"I feel as well now as I have in a long time," he said. "I feel inner peace right now. No anger."

"Believe me," Scully said, "we have not heard the last from [Ross Porter]."

- Tim Brown in the Times, reporting on Ross Porter's induction into the Southern California Sports Broadcasters Hall of Fame.

We don't need a Norihiro
We don't need to know Hideo

Honestly, is Tina Turner really a reliable source for this kind of analysis?

Which brings me to this morning's e-mail.

In the Dodger Thoughts In box:

I just wanted to make a polite lobbying pitch for you to do a post about Norihiro Nakamura. Haven't seen too much posted on him since the story first surfaced, but this piece suggests the Dodgers are a good bet to sign him and that he would be willing to play for only $500,000.

ESPN Rumor Central says "scouts suggest" that he only projects to be an average MLB third baseman.

- Ben Pershing

In the Dodger Thoughts Sent box:

I'm paying attention but just haven't been moved to post yet. I know I should - I know it's more important than some of the stuff I'm doing. But it strikes me, other than the international flavor of it, as talking in advance about the equivalent of signing Olmedo Saenz or not much more. Nakamura just doesn't look that important to me. Certainly, he could probably help, but I'm not worked up over it.

Maybe I'll just run your letter and my response to get things started ...

The two main keys for Nakamura, assuming he didn't have a lights-out Spring Training (or even if he did), are whether his dream to play in the United States could include at least a temporary stay in Las Vegas, and whether the Dodgers will carry 11 pitchers or 12. The surplus of candidates and the fragility of the starting rotation points to a 12-man staff, but it's no lock. A trade of fellow Japanese veteran Kazuhisa Ishii could tilt the balance back to 11 pitchers and a six-man bench.

Perhaps the more important news to draw is the reminder that Dodger general manager Paul DePodesta hasn't closed the book on improving the Dodger roster now, in March or throughout the season.

Kazuhisa is life beyond ... the thunderdome

Update: Dodgers win the bidding. Ken Gurnick of MLB.com suggests that Nakamura "could become a Plan B at first base should Hee-Seop Choi struggle offensively."

Yet another statistician - David Pinto of Baseball Musings - offers numbers indicating that Jeff Kent was a better fielding second baseman in 2004 than Alex Cora.

I'm not keeping score, but I'm pretty sure that Kent is beating Cora in most of these studies.

Hey, I'm no different from the rest of you. This is like having people telling me that Phoebe Cates isn't beautiful or the hamburgers at Kirk's in Palo Alto during college weren't the best anyone has ever had.

But what are your options?

a) Conclude that all the statistical models picking Kent over Cora are flawed.

b) Conclude there's a conspiracy among statisticians to make Paul DePodesta look good.

c) Overlook or deny that these Kentriffic statistics exist.

d) Conclude that, at a minimum, there might be something to this.

You're welcome to make a case for a) if you can, but it seems better to go with d).

Someone could have the prettiest swing, but if the guy's offensive stats repeatedly trailed Mr. Herky Jerky, would you insist he was the better hitter? How many times can it be the stats' fault?

It should be as simple as the plot of Paradise that Cora is a better fielder than Kent, but it's not. There's something about Kent we're not seeing, something about Cora we're not seeing, or something about these models we're not seeing.

At any rate, anyone should be wary of stating unequivocally that the Dodgers have weakened their defense at second base. With all the evidence piling up against him, how can anyone stipulate to Cora's supremacy at this point? Really, is there so much harm in acknowledging the mere possibility that are eyes might be misleading us?

Beyond that, the task today is to increase the breadth and depth of this conversation by publicizing these advanced fielding models with the simplest possible explanation for how they work (like, "rate of expected outs converted.") Because just like it was with OPS, it's going to be a matter of momentum, of seeing other people using these statistics and feeling comfortable with them, to win acceptance for them.

OPS isn't the end of the conversation about offense - but it improves the conversation. It expands it. That's what I'm talking about. We need to expand the conversation about how defense is measured.

It's 2005, and like it or not, you can't judge a second baseman by its cover. Kent can field a little bit, and Cora maybe not as much as we thought.

And by the way, Cates' acting improved as her career went on...

Three different systems for projecting future performance are reconciled - with the Dodgers as guinea pigs - in this article by Tom Meagher at The Fourth Outfielder.

In some ways, writing Dodger Thoughts, is like whipping up a meal for the entire mess tent. And on some days, despite my efforts at gourmet preparation, I'm Igor ladling creamed corn.

One particular meal seems to go wrong for Chef Jon more than any other. Most of my efforts at serving Frank and Jamie McCourt come out flat - overcooked here, underdone there.

On no other issue relating to the Dodgers have I felt more out of sync with my readers. Pepper the McCourts, and patrons tell me to ease off. Serve the McCourts with sugar, and my guests want to spit out the sweetness.

Friday's supper, "One Year of the McCourts," was no different, even with an explicit effort to mix in both sweet and sour. Though there were a few who swallowed it all, most pushed it aside with a frown and asked for the check. As Zagat might have put it, the piece was "pointless" and "counterproductive," needed to be more "fair," offered side dishes that raised the question "how much do we really care," and overall signaled, in case one cared, that the chef could "kiss ... chances of working at the Dodgers' front office goodbye."

Sometimes I'll write something and expect disagreement. Comes with the territory of taking a point of view. No problem there. But when I write something and I'm surprised by the disagreeement, or at least the nature of the disagreement, well ...

First, it's an ego hit, in that I always expect my writing to hit the mark.

Once I get over that bad taste in my mouth (usually takes a couple of hours, or days, or ...) I've got some reflection to do.

I'll admit, the main conclusion I've drawn since last February was, "Don't write about the McCourts anymore." It has been something of a no-win situation for me since the get-go. There is something about the merge of their backgrounds and Dodger ownership history that has defied clarity. Little about them is as simple as it appears.

What I'm finally skimming off the top of this mess is that people can't seem to agree upon an owner's responsibilities, let alone whether these Dodger owners meet them satisfactorily or not.

I don't want to give the impression that I'm up nights worrying about this. Nothing I cook up about the McCourts on Dodger Thoughts is going to resemble Proust and his madelines anyway. But in the future, when it comes to the McCourts, I am going to try a new recipe - a much more humble approach.

On this site, I've asked the McCourts to relate more honestly to Dodger fans and acknowledge those who disagree with them with more than defensiveness and platitudes. I'm going to follow my own advice. It's a new year - Year 2 of the McCourt ownership. I'm throwing out any previous conclusions and try to reverse the divisiveness. Let's start over and see what happens.

Today is the 366th day of the McCourt ownership of the Dodgers. Dodger fans can be thankful in many ways - although mostly, perhaps, for fears about the McCourts not yet being realized. Sort of like giving thanks on Thanksgiving that you're not the turkey.

On the other hand, there definitely have been some "As God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly" disappointments.

Without emotion, let's briefly assess the McCourt ownership:

Positives

If you can make it there
You'll make it some-where
It's up to you
Tampa Bay
Tampa Bay

Wednesday, March 9: Dodgers vs. Tampa Bay. Scott Erickson vs. Hideo Nomo?

Update: In the prehistoric era of Dodger Thoughts, on September 13, 2002, I wrote the following:

After Hideo Nomo threw 132 pitches in the Dodgers' victory over San Francisco on Wednesday, players, coaches and reporters raved at his toughness. In response to the concept that throwing more than 120 pitches in a game has increasingly been proven to have a potentially harmful effect, these people all cited the fact that Nomo had exceeded the mark in Japan often, including a 191-pitch, 16-walk complete game. What they don't seem to remember is that Nomo's arm then went dead in the late-1990s, causing him to be released by the Dodgers and later by the Cubs.

I can't be the judge of whether this one-time pushing of Nomo will have a harmful effect, but I would feel better if the people closer to him were at least cognizant of the risk. The harm won't come in the game he throws the 132 pitches - it would come after.

Robert Tagorda, who covered politics and the Dodgers at his own site, Priorities and Frivolities, has taken Solomon's bait and cut himself in half. He is now doing his political writing at Outside the Beltway and his baseball writing at Baseball Crank. His recent output indicates that he's finding the moves quite liberating. Best on the new ventures, Robert.

Though his win-loss record fell from 23-8 in his Cy Young season in 1988 to 15-15 in 1989, Orel Hershiser remained a stalwart for the Dodgers. His ERA rose only from 2.26 to 2.31 and was just as strong relative to the league average.

In his fourth start of 1990, however, Hershiser walked off the mound in the middle of the seventh inning with rotator cuff damage. He would not return for 13 months.

Hershiser's departure opened up a fissure in the Dodger starting rotation of painful duration. While Ramon Martinez, Mike Morgan, Fernando Valenzuela and Tim Belcher combined to make 123 starts, it took eight other pitchers (including Hershiser) to fill the remaining 39 - "fill," in many cases, being a generous term.

The evening is going to be about the "New Face of Sports Journalism," so I guess I had better shave.

Along with Times columnist J.A. Adande, KCAL Channel 9 broadcaster Alan Massengale, KSPN 710 talkshow host Steve Mason and Dodger public relations director John Olguin, I will be participating in a seminar on "21st Century Sports Journalism" on February 2 at the L.A. Press Club (6464 Sunset Boulevard, 8th floor).

The panel begins at 7 p.m. (moderated by Reason associate editor and media columnist Matt Welch), and is preceded at 6 p.m. by refreshments and, as the Press Club so coyly puts it, "networking." From the press release:

Panelists will explore a variety of themes, including: * The love/hate relationship between teams (and fans) and their hometown paper * The Dodgers' PR problems this off-season * How to cover increasingly aloof pro athletes * The ESPN factor * Tips for the novice sports journalist * Interesting developments online * and more!

I think I must fall in the category of "interesting developments online," although I will strive to be a part of "and more!".

Tickets are $15 for non-members, $5 for members and free for those who join the Press Club at the event. To RSVP or get more information, call (323) 469-8180 or e-mail info@lapressclub.org.

Don't have time to do a long post, but I wanted to open up discussion of the release of the Baseball Prospectus player projections for 2005, via the site's PECOTA system.

Just off the top (OBP/SLG/VORP):

Milton Bradley (.365/.441/27.1)
Hee Seop Choi (.374/.493/29.2)
J.D. Drew (.393/.516/44.5)
Cesar Izturis (.304/.353/9.5)
Jeff Kent (.341/.498/38.7)
Dave Ross (.317/.420/10.4)
Jose Valentin (.312/.445/17.2)
Jayson Werth (.335/.469/17.2)

Adrian Beltre (.337/.486/30.9)
Shawn Green (.363/.486/26.7)

To me, PECOTA is a mixed bag. (Here's a piece I wrote a year ago.) I don't put too much weight in the projections, but they offer a fun starting point for discussion. So discuss!

P.S. Noticed this from the comment thread on last year's PECOTA post:

If Mota can pitch well in the first half of the season, but the Dodgers don't appear to be playoff-bound I can see him being perfect trade fodder for DePodesta.

Posted by: Bob Timmermann at February 27, 2004 11:30 PM

Chin-Feng Chen and Joe Thurston cleared waivers, meaning that no team felt that they were so unfairly buried in the Dodger organization that they wanted to take a flyer on them. As a result, the duo will go to Vero Beach and try to win a job with the Dodgers in Spring Training. Another season in Las Vegas may well be in store.

The full list of Dodger non-roster invitees to Spring Training:

P Buddy Carlyle
1B-OF Chin-Feng Chen
OF Mike Edwards
P Aquilino Lopez
IF Jose Flores
1B James Loney
OF Tydus Meadows
1B-OF Brian Myrow
C Mike Rose
P Ryan Rupe
IF Tony Schrager
OF Henri Stanley
2B Joe Thurston
P Mike Venafro
OF Jon Weber
P Kelly Wunsch

The potential available slots include one spot at catcher if an in-house alternative is needed for Dave Ross, and as many as two slots on the bench if Jason Grabowski struggles and the Dodgers carry 11 pitchers. As for the pitchers, there's always the possibility of grabbing a spot in the back of the bullpen. Injuries could open up even more opportunities, and of course, trades can still be made.

Update: Commenter Icaros reminds me to mention Scott Erickson - who I appoint this year's occupant of the he's-so-done chair occupied in 2003 by Wilson Alvarez and 2004 by Jose Lima.

Too much to ask for a third successful reclamation, right? It doesn't always work. For example, we had a successful 2004 Over the Hill Third Baseman Makes Comeback as Valuable Part-Timer in Olmedo Saenz, but 2003 was a bust with Ron Coomer.

Most of you are eager for Dodger propsect news, but in case you haven't gotten over to Wait Til Next Year and its Top 100 List yet, here are the key Dodger mentions from All-Baseball.com colleague Bryan Smith:

9. Chad Billingsley: In 1996, [Kerry Wood] was the rage of the Florida State League, with a 5.7 H/9, 10.7 K/9, and an odd 5.5 W/9. His stuff was as good as it gets, with a huge fastball and breaking pitch, along with the occasional solid third pitch. Billingsley, similarly, posted a 6.7 H/9, 10/9 K/9 and 4.8 W/9 this year. His stuff is similar to that of Wood, the player whom I am speaking of above. But unlike Kerry, Chad moved up and dominated AA in the same season, and is set for an appearance in Los Angeles some time this summer.

Honorable mention - James Loney: We heard the wrist excuses a year ago, when Loney was showing no power in a pitcher's park as a teenager. But then he came to Spring Training in 2004 and turned everyone's heads, making them proclaim that since his injury was healed, he was ready to start showing why he was a first-round pick in 2002. And then they sent him to the Southern League, and he regressed. Talk of the wrist injury not being healed resurfaced, but I'm just sick of the excuses. I like the low strikeout numbers, but at this point that's all I really like. He doesn't walk quite enough, and hasn't shown the ability to hit for average that was supposed to be his calling card. And his power? I really think he hit more home runs in the first week of exhibition games last spring than he did all year with Jacksonville. ...

Can anyone translate this or this? For some reason, it's making me nervous - my post on Chin-Feng Chen was intended to be good-natured and I wouldn't want it to be misinterpreted.

Quick story: I worked for NBC as a gopher for the boxing coverage at the 1988 Olympic Games in Seoul. Some of you might remember how chaotic that was - Roy Jones being denied his gold medal, in a fight whose judging later was proven to be fixed, Byun-Jong Il's 67-minute sit-in in the boxing ring, etc. Anyway, at the end, we made sweatshirts that had the slogan, "We're boxing - We're bad." We meant bad in the "cool" sense, but whoever translated it into Korean made a mistake and used an offensive term. The sweatshirt story was broadcast on national television - with all our names - and covered worldwide. Got everyone in hot water. We felt lucky to get out of the country without being detained by the police.

By the way - I know Chen isn't Korean. It's just a language story. The point is, I do mean to be sensitive.

Anyway, if you scroll down you'll notice a recent rush of comments defending Chen, such as one saying that if the Dodgers don't keep him, it will be the worst decision they have ever made. The timing, of course, is ironic. I'm not going to say I agree with these commenters, but they're certainly welcome to their opinion.

Dave Ross was released by Dominican Winter League team Licey, according to Raul Tavares on Dominican Players.

"He struggled in the plate and behind the plate," Tavares said. "He was not popular at all with Licey fans."

USA Today has Dominican League stats: Ross was 4 for 29 with one home run, two walks and nine strikeouts.

Go easy ...

Among the other fancy names down there, Joel Guzman is 10 for 34 with three walks and a home run. ... Angel Pena is 16 for 39 with three home runs. ... Jose Offerman has a .391 on-base percentage. ... Luis Polonia (Remember him? He's 41 now.) has a .770 OPS. ... Jose Lima has a 3.00 ERA in 21 innings ... Pedro Astacio hasn't allowed a run in 10 innings ...Dodger non-roster invitee Aquilino Lopez has a 5.87 ERA but 14 strikeouts in 15 1/3 innings. ... Duaner Sanchez has a 6.14 ERA in 7 1/3 innings.

A year ago, we were flared up for the Dodger ownership change. Things have been a little more sedate this week. But still, there's news ...

The Pedro Martinez trade or the Darren Dreifort contract?

Journey through time, space and concrete for a dirt's-eye view of the 2004-05 renovation of Dodger Stadium, courtesy of these 20 photos by Dodger historian Mark Langill.

They gone dug some big holes. Imagine a cartoon Steve Garvey literally scooping out a low throw to first base with those Popeye arms of his. That's what it looks like.

If I didn't know better, it would appear that not only have they eaten into much of the foul territory, they have eyes on some fair ground as well. That'll really wreak havoc with the park effects on offense.

It doesn't rank quite as high as "Greatest Golfer Never to Win a Major," but the chance of Chin-Feng Chen becoming the "Greatest Dodger Never to Get a Hit" could just lip out of the cup.

The Dodgers designated Chen for assignment January 13, meaning that they had 10 days to trade or release him. This might be the end of his Dodger career, though if he clears waivers, he can return to Las Vegas, and the Dodgers can purchase his contract if they so desire.

In three seasons of play with the major league club, Chen has compiled 14 at bats without getting a hit - tied for fourth all-time among the franchise's 184 career .000 hitters. First is second baseman Harry Redmond, whose entire major-league career consisted of 19 hitless at-bats with the Dodgers between September 7 and September 14, 1909 - the day after his 22nd birthday.

On the upside, Redmond did have a sacrifice hit, and he fielded 29 of 33 chances successfully.

Here is the illustrious group, courtesy of Lee Sinins' Sabermetric Encyclopedia.

Dodger .000 hitters
19 at-bats: Harry Redmond
18: Turk Farrell
15: John Tudor
14: Chin-Feng Chen, Johnny Hopp, Dennys Reyes
11: George Stallings
10: Dave Sax
9: John Douglas, Elmer Steele, Nig Fuller, Carmen Mauro, Ted Power
8: Mace Brown, Paul Richards, Bert Cunningham, Snooks Dowd
7: Joey Eischen, Lindsay Deal, Mike Garman, Terry Mulholland, Wally Millies, Horace Allen, Frank McManus, Jay Howell, Ed Palmquist, Terry Wells
6: Dick Calmus, Dennis Springer, Carlos Diaz, Gene Snyder, John Gaddy, Dick Smith, Johnny Enzmann, Pedro Martinez, Buck Marrow, Ray Moore, Luis Lopez
5: Ray Lamb, Ken Rowe, Joe Tepsic, Sweetbreads Bailey, Alan Mills, Scott Radinsky, Lance Rautzhan, Stan Wall
4: Brad Gulden, Bill Schenck, Oscar Roettger, Lefty Hopper, Tom Sunkel, George Culver, Tom Fitzsimmons, Don Crow, Ron Negray, Ralph Mauriello, Onan Masaoka, Walt Miller, Ed Albosta, Rick Wilkins, Hoyt Wilhelm, Stuart Pederson, Brad Penny
3: Rene Valdez, Andy Rush, F.C. Hansford, Tony Giuliani, Bonnie Hollingsworth, Sergio Robles, Brad Havens, Phil Haugstad, Chris Haughey, Enzo Hernandez, Greg Smith, Jack Smith, Phil Gallivan, Fay Thomas, Sam Fletcher, Chuck Templeton, John Cummings, Pembroke Finlayson, Lady Baldwin, Chappie McFarland, Pete Wojey, Al McBean, Earl Mattingly, Whitey Ock, Jim Bruske, Hank Aguirre, Chink Zachary, Matt Young, Pat McGlothin, Joe Koukalik, John Kelleher, Bill Leard, Jack Billingham
2: Ed Chandler, Paul Schreiber, Kid Carsey, Ray Hathaway, Brad Clontz, Rudy Seanez, Jean-Pierre Roy, Bob Darnell, Clancy Smyres, John Duffie, Don Stanhouse, Balvino Galvez, George Crable, Wes Ferrell, Ray Searage, Earl Naylor, Lave Winham, Dan McFarlan, Rodney Myers, Rube Yarrison, Victor Alvarez, Ed McLane, Todd Worrell, Glenn Mickens, Steve Rachunok, Juan Marichal, George Pfister, Jim Korwan, Pedro Borbon Jr., Ed Pipgras, Bill Brennan, Matt Broderick, Jerry Hurley, Jesse Orosco, Mike Maddux, Charlie Loudenslager, Abe Kruger, Frank Lankford
1: Mike Harkey, Bert Hamric, Jack Ryan, Luther Roy, Kent Greenfield, Jackie Collum, Bill Hall, George Dockins, Bert Hogg, Rich Rodas, Harry Harper, Lafayette Henion, Greg Shanahan, Lee Rogers, Jim Romano, Ed VandeBerg, Artie Dede, Butch Davis, Dick Egan, Chuck Connors, Eddie Solomon, Jerry Stephenson, Ricky Horton, Charlie Fuchs, Dwain Sloat, Dick Teed, Sean Maloney, Jim Winford, Tex Wilson, Sandy McDougal, Tom Martin, Rod Miller, Adam Melhuse, Scott Mullen, Mike Munoz, Noe Munoz, Eric Weaver, Gary Wayne, Boots Poffenberger, Lu Blue, Pat Perry, Roy Jarvis, Possum Whitted, Phil Page, Larry White, Barney White, Tommy Lasorda, Hal Peck, Frank Lamanske,Yhency Brazoban

Best names: Snooks Dowd, Sweetbreads Bailey, Pembroke Finlayson, Lady Baldwin, Chappie McFarland, Whitey Ock, Possum Whitted.

Tommy Lasorda had one hit in his career - with the Kansas City A's in 1956 - topping Walter Alston.

Hope the Dodgers have earned the right to use Gagne for more than an inning at a time without criticism.

Some previous entries:
October 4, 2004: No Proof That Mota Trade Hurt Gagne
August 14, 2004: Eric Gagne: Setup Man
April 23, 2003: Eric Gagne Is So Good

Update: Brad Penny asks for $5.7 million; the Dodgers counter at $4.7 million, according to MLB.com.

Update 2: The Gagne contract terms, from The Associated Press:

He will get $8 million this year and $10 million in 2006. Los Angeles has a $12 million option for 2007 with a $1 million buyout, but Gagne has the right to void the option and become eligible for free agency. If he voids the option, he would receive a buyout of $250,000 to $1 million, depending games finished the next two years.

In other words, if Gagne thinks he is worth more than $12 million for the 2007 season, he can declare free agency - and get six figures and a blender in parting gifts to boot. Still, as complicated as that third-year option sounds, and as much as it is tilted toward Gagne, it is not something to be worked up over.

As with the J.D. Drew deal, the worst-case scenario is that the Dodgers will have the money to spend elsewhere in '07. Even better than the Drew deal, the Dodgers aren't committed to any more years than Gagne is.

Update 3: AP reports that Alex Cora will make $1.3 million in 2005 from Cleveland - no raise from his 2004 salary - to go with $1.4 million in 2006. However, he can almost double his contract value through incentives, and can void Year 2 if he achieves 450 plate appearances in Year 1. The Indians are not handing him a starting role, though.

Who are the 125 men who will cause your spirits to rise and fall this year as they pass through Stadium Way?

Most of their names appear below, in this side-by-side preview of the rosters of the National League West. Note that these are the 25 hale fellows well met whom each team might pick if the season started today. No claims are being made here that this is a foolproof list (and feel free to write in with any obvious mistakes).

The Rosters ...

Pos.	Arizona		Colorado		Los Angeles	San Diego		San Francisco
C	Koyie Hill		J.D. Closser	Dave Ross		Ramon Hernandez	Mike Matheny
1B	Chad Tracy		Todd Helton	Hee Seop Choi	Phil Nevin		J.T. Snow
2B	Craig Counsell	Aaron Miles	Jeff Kent		Mark Loretta	Ray Durham
SS	Royce Clayton	Clint Barmes	Cesar Izturis	Khalil Greene	Omar Vizquel
3B	Troy Glaus		Garrett Atkins	Jose Valentin	Sean Burroughs	Edgardo Alfonzo
LF	Luis Gonzalez	Matt Holliday	Jayson Werth	Ryan Klesko	Barry Bonds
CF	Luis Terrero	Preston Wilson	J.D. Drew		Dave Roberts	Marquis Grissom
RF	Shawn Green	Dustin Mohr	Milton Bradley	Brian Giles	Moises Alou
IF 	Alex Cintron 	Luis Gonzalez 	Antonio Perez 	Geoff Blum 	Pedro Feliz 
IF 	Scott Hairston 	Desi Relaford	Olmedo Saenz 	Eric Young 	Deivi Cruz 
OF 	Robby Hammock	Jorge Piedra 	Ricky Ledee	Xavier Nady 	Michael Tucker 
OF 	Q. McCracken 	Brad Hawpe		Jason Grabowski 	Mark Sweeney 	Todd Linden 
C 	Kelly Stinnett	Charles Johnson	Paul Bako 		Miguel Ojeda	Yorvit Torrealba 
SP	Javier Vazquez	Joe Kennedy	Odalis Perez	Jake Peavy		Jason Schmidt
SP	Brandon Webb	Jason Jennings	Derek Lowe		Woody Williams	Noah Lowry
SP	Russ Ortiz		Jeff Francis	Brad Penny		Brian Lawrence	Kirk Rueter
SP	Shawn Estes	Jamey Wright	Jeff Weaver	Adam Eaton		Brett Tomko
SP	Casey Fossum	Shawn Chacon	Kazuhisa Ishii	Darrell May	Jerome Williams
RP	O. Villarreal	Marcos Carvajal	Elmer Dessens	Blaine Neal	Jesse Foppert
RP	Randy Choate	Javier Lopez	G. Carrara		Dennys Reyes	Jason Christiansen
RP	Brian Bruney	Scott Dohmann	Duaner Sanchez	Chris Hammond	Matt Herges
RP	Mike Koplove	Brian Fuentes	Wilson Alvarez	Scott Linebrink	Scott Eyre
RP	Jose Valverde	Aaron Taylor	Yhency Brazoban	Akinori Otsuka	Jim Brower
Closer	Greg Aquino	Chin-hui Tsao	Eric Gagne		Trevor Hoffman	Armando Benitez
25th	Matt Kata		Allan Simpson 	D.J. Houlton 	Rudy Seanez 	Tony Torcato

Lurking...

Arizona: C Chris Snyder, IF Jerry Gil, OF Josh Kroeger, P Jason Bulger, P Lance Cormier, P Edgar Gonzalez, P Mike Gosling, P Brad Halsey, P Brandon Lyon, P Dustin Nippert, P Adam Peterson, P Phil Stockman
Colorado: C Todd Greene, IF Alfredo Amezaga, IF Greg Norton, IF Ryan Shealy, IF Andy Tracy, OF Choo Freeman, OF Jeff Salazar, P Aaron Cook, P Tim Drew, P Eddie Gaillard, P Javier Lopez, P Matthew Merricks, P Darren Oliver, P Ryan Speier, P Jason Young
Los Angeles: C Mike Rose, C Dioner Navarro, IF Brian Myrow, OF Jason Repko, OF Cody Ross, P Frank Brooks, P Edwin Jackson
San Diego: C Humberto Quintero, IF Tagg Bozied, IF J.J. Furmaniak, OF Freddy Guzman, OF Jon Knott, P Brad Baker, P Justin Germano, P Chris Oxspring, P Tim Stauffer
San Francisco: C Justin Knoedler, IF Lance Niekro, P David Aardsma, P Kevin Correia, P Wayne Franklin, P Brad Hennessey, P Tyler Walker

Some brief comments ...

Yes, with all the elective surgery it performed, Arizona should look better this season - in a Nicolette Sheridan kind of way. (I’m not a fan of that show, but could you find a desperate housewife for each team in the division? San Diego as hot but misstep-prone Eva Longoria? The Dodgers as Teri Hatcher - the ditzy lead? But Felicity Huffman and Marcia Cross as the Rockies or the Giants? Nah - doesn't work.) Anyway, for a good many games, the Diamondbacks will have a nice 3-4-5 in Killer Gees Gonzalez, Glaus and Green. Tracy is a promising young player who will get his shot. Vazquez and Webb are due for rebounds - heck, just about everyone on the team is. But the team has too many day players and not enough actors of substance.

Colorado has promising starting pitchers in Kennedy, Jennings and Francis, with Aaron Cook hopefully on the mend. The Rockies also seem to have made a solid effort to rebuild their bullpen, despite losing Steve Reed, and will be hoping that at least one if not two Rule 5 draftees, Carvajal and Merricks, can phenomenize. Helton is a rock, and Closser, Atkins and Holliday are among their young players with potential. This is probably not the year for Colorado, but the Rockies suddenly strike me as a team that might begin rising in 2006.

The biggest weakness for the Dodgers, outside of the mystery that is their catching, might be their bench. Antonio Perez is promising but untested. The beloved Saenz will be good against lefties off the bench, but is hopeless in the field. Grabowski had a half-season slump. Bako is a zero at the plate. Perhaps hopes can be higher for Ledee, but not all that much. The Dodgers don’t seem that prepared to withstand a significant injury right now. On the other hand (or as an alien would say, on the other head), the lineup should be solid in seven spots if the Valentin-Perez platoon works out. (File this away: Out of eight Dodger lineup slots, 6 1/2 are below the age of 30.) They have the division’s best bullpen and the best starting four on the mound. Give me whomever you think the Dodger No. 4 is - Weaver, Penny, Lowe or Odalis Perez, and I’ll take him over his counterpart with the Sans.

In case you haven’t noticed, San Diego righthander Peavy is a star in the making. Quietly in 2004, at age 23, he had an ERA of 2.27 and 173 strikeouts in 166 1/3 innings. He should be the ace of the division this year. On the other hand, if you still have misgivings about the Dodger pitching, you must have them as well about the inconsistent Williams, Lawrence and Eaton. The Padres’ bullpen looks great at closing out games but iffy in middle relief. The starting eight have a nice mix, but Giles (remember when he was a kid? He’s 33 already!), Klesko and Nevin might not be aging well. The bench looks decent.

Another respectable bench is in San Francisco - but boy, are the Giants going to need it. For all the grief J.D. Drew is getting, there isn’t a player in the San Francisco starting eight that you can lock in for 140 games this season. (Bonds led the team with 147 in 2004, while Vizquel played 148 in Cleveland.) And here's a bold prediction: Dodgers catchers will outhit Giant catchers this year. Meanwhile, San Francisco has shored up its bullpen and has apparent depth in the starting rotation, though Rueter’s longtime magic is running out (56 strikeouts, 21 home runs allowed) and Tomko’s short-time magic may be just that.. Outside of Schmidt, it is not a big strikeout staff at all: 316 strikeouts among the other four pitchers in 605 2/3 innings.

Do you know who will win the division? I don't. All the teams have vulnerabilities. Sideline Penny, Schmidt and Peavy (all of whom were disabled in 2004) with injuries, and suddenly no one is a lock to win 90 games. At this time last year, most of the world considered Arizona a contender, and look what happened. We'll know more once Spring Training begins, but once more, the NL West could turn on what payoff teams can get from their midseason moves.

Contract terms for Cesar Izturis, courtesy of Ken Gurnick at MLB.com:

Guarantees ($9.9 million)
2005: $2.35 million ($2.05 million in salary, $300,000 signing bonus)
2006: $3.1 million
2007: $4.15 million
2008: $300,000 (if team buys out the contract)

Possibles ($6.15 million)
2005: $150,000 (incentive clause for Gold Glove)
2006: $150,000 (incentive clause for Gold Glove)
2007: $150,000 (incentive clause for Gold Glove)
2008: $5.7 million (5.55 million team option on top of buyout, $150,000 incentive clause for Gold Glove)

Just for comparison, Omar Vizquel is guaranteed $12.25 million from San Francisco over the next three years. Vizquel turns 38 in April and is losing range in the field, as well as whatever offensive advantage he had over Izturis.

OPS+ (100 is average, courtesy of Baseball-Reference.com)
2002: Vizquel 100, Izturis 52
2003: Vizquel 80, Izturis 61
2004: Vizquel 95, Izturis 88

Can we come up for air now?

With most of the Dodger offseason moves completed - though there are no guarantees that this is the end - Jay Jaffe, who writes about baseball for his site, The Futility Infielder, as well as Baseball Prospectus, grabbed a nearby seat at the online pub so that the two of us could talk Dodgers.

What we realized is that 1) nearly three hours of instant messaging wasn't enough to cover the Dodger offseason and 2) it would still probably be plenty for anyone who was going to read this. So we decided to quit and publish while we were ahead. Part 1 of our chat appears here, and Part 2 appears at Jay's site. So come on and ease on down, ease on down ...

Jon: I'm trying to think of a clever way to start this ...

Jay: Ha ha ... "So, how about that Derek Lowe contract?"

Jon: The saying of the future. "How 'bout those Mets?" becomes "How 'bout that Lowetract?" Well, I'll bite.

In a nutshell, I was against signing Lowe at the outset of the offseason, I'm willing to believe that Paul DePodesta saw something that I didn't see initially, but in the wildest best-case scenario, I can't see the justification for risking four years at $36 million on Lowe. I have faith in DePodesta and feel he might be vindicated, but I wouldn't have done it for Lowe no matter what I discovered.

Jay: The concept of bringing him to the Dodgers is sound - Lowe was unlucky last year and isn't nearly so bad as his stats would suggest. As an extreme groundball pitcher who doesn't allow a lot of homers, he ought to do well in Dodger Stadium.

That said, this is a bad contract. The fact that it's backloaded a bit gives the Dodgers an opportunity to see if they can pawn him off after he mysteriously remembers how to win 15 games, but... I think this is a gamble that at best, they can wind up paying somebody a few extra mil to take him off their hands halfway through.

Jon: The thing about DePodesta for me is, even if I can see the logic in his moves, there are some in which I think the risk/reward ratio is too high.

Jay: I feel like DePo scrimped and saved all winter to cut himself the slack to do something a bit risky, and instead he bought Xt'Tapalatakettle (the big ugly head that Monty Burns gives the Simpson family).

Jon: Yeah, well, Monty Burns is probably more like a George Steinbrenner than a DePodesta. Perhaps DePo's idol will be of more value.

Jay: Frank McCourt isn't quite the Monty Burns character. Miserly and wealthy, but not obscenely miserly, and probably not as malevolent.

Anyway, most of DePo's moves have been sound. This one is off the reservation even given the fact that they can expect Lowe to be a League Average Inning Muncher (LAIM) instead of the least popular man in Massachusetts from April-September 2004.

Jon: Lowe will be earning eight figures in the fourth year of his contract, in his mid-30s. That's a big matzoball.

Jay: I mean, it's fine to get yourself an inning muncher when a week ago the Dodgers were looking at Edwin Jackson, Elmer Dessens and Wilson Alvarez as 3/5 of their projected rotation. But to overpay for what amounts to another Jeff Weaver, in terms of a performance niche, by a factor of 2-3x is just silly.

Jon: I agree.

Jay: As an aside, I've really started noticing the good, the bad, and the ugly about the L.A. Times coverage of L.A. since I took the Dodgers' Prospectus Triple Play beat on Baseball Prospectus. I liked much of Tim Brown's latest piece but found myself still disagreeing with a good amount of it.

Jon: I disagreed with some of it too, but I felt his approach, from the Times' standpoint, was so fresh. In a sense, I didn't feel I had to agree with it all, because at its core, the article was open-minded, which the columnists typically have not been.

Jay: I agree with you - I didn't mind disagreeing with some of the nits that could have been picked because the main thrust, that one win in October wasn't worth a bunch of stupid decisions to preserve the core of that team at all costs, was right on.

As for the L.A. Times in general, I can't think of a single NY writer as odious as either Bill Plaschke or T.J. Simers ... except for Mike Lupica on his bad hair days.

Jon: Plaschke and Simers were both better as beat writers. They're good reporters, and they had to rein it in a little bit, which was good.

Jay: Judging from their output over the past year, time has clearly passed them by. These guys beat DePodesta like a rented backup catcher and can't even acknowledge the fact that hey, they actually won something, in stark contrast to the preceding seven seasons.

Jon: Simers, I think I've figured out. Nothing less than unadulterated, unmitigated success impresses him - most recently represented in Los Angeles by USC football. Everything is black and white - and if you're not the best, you deserve ridicule. With some occasional exceptions made for honesty - such as when Milton Bradley had a forthright discussion with him. In a sense, I can even see where Simers comes from - but it's just way too cutthroat and nasty an approach for me. Ultimately, I think his columns are poisonous.

Plaschke simply is not governed by past opinions in his columns, not governed by anything but what he feels in that moment. And he's not the best logician.

Jay: Simers would probably play better in NY.

Plaschke would probably play better in some country where the concept of the two-sentence paragraph had yet to be introduced.

Jon: Okay, I'm going to speak up in defense of Plaschke on that one.

Jay: Knock yerself out.

Jon: For one thing, I don't think the one-line paragraph is inherently evil. And I think if you counted them up, he doesn't do it nearly as often as his rep indicates. I could be wrong.

Jay: Just pulled up his latest article and five of his first seven grafs are one sentence. That's just lazy.

Jon: I guess I'd just say that it's the least of my worries. He can write haiku for me if he makes sense doing it.

Jay: It's like nails on a blackboard to me. Unless it's done with extreme care, it's the sign of an utterly vapid line of reasoning, one that can't even find a sentence to support it.

Jon: Well.

The sentence might be in the next paragraph.

I think.

Or maybe the one after ...

... that.

Jay: Here's what I think.

He can't be bothered.

Like high-powered magnets, his thoughts are too weighty to put side by side.

Deal with it.

Jon: Hey, that's good stuff!

Jay: I could do his job without wearing more than a bathrobe and a hangover.

Jon: Don't we?

Jay: Oops, I've revealed too much ;-)

Jon: Back to the team?

Jay: Sure.

Jon: Before we give away all our nasty secrets?

Jay: Right.

Jon: I want to relate the Lowe contract to the Paul Lo Duca trade. I'm generally pro-DePodesta but I'm gonna get some of my misgivings out of the way first.

Lo Duca-Guillermo Mota for Hee Seop Choi-Brad Penny - this was a sound trade in terms of value. But I don't think the potential increase in value was large. Meanwhile, by combining this trade with the Steve Finley pickup, he redistributed the Dodger assets oddly. Five OF/1B, zero catchers. To me, that's a significant risk to get the reward he's looking for.

Now, of course, Finley worked out superbly, so perhaps it's good that he had a surplus there. Insurance. And although the Dodger catchers didn't hit down the stretch, neither did Lo Duca. If Penny doesn't come down with to me (although some would disagree) a freak injury, the trade is a huge success. So there is part of me that wants to give DePodesta some slack even when I don't automatically see the wisdom.

Lowe is really testing that for me, but I'm not gonna lose sleep over it.

Jay: The Lo Duca deal should have worked out better on the field. Off the field, it gave them a lot more flexibility this winter, which is I think what his true priority was.

I mean, there's no reason to think, based on his minor league track record and his previous year in the bigs, that Dave Ross struggles to get across the Mendoza Line. There's no reason to think that given enough playing time, Hee Seop Choi can't live up to what he did in FLA. And I don't think Penny's injury could have been predicted either.

I do like some of what I saw out of DePo in the aftermath. The promotion of Yhency Brazoban to Mota's role was sheer brilliance that spoke volumes about the organization's capabilities for scouting and instruction, especially when contrasted with the Yankees. The Finley deal was a decent one that made him look smart, and ain't it funny that they're getting an even better catching prospect back from the Snakes now.

Jon: I agree, and I think your point about Ross is well taken. And I should add that I was completely not enamored with acquiring Finley.

Jay: The Finley wasn't overwhelmingly necessary in that they had a competent centerfielder in Milton Bradley, and that Finley's not an especially good hitter due to his low OBP. But it certainly gave them an experienced player who'd been through his share of races before, and that may have helped in its own small way.

But let's face it, the walkoff, get-off-my-property-and-away-from-my-division-title grand slam - against the Giants, no less - makes everybody look smart.

Jon: So again, not that Paul's a saint, but I don't think he can be easily dismissed. Be skeptical all you want, but don't dismiss him.

Jay: Agreed, DePodesta is hardly infallible, and many of his moves take time to unfold, time that the instahacks clearly aren't willing to grant him. But he's clearly about the process, and if the process is sound, the results have a much better chance not only of turning out well, but of being sustainable to insure future improvement.

Jon: So on that note, having conceded he's probably smarter than me, I'm gonna get my third and I think final disagreement of DePodesta out of the way: Adrian Beltre was worth going after harder. Even if he tapers in 2005, I think the next five years from Beltre will be outstanding.

Jay: While I don't dismiss the possibility that Beltre might be outstanding over the next five years, the investment in J.D. Drew is a much sounder one.

1) He has a consistently solid and nearly outstanding track record as a hitter, with a ton more plate discipline than Beltre.

2) He's cheaper than Beltre would have been.

3) The out in his contract after two years shouldn't hurt the Dodgers at all. If he performs so well that he'd rather chance the market at 30 and toss 3/$33, hey, DePodesta's not going to stop him and I probably wouldn't either.

Jon: I will say the escape clause doesn't bother me either, and if it helped bring Drew in, great. If Drew has two great years with the Dodgers and then they suddenly have $30-plus million to spend, life is good. Once you're willing to go five years on Drew - that's the big decision - the escape clause is ancillary.

I do think that Beltre being a great-fielding third-baseman, plus the possibility so easily dismissed by so many - that at age 26-27, Beltre might even be better than he was in 2004 - makes him the better pick, even at more dollars.

Jay: I think it's virtually impossible for Beltre to improve on what he accomplished last year. Some players peak a couple years early, there's no denying it, and frankly I think Beltre might be one of them.

That said, as an excellent 3B in the field, he's got a bit more inherent value than Drew, assuming the latter plays a corner position either next year or eventually once he loses a bit of speed.

Jon: Well, you know, a 20 percent decline in HR next season still leaves Beltre at about 40. Plus, his walks figure to go up. That's a fabulous player.

Jay: Yeah, but we're also talking about a guy who for the previous three years - years that have their caveats, sure sure - who struggled to keep his OBP above .300 and who suddenly gained an extra .200 of SLG. Gains like those have "regress" written all over them.

Jon: I hear it. But 62 HR since August 1, 2003. When does the guy get some credit for being more than a flash in the pan?

To read Part 2, follow this link to The Futility Infielder ...

Thirteen months ago, 28-year-old Emily Christy was an intern for the Vero Beach Dodgers.

Thursday, she became their general manager.

The 28-year-old Christy, who rose quickly to become assistant general manager in 2004, got the promotion and will replace Trevor Gooby, who is now the Director of Florida Operations for the Pittsburgh Pirates.

"I guess timing is everything," Christy told Dodger Thoughts today. "I've worked hard and tried to maximize every opportunity that the Dodgers have given me to learn and grow as a baseball professional. However, if you had told me six months ago that I'd be sitting in the GM chair, I would have said you were crazy."

Even earlier this week, Christy said she did not think she would get the nod. But now that it has come through, she has plenty to offer.

"Given the particular time of year when my GM career is beginning, I'd say the most important strengths that I can offer in this role are flexibility and having a fresh energy," Christy said. "With Spring Training just around the corner, it's extremely busy and new challenges arise every day. Fortunately, there is a great staff already in place here in Vero, and I like nothing more than being challenged. With our combined efforts and some good weather, we're looking forward to an exciting and successful season."

The good weather is going to be a key. Gooby and Christy had to help Vero Beach recover from last year's onslaught of hurricanes in Florida. Hopefully, there will be clear skies ahead for the Dodgers' new Class A general manager.

Steve Henson of the Times has more about the increasing importance of women in the Dodger organization.

Raul Mondesi is like Darryl Strawberry without the drugs.

From The Associated Press:

Raul Mondesi said he has agreed to terms with the Atlanta Braves on a one-year contract.

"He has not signed with us, and we don't have plans for an announcement today.''

The Dodger Thoughts Mondesi Chronicles
aka
The Dodger Thoughts Strange Obsession with Mondesi

July 11, 2003: Ill-Winds on the Mondesi Front
July 30, 2003: The Lost Cause Marches On
February 11, 2004: Mondesi Forced To Pay 1 Percent of Career Earnings
February 11, 2004: The Youth Market
February 26, 2004: Mondesi Earnings Dispute Drags on
April 16, 2004: Mondesi Salary Withheld
May 10, 2004: Mondesi Out for Season
May 26, 2004: First Mondesi - Then Gagne?

Update: Raul Tavares writes that others and I shouldn't have been so quick to assume that Mondesi's story was the faulty one. And Tavares is right. I still think it's been a strange couple of years for Mondesi, which is all my lead really tried to point out, but I have to cop to not considering that it was the Braves spokesman who was out of the loop, rather than Mondesi being loopy.

Baseball cards and slapping five are the subjects of Alex Belth's great post this morning at Bronx Banter. Here's my comment.

I collected cards haphazardly as a kid - very organically, no designs on the future (although I've always been a packrat and have trouble throwing anything out). I even liked the gum. I know it was cardboard, but I liked it.

When I was about 10, in 1977 or thereabouts, for my birthday I got a vintage gumball machine that gave out a gumball and a baseball card in exchange for one penny. The machine came stacked with probably 300 baseball cards, all from the 1960s. It was an INCREDIBLE gift, certainly one of my best ever. I still have it, though I put marbles in where the gumballs go because it was gettin' kind of nasty.

The rest of my card collection (which is mainly baseball cards from the 1960s and 1970s that my brother and I saved, along with some football and basketball) is in what was once one of those huge containers of ice cream you see embedded in a Baskin Robbins/31 Flavors shop - together with an Oshman's Sporting Goods plastic bag filled with ticket stubs that I collected from the 1970s and 1980s. Again, it was very much the unstrategic, vacuum cleaner approach: I can remember one night, after a UCLA basketball game at Pauley Pavilion, walking through the stands and picking up every ticket stub that was left on the ground. But there is some real good stuff in there as well, tickets from big games, playoff tickets for games that were never played, tickets that were unused. Do those have any value? No idea.

As for slapping five (aka the low five) vs. the high five, I've written about it before: "Nearing its 30th birthday, the high five has seen disco come and go, and come and go. It has seen Charlie’s Angels both as television series and movie. In the history of the western world, what hand greetings, outside of the handshake, have stood the test of time better than the high five?"

There was an article in the Times a few months ago - I have no hope of finding it - about how the word "cool" has remained in style for decades, while other words such as "groovy" went from hip to, well, decidedly uncool in a much smaller span. The high five appears to be a blood brother of "cool."

But I can remember how new and different the high five was. I can remember being on the playground in third grade during recess and slapping five while imitating the guys on Welcome Back, Kotter. The change to the high five was like when I was a couple years younger and learning to dribble a basketball with one hand instead of two, or when I had to get used to the "Pac-10" instead of the "Pac-8."

The new is completely strange, until the old is completely strange.

What are your thoughts and memories? (And some of you big-name lurkers out there - don't be shy about jumping in.)

Dodger general manager Paul DePodesta, who recently has demurred on Jeff Kent's fielding qualifications, became more of an advocate today in Ken Gurnick's MLB.com piece today. Hee Seop Choi, too.

"I think we had possibly the best defense last year and I still think we're well above average," he said. "We have three center fielders [J.D. Drew, Milton Bradley and Jayson Werth] roaming the outfield. In Jose Valentin, we have a shortstop at third. We have a Gold Glove shortstop [Cesar Izturis]. Our people believe Hee-Seop Choi will be above average at first.

"We have Jeff Kent at second instead of Alex Cora. I don't think Kent is getting his due. He made fewer errors than Cora and his range factor is almost identical. And we will be very, very strong behind the plate [David Ross and Paul Bako]. I still think we have one of the best defenses in the game."

We also learn that Derek Lowe will earn $7.5 million of his $36 million contract this season.

Meanwhile, Paul Lo Duca is getting $18 million over three years from Florida. Like many contracts, it looks good for the employers for the first year, when he takes in only $4.25 million, but a lot worse when he gets $13.75 million over the next two, when he'll be 34 and 35 years old.

Tim Brown. Just about pitch-perfect. Again.

Not everyone bought into the last column of his I cited, and perhaps not everyone will buy into this one. I don't even agree with the latest piece 100 percent - but the vast majority of it that I do agree with is so right on.

If you don't think this is progress at the Times, ya need help!

Mitchel Lichtman, known to readers of Baseball Primer as MGL, is one of that site's most popular and respected commentators. Lichtman has been doing sabermetric research and analysis for 16 years, and is currently a part-time statistical analyst for the St. Louis Cardinals. He has a degree in mathematics and psychology from Cornell University and a law degree (J.D.) from the University of Nevada.

Dodger Thoughts recently asked Lichtman to assess the Dodgers' offseason reconstruction, and he was kind enough to put on his hard hat and run the inspection. Here are his answers:

1) Flashback to October: the Dodger season has just ended. Name the most important "do" and/or "don't" for Paul DePodesta.
If you mean in terms of trades and acquisitions, the do's are: Dump Green and his ridiculous salary, find a permanent defensive position for Werth, teach Jackson how to pitch or trade him, plan on cordially and gracefully letting Beltre, Lima and Finley go (because the former will be overpaid and the latter two have no value), figure out how to get Alvarez into the rotation, get Weaver to stop fidgeting so much on the mound and act like he cares, try to resign Hernandez and Bradley (for cheap), get Penny healthy, replace Mota with another good short reliever, pitch Gagne more, figure out why Dessens sucks as a starter, try and trade Ishii to a dumb team, touting his good W-L totals and his 2003 sub-4 ERA, throw a going away party for Nomo, play Choi full-time at first, and try and be a little more popular with the fans and the media - in no particular order. That also seems to answer most of the "don'ts."

2) Back to the present, what has been DePodesta's strongest offseason move to date and what has been his weakest?
Hmmm… Valentin was a steal, although I'd much rather see him at SS than at third. A platoon of Valentin and Hernandez (at SS) would have been lights out, sabermetrically speaking. Drew is one of the few high profile players who are worth their contracts. He is a top 10 player and only a top 10 player is worth 10 mil a year or more. I think the health concerns with Drew have been overstated. I don't particularly like long-term contracts, but one, sometimes you have no choice, and two, people forget that salaries in baseball have risen 12% a year for the last 16 years, and I see no reason why that should not continue. The Kent contract is not a bad one.

The weakest (and most controversial) move by far, and that is an understatement, is Lowe's signing. Funny I thought he was going to be underrated (since he had an unlucky regular season in '04) and able to be had for a bargain. I don't know what happened. Lowe should benefit from a very good Dodger IF defense. There is also some evidence that groundball pitchers do anomalously well in Chavez (and Fenway, BTW); I am pretty sure that Depo knows this. I have a hard time believing that even if true (that Lowe will benefit greatly from Chavez), it makes Lowe worth anywhere near 9 mil a year for four years. If Lowe even has a little bit of bad luck or a severe injury, Depo is setting himself up for a crucifixion.

3) For many people, the offseason priority was retaining Adrian Beltre. For me personally, his transformation seemed completely legitimate. What is the range of expectation for Beltre's performance in 2005, and what should the Dodgers have been willing to spend on him?
I don't know, or care too much about, the "range of expectation" for anyone. The "confidence interval" around a player projection, in my opinion, is almost wholly based on the amount of historical data we have on that player, and has nothing to do with the his range of performance in the past. In other words, all players with the same amount of career playing time have around the same range or interval of expected performance surrounding their mean or median projection. It is really not important in terms of valuing a player either, which is why I don't pay much attention to how certain I am of a player's projection. It's not like we are trading options, where volatility is important.

I also don't believe in breakout years or "transformations" as you put it. Not that players don't change their true levels of performance (including having breakout years), sometimes even drastically, from time to time. It's just that it is very difficult to identify a real change among all the random fluctuation (noise) in a player's stats. A scout can help with that of course. This is true of lots of things in baseball.

I (and most other forecasters I think) expect Beltre's offensive performance next year and beyond to be somewhere in between last year and prior years, with more of an emphasis on last year of course. His defense appears to be great. One of the best. He has no other above average peripherals, by the way. My observation (which I don't particularly trust) of Beltre this year was that pitchers starting pitching him away too much, he adjusted, and crushed the mistakes. I think he will and should be pitched inside more often this year. This is the sort of cat and mouse game (game theory) you sometimes see between pitchers and catchers.

He is worth around 10 mil per in a short or long-term contract, about the same as Drew. Seattle's contract of five years/64 mil is high. I would not have signed Beltre for that much. On the other hand, it is usually easier to replace a corner OF'er than a 3B'man. So between the Drew and Beltre contracts (assuming that the Dodgers could have gotten him for around the same money), it would have been close if I were the Dodgers.

4) When Beltre went to Seattle, did the Dodgers over-commit in their contract for J.D. Drew?

No, I don't think so. I already addressed that.

5) Jeff Kent next. First, talk about what we might expect from him offensively as he goes from Houston to Los Angeles (and parenthetically, perhaps, how much of a change to expect from Dodger Stadium now that the foul territory is being reduced).

There are lots of people who know more about that than I, and the answers are sort of obvious anyway. Less foul territory equals fewer foul outs equals more of everything else.

Who cares what Chavez will do to Kent's stats? All the Dodger opponent hitters at home will suffer the same effect on their stats, right? Sure some players may benefit more or less from a stadium than other players, but one, it is usually de minimus, and two, we don't have a great understanding of how that works anyway. That is one of the uncharted territories in sabermetrics, although I am sure that some teams are already working on it (see comments above on Lowe).

Dodger Stadium is fairly small and the average temperature is fairly warm. It does not suppress home runs. It increases foul outs (and therefore increases everything else), and decreases doubles and triples because of the configuration of the foul territory and the smooth outfield dimensions (no nooks or crannies). Kent is a fly ball hitter, so his doubles and triples should not be suppressed as much as the average hitter. Maybe that's one reason they acquired him. We still should see his overall stats decline, as compared to Houston's Minute Maid Park, which inflates almost everything.

6) A big topic of conversation has been about Kent's defense. Alex Cora simply dazzled us at second base, yet you have statistics that show that Kent may be as good or better?
Yup. Kent had a phenomenal UZR in 2004, +20 per 150 defensive games. Before that, his UZR was a few runs above average per year. So yes, using UZR alone, he projects to be a well-above average defensive second baseman. It appears that Depo does not disagree with that assessment. He probably uses a similar defensive rating system.

Kent is not generally considered a good defender, although I have heard a few knowledgeable people say that his instincts and positioning are underrated. In Tango's excellent Fan Scouting Report, the respondents have Kent rated quite low (and Cora high) in all categories. Who knows? UZR is not the gospel. All things considered, my best guess is that he is around average. For Dodger fans, let's hope that UZR is right!

Cora? Dazzle schmazzle! Seriously, UZR does not rate Cora very well. Interestingly, his UZR was much better as a SS in 2000 and 2001. It should be the other way around. Of course, that could just be luck (either good luck as a SS or bad luck as a 2B'man). How a player "looks" on defense can be misleading of course. In fact, players who make the spectacular looking (dazzling) plays are often overrated and vice versa. For example, there is a certain GG fielder whose first name is Der… Never mind.

7) Beltre gets replaced at third, for now at least, by a platoon of Jose Valentin and Antonio Perez. Is this adequate?
Sure. Not as good as Beltre of course. No one would be, other than Rolen or Chavez. But Valentin is a decent hitter overall, even better versus righties. He was an excellent defensive SS (again, according to UZR), so we expect him to be even better at third. Perez projects to be a decent hitter as well (from his MLE's and limited major league experience). I have no idea about his defense. As I said, I would have preferred to see Valentin platoon at SS, but the third base situation should be fine. Fans may not like it too much though, as apparently Valentin's excellent defense is not apparent to the naked eye. Most fans want offense, offense, and more offense.

8) Evaluate the Shawn Green trade.
Excellent trade. Green is most likely an aging, declining hitter (despite his "resurgent" second half last year), who does not play defense very well at any position (no positive peripherals either). He is barely an above average player anymore at either first or in the OF. He is only worth 3-4 mil per year. Didn't the Dodgers save 6 or 8 mil by trading him and subsidizing his contract? That was a great move by Depo; he completely suckered the D-Backs. And they got a good prospect in Navarro to boot! Catching prospects who can hit are like gold, by the way.

9) What would you do now about the Dodger catching situation?
I would have pursued A.J. whatever his last name is. He was signed for a song. Matheny may have been an option. Of course, his value is only in his defense. Bako is pretty worthless, even in a platoon, but they are paying him barely over the minimum. Ross is not as bad as most people think. He did not hit well last year, but he was not at all terrible (in linear weights) for a catcher. His MLE's (Major League Equivalent Averages) in the minors were not bad at all. In fact, quite good for a catcher. Still, a Ross/Bako platoon is a pretty generic barely over replacement-level solution. There really are no other catchers available, however. Absent signing A.J., I would probably do the same thing as the Dodgers are doing now. Keep the hole and wait and see if and when Navarro is ready. And as I said, Ross could surprise. I would even consider playing him full-time.

10) Jim Tracy's starting lineup could be something like: Cesar Izturis, Jayson Werth, J.D. Drew, Jeff Kent, Milton Bradley, Jose Valentin, Hee Seop Choi, Dave Ross. Overall, what's your impression?
It is good, not great, overall. Excellent defense all the way around, other than Choi. Should be one of the best defenses in baseball. The offense is much improved over the past few years. Not quite the caliber of the Cardinals, or the Giants, with Bonds in the lineup of course, or even Atlanta or Philly. And certainly nowhere near that of the Yankees or Boston. I am not crazy about Izturis, and they have a dearth of superstar quality hitters. Only Drew comes close (but not quite). All great hitting teams have at least one and usually two or three superstar or near-superstar level hitters. Beyond Drew, their best hitter is, believe it or not, Choi (Werth, Kent, and Bradley are close thirds). In other words, there is plenty of room for improvement in the future, especially with a large payroll.

12) Even with the return of Odalis Perez returns, the starting pitching appears a bit threadbare. Jeff Weaver is the most durable starter. Perez misses a few starts here in there. Kazuhisa Ishii is inconsistent. Edwin Jackson has potential but some growing on the mound up to do. Brad Penny - who knows? Though Elmer Dessens and Wilson Alvarez can spot start, and help may come from the minors (such as Jackson provided in 2003), should fans be worried the staff will be battered? (Note: this question was asked before the Derek Lowe signing, but answered after the signing.)

I don't know about "battered", but yes, the rotation is suspect. Perez is their best pitcher (actually Alvarez is, but he does not appear to be able to start much or for long), Weaver is OK, so is Lowe, Ishii is terrible, Penny is a question mark, and Jackson has a long way to go, and has not progressed so far. If Penny is healthy (he was very good when he was) and Lowe greatly benefits from Chavez and the Dodger defense, then things will look a lot rosier for Dodger fans.

13) Ultimately, what do you see as the common thread in DePodesta's maneuvers?
Getting the best possible players he can (in marginal value) with the considerable money he has to spend, using excellent sabermetric evaluation techniques. Dodger fans are lucky to have who I consider one of the best GM's in the game. Sabermetric and innovative GM + lots of money to spend = lots of wins!

14) Any thoughts about how the Dodgers will fare in 2005 - or too soon to say?
Not too soon, I don't think. They are probably pretty much done dealing. Given the quality of the division (not too good) and the quality of the brain trusts of the other teams in the division, save the Padres, although I haven't "run the numbers" yet for all the teams, I think that they will be a top contender, along with the Padres, in the division. I'm not just saying that to appease the fans on this site. The Giants may also contend again, but after Bonds retires, they are going to be in big trouble.

15) Any other insights about the team you'd like to add?
Nothing I can think of that hasn't been covered. Good luck to the Dodgers and best wishes to all the Dodger fans!

Joe Thurston, the career Dodger minor leaguer who couldn't make the leap into a starting role tailor-made for him at second base in 2003, and Henri Stanley, acquired in the Dave Roberts trade last summer, were designated for assignment Tuesday, according to Tony Jackson of the Daily News. They could return to the Dodger organization if they are not traded or claimed on waivers in the next 10 days.

"Another player will have to be moved off the now-full 40-man to make room for (Paul) Bako," Jackson adds. "(Dioner) Navarro took the spot vacated by Green."

Here's a piece I wrote about Thurston in March 2003, a piece that now belongs in a time capsule for its irrelevance - except perhaps for its overall point of giving young players a chance.

What I can’t understand is how you can talk sending to the minors a young guy who has a rough five weeks while advocating that the team build for the future.

If you really believe in constructing your team for the long term, you keep Joe Thurston on the roster. And if he starts the season hitting .189 and Bill Plaschke comes around to say that you’ve made a mistake - you’re ruining this guy’s confidence and you’ve lost solid-hitting veteran Terry Shumpert to boot - then you tell Plaschke, "Thank you kindly for your thoughts." And then you say emphatically that you believe in Joe Thurston, and that you have your best people working with him, and that you’re gonna give him a real chance, not one that expires in March.

Stanley didn't look like much for Roberts last summer (other than providing cost savings for the Dodgers and ultimately the granting of a World Series ring to Roberts). Of course, he's not too old to follow Roberts' career path.

Just felt like talking about Wilson Alvarez and the out-of-the-spotlight Dodger bullpen today.

Some carefully husked 2004 stats for Alvarez:

IP/ERA Category

14.0/2.57 April
29.1/3.68 May
10.1/5.23 June
30.2/2.93 July
20.0/7.65 August
14.1/3.14 September
2.0/0.00 October

70.1/3.20 Home
50.1/5.19 Away

76.1/4.95 As starter
44.1/2.44 As reliever

41.0/5.27 Day
79.2/3.39 Night

18.2/13.50 vs. Braves, Mets and Phillies
102.0/2.29 vs. others

OPS allowed vs. right-handed batters: .584 (333 AB)
OPS allowed vs. left-handed batters: .869 (114 AB)

Strikeouts: 102 in 120.2 innings. Walks: 31.

If Alvarez remains in the bullpen this season, odds are he will give the Dodgers some smothering performances - which no doubt will lead to calls for him to re-enter the rotation. And it should be said that Alvarez is not a lefty specialist in the Tom Martin/Jesse Orosco mode. You get more out of him if you let him face righties as well.

Note that outside of Eric Gagne, the Dodgers will have five or six other relievers earning a combined total of under $5 million. And all six have strong credentials as relievers. The weakest link would be Elmer Dessens, who pitched well in relief last season but has been inconsistent.

(Edwin Jackson will probably begin the season in the Los Angeles or Las Vegas starting rotation. If the Dodgers do keep a seventh reliever, look perhaps for another lefty in the Martin/Orosco mode. Anyone got Jesse's number, by the way?)

There could be other changes. Remember in 2003, Giovanni Carrara was considered a lock to make the staff after a solid 2002, only to be released before the end of Spring Training.

In any event, pitchers like Alvarez, Duaner Sanchez and Yhency Brazoban could once again combine with Gagne to provide a dandy Dodger bullpen, one that only requires six solid innings per game from a starting rotation that should be equipped to provide them regularly.

Tony Jackson of the Daily News gets the dates of payment for Odalis Perez's $4.5 million signing bonus: between November 2006 and November 2007. Yep, that's right. For 2005, Perez is taking a paycut from $5 million to $3 million.

Over the next two years of his contract, however, Perez will earn $19.5 million - this damage coming when the approximately $15 million owed to Shawn Green and Darren Dreifort is history.

Jackson also clarifies the additional $1 million in possible incentives Perez can earn: each year, $150,000 for pitching 185 innings, another $150,000 for pitching 200 innings, another $200,000 for pitching 215 innings.

In the past three seasons, Perez has pitched 222 1/3, 185 1/3 and 196 1/3 innings.

The 2005 Dodger payroll is now at about $88 million. Additional savings for 2005 could come soon, if we find that Derek Lowe's contract is also backloaded.

Meanwhile, Rob McMillin at 6-4-2 has information and analysis of the just-revealed escape clause in J.D. Drew's contract that allows him to opt out after the 2006 season.

Some might argue that everything in the following press conference quote from Odalis Perez, as recorded by John Nadel of The Associated Press, is wrong (yep, including the seemingly carefree putdown before the compliment).

"(Jeff) Kent is not a great fielding second baseman, but he can hit 30 home runs and drive in 100 runs," Perez said.

Right or wrong, Perez comes across as very excited about his new contract with the Dodgers - which is probably the main point. Smiles, everyone, smiles.

"(Jose) Valentin is the same way," Perez continued. "We might not have as good a defense, but we're going to score some runs. If they can score some runs, it doesn't matter."

Perhaps more pertinent than Perez's seat-of-the-pants statistical analysis is the fact that, according to Nadel, Perez has less in the seat of his pants. He has already dropped 10 pounds - and isn't stopping there.

"I might lose about 10 more," he said. "I'm working hard. I have a personal trainer. I'm doing whatever it takes to come to spring training in the best shape of my life."

In passing, Nadel adds (without elaboration) that Dodger general manager Paul DePodesta "indicated a catcher will probably be added to the roster."

Update: Ken Gurnick of MLB.com has details on Perez's contract, and they're significant with regards to the 2005 payroll.

2005: $3 million
2005-06: $4.5 million signing bonus*
2006: $7.25 million
2007: $7.75 million
2008: $9 million or a $1.5 million buyout.
Total commitment: $24 million

* Gurnick writes that the signing bonus is "paid after this year." It's unclear whether that would fall on the 2005 or 2006 budget, though one presumes 2005 based on Perez's salary for the year. That being said, the delay gives the Dodgers a little bit of extra flexibility in terms of timing future deals.

Gurnick has much more from DePodesta, including a comment that "DePodesta said he hopes to sign (Eric) Gagne to a multiyear deal and avoid arbitration."

Meanwhile, Nadel's write-thru indicates that the Dodgers have committed a roster slot to journeyman catcher Paul Bako with a $650,000 contract, plus another $100,000 in possible performance bonuses.

Without going into any detail, Bako cannot hit. Like Brent Mayne did, Bako does his non-hitting from the left side.

Nadel adds that in 2006 and in 2007, Perez can earn $150,000 for pitching 185 innings and another $150,000 if he reaches 200 innings.

At different times, Shawn Green could be great, he could be good, he could be tolerable, he could be frustrating, and he could be a downright nuisance.

If you're completely at ease with Green's departure, you're probably not valuing what he could have contributed below the cleanup spot this season for the Dodgers. If you can find no consolation at saying farewell, you're ignoring Green's declining speed with the bat, on the basepaths and in the field, and the probability of recurring shoulder problems reducing his effectiveness, despite his improvement as 2004 went on.

Six million Dodger dollars that would have gone to Green in 2005 will now go elsewhere in the Dodger organization. Ten million Dodger dollars will continue to find Green's pocket - but in exchange, the Dodgers will acquire four minor leaguers:

On the sidebar ...

Baseball Primer has a thoughtful discussion of rumored Dodger target Derek Lowe that is well worth your time.

While everyone is wondering about giving four years to this pitcher (or any pitcher), there are some interesting revelations - beyond what you already knew - about DePodesta and an emphasis on groundball pitchers and flyball hitters.

Note also in the Times this morning that, in addition to renewed momentum for a Shawn Green trade, the Dodgers hope to recoup approximately $8 million in insurance this year on Darren Dreifort's contract.

Update: With this piece, Tom Meagher at The Fourth Outfielder has completed his rapid journey to must-read status. Meagher has always had the analysis, but you might have been wondering if he had the writing chops, too. He does.

Oh, and by the way - today's Times mentions that the LAAoA (would you like to buy a vowel?) didn't know Vladimir Guerrero was playing in the Dominican Leagues until he injured his thumb December 26. Perhaps they should have been reading Raul Tavares' Dominican Players, which had this December 20 photograph of Guerrero taking batting practice for Licey and has been tracking him all winter.

Finally, a tremendous honor for All-Baseball.com's Rich Lederer of Rich's Weekend Baseball Beat and the retired Brian Gunn of Redbird Nation: Their piece on Jim Edmonds was named one of the top 10 sports columns of 2004 by The Wall Street Journal. Major congratulations!

Did he stay or did he go now?

Update: From Mark Gonzales of the Arizona Republic:

The Diamondbacks were still working past today's 10 a.m. (MST) deadline on a contract-extension plan that would land two-time All-Star right fielder Shawn Green from the Los Angeles Dodgers.

As of 9:45 a.m., agent Greg Genske was awaiting a telephone call from Diamondbacks officials and said no decision had been made on his client.

Update 2: He stays.

Update 3: Sample lineup vs. righties:

Izturis, SS (still wouldn't mind seeing him drop back down)
Bradley, LF
Drew, CF
Kent, 2B
Green, RF
Choi, 1B
Valentin, 3B
Ross, C

Sample lineup vs. lefties:

Izturis, SS
Werth, LF
Drew, CF
Kent, 2B
Bradley, RF
Green, 1B
A. Perez, 3B (maybe he ends up batting second)
Ross, C

Obviously, there are several different combinations.

Citing Robert Louis Stevenson as justification (with nary a mention of Arte Moreno), the Pittsburgh Pirates and Steelers blog Honest Wagner has changed its name (for now at least, as long as it keep its tongue in its chaw-filled cheek) to the Los Angeles Wagner of Honest.

This morning's newsy entry explores the controveries surrounding the Aramis Beltre, Jason Lo Duca and Craig Seop Choi transactions.

(The joke window on the Angels' name change is starting to close - but we're not quite there yet. So enjoy it while you still can!)

Jerry: (doing the voice) Good-bye Kramer.

George: I told you.

Name Change
by the Score Bard

Line 2 launches us to a whimsical place, but it is Line 6 that moves us beyond whimsy to genius.

Though the East Valley Tribune reports a snag in the negotiations between Shawn Green and Arizona, perhaps once again unlocking this locked deal, my hunch is that Green will go through that door.

On the other hand, this news, combined with the reports that Odalis Perez's return to the Dodgers is contingent on the savings from Green's departure, does raise some questions.

If Perez's return is dependent on Green's leaving, and Green stays, is there any hope for the Dodger rotation beyond a couple of miracle seasons from organizational soldiers or prospects? Is there a $950,000 pitcher like Jose Lima 2004 out there?

Maybe not.

If Green stays, the Dodgers retain a player who is certainly not worth $16 million, but who would certainly strengthen their lineup. He would once again give them considerable depth at the outfield/first-base positions, allowing Jim Tracy to mix in - as well as rest - Green, Jayson Werth, Milton Bradley, J.D. Drew and Hee Seop Choi, while a trade from the surplus remains a possibility. Can that compensate for the apparent pitching shortfall?

Maybe?

One thing I'd like to say about those who criticize Paul DePodesta for not having a plan is that the current situation illustrates that nothing ever goes according to plan, no matter how perfectly designed it is. You simply can't control everything. This does not excuse DePodesta from any poor decisions, should his decisions turn out that way. But the constant chanting of the plan mantra is way beside the point. Plan is the wrong word. A more appropriate concept would be "philosophy," and there is no doubting DePodesta has that.

In any case, there are benefits to Green staying and benefits to Green leaving - some more obviously short-term and some more obviously long-term. Histrionics will not be in order, no matter how this turns out.

P.S. Read The Fourth Outfielder for some deep analysis from the past two days, including how the Dodgers are stockpiling so many highly regarded prospects that by the time the next Rule 5 draft comes along, in about 11 months, there may well be more than the Dodgers can protect - meaning either that DePodesta will be cashing in some of those chips, or that he will need to maintain most Dodgers on short-term contracts in order to have roster spots to accomodate the prospects.

Following this morning's great Tim Brown column in the Times (and ensuing interesting dicussion), new Dodger beat writer Steve Henson knocks one for extra bases with a provocative piece on Paul DePodesta.

And yes, Henson smoothly gets at both the praise and criticism of DePodesta ...

And yes, The Fountainhead is back ...

Architect is a description the Harvard-educated DePodesta would find flattering because the fictional character he admires most is Howard Roark, the fiercely independent architect in Ayn Rand's 1943 novel, "The Fountainhead."

Fans alarmed at the wholesale shakeup of the Dodgers probably feel DePodesta is more interested in detonating dynamite than in drawing up the blueprint for a winning team. Not that he would be insulted — Roark too blew things up when he deemed it necessary.

Here, for me, is the toughest Roark to swallow.

DePodesta didn't return agent Scott Boras' phone call the day Beltre agreed to terms with the Seattle Mariners because Beltre, he of a monstrous 2004 season after six years of inconsistency, was not part of the plan.

To this day, this sounds oversimplistic to me - the idea that Beltre was not part of the plan. At a minimum, I can't believe he wasn't of part a plan - whether or not that became the ultimate plan. If that's the case, I disagree. But I really don't know if this should be taken at face value.

As a postscript, I'm wondering now how Roarkian I am with my approach to this site.

Here's the Milton Bradley press release; he and the Dodgers avoid arbitration with a one-year contract. Dodger Thoughts commenter Saul also says Peter Gammons is reporting that the Dodgers have resigned Odalis Perez. To be updated ...

Update: Bradley will get $2.5 million, according to Ken Gurnick of MLB.com, $500,000 less than my estimate. As for Perez, "the club," Gurnick writes, "denied reports that a deal had been struck with Perez, who went 7-6 with a 3.25 ERA in 31 games (all starts) for the Dodgers in 2004. But it is believed an announcement could come as soon as a proposed trade of (Shawn) Green to the Arizona Diamondbacks becomes official."

Update 2: I've taken a gamble that the Green and Perez transactions will happen, and incorporated them into my estimate of the 2005 Dodger player payroll that I posted on the sidebar.

Perez should be welcomed back - despite his postseason meltdown, which might or might not turn out to be a learning experience, he is a quality pitcher. While the dearth of free-agent alternatives no doubt increased his salary demands, his reported contract is not an obvious overpayment. A team with better starters could let him go by on the baggage carousel. A team like the Dodgers needed to make a grab - and Perez is a better piece of baggage to take a flyer on than many others. His contract is well in line with free-agent deals made days and weeks ago.

The team is already looking better, with Dessens moved into the bullpen where he belongs (at best). He and Wilson Alvarez can serve as sixth and seventh starting pitchers to back up the fragile rotation - not that the current rotation is in cement, yet.

The most obvious weakness remains catcher, but the team could simply use more overall strengthening at most spots. Payroll is now at approximately $80 million.

A few years back, Bill James put out a Page-a-Day calendar that was about the best and most interesting I had ever seen in that highly respected medium. Walter O'Malley - The Official Website has announced its own day-by-day calendar, and while the site is keeping its version online, it comes the closest (at least for Dodger fans) to duplicating the uniqueness of the King James calendar.

Let's catch up with some samples from the year to date:

January 1:

1958: A float called “The Big League” sponsored by the City of Los Angeles and representing Major League Baseball’s arrival to the Southland is included for the first time in the parade. Guests of Los Angeles County Supervisor Warren Dorn, the O’Malley family later attends the Rose Bowl game, sitting with current New York Yankee Manager Casey Stengel, as Ohio State defeats Oregon, 10-7. Stengel was also a former Brooklyn Dodger player and manager.

January 2:

1948: The Board of Directors, including Vice President and General Counsel Walter O’Malley, of the Brooklyn Dodgers execute an agreement to purchase the franchise rights, players and equipment for Brooklyn in the All-America Football Conference, with home games to be played at Ebbets Field. O’Malley also submitted a frequency modulation application for radio coverage of the football games.

January 3:

1962: Sportswriter Frank Finch of the Los Angeles Times, comments in The All-Sports News about his biggest thrill for 1961: "Outdrawing Walter O’Malley on the last card in a poker game in the Dodgertown (Vero Beach, Florida) press room was an unforgettable moment, but I guess my biggest thrill on the sports beat in 1961 came when Roger Maris hit his sixty-first home run." Finch’s statement concluded, "O'Malley won the next five hands."

January 4:

1955: Walter O’Malley writes a letter to broadcaster Vincent Scully stating, "John Johns (advertising agency executive) told me a few minutes ago that all negotiations with you, Connie (Desmond), and Andre (Baruch) have been completed and I am now free to resume ordinary social amenities. Why not come in some day and we will go to lunch, and at a later date, I have asked Connie to have you three join me also."

What can you say about a 32-year-old former Dodger whose contract was sold to Japan? That he was useful and occasionally brilliant? That he loved Mozart and Bach, the Beatles and playing seven positions?

Mariners Musings has the news of the next chapter in the career of Jolbert Cabrera, amid a larger post about Seattle's signing of shortstop Pokey Reese for something in the neighborhood of $2 million to sidekick Adrian Beltre.

"When a Japanese team approached the Mariners about Cabrera," writes Larry LaRue of the Tacoma News-Tribune, "it was clear they planned to offer him a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract – and the Mariners saw a way to save salary and make a popular player happier."

Not that it matters in Los Angeles, but does Reese's fielding ability make him a better player than Cabrera?

Age: Reese 31, Cabrera 32
2004 OPS+ (100 is average): Reese 46, Cabrera 87
2004 EQA (.260 is average): Reese .204, Cabrera .256
2004 VORP: Reese (-7.6), Cabrera 7.5

Wade Boggs and Ryne Sandberg, great guys from the Cheers era who were becoming too quickly forgotten, are elected to the Hall of Fame - happy about that. Of course, I can't have read Rich Lederer's stuff and be happy about Bert Blyleven's omission, and the lack of appreciation for Alan Trammell hits me wrong.

The ex-Dodger standings:

Player            Votes % (75% needed)
Tommy John         123 23.8 
Steve Garvey       106 20.5 
Darryl Strawberry    6  1.2 
Tom Candiotti        2  0.4 
Otis Nixon           0  0.0

The early days of Dodger Thoughts featured a short piece about Garvey. I have always liked Garvey, but the case is clearly against him for the Hall.

For lack of anything else to keep score of (other than that minor announcement they're making in Cooperstown this morning), here are the morning standings for the Best Sports Blog competition at The Best of Blog Awards. (To vote, click here)

All Quiet in the East Stand 49.43% (173 votes) 
Dodger Thoughts             27.14% (95 votes) 
Arsenal Blog                 8.57% (30 votes) 
Fishing Jones                4.00% (14 votes) 
Sitting Courtside            4.00% (14 votes) 
The Soxaholic                2.86% (10 votes) 
On the Field                 1.71% (6 votes) 
Ben Maller                   1.14% (4 votes) 
Formula 1                    1.14% (4 votes)

Yeah, sadly, it's meaningless and yet I find myself caring.

Sincerely no offense to Ross Newhan, but what the Times has unleashed by making Tim Brown its national baseball columnist is equivalent to Adrian Beltre waking up and discovering the joys of hitting the ball the opposite way.

Whole new worlds of insight and enjoyment have opened up.

Presley Green is on the telephone, or near enough so her soft sobs are audible.

"Sorry," Shawn Green says into the phone, a small laugh follows, and he resumes a conversation more complicated, a decision unsolved by simple distraction.

Is there news in the lead to Brown's column this morning? Perhaps not literally. Yet I find it more informative and compelling than anything else I've read on Green. This is him.

Want analysis? Here's Green, in a paragraph.

He is a good man whose price got too high, whose swing got too measured, whose bat got too unpredictable. The best players in the game, Beltre, for one, were getting $13 million a year, and Green, sadly for everyone, hasn't been one of them for a while.

Want to know where things stand?

He has a contract to negotiate, his only option being to trudge back to the Dodgers, hold them to an agreement reached a few general managers ago, and play in a uniform being measured for somebody else.

It's not great leverage; it's all he has.

And then, the conclusion - summing up the situation, art disguised as news.

So, the question comes, dressed in blue, decorated in opening-day bunting: What became of happily-ever-after?

And then he is gone.

This column isn't just a grand slam - it's the surge you feel with the bases loaded and the ball in the air and you know it's going out, and you just want to milk the sweet moment as long as you can. It's great writing, and everyone involved deserves credit for bringing it to us this morning.

The Arizona pitching prospect to accompany Dioner Navarro to Los Angeles in the Shawn Green trade (now approved by the commisoner's office and waiting for Green's signoff on a contract extension) will be William Juarez, according to The Associated Press.

Juarez is a 23-year-old righty starter who split time between A and AA ball last season. He has good walk and strikeout numbers - 2.2 walks against 7.6 strikeouts per nine innings in his career - and only 20 home runs allowed in 408 innings. Like Navarro, probably not ready to have an immediate impact - the Dodgers' 2005 needs will have to be solved elsewhere.

Does potential Dodger catching prospect Dioner Navarro remind anyone else of a younger Paul Lo Duca - except with switch-hitting ability and better defensive skills?

Based on this detailed analysis from John Sickels at ESPN.com, Navarro - like Lo Duca - appears to offer nothing special in the walks or power department, but maintains a steady batting average and puts the ball in play. And he tops out at 5-foot-10, 190 pounds - Lo Duca is listed at 5-10, 185.

"[Navarro] has a short and compact stroke from both sides of the plate," Sickels writes. "He doesn't have a lot of home run power, since his swing is level and not tailored for loft. He hits quite a few doubles, and more home runs may come eventually. Navarro shows good command of the strike zone and will take a walk if offered. He does not strike out much, and with his quick swing is difficult to overpower.

For now, Navarro's offense probably remains at least a year away - he posted Minor League Equivalent Averages near .200 last season. (Recent minor league free agent signee Mike Rose, by comparison, was at .231.)

Perhaps the biggest key is this: Navarro appeared in 2004 to have a slight but, for now, correctible work ethic issue, one that will probably determine whether he becomes the next Lo Duca or the next Angel Pena.

(Of course, Lo Duca didn't become Lo Duuuuuuuca until he was 29. Believe it or not, Angel Pena, out of the majors since 2001, is still only 29 years old himself. Navarro turns 21 in five weeks.)

Since it seems pretty clear that Shawn Green is leaving, coming desert or high water ... once more with feeling, the updated Dodger player payroll (some salaries are estimates):

Starting Rotation
$7,750,000 Jeff Weaver
$5,000,000 Brad Penny
$3,230,000 Kazuhisa Ishii
$1,300,000 Elmer Dessens
$325,000 Edwin Jackson

Bullpen
$7,500,000 Eric Gagne
$2,000,000 Wilson Alvarez
$500,000 Giovanni Carrara
$325,000 Duaner Sanchez
$325,000 Yhency Brazoban
$316,000 D.J. Houlton (or whomever)

Starting Lineup
$11,000,000 J.D. Drew
$8,000,000 Jeff Kent
$3,500,000 Jose Valentin
$3,000,000 Milton Bradley
$1,300,000 Cesar Izturis
$350,000 Hee Seop Choi
$350,000 Jayson Werth
$325,000 Dave Ross
Bench
$1,250,000 Ricky Ledee
$650,000 Olmedo Saenz
$325,000 Jason Grabowski
$316,000 Antonio Perez
$316,000 Mike Rose or Dioner Navarro
$316,000 Cody Ross (or whoever)

Disabled List
$13,000,000 Darren Dreifort

$72,569,000* Total
* Does not include any portion of Shawn Green's salary that the Dodgers might commit to paying.

There's money to spend, folks.

I feel as strongly as ever that the Dodgers should have signed Adrian Beltre. I have injury fears, however rational or irrational, about J.D. Drew. At the same time, I don't hate the Dodger starting lineup. It doesn't have a huge power hitter in the form of Beltre, but at the same time, there are six players who could hit 20 or more home runs. The team could reasonably hit 160 home runs next season. Not as good as last season's 203, but not horrible.

It's the starting pitching that remains in clear need of strengthening. You can't possibly imagine simultaneous quality seasons from Weaver, Penny, Ishii, Jackson and Elmer Dessens or Wilson Alvarez.

Derek Lowe? Last season ended a six-year run of park-adjusted ERAs better than the league average. That should have lowered his price, but his wonderful postseason, combined with the dearth of free agent pitchers, buoyed his salary demands. His walks are ample, his strikeouts much less so. He would certainly fit into the current Dodger rotation, but he is a prime case study for the question, "Just because you have money to spend and a need to spend, should you spend?"

Lowe could pull a Jeff Weaver and lower his ERA coming to the National League. Still, I'm not at all convinced that Lowe is better (or more affordable) than someone like Odalis Perez, for example. And I'm not at all convinced that locking up Lowe for three years, when Jackson (still only 21), Greg Miller, Joel Hanrahan, and so on and so on remain exciting prospects, in trade value if not actual value in a Dodger uniform, that we won't feel like it the dollars spent on Lowe were a waste by July.

Today's special section on potential Oscar nominees for Best Actress in this morning's Variety contains two articles by your intrepid correspondent - features on Laura Dern of We Don't Live Here Anymore and Imelda Staunton of Vera Drake. They're not free at this moment, but perhaps you'll find a way to read them. I'll excerpt myself to tease ya. ...

After more than 25 years of trying, Hollywood finally made Laura Dern blush.

The press release is out. The Angels have gone official:

ANAHEIM -- Angels Baseball Monday announced the team has changed its official name to the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. This change is effective January 3, 2005.

The Angels have enjoyed tremendous success in Anaheim, highlighted by a World Championship in 2002. The organization will continue to work closely with the City of Anaheim in promoting the Anaheim community, Angel Stadium of Anaheim, and the Angels' baseball experience.

The press release is well-written, however much it skirts the legal issues surrounding the name change. And the fact of the matter is, as Bill Shaikin (who broke this story to much derision last summer) of the Times wrote last week, the city of Anaheim's legal footing in preventing the name change isn't as solid as it first appeared:

The stadium lease agreement demands only that the team name "include the name Anaheim therein," providing Angel owner Arte Moreno with a potential loophole to exploit should he decide to call his team the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.

"There's no question the city could have written a lease provision that would have given the team no wiggle room. This provision does give the team some wiggle room," said Robert Jarvis, professor of law at Nova Southeastern University in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., and co-author of a sports law textbook.

A negotiated settlement remains a likely outcome - though who can wait to see the Law and Order ripped-from-the-headlines version of the trial? (R.I.P., El Gallo.)

As for the lengthy name, obviously the prepositional phrase at the end will be dropped for brevity by most people. As for the redundancy in the name, I'm not going to worry about it as long as I'm working next door to the La Brea Tar Pits.

I still think the homage to the World Football League, the Southern California Angels, would have been the way to capture much market share indeed. But who am I to get in the way of identifying the "territory that Major League Baseball expects the team to serve?"

The Cable Ace Awards were first presented in 1979. Points to anyone who can find a record of the occasion with a list of the winners.

In that spirit, let me tell you that Dodger Thoughts has been nominated for Best Sports Blog on The Best of Blog Awards 2004. To vote, click here.

For those of you who can't get enough of the electoral process, you can vote daily through January 17. Go on - be a kingmaker! And watch for the exciting dance number in the middle of the show - choreographed by Debbie Allen, Peter Allen and Richie Allen.