have to be really patient with young players. Giving them a month then giving up does not work. The Dodgers just had a flawed plan, because it seemed like they had no plan. As I have said, we should have been in full rebuild mode last year.

273 -

(1) The Rangers had Chris Davis, a 22-year-old power hitting first baseman behind him in the minors who is this season posting an OPS+ only ten points lower than Teixeira was last year. The Rangers intelligently decided to move Teixeira for as many good young players as they could get.
(2) The Braves are cost-conscious of late, and needed more dollar flexibility at the position. Once Teixeira showed he was unwilling to sign an extension (aren't all Boras clients?), that sealed the deal to move him.

271 - Well, there's a difference between value and ability. Teixeira is a better player than all of those players, save for Pujols and Berkman (in my opinion, obviously). I don't think you can compare Tex to many on your list since they are cost-controlled. The Dodgers don't have a realistic chance to acquire those players, and certainly not for cheap.

275 It sounds like you don't disagree with my overall point, though. I mean, do you think that there's something radical that the Dodgers need to do this offseason? I don't, even though it might mean another mediocre season... and it doesn't sound like you think that, either, but I could be wrong.

252 - I doubt McDonald ends up a superstar. A nice 3-4 pitcher, sure.

272 You better hope Boras really screws over Alverez then, and he doesn't sign with the Pirates because he's supposed to be the 3rd baseman of the future.

278
Well it kind of stinks we cannot trade Kent and others away for more pieces.

I think we need to do what the A's do. Go young and access our team at the deadline. If we are still in it, then trade for a couple of vets, but ones that are actually good. Not Casey Blake. Our best players are not yet in their peak years.

280 I don't think their going to give up easily on the guy they got for their best player.

251 I think Gonzo was using PEDs.

281
By in it, I mean leading the division. That was one of my issues with Manny trade. It only made us a game or two better, which did not even assure us of making the playoffs. If we had been leading the division by some games, then make the deal, because Manny would have been big help in post-season.

281 That might actually have happened this year if it had turned out that Arizona was actually, y'know, good. If the Dodgers were 10 or more games out, I think you might have seen trades of Lowe and Kent -- especially Lowe, since he's still good. Not sure if any playoff teams would've wanted Kent.

But with the Dodgers within reach of 1st place at the deadline, I think most of us applauded the team's efforts to keep the Dodgers in the race, thinking that this could be a dangerous team in the offseason.

So, wait... what you say in 281 ... isn't that what they did?

252 - you're right, I overlooked Martin.

277 Just because the players I mentioned would be difficult to obtain over the relatively easy signing of Texiera as a FA, doesn't mean we should sign Texiera just because he may be the best 1st baseman who just happens to be a free agent. My point is that Texiera wouldn't make this team any better, so why should we waste that much money and years on a guy when there isn't an obvious need at first base with James Loney already here? The Yankees would be better served passing on Texiera and look at other shorter term options as they try to rebuild their team to a functioning playoff team, but they're the Yankees and they're going to spend on a guy who isn't the best at his position, and yet is going to be the highest player paid at his position.

284 I thought that the argument was that Manny DOESN'T really help in the postseason because it's only a few games and he can easily slump, etc... the theory being, "you trade for Manny if you think that he can get you to the postseason -- if he's the difference between going and not going."

284 - that was my objection, too. Manny was just a diversion of the sort that appeals to the perpetually star-struck McCourt.

282 They will if LaRoche keeps on putting up his current numbers. Maybe he's really injured, but that still isn't an excuse to produce like he has with the Pirates.

What makes you think the Pirates has the patience to work with whatever problems LaRoche has?

288
He was not going to help us enough to assure we would make the playoffs. It's like what the Angels did. They knew they were going to the playoffs, so might as well add another good hitter in Teixeira.

290 Because getting nothing for Jason Bay is going to look really bad.

289 Really? You're referring to what Manny Ramirez can produce between the lines as "a diversion?"

I mean, I've heard Mannybeingmanny called "a diversion" before, but never like that.

My objection to the Manny deal -- and it's a tepid one -- goes back to 238 . If you're putting faith in the kids, don't do it half-heartedly. Let LaRoche show what he can do.

But that was a tepid objection... I mean, they got Manny Ramirez!

291 Yeah, I'm not a fan of the Angels' move. Maybe Teixeira makes them sliiiiiiiiiightly better than if they played Kotchman. But he'll cost a ton more starting this offseason, and maybe the Angels won't sign him at all, in which case, they will have no one to play 1B. (Look for a lot of doubles down the right field line.)

292 More like Bryan Morris suddenly becomes the centerpiece of that trade. And its not as if the Pirates only got LaRoche and Morris for Bay, they got Andy LaRoche, Bryan Morris, Brandon Moss, and Craig Hansen. If LaRoche panned out then that's the risk they're taken. It just means that the other three players better pan out.

And would LaRoche pan out at 2nd or 1st or in the outfield? Its not as if Andy is going to push his borther Adam out from Pittsburgh. He's not going to push Freddy Sanchez from 2nd, and he can't play SS, even if the Pirates wish to move Jack Wilson, and the Pirates have higher ranked OF prospects over than LaRoche, not to mention Nate McLouth.

294 Angels have Kendry Morales at Triple-A, who's 25 and just waiting in the wings. And the thing about Kotchman is that he's doing his best impression to love his job with the Braves too. He's been playing horribly with the Braves for whatever reason, and the whispers from the Angels and Kotchman was that the team didn't trust him as the first baseman of the present or future.

294
They can always make Wood a first baseman.

Yeah, and Morales.

296 297 298 OK, fair enough. I guess SOMEONE will play 1B.

296 Lose, not love. Lose his job. Loooooooose his job.

260 . I want a $200 million contract as does Tex, also, but I probably won't get it. He's seriously not going to make a payday like that, is he?

Even Roger Ebert ripped on Jay Marriotti.

Guys, this has been fun. I'm out -- I'll check in a little later.

301 Why wouldn't he?

293 - Really? You're referring to what Manny Ramirez can produce between the lines as "a diversion?"

Absolutely. Manny currently has a 18.2 VORP, and .662 VORPr score, meaning that with his remaining time on the Dodgers (28 games, assuming he plays in all of them), he's worth a hair under four wins over a replacement player. Take some of that back for what he takes away with the glove and his lack of speed on the basepaths and you're probably looking at three wins. Those wins will have to be very strategically placed... moreover, as we saw in the Nationals series, unless Manny homers, the Dodgers' offensive strategy can be contained because the Dodgers' fundamental problem of poor situational hitting yet remains. Among other things, there are too many slow baserunners on the team (remember Manny failing to make it home/to third in the second game?). Perhaps in part due to those reasons, others (I want to say Andrew Shimmin) have suggested Manny has an even lower value than suggested by VORP, perhaps a win or two, which I am inclined to agree with.

Those wins will have to be very strategically placed

I don't think this is the proper useage of VORP.

270 . If the Dodgers hadn't wasted so many prospects in meaningless trades, maybe they could have put together a package to get Jason Bay for example.

Exactly. I think one of the current problems is Ned failed to keep his prospect/trade powder dry for a GOOD trade like for Bay.

I keep trying to figure out why the Dodgers seem to be talent thin all of a sudden. I think it has to do with Ned paradoxically squandering the Dodgers' prospect talent even though he harbored a "core". I'm saying that when he's decided to trade prospects it's often either been too soon to know which are the correct ones to keep or he's not made sure to trade them for good value. Hence we're suddenly thinned out quite a bit with not much to show.

294 - Kotchman's problem was that he was hitting too many balls on the ground. The bottom line for Casey is that his SLG was too low to be acceptable at first and he wasn't showing any signs of consistent improvement.

DODGERS::
A JEKYLL & HYDE TEAM.

306 - why?

304 . So more than one will enter the Arod payday stratosphere? Yikes.

310 you're quoting VORP but it sounds like you might mean WARP. And if you do mean WARP, I don't think that the placement of the wins is relevant.

305
That would be Andrew Grant.

I'm not exactly sure what the acceptable Bill Jamesian answer to this might be, but: Is situational hitting a myth? Could the Dodgers' recent offensive slide really be chalked up to bad luck? We got clobbered in three of the seven recent losses, but in four others, the games could easily have fallen our way. I don't think this is a playoff-worthy team, of course, but might we be victims of the old game of inches right now?

Those numbers were based on Manny putting up a 20ish VORP with the Dodgers. If he puts up a 40 it's entirely differently.

Woo, tonight's game at KCAL, I can watch from Work!

316 - Which means I am limited to Darren Sutton :(

314
About the skill of clutch performance, James says he used to know, but he doesn't anymore.

317 - Hopefully, you'll hear the sad tone of Daron Sutton all game long.

"And the Diamondbacks lose!"

312 - the standard rule of thumb is 10 VORP = one win.

Didn't see this mentioned but it is up on MLBTR:

"Casey Blake is a Type B; I could see him seeking a multiyear deal in a weak third base market. The Dodgers may re-sign him, though.
Rafael Furcal seems to have neither Type A nor Type B status, due to his injury this year. So the team that signs him does not have to worry about losing draft picks."

Wow, what happened to Bad Altitude? It just vanished. All of it.

Question: say Furcal is available next year on a one year, $13 million contract. (In other words, extend his three-year deal by one year.) Would you do that deal?

Projected Elias Rankings:

http://tigers-thoughts.blogspot.com/2008/08/projected-elias-rankings.html

Blake is barely a B and Furcal just misses, so there's still hope.

The Dodgers are totally going to sign Blake to a three- or four-year deal. I can feel it. I'm not happy about it, but I just think it's going to happen.

"Casey Blake was a big part of our second-half resurgence," Ned will say, "and if we're going to take the next step, we're going to need his bat at third base."

325
{Bangs head against desk till Brain forgets what baseball is.}

Blake's .318 OBP has Colletti written all over it.

My prediction? The Dodgers re-sign Furcal, on that short term deal as suggested above, and do not re-sign Blake. That's just a gut feeling, but I'm predicting it.

I am debating whether to root for us to lose all of our games from here on out.

322 It's showing up for me okay.
https://badaltitude.baseballtoaster.com/

Some good news as we don't face Peavy when the Padres come to Dodger Stadium.

329 What would be the point of that? Utter embarrassment, finishing around where the Giants are, is that what we want? Coletti's probably gonna get canned unless the team makes it far into the playoffs, which is unlikely at this point, so why root for utter humiliation when it just affects the players and the fan's psyche at this point? I don't get that. I want Colletti gone as much as anyone, but not so much that I can hope they not only don't make the playoffs but they flail to embarrassing lows.

332
Well then you think Frank likes Colletti far less than I do.

It's not like it is going to happen. I just want Ned gone for my psyche.

332 - plus the more games the Dodgers lose, the higher the probability that whoever the GM is next year will consider certain younger players to have not met the proper projections and move them for some PVL.

I don't understand placing hatred for the GM above winning baseball games. I think if you've spent any length of time playing competitive sports, losing just isn't something that breeds anything good. In college or high school, regardless who the AD is, or even the manager, on the field losing is horrible and corrosive. It doesn't help anything.

335
But what if said GM will cause us to continue to lose into the future?

325
Don't you have to have a resurgence to be able to make a comment like that.

If we do have a resurgence then it is likely that Blake had something to do with it. Other then Pierre, Ned has shown no inclination for long contracts. At this point it ain't going to happen for a 35 year old 3rd baseman on the edge of falling off the cliff who has impressed Torre so much he's batting 8th. I mean it is very possible that Blake could be our 3rd baseman next year but I find it improbable that it would be on the 1st year of a long term deal.

It seems the Furcal question is asked by someone at least once a thread.

BTW, I was not being serious, which is why I said I am debating.

Seeing ridiculous quotes like that are going to cause me to have a bad immediate reaction.

336
I'd much rather see Furcal, Schmidt, and A Jones come back healthy and productive then root for the Dodgers to lose so that Ned gets fired.

338 understood, it's just that my perspective is that winning is #1, and the guys on the field can't control who the team executives are. If the GM causes us to lose games, the GM has got to go. I didn't want Colletti from the start, primarily because I have two abiding hatreds in my life, moustaches and the Giants.

I can't remember ever being more frustrated with the Dodgers. Earlier this year I though the team was fun to watch with some of young players developing. Now I don't know. I have tickets 2 rows off the field for tonights game everything paid for by my company and I'm not excited about the game.

338
You do know he made that quote up?

342
Sigh, no I did not. I totally bought Ned would say that.

I will soon be consuming this slice of humble pie, that comes direct from the oven of shame set at gas mark egg on my face.

332 - I expect that Colletti won't be fired unless it becomes clear that Brian Cashman is out in the Bronx. Then the McCourts will make a move.

As Jon pointed out above 2006 right after the All-Star Break was one of the worst times for the Dodgers. It was only two years ago and this stretch feels worse now because we're living it as we speak. That was an awful stretch of games! However, so are these games.

But, these things do turn around. It's just really tough these days. Really tough and you at times want to give up, if for nothing else your sanity. But, everyday I wake up and think 'this will be the day'. I can't stop thinking that as I don't know any other way to think until they're mathematically eliminated. In this crazy division that day may not come until the last day. Where we may need Arizona to lose to get in. It's been that kind of year.

340 - but how can you not love pornstaches?

345
Cashman - would that be a good thing or a bad thing? I've always thought of him as a horrible GM when I've looked at the complete team he assembles. He always has had a great/expensive core but the depth of the team has always been very weak and it never made any sense to me given the budget.

The more I see this year's team, the more I agree, TC.

I was actually a big proponent of Cashman until recently. I'm not sure what changed. But his recent pickups have not panned out. I'm not really sure what to make of Brian Cashman, honestly.

I should have said "the more I see of this year's Yankee team..."

346 Yeah, but when we think back to that stretch of games, we know that it will be followed with 18 wins in 19 games.

I remember towards the end of that streak I declared that the Dodgers were dead and that they should trade Nomar and Lofton for prospects.

Of course, they turned that around and 2006 is a season of fond memories second only to 2004 in my mind.

I really don't understand how anybody who claims to be a Dodger fan could ever root for them to lose. It may be in part of my utter disdain of the utilitarian philosophy, but I really don't see how losing could be a good thing. I don't expect this team to make the playoffs. Even if they sweep Arizona this weekend I'd call their chances a coin flip at best and I don't have any faith of thos team winning the Webb game. Still one must root for wins. There is still hope.

I would love to see Scott Elbert in high leverage situations. Make it happen!!

348 - Cashman is a pretty good GM once you remove the handcuffs of the Tampa mafia (i.e. the Steinbrenner and non-Steinbrenner mafia that are the power behind the throne). His moves in recent years have been solid.

I'm not a big Cashman fan either. GMing for the New York Yankees and their ridiculous payroll might be the easiest job on the planet to do correctly.

339.
Agreed..even getting a sub-par year from Schmidt, Jones, and Furcal should conceivably be enough to get us over the hump next year. Getting rid of Colletti, however, isn't going to be the answer regardless of what happens this year or next..our course is pretty well set no matter who steps in, unless they fire sale and start from scratch (again).

Wasn't Cashman also the driving force in re-building (or attempting to re-build) the Yankee farm system?

354 What about the Steinbrenner factor?

And here we go.

Per ITD:

Martin, C

Ethier, RF

Manny, LF

Kent, 2B

Kemp, CF

Loney, 1B

Nomar, SS

Blake, 3B

Kuroda, P

Martin at leadoff?

Martin at C.... an idea crazy enough it just might work.

360 ER, leadoff, I mean. Yeah.

Simulator has tonight's Dodger win expectancy at 54.53%. Vegas has a very similar number. Vegas says 8.2 runs will be scored, Simulator says 9.6, AccuScore says 8.8. Go Dodgers!
vr, Xei

359 - Highest OBP not named Manny. Worth a shot.

Torre finally put Martin in the leadoff spot. I like it!

Now get Kent out of the 4 slot.

I'm ready for a modest one game win streak to begin tonight.

Uhh...hell yes!! Martin at lead off, awesome!

Putting the man who has the highest OBP outside of Manny and can run a bit, batting leadoff, while putting Kemp in position to drive in some runs with his extra base hits. What a concept.. finally!

358.
Switch Kent/Kemp and I'd like this a bit better..

Wow, I've advocated Martin in the leadoff spot for a long time. Can't believe Torre's that progressive and open-minded.

Nice job.

369
Stop being so humble.

346 Exactly. The fact that a team that ended up with a record of 88-74 had a 1-13 stretch at one point in the season should give people pause before writing off the season just yet.
And boy did the Dodgers look miserable during that 2006 stretch. Absolutely atrocious. At least recently they've been getting on base, just not timing their hits very well.

The D'Backs have activated Justin Upton.

NPUT

371 - the problem I have with this line of reasoning is that the Dodgers have spent more time under .500 than they have above it (only 45 days over in 134 games played). I don't care how lousy the competition is, the Dodgers haven't played well all year. And post-Manny, they don't look any better, really.