just got back from the Angel game so couldn't follow the Dodger gam at all. There is no way Robles had five hits. No way. what weird season.

1. Robles didn't have five hits, it never happened. It was just Jon and his fictional game thingie again. :)
vr, Xei

#2

Ha! I knew it. Robles couldn't even get 5 at bats in a game let alone 5 hits. I fell for it. Nice one , Jon. All is right again.

Holey Moley C. Fen's first hit wasn't much to write home about. a 50 hopper. at least he is off the shnide. good for him.

chen not fen. wow that has to be the most typo's in just two posts. good night all

some think it might be premature, but we should start pulling feelers out for izzy.

Yeah right. Five hits for Oscar Robles.

What the heck is going on here?

I better get home soon.

The alleged world's longest escalator was a bust. It wasn't very long and it wasn't even a nice view.

The escalators at some of the DC Metro stops are much longer.

I'd ask if you were coming home tomorrow, but I really don't wanna go through that again.

I like to use all the possible tenses in one post.

I'm trying to use up my yen before I get on the plane. No sense in changing them back.

Seems like starting Saenz against righties is going to hurt his trade value as well as stifle the development of Choi. Saenz will likely see his ba go from near .300 to about .270 and his HR/ab rate to drop considerably. Since this affects his possible trade value, shouldn't Depo step in and do something about it?

Since I just got around to reading the comments from the game thread I wanted to make a few points that will hopefully be heard in this thread:

1. Choi being used as a psuedo-pinch hitter - not uncommon at all, forced the Rockies to burn another crappy reliever, this move usually helps the offensive side

2. Choi not starting - fairly surprising, especially since the Dodgers face a lefty in 2 of their next three games, seems like Tracy has truly soured on him

3. Perez's sac bunt - isn't it ironic that the play everyone scoffed at being a nuisance (the double play) happened only after the sac bunt was performed? or that Perez hit into the DP in the first inning when it would normally be a sac bunt situation?

4. Happy to see the team pull out a scrappy win, but I (along with many others) am extremely worried about the offense. Hopefully DePo can pull of a trade that can bolster the offense right now and also in the future (Dunn anyone?)

Robles might feel good at Coors Field, since he played most of his career in Mexico......

#6 - escalators are another one of those things that I am now unable to hear mention of without flashing back to a Mitch Hedberg routine.

#10 - and here I was just saying yesterday that with Drew out, there was absolutely no reason to ever leave Choi on the bench. You would think that a big power hitting type might be wise to start in F'N COLORADO!! I just doesn't make any sense at all what they're doing with him. None.

Well, I'm very pleased that my big disappointment this a.m was Bob's escalator bust and not the game getting away from the Dodgers.

Wonderful article about Vin in today's Wash Post. Great opening line: "His might not be the Voice of God -- not deep enough, someone might quibble, not scary enough -- but surely it is the Voice of Heaven."

http://tinyurl.com/bu8rw

#13 -- Thanks, Sam, for the heads up on the article about Vin in the Post. Not having XM I only get to hear Vin on the highlight clips on the dodgers.com page, but that seems sufficient at this point. I miss hearing him on the national game of the week.

Sam, are you going to the Nats-Dodgers games the first week of August? I thought about trying to go but it is a midweek series and I'd have to miss too much work time. My cousins (one a fan of the O's and the other of the Red Sox) are going. By then I will have spent my entire year's worth of vacation time. I'll plan better next year.

Here's the mind boggling question of last night.

Why was A. Perez trying to sac. bunt I think in the 7th inning last night. Men on first and second, no outs. And he finally gets a bunt down to advance the runners. Although it probably could have been caught in the air by the pitcher.

Thanks, you just took the bat right out of Kent's hands. He gets intentionally walked.
Saenz pops out, and Chen becomes the hero driving in a pair. What a crazy night.

Dag -- I'll be there for the tuesday and wednedsday games. Not to rub it in, I even managed to lay hands on 2 Diamond Box tix for the Wednesday game, which are about 25 feet from the visiting team on deck circle. Man I can't wait to see Oscar Robles up close.

Being able to walk (or metro two stops) to a pro ballpark is just a wonderful thing. It is so much easier to get to a game than anything I've ever experienced.

Sam -- I think it's WTNY (wait til next year) for me seeing a Dodgers' game in DC. Maybe next year we can organize a mid-Atlantic get-together around a game somehow.

These days I content myself with minor league ball in the Raleigh-Durham region. I did get to see the Suns play the Mudcats a couple weeks ago. And (also) not to rub it in but I was at field level watching Guzman, Broxton, Loney et al. Steve Yeager too!

Anyway, enjoy the games. I am experiencing some envy.

15 - Saenz actually grounded into a DP ending the inning. We had no outs and runners on first and second and managed to get nothing out of it. That said, Perez had GIDP twice already, so it might have been wise to take the bat out of his hands. Then again maybe that tricky submarine delivery just had him fooled and he would have teed off against the Rockie reliever (everyone else did).

Hope Timmermann remembers to bring back souvenirs for everyone on this site when he comes back.

Anyone else see Tim Brown's LA Times column today where he pronounces the season "done".
Pretty overly dramatic, almost Plaschkian piece.

Despite the catastrophic injuries to Bradley,Drew, and Gagne, when you're only 5 games behind in the loss column, with half a season to go in a garbage division, why should you throw in the towel?

19 - Considering that I wrote pretty much the same thing Monday as Brown did Tuesday, I'm gonna disagree with you, gvette.

It's not that you stop playing the games, but consider this - they were 5 games behind with Bradley, Drew and Gagne et al. Imagine what you would need to do to generate positive momentum now.

19 & 20 -

I'm with gvette, I still see us winning the division.

I believe over the course of time, our pitching will prevail in this division.

#18: Perez grounded into his second DP of the season, but not of the night. Two double-plays in 164 PAs doesn't seem too bad. On the one last night, he was pretty close to being safe, it was a very close play.

#21: I somewhat agree, but only if the Padres continue spending considerable time on the DL. If they get much healthier, they'll likely run away with the division.

here's a headline for you in dream world...

Robles subs for Izturis in All-Star Game

I feel like people are talking past each other a little bit on this "is the season over" question. I don't think Jon is arguing that we should throw in the towel, or even that we cannot win the division. I think his point is that, given all that has come before, it wouldn't make sense to make roster moves that benefit this season at the expense of next or future seasons. Gvette, Howard, I doubt you disagree with that but I imagine you'll let me know if I'm wrong.

Now it may be that DePodesta can find a move that bolsters the team now, but does not meaningfully come at the expense of next season (picking up someone's salary dump, or trading off a "prospect" that the organization already has lost faith in). Again, given those limitations, I expect that everyone would agree that he ought to make such a move.

25-

I agree with alot of what Tim Brown said in his article re: not giving away our prospects chasing fool's gold. I see a master plan remaking the Dodgers, rebuilding if you will. We are in the second year of what looks like a 3 year project. To me, the future looks very bright.

That being said, I see us as strong as our competition in the division even now. With all the young guys forced into action early, I see us similar to a dark horse small college who somehow makes the NCAA tournament, maybe even winning a game or two...that is us this year. Just my opinion of course, but I always see the glass as half full...

Jon,

I hate to disagree with you, but to say that the Dodgers are done for the season is premature. Bradley & Izzy should be healthy by August. Drew's bat probably should and will be compensated for via a trade. And our pitching is still the best in the division, especially if Perez comes up aces.

I know it's a lot of ifs, but we've more than had our share of bad luck for the season, and are still 5 games out of first. Not to wish injuries on anyone, but are we really more than a Jake Peavy injury (or sudden underperformance) away from winning the NL West? Weaver and Penny have been pitching extremely well, and Lowe and Perez can be more than capable. Drew or no Drew, we're still one big bat away from contention.

All that being said, we are facing a very tough and an important series in Houston this weekend, as long as we do well in Colorado.

Choi will carry the load until he gets trade deadline help. Bradley and a healthy Izzy will provide further reinforcements (okay, mostly Bradley).

You heard it here first.

/end wishful thinking

28-in last night's game, we saw the future of Choi in Los Angeles

Sam,

I'd still give up Guzman + Billingsley/Broxton for Dunn. Guzman is projected to be what Dunn already is... and that's a best case scenario. And with our depth at pitching prospects, this season is definitely worth saving by "sacrificing" one of our prospects. Remember, we could have had Dunn for Jackson less than two years ago.

On a wishful thinking note, let's say that all projections fall in place, how awesome would an infield consisting LaRoche and Guzman be in 2007? But then again, what are the chances that all projections will fall in place?

30-I'd give up Izturis or Choi, but not the youngsters on which we are hedging our future.

31 - But, what are we expecting from the youngsters? I mean, Guzman, at best, will be a 40-45 HR guy who strikes out a lot. Adam Dunn gives us that today. And do you think we shouldn't trade any of our pitching prospects? We will have to at some point. We can't keep them all. Why not trade a Billingsley while his value is really high? Pitching prospects can be unreliable as it is... see Jackson, Edwin.

25 - Sam's got me summed up well.

I realize I could find this in a thread somewhwere but, if you get Dunn, how long is under your control? And what's he slated to earn this year and next?

32-but how long til Dunn hits free agency, and how long for Guzman...that is a driving force with DePo, how much time will we get from them before they become too expensive

pitching prospects? I'd give up Weaver or OPerez before the prospects

27, 28 - It's gotten to the point where when people use the word Choi, I don't know if they are referring to Choi or Choi.

Jon,
Right under Brown's LA Times article is a box showing that this time last year,the Angels were 5 games out in the loss column, yet they won the division. Obviously, comparing the Angels last year (even without G. A.)and the decimated Dodgers is apples and oranges.

But as long as it's within the realm of possibility, IMO the Dodgers management owes its fans the duty to due what is necessary, within reason to remain competitive.

No one advocates gutting Jacksonville in exchange for a Jeromy Burnitz or Eric Milton, but that doesn't mean you do nothing. Remember how furious most fans were with Dan Evans when he settled for Ventura or Tyler Houston et. al.?

36-

6 of one, half a dozen of the other

#32: Best case for Guzman is he is a 40-45 homerun shorstop making $350k. Best case for Adam Dunn is he is a 40-45 homerun, below-average left-fielder making $10 million / year. We shouldn't trade our pitching prospects who have front-of-the-rotation upside (Billingsley, Miller, Hochevar, Orenduff, Jackson?). It's hard to get a front-of-the-rotation starter through free agency, so we need to give ourselves every opportunity to build from within. Even if only 1 of the 5 reaches his potential, we'll be in great shape with a staff ace under team control. Unfortunately, you can't reliably determine who that will be, so you try to give your team as many opportunities as possible.

Also, re Guzman v. Dunn. Guzman is notionally an infielder. Getting that big production from an infielder is arguably more valuable, as hard hitting outfielders seem to crop up somewhat more readily. (This was one of the big dings on the effort to replace Beltre's production with Drew.)

37-

if the Dodgers give up a bunch of prospects who become something with other teams for a Dunn or someone like that who is gone in a year or two, what do you think the "fans" will say then?

I think Dunn hits arbitration this year and is a free agent after 2006. Don't quote me on that though, it's from memory only.

As far as the control Guzman for longer opposed to Dunn for a year and a half, there is no guarantee that Guzman will hit the majors and become an impact player right away. In fact the likely scenario is he will be a serviceable player for a few years, and become a superstar (if he does become one) a year or two before free agency. Not that different from Adrian Beltre.

42-now you are calling Beltre a superstar?

37 - "Obviously, comparing the Angels last year (even without G. A.)and the decimated Dodgers is apples and oranges. "

That's my point. You use this as a throwaway line, but this is actually the crux of the issue.

"the Dodgers management owes its fans the duty to due what is necessary, within reason to remain competitive. "

When you use the qualifier "within reason," is this at all different from what I'm saying?

"No one advocates gutting Jacksonville in exchange for a Jeromy Burnitz or Eric Milton, but that doesn't mean you do nothing."

Have I at all said "do nothing?"

I'll repeat what Sam said. It works with what I wrote and I don't think it contradicts Tim Brown either.

"I think his point is that, given all that has come before, it wouldn't make sense to make roster moves that benefit this season at the expense of next or future seasons.

39 - I do not think Dunn makes $10 million a year. I could be wrong, but I think he makes less than half of that. And I agree with everything about 1 in 5 pitching prospects making it, and it's worth growing a starter from within the system. But if we have that many prospects, isn't it worth giving up one for an immediate young impact player?

40 - Guzman may be an infielder, but all projections and scouting reports suggest that he will be an OF by the time he hits the big leagues.

I thought Brown was funny, since two weeks ago he was practically begging for Preston Wilson.

43 - God forbid, no. I said (or was trying to say) that he had one superstar-type year before free agency. My point was that if Guzman becomes as good as Beltre was last year, we'd still only get a year or two Beltre-type years from him before he hits free agency. And that is a big if.

47, and is that any different than you would get from Dunn? and you would have to give up a lot more than just Guzman to get him

46 - Again, I think it's fair to say that losing Drew entitles one to a second opinion.

37 - "the Dodgers management owes its fans the duty to due what is necessary, within reason to remain competitive."

As a fan, I think it's more important to contend for a World Series appearance next year, than a first round exit this year.

The only way I see the Dodgers as buyers this year is if, IF, they somehow jump into first place with a few game lead before the deadline. Problem is, by then, all the rumored targets may be gone, or the bidding may have risen.

It just seems like it's too hard to salvage this season, when giving up on this season can be so benificial to the next.

I guess. Whatever works. Maybe we should have had Hee Seop Choi shot, and then he wouldn't have been pining for Carl Everett.

47 - A few years at the minimum of good production gives us the cash availability to sign like Dunn through free agency...

What would you rather have - Dunn via Guzman in 2005, or Guzman and someone similar to Dunn in 2007?

#44 Jon, if the goal is to not make roster moves that in theory would be at the "expense of next or future seasons", does this exclude ANY moves that would involve prospects, even if the hypothetical result was Adam Dunn?

If you are limiting what you are willing to give up to what is on the ML roster, what in practicality can you get that is useful (other than in theory for Weaver)? Carrara, Saenz, Alvarez, even Wunsch may have "value" but not enough to make it worthwile.

The Reds want pitching, for obvious reasons. This discussion should be about Billingsley/Tiffany

53 - You tell me. Does Adam Dunn help in next or future seasons?

I try to avoid sweeping generalizations. I feel like you keep trying to read things into what I'm saying that just aren't there. I wasn't writing the Monroe Doctrine or anything.

53-you forget, Izturis has value, currently a lot of it

54 - I would think they want the best package of prospects, as you can deal them later. It's not like they're on the verge of decency, they've got years to go.

and Saenz has more value to an AL team, more than the NL, as a DH where he wouldn't tire as much

Should we still be sellers or non-buyers, as some have argued, if we go into the all-star break only 2-3 games behind the Padres? If we had won Sunday's game against AZ, we'd be in second place, 4 games behind SD and winners of 5 of 7.

My point is, if we are only one good week/game away from being contenders, why not salvage this season, or at least try. Nobody is saying a player like Ventura or Burnitz is the answer. Nobody wants to rip out the farm system for role players. If we can get one of the best young players in baseball whose HR/AB and BB/AB ratios are up there for a couple of prospects who may or may not pan out, then why not salvage this season.

As for people who are worried that we might lose in the first round of the playoffs this year, so we should wait till next year when we might win the World Series, you will say the same thing next year and the year after. No Dodger prospect is going to lead us to the World Series in 2006 or maybe even 2007. More importantly, Lowe, Penny and Perez will probably be our playoffs started whether we make the playoffs in 2005, 2006 or 2007. Maybe we should start selling and build for 2008.

59-good idea Jim, here's to 2008!!

59 - What's the point of contending for the division if you're going to flop in the playoffs?

I think it might be necessary to explain what you mean by "contenders." Does anyone argue that we're not division contenders? Not that I've seen. But the goal is to win a WS or at least go deep - can we assemble a team that can without ruining next year? Yes, but it's hard.

59 -- I agree. This is where Brown went off the skids, comparing Adam Dunn to Joe Randa. If the Angels traded for Adam Dunn, he would be doing coke off of hookers at Arte's celebration party, but let that not trouble us now. Trading for Dunn helps the long term. We should do it if it is possible.

52 - So, Guzman plus someone like Dunn (who will just happen to come by) in 2007 is worth losing in 2005 and 2006? And Guzman will turn out to be as good as advertised by 2007?

People will attack me for this, but my projections for Guzman in 2007 aren't much better than a .245 hitter with 17-20 HRs. Which is very good for a 22? year old rookie, but don't think that Guzman will come in 2007 and Dodgers will win the World Series.

62-how does it help the long term? we won't pay the price when he becomes a free agent? so aren't we just renting him for the short term when it will only serve to make us look good for now?

59 - This lineup gets blanked by KIM! Assuming the Cards have the best rec. in the NL and the Dodgers face the Nats, Braves, or Marlins, what is the lineup going to do then? And is an aquisition like Dunn going to transform the offense into a powerhouse?

61 - I hate to break it to you, but to become WS contenders next year, we are going to have to trade some prospects and get players like Dunn. We'd just have to do it next year.

The same Dodgers team as this year, plus our still-far-from-the-majors prospects won't be any closer to the World Series in 2006 than they are in 2005.

64 -- I would not trade for him if I wasn't going to do what it took to lock him up long term. This goes back to my stand that long-term contracts are generally a bad idea, but that we have to live in the real world, and not the world as I wish it were. As long as such contracts are given out, Adam Dunn is a pretty good candidate for one.

66-why?

why can't we develop players thru our farm system? why do we have to overpay for players from other teams?

59 - If the Dodgers sweep Colorado this week - doubtful, but possible, what do you think that signifies? It's Colorado.

The fact is, if the Dodgers had beaten Arizona on Sunday and retained Drew, things would certainly look about as promising as you suggest. But that's a pretty big if. The Dodgers lost to Arizona - handily - and lost Drew.

Yes, the Dodgers are one week from being back in the race. But then what does the following week bring?

All this being said, I don't think there's a lot of disagreement here today, other than some nuances of trade talks that frankly, none of us are really capable of speaking about with authority.

66 - Did you forget that half of the team is on the DL?

JD Drew may come back this year, but you need strong wrists to hit a ball, and he hasn't been knocking the cover off before his injury. Who says Bradley starts producing like he did the year before he was a Dodger?

To think that next years' team will be the same as this is pretty remarkable.

69-oh come now Jon, we can speak with authority, so what if we have none, we can still do it....

its our first amendment right! need I remind you that yesterday was July 4th? stand up for the rights our forefathers fought so desperately to give us!

oh, sorry, wrong blog...

64 - Why can't we sign him long-term?

65 - Dunn makes a difference to players like Kent and Bradley with the protection and the oppotunities he provides. The guy gets on base a lot and hits a lot of HRs. What more do we need from any single guy? If there is any chance Drew comes back this year, a middle of the line-up with Drew-Kent-Dunn-Bradley is at least the second best in the NL. Even if Drew does not come back, Kent-Dunn-Bradley-Saenz is not a bad middle of the lineup against the Braves/Nats/Marlins.

72-we can...we won't, but we can...

69 - Jon, I agree. It's all just speculation and perception. Some of us think that the season is close to over, some of us think that it's worth salvaging. Maybe both sides are wrong.

3 hitters in all of baseball have 20+hr and a 390+OBP.

Only 1 of those three is on the trade market.

I say we go get him if we can.
I would not include any hitting prospect of worth. If they want arms, then do it.

And to go back to what Steve said, even if it does not help this year, if we can get Dunn and lock him up for 5-6 years, we should still make that deal.

Fox, re: 66, which I think is the best explanation of the situation so far...

He's not saying we can't develop players through our system or that we have to overpay for players from other teams.

He's saying that many of us are thinking that if we just leave our prospects alone, we'll have a better shot at the world series next year or in 2007 and that this doesn't make sense. I agree. Guzman and/or LaRoche or anyone else is not likely to become a major league IMPACT player in just one or two years. Yet we have the pitching and core players (Drew, Kent, Bradley, Choi/Saenz) to compete next season. Who knows how those guys will be in 2007/8/9 when our prospects finally, hopefully, become bonafide major league stars.

Dunn helps a little this year, and a lot as the centerpiece of a top-5 team next year at the expense of prospects who MAY put up Dunn-like numbers in 2008.

And yes, this is all assuming that Depo will shell out the money to keep Dunn past 2006. The money is certainly there.

Just my opinion, but I am a little surprised by the amount of love being shown by everyone for Adam Dunn.

I'm not sure he is a guy who fits in DePodesta's grand scheme, although I could be wrong.

Probably am...someone I am sure will let me know if I am...

ESPN Insider is talking about Matt Lawton and "Wilson," whom I'm assuming is Preston Wilson, which makes me sad. I don't get Insider.

77 - In terms of prospects as a capital which you can spend to put together a WS caliber team, I'd rather spend it next year - barring a miracle.

78 - Hate to be the first, but I think Dunn fits in perfectly with DePo's grand scheme. High OBP, lots of HRs, can play 1B/OF, still very young. I think signing Dunn long-term would be the best move DePo has made with the Dodgers.

79 - Based on ESPN's track record, I wouldn't pay money to read speculation - especially living on the west coast.

80 - minus the "a"

I just don't see the Dodgers shelling out major amounts of money for players now or maybe ever, or at least as long as the McCourt/DePodesta team is running things.

I finally got around to reading the MoneyBall book, and unless I completely missed the point of the book, the Dodgers will now be looking for bang for the buck, and not the other way around.

And this has nothing to do with the image of the McCourts being paupers. They are far from it.

22 - You are right. Though he did nearly GIDP in the 5th with Robles on first. Instead he beat out the throw, but suffice to say that he wasn't hitting well against Kim. I love Adam Dunn, but with hitting prospects like Laroche and Guzman, I think you have to hold on to them. It is possible, nay probable, that neither of them will be the hitter that Dunn is. However, both will be better defensively, and both play far more premium positions than Dunn who poorly plays the least premium position. Dunn's bat would be nice in the lineup, but if we have trade Billingsley and Guzman, forget it! Trade Izzy, Weaver and anyone in the bullpen who the contenders are willing to overpay for, but hang out to the high ceiling talent. It is only a hop skip and a year from AA to big leagues, I don't want to be bemoaning the Guzman and Billingsley trade in five years when they are Arod and Oswalt redux.

77 - I think Alex makes my point far more articulately than I do. There is no prospect in MLB who is guaranteed to be as good as Dunn is now. If we can sign him long-term, he is worth giving up a couple of top prospects. And I think (although I see the point of others who don't) that he helps us this year.

I just don't see the Dodgers shelling out major amounts of money for players now or maybe ever, or at least as long as the McCourt/DePodesta team is running things.

They shelled out a lot of money this winter, just not for Beltre. Why do you think they won't in the future?

81 - If Dunn's agent talks about an extension if traded, then I agree with you that the Dodgers should get him if they can lock him up. I don't know who his agent is, but if his agent has any sense, he'll let him hit the FA market unless the Dodgers give him an offer he can't refuse.

Extensions for guys hitting their prime are rare, and the Dodgers were lucky to do so with Penny (who's agent, notably, is NOT Boras, who seems to only allow his players to get extensions if they're old (see CJ & RJ)).

#55 Jon, the Monroe Doctrine? Didn't that have something to do with Marilyn Monroe, JFK, RFK, Frank Sinatra and The Mob? Hard to believe I was a History Major.

#56 Howard, if Itzuris gets traded the LA Times building will levitate off the ground, powered by the hot air from Plaschke and Simers;

#62 Steve,"coke off of hookers at Arte's celebration party.." Thanks for the visual, but that may explain the earlier column pleading for acquiring Mike Lowell.

86-but net effect, their payroll came down from last year, and, I suspect will continue to do so in the future

85 - You're still not recognizing the fact that the prospects are still valueble even if they never play a game in the majors in that they're used to aquire talent.

The issue really is - and this seems to require alot of repeating - is this year the best year to spend our prospects?

89 - I don't know how much total payroll will come down, but Dreifort, Green, and Weaver are all coming off the books next year, so that's about $30 million (depending on DD's insurance) to spend right there.

91-you are assuming they will spend that $30mm

92. it looks like you are assuming they won't. i think it's safe to say they'll spend some of it at least.

92 - So you think they are dropping payroll to $50 million? You've been reading too much LA Times, then.

92 - What makes you skepitcal?

All the love being shown around here for Dunn reflects the stathead myopia of many of the visitors to this site. They are blinded by the walks and the HR's, apparently not cognizant of just how dependent Dunn is on his home park for those great home run totals (so far this year, or when I checked a few days ago, 16 HR's at home, 5 on the road). Dunn is an atrocious outfielder who really has no business being anything other than a DH, something that tends not to be too useful in the National League. He is not likely to age well at all given his lack of athleticism, which actually ties in with something Bill James himself noted about young players with "old player skills" not holding up well over time, so the statheads really should appreciate that much at least, but they don't. Guzman now, at age 20, is a far superior prospect to the prospect Dunn was at the same age.

I'm not skeptical, I just see DePo as a disciple of Billy Beane...that's all

They would spend it on Adam Dunn. I don't know about the rest of the rabble.

All of this skepticism seems to stem from the Dodgers being about 10M short of the 100M are McCourt said it would be in. They've acknowledged that it isn't 100M and said it's for room for acquisitions midseason - if necessary.

To me, they look smart for not spending that money before the season began. Like 10M worth of players would have prevented Drew, Bradley, Perez, Gagne etc from spending time on the DL.

I'm not skeptical, I just see DePo as a disciple of Billy Beane...that's all

I'm sure Beane would spend a lot more money if the organization he works for could afford it.

90 - I do think that prospects are valuable and I am also a fan of developing from within. I am not saying we should trade prospects to get anybody who might help us this year. I am not advocating getting a Preston Wilson for Joel Guzman. Not at all.

If we can get an Adam Dunn and use him for at least this year and next, with the possibility of tying him up long-term, well use the prospects and get the guy. That's all. It'd be silly, but highly probable that we'll be in contention at the 2006 trading deadline and then we'll pull off a similar trade because we'll be up 3 games as opposed to down 5 and everyone will say a player like Dunn will take us over the top. And I'm saying, we can get a player like Dunn, or in this case, Dunn, for all of next year while giving us a chance to salvage this year.

97 - I'm sure Billy Beane works with the money he's given. Keeping that in mind, you should be confident that DePo will be spending 30M next winter.

97 -- But Beane is limited by his budget in Oakland. Between Oakland and Boston, there is a likely budget for the Dodgers

100-maybe...but he seemed to get off on getting more for his dollar than the next guy

90 - "The issue really is - and this seems to require alot of repeating - is this year the best year to spend our prospects?"

I actually think this is a big mis-stating of the issue and would love to see it not repeated. There is never a year to spend or not spend your prospects, because it all depends on what kind of deal you might get in return.

I feel, very strongly in fact, that it is more proper to frame the discussion in terms of what your goals than what you might spend.

Consider your day-to-day life. You might have $3 in the bank or you might have $3 billion. Either way, you don't ask yourself, "is this the year I spend my money?" You ask yourself, "What do I need or want? What's the best deal I can make to get that? Can I afford that? Is this a wise expense?"

If you start making grand pronouncements about what you can or can't do, you're lost.

101 - If an extension is involved, I agree.

You might have $3 in the bank or you might have $3 billion.

My assets are closer to one of those figures than the other. Guess which one :)

I guess someone would have to check out next year's likely to be traded players and see if any of them match Dunn's hitting and on base ability. Then we would have a better idea if it's ideal to trade prospects for Dunn, or hold on and trade them next year for someone else.

I think Dunn's as good as they come as far as hitters go, so I don't see why we should hold onto prospects and trade them next year for someone else. Especially with our prospects maximizing their trade value with huge years so far this year. What if they slip next season, ala Edwin this year, and drop in trade value?

And I can't envision Guzman being the next ARod if only because I don't remember people mentioning ARod's strikeout problems, his lack of defense, etc. He seemed like a complete prospect at Guzman's age, whereas there are a few things Guzman hasn't shown he can do consistently yet. Not that he won't, just doesn't seem on the same talent-curve as ARod.

105-speaking of which, I can't seem to find my way out of this paper bag...

96 - Doesn't Dunn have a lot of speed? He was touted as a being a fast runner when he came up a few years back.

I'm a little ignorant to the world of minor-league projections. Could you explain how Guzman is a far superior prospect than Dunn was at the same age?

Great news if true, but I have fears of Guzman being another player from the DR who swings at everything he can see.

97. it's not like billy beane loves trimming his salary budget ad infinitum. i'm sure beane would LOVE an extra $20-30 mill to work with. it'd give him a lot more options. however, he's got a lot of limitations to work under because of the oakland market and the ownership.

while depodesta doesn't have a sky-is-the-limit kind of budget like they have in new york, he's definitely got more freedom to do what it takes to sign say, an adam dunn extension, if he wants to. i wouldn't mind giving the reds say, werth or izturis and some pitching prospects to get dunn, as long as we can extend him. imagine a team in '07 with dunn, bradley, drew, choi, laroche, guzman, martin/navarro... we have more prospects than we can protect anyway, right? let's get something for some of them.

NO trading Guzman for Dunn. Guzman is going to be a GREAT major league shortstop. Those who disagree, and think we have to move him, I can't hear you. I have a banana in my ear.

111-I'm with you, minus the Choi component

105 - To clarify, I meant in terms of the debate, not trading prospects this year doesn't mean you have to develop them. I didn't mean to lead you to believe that prospects should be universally regarded as money and not something you should spend.

If you're saying that you must make the bets decision, be it spend prospects now, later, or develop them now, later - then we agree.

Also "If you start making grand pronouncements about what you can or can't do, you're lost" sounds like a grand pronouncement.

112 - Yeah, in your ear, right...

115-be nice....

114 - as if this wasn't complicated enough, replace the last word in the first paragraph with "develop."

114 - "If you start making grand pronouncements about what you can or can't do, you're lost" sounds like a grand pronouncement."

Touché!

Fox, just don't see Choi with L.A. in 2007? Think he'll be traded or just not play much?
Or would Dunn have to play 1B in that situation?

I would hope that his small salary and production is what allows us the money to spend on bigger contracts.

It'll come down to a decision of Choi or Tracy, for DePo.

What? I didn't hear that. I've got this banana in my ear, you see.

i don't think howard believes in choi. technically, does this make him an atheist?

I though this could shed a little light on the topic. The Houston Chronicle is reporting of a possible Dunn to Houston Deal. The Astros would deal three minor leaguers for Dunn: "According to a report, the Astros have been working on a deal to acquire Dunn for prospects Ezequiel Astacio, Taylor Buchholz and Fernando Nieve." Does anyone know anything about these prospects or the Houston system overall? What would be the Dodger equivalent?

http://tinyurl.com/aptsg

With Tracy seemingly being lowballed and shown little love in the off-season, it appears Depo isn't fond enough of him to keep him over Choi. Heck, they make about the same amount of money, one performs, the other one doesn't.

Ok, here's the scenario: DePo trades Choi to N Korea for their nuclear arms program, declares war on the US and immediately surrenders. He gets paid immense amounts of money for rebuilding.

122-agnostic

123 - it's the "Red" propaganda machine at work trying to drive the price of Dunn through the roof.

124-which one performs? Choi has 13 homeruns, what does Tracy have?

Can we just agree that if Dunn gets traded anywhere, we don't want to see a "Dunn Deal" headline?

129-

yes, "Dunn"...

re:123

FERNANDO NIEVE
Position: Pitcher
Age: 22
Height/weight: 6-0, 170
Bats/throws: R/R
How acquired: 1999 free-agent signing
2004: Started the season in Salem before moving to Round Rock. At Salem, Nieve was 10-6 with a 2.96 ERA, 117 strikeouts and 40 walks in 24 starts. With the Express, he was 2-0 in three starts with a 1.56 ERA, 17 strikeouts and eight walks.
Career numbers: (four seasons, not counting one Venezuelan Summer League campaign: 34-19, 3.15 ERA, 389 Ks, 161 BB, 425.1 IP)
2005 outlook: Along with lefty Mark McLemore, they were the first two optioned to the Hooks off the big-league club in early March. His fastball has been clocked in the 91-97 mph range, and likes to throw it hard. Another player from the Astros' Venezuela connection has two curves that, when he gets sluggish, can hurt him. But the heater will serve him well if other pitches don't develop. Nieve remains one of the Astros' top pitching prospects.

Sounds like Jackson or an experienced Broxton?

129 - That headline has already been overDunn.

112 - Steve I hope you are being sarcastic. There is almost a zero chance that Guzman will be a SS with the Dodgers.

Guzman is not, nor will he be Alex Rodriguez or Albert Pujols. The numbers do not indicate this at all. In my opinion, worst case, he will end up being an Adrian Beltre and best case, he will end up being an Adam Dunn. Unless he makes some kind of amazing improvement in BA, which is highly unlikely despite his age.

How about "Dunn Shopping"?

In Cincy it will be "Dunn let the door hit you"

Steve,
You seem to have bananas in your ear quite a bit.

For now, I think the Dodgers will remain competitive. I too don't advocate chasing "fool's gold" by giving away prospects, but if DePo can do something (sentiments echoed before) that may help us now and later, then by all means do it. I don't see DePo gutting the team anyway.

People have said that we have a 40-man roster to worry about and too many prospects. Exactly who's projected to be on the 40-man roster when the prospects will be on it? What's the running list?

how about "Saenz Sealed Delivered"

the other two astros' prospects are AAA pitchers, so IF this trade proposal has any truth to it, the Reds would settle for all pitchers =)

i wouldn't mind seeing a "consider it dunn" headline, actually.

NO.

Joel Guzman is a shorstop. SHORTSTOP! SHORTSTOP! If he's not a shortstop, what does that leave. Izturis!

Just leave me to my delusions and pretend that Guzman is a shortstop.

"Dunn Believe It"

139 - You want Robles instead?

There are other outfielders available, if that's what you're looking for, maybe not as good as people think Dunn is, but certainly capable of hitting. I'm not a huge Dunn, fan, but I could see him helping, and I'm not a Lawton fan, but he could help, too. I like giving Werth another year, but I like that Dunn could be 1B, too. And if we aren't going to play Choi can we at least trade the guy?!?!

I think Dunn would prefer Houston, don't you?

My wife recently, commented that when Vin, retires, or if something happens to him, I will be a basket case. I can hardly bare the thought! Thanks for sharing the link.

Was tough to be away from this place for the weekend, but I played baseball almost non-stop with my Dad and my son, and niece. Plus we got to see an amazing lightin' bug/firefly display, that truly made the fireworks look like child's play.

139-Robles is okay with me

143 - Give him a couple weeks.

Yeah I like Robles right now sure. And then next month, he's Repko again.

Ahh, but Joel Guzman will save us.

"Saenz point to DePo Weaving a Werth-while Dunn Deal"

Too bad Lowe and Penny wouldn't be involved.

146-you have too much time on your hands

145-then who was that in centerfield?

148 -- I don't know, but he got on base last night, so it couldn't have been Repko.

#110: In 2000, Adam Dunn was the same age as Joel Guzman is in 2005. In 2000, Dunn was ranked the 56th best prospect in baseball, whereas in 2005, Guzman was ranked the 5th best prospect in baseball.

150-so Guzman is ten times as good? or 1/10 as good?

Guzman probably ends up as a corner outfielder.

It also means that there are 55 better players than Dunn who were prospects in 2000.

152 -- I'll never have peace.

Is Delino DeShields still around? We could trade Guzman for him.

How is Guzman, currently age 20, a better prospect than Dunn was at age 20? When he was 20, Dunn spent the whole year in low A, two levels below where Guzman is playing now. Dunn hit .281/.422/.469 in low A. Guzman, as of today, is hitting .289/.358/.507 against pitchers two levels above the pitchers Dunn faced at the same age. Dunn was not a good left-fielder, according to scouts who saw him in low A. His arm was too weak for right. He could never read balls off hitters' bats well, or take good routes to fly balls. Guzman is a shortstop with a cannon arm whose defensive package as a whole scouts rate average to slightly above average. If he does move to the outfield, his arm will certainly be good enough for him to play right field instead of left. After his age 20 season, Baseball America ranked Dunn #33 on their Top 100 Prospects list. Guzman came into this year ranked by Baseball America #5 on the Top 100 Prospects list.

40-Man Roster
Pitchers
47 Wilson Alvarez (replace w/Billingsley)
43 Yhency Brazoban
55 Giovanni Carrara
46 Elmer Dessens
37 Darren Dreifort (replace w/Tiffany)
15 Scott Erickson (replace w/ Broxton)
38 Eric Gagne
Joel Hanrahan
D.J. Houlton
Edwin Jackson
Ryan Ketchner
Derek Lowe
Franquelis Osoria (replace w/ Miller?)
Brad Penny
Odalis Perez
Duaner Sanchez
Steve Schmoll
Derek Thompson
Jeff Weaver (poss. replace w/ Kuo/Orenduff)
Kelly Wunsch

Catchers
18 Paul Bako (replace w/ LaRoche)
70 Russ Martin
Dioner Navarro
Jason Phillips
Mike Rose (replace w/ Loney)

Infielders

78 Willy Aybar
5 Hee-Seop Choi
3 Cesar Izturis
12 Jeff Kent
Antonio Perez
Oscar Robles
Olmedo Saenz
Jose Valentin (replace w/ Guzman)
Delwyn Young

Outfielders

Milton Bradley
Chin-Feng Chen (replace w/ DeWitt)
J.D. Drew
Mike Edwards
Jason Grabowski (replace w/ Dunlap)
Ricky Ledee
Jason Repko
Cody Ross
Jayson Werth

still have a few replaceable OF for free agents or players brought in through trade.

Guzman is a shortstop with a cannon arm whose defensive package as a whole scouts rate average to slightly above average.

Hope revived!

#133: I have a lot of trouble believing you have more expertise in this area than Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus who both ranked Joel Guzman extremely highly (5th and 7th best prospect in baseball respectively). I'm not sure what you don't like about a .289/.358/.507 batting line in AA at age 20 in a hitter's league.

153-no, it means there were 55 prospects rated higher in 2000

150 - Thanks, but I'm not too impressed by rankings. Look at Dunn's minor league numbers, his OBP was never under .398.

Going into this season (and I know he has improved his walk totals this year), Guzman's career minor-league OBP is .312.

I'd really like someone to explain to me why I should expect Guzman to be anything more than Raul Mondesi.

157,
Thanks. The reason I ask is because a lot of people that advocate trading prospects now cite the the theoretical 40-man roster logjam problem. I'm just wondering how much of a problem that logjam can theoretically be.

160 - Thanks for the clarification........ I'll take my jokes elsewhere.

Reds want pitching. Let's all assume Guzman will remain a Dodger and IF we trade for a hitter, it will be pitchers and Dunlap/DeWitt/Loney we give up.

why I should expect Guzman to be anything more than Raul Mondesi.

Ouch...

161 - If he has the talent of Raul Mondesi, that would be fantastic. What are Guzman's DUI projections?

161 - If he has the talent of Raul Mondesi, that would be fantastic. What are Guzman's DUI projections?

#159 you mean pitcher's league, right?

btw, any news on kuo's arm yet?

163-funny...

yeah fanerman91, looks like we have plenty of room in the 40-man roster to fit our top prospects when they become eligible.

All the talent in the world couldn't keep Mondesi from chasing sliders in the dirt, and it took bone spurs to keep Beltre from doing so for one year.

Three reasons I don't like the Dunn option:

1) He would be extremely overpriced for a mid-season deal, because multiple teams are competing for an outfielder. Giving up three quality pitching prospects (Billingsley, Thompson, and Tiffany) is not appealling to me.

2) According to all reports, he's not on the trade market.

3) He's a first baseman playing left field.

4) He benefits significantly from his homer-happy home-field advantage.

5) He's arbitration eligible this year, which means his salary will go up to the $10 million range.

172-

please pick 3 of those 5 reasons

Just when I thought that I was out they pull me back in.

Dunn was prospect #56 in 2000 and Guzman is #5 in 2005. If that makes Guzman better, then by that logic, he will turn out to be as good as the #5 prospect in 2000 - Nick Johnson.

Interesting sidenote, in 2000 rankings:

#22 Brad Penny
#36 Milton Bradley
#48 Jayson Werth
#49 Eric Gagne
#67 Cesar Izturis
#77 Hee Seop Choi

172-

you can't count to 5, but we are supposed to rely on all your statistical analyses?

172 - If you can't count to five, why should we trust any of your analysis? =)

6 seconds... well done Mr. Fox

172 -- Is that who the three Astro guys are is all pitching prospects?

By the way, I would not say that "all" reports say he's not on the market. Ken Rosenthal just wrote last week that the Reds are shopping him for a top pitching prospect.

Just to clarify, I'm not really advocating a trade of Guzman for Dunn. I have advocated such a trade in the past, but with the injuries to this year's team, I'm not so sure.

I'm really just interested in what makes Guzman such a can't miss prospect. I hope the experts are right, but the guy looks like he won't be able to get on base when he starts facing MLB pitching.

177-I may know nothing about baseball, but I did graduate kindergarden

Also, to point out how unpredictable prospects can be, Edwin Jackson was the #4 prospect going into last year and the Dodgers refused to trade him for Adam Dunn. I don't think anyone on this site would mind that trade now. I just hope we don't feel the same way about Guzman next year.

174 - I may be totally wrong, but I don't think anyone was SERIOUSLY using the rankings as an arguement as to Guzman's superiority over Dunn. You have to be very careful where you employ sarcasm around here.

179-

3 words: "Greg Brock"

Mondesi, age 20, Double A: .272/.304/.441

Guzman, age 20, Double A: .289/.358/.507

That is a substantial difference in Guzman's favor in walks drawn and slugging.

doesn't a 6'6" shortstop with above average arm, average range, and an average glove project well to 3B? Or would the Dodgers not consider that due to LaRoche?

#172: The $10 million is extremely important because it's an opportunity cost. I'd rather spend $9 million / year for 2-3 years on Brian Giles, who is crushing the ball in a hitter's park and is a strong defensive outfielder.

You have to be very careful where you employ sarcasm around here.

not only are we all baseball experts, but we also help with unemployment

179 - I'm sympathetic to your concerns about Guzman's plate discipline - I voiced them before this season, in fact. Haven't checked lately to see what the evolution is ... because I procrastinate.

#175: Haha.. I started with three, but I couldn't stop :).

#189: I need to fire my editor.

#178: All reports from Cincinnati, rather. Every city that wants to trade for him is reporting that he's on the market :). From today's ESPN Rumor Central:

According to the Cincinnati Enquirer, Adam Dunn is staying put – for now. When asked if the Reds are shopping Dunn, Reds GM Dan O'Brien said: "Negative." However, Dunn's name likely will come up as the trading deadline approaches. At 25, he is already one of the game's top sluggers, and makes only $4.6 million this year.

I'm actually pinning all my hopes on LaRoche. He's dreamy

187 - I can't tell if you're taking a shot at my verb selection.

184 - Thanks, CD. So he should be better than Mondesi. That's good, at least.

#183: The rankings were being used to argue that Joel Guzman is a better prospect now than Adam Dunn was at the same age. Of course, as everyone has stated, prospects are an unknown quantity.

maybe the Reds can put Izturis at 2B? Cesar, Jackson, and Brazoban/Tiffany?

Three things -

1. I do not employ sarcasm, sarcasm keeps me employed.

2 - I was just having fun with the prospects list.. didn't mean to make anyone feel bad.

3 - I would advocate paying Brian Giles $9 million/year.

4 - For Steve's sake, I hope Guzman stays at SS.

5 - I will support Fearing Blue any time he wants to count to 5 instead of 3.

Just saw this on Rotoworld (this is their comments):

"The Astros would probably be willing to bring Dunn home, but considering how much they'll have to pay him in the future, they're unlikely to give up three of their four best pitching prospects for him."

I still wonder what the Dodgers equivalent to these players would be. Does anyone know?

With the depth of the Dodgers system, I wonder where the Astros' top pitching prospects would rank if they were in the Dodgers' system.

#196: More likely, the Reds would put Izturis at SS and move Lopez to 2B. Lopez has some serious defensive concerns at SS, which his strong offensive numbers are masking.

192 - I'm with you. That .408 OBP he has right now makes my heart melt.

196 - Trade for Dunn to try to salvage this season and have Duaner Sanchez our closer? Wow.

does dunn really "benefit significantly" from the ballpark? are his homers barely clearing a short porch or something? i thought he had ridiculous monster power and was hitting towering drives that would clear the fence in any ballpark. anyway, dodger stadium favors homers too.

Hey Jon, can we start the game thread so I no longer have to hide in shame from my inability to count?

Maybe we can package Jim Tracy in a trade for Dunn...

204. i tell you, nothing would make this wasted season worthwhile more than seeing dunn in dodger blue and tracy in cincy red.

203 - Don't sweat it, Blue. Five strikes and you're out.

#202: From Michael Schell's, Baseball's All-Time Best Sluggers:

Dodger Stadium is slightly worse than neutral for homeruns. Between 1994 and 2003, 1493 homeruns were hit at Dodger Stadium and 1609 were hit during road games.

Great American Ballpark is much better, though the book only has 2003 data. In 2003, 215 homeruns were hit at Great American Ballpark and 176 were hit during road games.

201- I would rather trade Braz than a Guzman/LaRoche/Tiffany/Billingsley, so if that's what it took, then yeah, we'd have to find another closer. I would look at that trade with 2006 in mind more than this season.

I would imagine there is someone in the minors that could come up and compare with Brazoban in effectiveness.

Or we could just Game Over with Erickson =)

Lawton is 33 and makes 7.75 million a year. Can't imagine Depo wanting anything to do with him.

208 - You're right about one thing - the game would be over with Erickson on the mound.

BTW, before this year, Dunn's career HR splits are

Home - 62 home runs
Road - 56 home runs

I would have to think that this year is an aberration. I don't think Dunn would have trouble hitting home runs in Dodger Stadium.

#209: He's in the last year of his contract, would be cheap and can play all three outfield positions. If we could get him for one of our mid-tier pitching prospects, Eric Stults or Derek Thompson, for example, by taking on all of his remaining salary, I would to it. His .793 career OPS would be a huge improvement over what we're running out currently. He's a much better option than Encarnacion, Wilson, or Winn, the other options suggested by ESPN.

Besides, Erickson is our desiginated brawler/ejectee

Encarnac I can't even bring myself to type his name. I never want to see him in a Dodger uni again.

212, yeah I could see DePo bringing back Encarnacion...oh sure...

#211: You're right. Dunn has tremendous power and while his homeruns will likely take a small hit playing in Dodger Stadium, it shouldn't meaningfully impact his production. So, that brings it down to 4 reasons :).

216- nice try

#215: I think ESPN just pulls names from a hat sometimes when suggesting trade rumors. I laughed when I read Encarnacion as well.

Fearing Blue - I also don't think #2 applies. All GMs say that before pulling off a trade. In which case, my apologies for making fun of five reasons; you had three all along. :)

219- brown noser...

#217: In the spirit of good fun, I'll eliminate the off-the-market argument, thus getting down to my original three :). As we all know, that statement is just another way for a GM to say "You're going to pay through the nose b@#$%es!".

#221: I'm too slow to even correct myself correctly...

#216: that's what i was trying to suggest in 211.

223, 211
Vishal, you're Jim Tracy?

er... i was trying to say that's what i meant in #202.

#224: If so, please have Antonio Perez stop bunting. Thank you!

I can't believe all these teams have a better record than the Dodgers:

NY Yankees - after all the grief they have taken.

Toronto - DePo is the genius, Riccardi sucks.

Cleveland - I'm sure we thought they would turn it around so quickly.

Oakland - same as Cleveland, but somehow much more shocking.

NY Mets - come on.

Houston - To me, this was as unlikely to happen as Oakland's turnaround.

Arizona - COME ON.

lol, if Perez stops bunting, Steve will have nothing to complain about.

Actually, I take that back... I forgot about Izturis, Erickson, the GM and Tracy.

229-
and Guzman not playing SS

What were the sentiments on Aubrey Huff? RF, LH and hitting lefties well, only making $5 mill, 28 so probably tradeable(??) by Tampa, .884/.920/.853 OPS last 3 seasons before this off-year. Shouldn't he come cheap this year? Say, Jackson or Loney straight up?

231-

his problem is Huff is not much of a ballplayer's name

for that matter, neither is Audrey

227 - looking at the Dodger injury history, I don't find it hard to believe.

I guess everyone else here already knew that Perez was back tonight. First start back at Coors Field, huh.

235-yes, and Odalis is extremely happy having his first start at Coors

168 - this is on the dodgers.com website: "Star-crossed Taiwanese pitcher Hong-Chi Kuo, finally appearing to be healthy after two Tommy John surgeries, heard a pop in his arm on Sunday and left Double-A Jacksonville's game. Kuo was promoted two weeks earlier after dominating at Class A Vero Beach."

#237: There are two possibilities that have been discussed on DT. One is that he tore something and will be out for good. The other is that it was just scar tissue breaking up, something he has supposedly had problems with in the past. We are all hopeful that it's the latter.

238,
When will we know? Is there a test scheduled to be done?

238 - Are there any other reports that are a little more descriptive? Is he in pain? Did he have an MRI?

Over/Under on Odalis Perez in tonights game is 5 1/3 IPs. Place your virtual bets now.
vr, Xei

241-under...he goes 5 at Coors Field

#240: Nothing has come out so far. Nate emailed the Suns and I imagine he will post if he hears anything back.

when steve first mentioned trading braz for dunn a few days ago, i was very against it. the more i think about, he is the perfect piece. way overvalued, will return to the set up role next year and replaceable with one of our young arms next year.

any status on kuo?

i agree juan encarnacion will not be brought back but he has been par with Bradley this year, with slighlty less power

11 Hr 45 rbi-834 ops and the unreal 358 OBA.

there is my answer on kuo

Jon, if you do another webcast of a fictional sporting event this year, could it please be of the beanbrawl-that-might-have-been between Kim and Kent yesterday?

I'm really interested to see how that tussle would have turned out.

Thanks in advance

I have returned home. I have read all the comments in this thread.

I think I can best help everyone here by doing one thing: showering.

Um, so (he asks with teeth clenched), who got sent down when Odalis was activated???

247 - (in John Wayne drawl) Konichiwa, big guy!

248. no news yet. one can hope, though!

As long as there's still hope...

246 - I'm surprised that the comments about the near fight focused only on Colorado's having hit the Dodgers with pitches, and not on the fact that the Dodgers were sensitive to it from what happened just one day before - three HBPs, one possible season-ending injury. I really interpreted Kent's actions (despite what Vin lip-read) as, "Enough is enough. I don't care how wild you are - it's time you all started missing outside, not inside."

I realize I'm reading quite a lot into that.

I'm glad there wasn't a fight. I hate baseball fights with a passion. Don't understand why people are so eager to see them - they only contribute to a toxic atmosphere.

252-
"We came for blood!"

When you get off the plane at the United terminal at LAX, one of the celebrities that they use in a sign promoting LA tourism is Kaz Ishii.

At Union Station, they use Ted McGinley.

What happened exactly? I missed the game.. flew back up to where work is.

248, if I were a betting man, I'd say Osoria

I would guess it's Ross or Erickson. I was thinking Osoria, but I imagine the Dodgers want as many arms as possible for the rest of this series and Erickson just threw his innings for the week.

Can't imagine it's Erickson - he's coming off his best week in ages, what with his three or so effective innings against Arizona and his save against the Bears. But we'll know very soon.

maybe its Kent, might as well go all AAA

If this is Depo's goal:
Get impact player that may help fix '05 and be highly beneficial in '06 & '07.

Then I still don't see a better answer than Dunn (in terms of performance, history, age, availability & price). Even if '05 is lost.

Yes, thru arb he may cost $9M '06/$12M '07 and we may overpay in right now in blue chip prospects...but I would argue he's undervalued even at those prices. Dunn is an extremely rare player.

Man, I miss Meagher right now.

It's like a death watch. Who will "The Turk" visit in the Dodger locker room?

174 - JT, Thanks for posting who someof the other 2000 prospects were. I am always curious how those guys measure up today.

O/U - Unfortunately, under (although I really hope I'm wrong. I'd love seven strong inngs)

And my headline for the trade of Izzy and prospects to the Reds: "Itzuris Good to Welcome Dunn Aboard"

261 - "Izturis Tsuris All Dunn"

Skimming through:

FB -- DePo was denying he was trading Shawn Green right in the middle of making three different offers for him. I don't think there's anything wrong with that; but like most tactical media statements, the GM of the Reds is, ironically, not the first guy I would go to for confirmation

JT -- Thanks for your understanding on the FUTURE(TM) staying at shortstop. It's just better the longer we maintain that legal fiction.

stubbs -- This is, of course, not an ideal time to trade the one guy you might possibly call your closer. But there's never an ideal time to do anything.

Everyone -- If Juan Encarnacion shows up at Dodger Stadium again, wearing a Dodger uniform and pretending to "play" for us, I will climb to the top of the stadium, pour gasoline all over myself, light myself on fire, dive off the mezzanine, and land on the pitchers mound in a glorious display of self-immolatory protest.

262 -- DePo Dunn Did It.

263 - Can you aim for the bullpen instead?

Nice Jon. I was trying but couldn't find a way to use Tsuris in a headline.

263-that I would pay to see

Yes, Steve, but can you pitch once you get there?

263,
With the season potentially in shambles, a one-year rental of Encarnacion maybe worth it to see that actually happen.

Steve,

Do that when Tracy is at the mound about to hand the ball to Scott Erickson.

Thanks, it's been fun.

Wait a minute, Steve. If you leap from the mezzanine, those poor folks sitting under the new video strip might not be able to see.

Air-Rick-san, Air-Rick-san, Er-ick-son!

ill chime in on guzman since i got here a litle late.

the only thing that worries me about guzman is his high whiff rate. he has struck out 88 times in 284 at bats so far. that is the most concerning thing for me when it comes to guzmans production in the major leagues.

to put it in perspective, dunn, a guy strikes out close to 200 times in the majors, struck out only 82 times in 350ABs between AA and AAA at the age of 21.

everything else is dandy though.

273 - I don't care if the guy strikes out every time he makes an out as long as he gets on base at a high rate.

What worries me, as I've said, is that this is by far Guzman's best OBP year, and it is only in the .350s, in AA.

i dont mind his walk rate right now. its at a iso of .69 which is pretty good.

his walk rates have improved and will probably improve more as he matures more as a hitter.

the strikes outs worry me more though.

274,
As long as it's actual walk improvement and not a fluke, he'll be fine... Though only time will tell if it's actual improvement.

Damn, this was a lot of reading, don't you people have jobs? ;)

I am all for trading for Dunn, but I don't think Guzman has to be a part of the package. One of our top pitching prospects (Billingsley, Tiffany, Broxton, or Orenduff) along with a mid-tier prospect (Thompson, Houlton, Elbert) and a middle infielder (Aybar or Lu) should be sufficient.

Oh yeah, and for the guy who kept asking about how the Astros' prospects rank, John Sickels has them as

Ezequiel Astacio - Grade B
Fernando Nieve - Grade B
Taylor Buchholz - Grade C+

If we were to give up three pitchers of the same grade, it would be Jackson, Tiffany, and Houlton.

To answer the inevitable question (if people are still reading this thread), here's the link to the grades for Dodger prospects

http://www.minorleagueball.com/story/2005/3/2/95018/95680

the thing is, if guzman can stay at SS, then you dont trade him, his value there would be tejada like.

if guzman cannot stay at SS, then you can look at trading him because as an Left or right fielder, a line of 280/350/525 30 homeruns is pretty good but not top of the line.

but that line as an SS? forgettabbouitttttt

277 - I'd make that trade in a heartbeat.

277, 280 - If you trade Tiffany, Plaschke will tear his hair out. Wait...

I mean, he will lose his senses and start writing in an incoherent fashion. Wait...

I mean, he will get really angry and start writing small paragraphs like I am right now to somehow make his logic seem correct. Wait...

Adam Dunn fun fact:

.246/.390/.560 - 87 k's
.950 OPS - 15th in MLB

Turn 10 k's into singles:
.284/.420/.597
1.017 OPS - 4th in MLB

10 k's in 333 PA's and you've got Albert Pujols. 10 k's to turn all the batting average witches into fairies.

So signability aside, I hereby request that all Dunn-naysayers also explain why they would prefer X prospect over Albert Pujols.

vr,
bigcpa