I don't know about the rest of you, but I am feeling cautiously optimistic about next year. Catcher looks solid with Navarro and Martin. The bullpen looks good with Gagne back and all the young power arms behind him. Lowe and Penny are both reliable starters. Kent at second and Drew in center are stars.

Of course then we get to the rest of the team. Who will start in the outfield corners? Who will play third and short? Will Odalis be healthy and effective? Who will be the fourth and fifth starters? Will Choi be allowed to play everyday?

Jon, perhaps you might do us the service of listing some plausible free agents to be who play corner outfield or are starting pitchers or play third base. I guess the idea is that Guzman might be ready to play third in 2007. Maybe Antonio Perez could become a decent third baseman with hard work in the offseason. A lot of questions...

So you were playing with all these rosters on your laptop just as DePodesta was on his during last night's game?

You don't see Wunch or Dessens returning? I would think Dessens would provide "starter" in surance & Wunch was an effective lefty.

Saenz could also be asked back. what do you think?

1 - Others have done so in the comments previously; I'm sure they would be willing to do so again. I can do it myself, but not today.

2 - DePodesta has a laptop! He must be an evil mutant robot from Mars!

No, I was starting comatosely at the game.

Ok, you aren't going to go anywhere near there today, but I will. :) Who is the backup 1B on this list? Or are we to ass-u-me that that would be one of our needs and that perhaps Saenz or a Saenz clone would be signed to a one year contract. I'm sure especially if Buntermaker is around next year that Choi as your #1 option at first base would be unacceptable.

There doesn't seem like a whole lot on the free agent market this offseason, and even the next, atleast not the type of stuff one would like to throw large sums of money at. I think you are going to see DePodesta trying to find a few diamonds in the rough and probably orchestrating some trades. DePodesta has shown that he is not shy when it comes to wheeling and dealing. Much of that money that the Dodgers have to spend might not go to free agents, but to the contracts of players acquired via trade. Just my $0.02. vr, Xei

Presumably, some improvement to the bench will take care of itself in the process of upgrading the starting lineup from what you have here. I can't imagine the Dodgers going into 2006 with Ledee and Werth starting in the outfield, for example, but they'd look good on the bench.

Obviously, the bench would have looked a lot better this year if it didn't consist mostly of players replacing the players who were injured, who themselves were often replacing the original players who were also injured.

For me, the holes seem to be at 1ST, 3RD, starter, and OF. Can any of those be filled from within? Does Aybar have enough power for a corner infielder?

3 - You're missing the point. These are not predictions. This is the base. I'm not counting free agents. I'm only counting people under contract or people I'm confident will be offered salary arbitration.

Top 20 in Win Shares (as of a few days ago), per Hardball Times.

1. Pujols - 36
2. D.Lee - 35
3. AROD - 31
4. B.Giles - 31
5. J.Kent - 31
6. C.Delgado - 29
7. G.Sheffield - 29
8. ManRam - 28
9. B.Roberts - 28
10. M.Cabrera - 28
11. B.Abreu - 28
12. J.Bay - 28
13. D.Ortiz - 27
14. J.Edmonds - 27
15. M.Ensberg - 27
16. M.Teixeira - 27
17. A.Dunn - 26
18. M.Tejada - 25
19. A.Jones - 25
20 - C.Lee - 25

Al Campanis never had a laptop!
Branch Rickey never used a laptop!
Wilbert Robinson never used a laptop!
Larry MacPhail just scribbled names down on a cocktail napkin and acquired players while in drunken stupors!

And the Dodgers were good then!

8- sorry, I thought we were looking at current Dodgers likely to return.

And not only was DePodesta using a laptop, but he was using .... a spreadsheet....

5
Can Saenz really be counted on to play a full season in the field? He seems chronically hobbled by various pains, and if my memory serves me right, this has been true in past years for him as well. I suppose he could still be re-signed to platoon with Choi (or someone else), but if there is to be someone new to be an everyday 1Bman (either if Choi is gone or not considered a starter) it will presumably need to come from outside the organization.

Notice I choose the word "presume" in order to avoid you know what... : )

10- Branch rickey was an innovator, if he could have used a laptop, he would have. (He didn't use a radar gun either, should we shun those as well?)

Reagarding Hee Seop, even as a worst case scenario he's a reasonable (and affordable) bench player/pinch hitter/spot starter.

For a temporary 3rd base solution until our AA guys come of age, how about Bill Mueller? He's relatively cheap and seems like a Moneyball kinda guy. (Not much power, though).

If we get a stud outfielder, Mueller would be a great addition, IMHO.

14 - I think your sarcasm detector was off there, Kent.

Campanis had no laptop, but it's a little known fact that he used to fill out punch cards full of baseball stats and feed them into the computers at UCLA, which would then tell him which player to sign to a long-term contract.

I think Saenz had a good season this year, but I dont think it would be a good idea to keep him around. He'd make for good trade bait to an AL team. I kinda feel the same way about Antonio Perez. He was batting like .350 earlier in the season, but eventually fell down towards .310 and given more starts might have regressed to the mean. I say trade him when his value is high. We have alot of utility guys coming up who could fill the gap he would leave in the roster.

15. What about Willy Aybar?

19- Aybar's had a great start... but do we know how consistent he's going to be? He also has no power. I don't feel comfortable handing a starting job to someone with such a brief MLB track record. At the very, very least (even if you're sold on Aybar as a potential starter) someone like Mueller would provide a nice platoon, and you know what you'd be getting.

Given how the Valentin/Perez "platoon" worked out this year, though, I'd feel much more comfortable having one starter locked in at third.

15 - Mueller would be a nice pickup. I like Russell Branyan too.

I still think Milton Bradley will be back. I think time heals all wounds. I wouldnt mind this lineup, if everyone is brought back:

SS- Perez
1b- Choi
RF- Drew
2b- Kent
CF- Bradley
LF- Cruz
C- Navarro
3rd- Aybar

Bench: Robles, Werth, Ledee, Mueller, Bako,PLUS 1 of (Guzman, Ruggiano, LaRoche)--

Staff:
Penny
Lowe
Perez
Houlton
Billingsley
Dessens
Sanchez
Osoria
Gagne
Broxton
Kuo

Just be resigning Cruz, arbitration to Bradley, and bringing in a lower tier free agent like Bill Mueller...

Thats a pretty good team for only 70mils.

Mueller would be a good one or two-year stopgap at a reasonable price. It's hard to tell whether he'll be available, though. Some reports say the Red Sox want to re-sign him, some say they'll let him walk and give the full-time job to Youkilis. If they let Mueller walk, it'd definitely be worth looking into for the Dodgers.

22 - I think the Milton Bradley situation has already been decided (though obv. not executed on yet). I can't see how it is dependent on anything going forward (with the exception of his knee - I'm speaking more of his "behavior"). He is what he is. If the Dodgers want to overlook his off-field and clubhouse behavior, then of course they bring him back. All this "character" business from a few weeks back is just lip service then.

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that rotation, especially the depth (or lack thereof).

20. Willy Aybar has had a similar career path as Jhonny Peralta of the Indians. Peralta never belted that many homers in the minors, but he's developed nicely on the Indians.

Aybar had a down power year in vegas this year, but the years before he showed some power. 11, 15, 15 hr power.

Mueller will be 35 next year and his power numbers are declining. He did post an OPS of .805 in Fenway Park this year, nothing really to get too excited about. At best I would want him as a backup and only as a starter if things didn't work out for Aybar or APerez, but I'd rather give the at bats to the young guys if they can put up similiar numbers. Plus if Mueller wants a multi million dollar contract or more than one year, I'd say forget it. vr, Xei

24.

#1 Penny
#2. Lowe
#3. Perez
#4. Houlton
#5. Billingsley

I agree the rotation is a little thin at the bottom, but I dont want the Dodgers to resign Weaver at 10mils, or chase after Burnett (injury concern). Maybe a Ted Lilly type to solidify the rotation.

We've been talking mainly about hitters... but as Jon has repeatedly pointed out, this year, our pitching has let us down more. How do we rectify this for next year?

Obviously, Gagne in the bullpen will be a stabilizing factor... however, I don't think we should assume he'll be back 100% to the Gagne of old, since it's always hard to tell how someone will respond to surgery. I do like the inclusion of Kuo and Broxton, though.

What about the starting pitching? Do we write off the semi-off years of Lowe and Penny? What about the #4 and #5 spots? What Odalis Perez will we get in '06? How can we assume that the AA kids will be ready to go?

It's great if everything comes through well, but it's a good idea to plan for a far worse situation. Problem is, there's not much in starting pitching FA... so what sort of (realistic) trades might Depo try to do?

If we trade the rights to Bradley in the offseason, do you think we could get a #3 or #4 starting pitcher for him? WIth his anger history and injury, it's hard to judge his trade value. vr, Xei

20. Why are you unwilling to give jobs to the "AA guys" in 2007, but unwilling to give Aybar the job in 2006. Part of utilizing a good farm system is giving guys a chance to play. Concerns about Aybar's consistency are unfounded:
2003(high-A)=274/336/427
2004(AA)=276/346/425
2005(AAA)=297/356/419
Aybar has been the most consistent player in the system over the past 3year and clearly ready for a major league job. PECOTA's weighted mean EQA for Aybar in 2006 is .264. He compfortably projects as a 3-5 win player. The dodgers should invest money in other areas, not to block at least one good prospect.

I've seen the mentioning of Billingsley in the 2006 rotation on quite a few posts. A few months ago when this was mentioned, many regulars said spring of 2006 was too early for him (which is NOT my opinion by the way). If you want to give Billingsley a shot to make the rotation out of spring training, which I would do. Why not also give Broxton a shot? Is there some endurance issue, or a problem with him not having enough pitches to be a major league starter? I know he did both in the minors.
vr, Xei

22 Your roster should include whoever we got for trading Cesar Izturis.

The last thing I want is to turn this into another Tracy discussion, so let me be careful to phrase this as a point on future roster construction.

As long as Tracy is back, the GM cannot continue to populate the roster with players that the manager won't play. The Choi issue is not just a matter of Choi wasting on the bench, but also a matter of very useful utility guy in Saenz breaking down from over use.

I'll try to make that more generic. If the GM and Manager don't agree on Plan A, it has a domino effect on the rest of the roster.

I think this is my way of saying we should get a new first baseman.

28. Bullpen:

RHP- Broxton
RHP- Sanchez
RHP- Gagne
LHP- Kuo
RHP- Dessens
RHP- Schmoll or Osoria

Broxton, Sanchez, and Gagne all have great tools to become very good pitchers. Gagne's already there. Sanchez with his changeup has gotten a lot better. Broxton with his arm, and his assortment of pitches being a prior starter also has a ton of potential.

7th- Broxton
8th- Sanchez
9th- Gagne
Loogy- Kuo
Swing- Dessens
Mop Up- Schmoll

I like our bullpen.

Starters, there's not a lot you can do. Just hope Penny stays healthy. That Odalis Perez bounces back. Lowe is what he is.

That leaves Houlton, Billz. You could bring in Ted Lilly to be the #4 innings eater that Weaver was. Or just go with the two kids and use Dessens as insurance. I'd like to pick up Lilly. I like having 2 lefties in the rotation. We can go RLRLR in the rotation...

I'd really like to have Lilly. Problem is that he'll probably command three years at 22-24 million.

With our current pitching depth, I don't know if I want to make that kind of commitment to a slightly above average pitcher.

16

A sarcasm detector! Now there's a really useful invention!

28. Your right, the offense, despite the injuries, and the sinkholes at 3B and C, is middle of the pack in the NL in runs scored. The team EQA is .260, league average. The offense should be fine just by patching up 3B and C with Aybar and Navarro, and better health.

The pitching staff has been the culprit, the bullpen has been largley to blame. Kuo and Broxton, and Gagne's return will help a lot, but will Gagne be the same, and will Kuo and Broxton work out? Id be open to bringing in one experienced setup guy as insurance, like a JC Romero or Juan Rincon from MIN.

The bullpen will need at least one guy to take Weaver's spot. Im fine with Houlton as the 5th starter. I think the FA market is best to avoid this year for starting pitching. A trade, or low cost signing would be best. Example; trade for Zito, then sign Cory Lidle. Zito might be a tought guy to trade for, but really anyone capable of pitching 200 decent innings would do.

OT. As I've noted here a bunch of times before, the Washington Post has many of its reporters -- all subjects, not just sports -- run weekly online chats with readers. On the sports front, this strikes me as a great use of a newspaper's web page. The two-way interaction with a reporter you've gotten to know is a lot of fun, and the chats bubble up a lot of interesting info and allow one to comment on issues raised by particular articles in a way that would not otherwise be possible. All papers should do this; it's a great feature that the reporters seem generally to enjoy as well (of course, they have to seem that way).

Now the Post has also started including a sidebar to some of its online articles identifying blogs that have linked that article. Was very surprising to me to see that. I don't know if I think that's a particularly good idea -- would seem to raise some difficult editorial policy type decisions -- but I commend the paper's effort to creatively manage its online presence into more than just a quicker version of the paper paper.

One more Washington point -- a question this time. The buzz here is that Jeff Smulyan is the frontrunner to buy the team. I gather he's been around the league a while, owned Seattle at one point. Any views/gossip/dirt?

The NY Times has online chats with its columnists too and also some have blogs or message boards where they respond. All of this is being required since the NY Times is requiring people to pay to read the columnists.

16, 35

Kent might just be on the young side. My son, who's 15, doesn't quite believe I got through high school and college without a computer.

*Saenz is going to get a big offer from an AL team that needs a DH and won't balk at paying big $ to a 30-something galump (Bill Bavasi, I'm looking at you; the M's just had to write off the Bucky Jacobsen experiment, and Ibanez isn't the answer at DH). Who couldn't see the Angels trying to land him as well? DePodesta will balk at that, rightly, and needing to make peace with Tracy, he'll accomplish it by re-signing Weaver and not Saenz. At some point, somebody may take Jeff Kent aside and ask him to think about playing 1B a lot so they can get Robles and Perez into the lineup - remember that when Kent signed, there was serious talk about him playing 3B or 1B.

*Seeing Houlton and Billingsley in the 2006 rotation does not give me confidence. Houlton this year, good starts notwithstanding, was not good enough to be a #5 guy for a playoff team.

*It could be worse - ussmariner.com is really rooting for the M's to sign Kevin Brown.

*Why is Carrara not on this list?

*Branch Rickey embraced statistics wholeheartedly and even invented a metric that was like a precursor to OPS. Somewhere, there's a picture of him posing in front of a blackboard filled with equations and smiling proudly. And somewhere else, there's doubtless an op-ed from that era by a long-forgotten name that calls Rickey "Blackboard Boy."

33
So you think Ghame Over is over? Do you picture him traded, or in the minors next year? Has he really fallen below Schmoll and Osoria in our hearts?

38 - Smulyan was a fairly miserable owner in Seattle. He pretty much spent the entire time whining about how they needed a cable deal, publicly-funded stadium, etc. to be successful, but doing very little about it. He also threatened to move the team all the time.

I was thinking about Tracy and his personnel decisions, trying to solve the Sphinx like mystery of why he doesn't play Hee Who Will Not Be Named, and other decisions.

Here's my hypothesis: It comes down to Spring Training. Tracy takes that period very seriously as the educational phase of the baseball season. For young players, there is an agreement among the player, the coaches and himself on 'goals' for that Spring. He then makes his determination on future playing assignments based on how well they do during Spring. A player who doesn't get an A during Spring could impress the manager later, but it's an uphill battle.

I'm suggesting this hypothesis not to reignite a Choi debate, but to shape expectations for next year. Tracy is going to be presented with a bunch of rookie options next Spring. It's hard to tell now who will excel to a surprising degree, and who will not. But it's at least possible that he and DePo will decide that certain players no one is now projecting for 2006 will emerge during spring as viable options. And the reverse. Given the bulge of talent in AA, it stands to reason that Tracy will have more options this spring than he's ever had, or will know what to do with; but an optimistic approach is justified by the numbers if nothing else. Which makes me think DePo will not be very active this winter on the trade/free agent front, unless he finds a deal that is stacked in the Dodgers favor. I'm not sure that's what I want to see, but it's what I would expect if this hypothesis is true.

44- The Spring Training theory is a good one. Note that Choi changed his approach this spring and tried to slug more and walk less, presumably in response to Tracy's comments last year that a first baseman should hit home runs. He got a reputation as a free swinger, his average and OBP suffered and that led to the current rap on Choi, "Choi can't hit."

He can't win, because nothing less than a 30/100 season will clear his name, and he can't hit 30 HR if they refuse to use him against any and all lefties.

9 - Kinda puts the "Andruw Jones for MVP" debate into context.

40- I'm 51 and also survived college w/o a computer. On the otherhand, if I went back to school today, I'd certainly use one.

42 - I don't see how Brazoban could be behind Schmoll. I don't think Schmoll has had two consecutive good weeks all year.

42. I dont see Brazoban coming back next year, unless he beats out Schmoll for the mop up role. Brazo might be good trade bait to a team that just wants a power arm that maybe they can mold.

Gagne>Brazo
Dessens>>>>Brazo-- bc Dessens can also start
Sanchez>>>>Brazo--bc Sanchez has the changeup
Kuo>>>>>Brazo-- bc Kuo is left handed
Broxton>>>>>Brazo--- bc Broxton has the high draft pick pedigree. I think the organization is more invested in Brox than Brazo.

That leaves Brazo fighting it out with Schmoll, Osoria, and some other NRI for the last bullpen spot. At least thats how I see it if everyone is resigned and no trades are made.

49 - Has LA fielded a 12- or 11-man bullpen for the bulk of the year?

If 11, I'd send Broxton down, keep Braz and teach him a change up.

If 12, everyone stays!

Broxton and Kuo show potential but neither has yet proved capable at the ML level. Why do so many of you believe they are ready to cut it in the bigs? I still see Wunch comming back as his injury will make it hard for him to get a deal elsewhere.

Bob Nightengale's GM Survival chances story in McPaper:

Paul DePodesta, Dodgers

• Survival odds: 60%

DePodesta has a target on his back after this miserable season. He's responsible for the horrid signings of J.D. Drew, Derek Lowe and Odalis Perez. But the farm system has been nicely restocked, and there's no reason why the Dodgers won't contend again next year.

The big question will be whether DePodesta even wants to come back. He has told friends that he's miserable. He has three years left on his contract, and owners Frank and Jamie McCourt don't want to swallow $2.4 million.

• Prediction: DePodesta stays, but if the Dodgers miss the playoffs next season, he's out.

Is having both Schmoll and Osoria kind of redundant.

Here's my team for next year:
Navarro C
Choi/Eduardo Perez 1B
Kent 2B
Veteran SS (Robles can backup)
Aybar 3B
Power hitter LF
Cruz CF
Drew RF

SP
Penny
Perez
Lowe
Veteran (I like Ted Lilly)
Let (Houlton, Billingsley, Jackson battle it out for the 5th spot in the rotation)
Add a couple cheap veteran relievers

52 I can't recall the last time Bob Nightengale gave accurate commentary.

52 Unless the McCourt's really are slaves to popular opinion (as determined by the LA Times), I'd say that this is a pretty stupid column. DePo has stated from day 1, and McCourt has seemed to echo, that (something like) 2007 is the game plan - that the restocked system will start to bear fruit then, and until then that the ML lineup would be makeshift, good enough to contend, but not the focus. And had the Dodgers had even AVERAGE injury problems this year, they would have contended, and likely won the West. They wouldn't have measured up to the Cards or (we see now) the Braves, but they'd have been back in the playoffs.

I hate it when columnists just make stuff up. As though their own fickle opinions somehow summarize both the public mood and the calculations of decision makers.

Here is what I think the dodgers should do for 2006, first off I would like them to increase payroll about 30 million, but since that won't happen here is what they should do.
I'll start with free agents, get brian giles, then get an affordable starting pitcher like a millwood type, there might be someone better for the price, but I'll use millwood for the example.
Next are the current dodgers with expiring contracts, team options, mutual option, arbitration eligibility, sign dessens (mutual option), sign bradley (aribitration), sign seanz (free agent), sign cruz (free agent), if I missed anyone that is arbitration eligible then whoever is arbitration eligible on my 25 man roster below offer them arbitration.
Next is a trade in the middle of the season at the same time izturis comes off the disabled list and at the same time either laroche or guzman has had enough time to develop, a trade for a young good cheap "penny type or better" starting pitcher that involves trading away izturis, antonio perez, repko, delwyn young, either schmoll or osoria, and either jackson or houlton.
Next is the transition when the trade happens, the pitcher we get takes over in the rotation for houlton, guzman or laroche gets promoted and takes antonio perez spot on the roster, if we trade jackson instead of houlton then houlton goes to the bullpen, if we trade houlton instead of jackson then jackson doesn't factor into the 25 man roster cause he won't be on the team in the first place, and either osoria,kuo or schmoll is our 6th reliever till the trade (if its jackson getting traded, which means houlton moves to the bullpen) and osoria/schmoll/kuo gets sent down, or either osoria,kuo or schmoll stays as the 6th reliever if its houlton getting traded.
Roster before the trade, a position by the position players name means that he is a starter.
Drew of
Kent 2b
Giles of
Choi/seanz platoon 1b
Bradley of
Perez ss temporary till trade
Aybar 3b
Martin/navarro catchers need quite a few days off c
Cruz
Ledee
Werth
Robles

Starting pitchers
Penny
Lowe
Perez
Millwood type free agent
Houlton temporary till trade

Bullpen
Gagne
Brazoban
Sanchez
Dessens
Broxton
Schmoll,kuo or osoria could be temporary till trade depending if houlton doesn't get traded

Roster after trade
Drew of
Kent 2b
Giles of
Choi/seanz platoon 1b
Bradley of
Guzman ss or laroche 3b
Aybar ss or 3b depending on who gets promoted between guzman, laroche
Martin/navarro catchers need quite a few days off c
Cruz
Ledee
Werth
Robles

Starting rotation
"penny type or better" from trade
Penny
Lowe
Perez
Millwood type free agent

Bullpen
Gagne
Brazoban
Sanchez
Dessens
Broxton
Either houlton, schmoll, kuo, osoria depending on how I explained above

This roster fits within the budget.
Why not sign weaver?, cause boras is his agent and will be too expensive.
And obviously tracy is fired or opts out of his contract.
Remember that both lowe and perez will be in their final contract year in 2007, so they will be easy to trade to make room for billingsley in 2007, which means we are not blocking billingsley by signing a free agent starting pitcher and trading for one.
And remember having werth, ledee, cruz all as backup outfielders gives us depth incase drew, bradley, giles gets injured.
If we can't sign seanz because of an AL team will want him as a DH, then sign a clone.
To me there is absolutely no reason to spend money on outside help for the bullpen, we have plenty of young relievers, and if you build a good offense and good starting pitching, you give the bullpen some breathing room for the most part.

The only name that jumped out at me from Jon's list was Schmoll. I don't think he's ML quality now, and I'm not sure I see much upside. Brazoban and Broxton could learn off-speed pitches (tho I think that's what the minors are for -- learning and experimenting) but Schmoll relies on deception, and that's not enough unless you can really control your pitches. I dunno. I'm not a pitcher. But I'm not on the Schmoll bandwagon.

Nightengale did go on to say that Jim Bowden had brought respect to the Washington franchise.

I wonder if he also brought them their good fortune from earlier in the year and if he is responsible for their bad fortune now?

54 - Yes, regarding the line that DePodesta "has told friends that he's miserable." Honestly, this is the kind of thing that sort of drives me crazy with some baseball writers. This is not a good use of unnamed sources. There's no context, no way to evaluate the merits of the quote.

Just out of curiosity, why would DePo be miserable as far as staying in Los Angeles? He doesn't seem at all like the kind of person to let one bad season rob him of all his convictions and self-confidence. Certainly, I can understand him being miserable about the Dodgers' W-L record, but what's even the logic that would suggest he's so miserable that he would consider trying to get out?

also for 56, lets not rush billingsley, and lets make him our starting pitcher that is truely fined tuned in the minors.
lets make sure he is ready when we bring him up.
give him 1 more year in the minors.

56 Millwood leads the AL in ERA, at 2.97. What makes you think he'll be affordable?

58 - I think Joe Sheehan determined a month or so ago that a huge part of the Nationals' production derives from Omar Minaya-acquired talent.

59
And since when does Depo have "friends"? Is that referring to his laptops?:)

Since when are Drew and Lowe "horrid" signings? I can see how some might disagree with what they're being paid, but so extreme as to be "horrid"?

Realistically, what is an "affordable" starting pitcher, especially one worth getting (ie. one that's a significant improvement over what we have)?

I can't see any worthwhile FA pitcher this year going for less than $8+ per, unless the market suddenly takes a downturn.

61
he won't get a 4 or 5 year deal like burnett and weaver.
millwood would to me be a nice 2 or 3 year pick up at 8 million per year, preferably 2 year.
and remember that both perez and lowe are in their final year in 2007, which will make them easier to trade, opening the door for billingsley.

Scene: DePodesta household. Paul walks out to pick up his copy of the LA Times on the front porch.

Paul DeP: Oh no!
Mrs. DeP: What happened honey?
Paul DeP: I just looked at the Bill Plaschke column!
Mrs. DeP: So, what did he say?
Paul DeP: He called me "Google Boy"! He said I used an iPod to pick players!
Mrs. DeP: That's not so bad.
Paul DeP: No, this hurts my feelings.
Mrs. DeP: Paul, it will be OK.
Paul DeP: No, my life and reputation are ruined. Frank McCourt is going to kill me!
Mrs. DeP: No, he won't.
Paul DeP: Yes, he will. He doesn't like bad publicitiy!
Mrs. DeP: Umm... Paul.
Paul DeP: [sniffs] What?
Mrs. DeP: There's a black van with "Sitrick" on it parked outside. I think there are men with guns coming out of it.
Paul DeP: Honey, grab the baby and the Hee-Seop Choi baseball cards! We'll have to go on the lam!

a trade for a young good cheap "penny type or better" starting pitcher that involves trading away izturis, antonio perez, repko, delwyn young, either schmoll or osoria, and either jackson or houlton.

Izturis is damaged goods with a damaged OPS, Everyone else, and I'm including Jackson is marginal at best. And some GM will give us a "penny type or better" pitcher for that? I don't see it happening. None of those except Izzy is a legit starter IMO so the GM would have to have an empty bench to even consider that.

58- 62- "Respect" in these circles seems to be defined as "overpaying veteran players," it's very similar to the definition of "respect" used in the MLBPA dictionary. Also used in the olive oil and auto salvage industries.

66 werthgagne31: This will sound like sniping, but it's really more about me than anything else: Any chance you would consider using capital letters and paragraphs? They make things easier to read. If you don't want to, OK, we all have our own stylistic fetishes, but it would be easier on your readers. This is by no means a demand -- just a request. I think part of it also is that the 1-sentence paragraph format smells too Plaschkerific to me. That's my problem, of course, not an objective evil on your part.

But back to my question. Taking Telemachos's point in 65 seriously, why do you think Millwood could be had for $8-9M per, when most people think that Weaver will get more than that?

L.A. Observed is reporting many people complaining of a foul smell throughout L.A. yesterday. No truth to the rumor that it is the rotting corpse of this year's team :)

68
jackson and houlton are being considered in our starting rotation for 2006 by many posters on this board and others, osoria and schmoll are legit bullpen relievers, antonio perez is a starting 2b, delwyn yound is a legit prospect, and izturis is a gold glove ozzie smith type ss according to some, but not me.
look at who we gave up to get penny AND CHOI, and compare it to who i'm proposing to give up FOR ONLY A PENNY TYPE STARTING PITCHER NOT PLUS A CHOI TYPE.

antonio perez is a starting 2b
He is?

The guy the Dodgers should be targeting is Jake Westbrook

72 I think Marty's point is not that the deal you propose would be bad for the Dodgers, but that he can't imagine another GM being willing to make such a deal. All of our scrap parts for a #1 or #2 starting pitcher? Only a GM who had too many starting pitchers (as Florida arguably did late last year) no decent bench players would make that deal. If it's a great deal for LA, isn't it likely lousy for the other guy? Takes 2 to tango.

Jake Westbrook is Derek Lowe in the mirror.

67. Bob Timmermann

"Google Boy"...wasn't that TJ Simers' quote?

74 obviously said it better than me :)

*Paul DeP: Honey, grab the baby and the Hee-Seop Choi baseball cards! We'll have to go on the lam!
*

Thanks for the laugh Bob T. I thought for a second you were going to say grab the Hee-Seop beenie babies. Now that would be a scary sight.
vr, Xei

74
i guess i just disagre that jackson,houlton,osoria,shmoll,izturis,perez are scraps.
young is a prospect.
repko is scrap tho, but some gm's value tools.
well if we can't get this deal done then jackson or houlton are our 5th starter next year, which is not a good thing.
oh well.

74. I'm sure Cesar Izturis is valued by other GM's quite substantially. How about Izturis to the Mariners for Joel Pineiro?

79 That's the problem with your argument. You say that Houlton and Jackson aren't scraps, then turn around and say having them as our 5th starter isn't a good thing, which means they're scraps.

Jon,
Thanks for the list. Lots of serious questions to look at here, and I'm not exactly positive about them winning anything next year either.

However, these young guys look to be very good for the future in the big scheme of things. I certainly applaude Depodesta for that, and I like the idea of seeing home grown or home developed baseball a lot more then Free Agent Wars.

About J.D. Drew:

When I was about 12 years old, a guy that lived a few miles away gained national attention when he drove (actually towed) his Lincoln Continental on to the front lawn of the Ford Motor Company plant in Pico Riviera and prompty lit it on fire. This guy, had saved his entire life's savings for this car and it was just the biggest lemon imaginable. Given the day, Ford didn't care and of course didn't want to be responsible for the car in anyway. Everything that could go wrong with the car did, and he was a hopeless victim.

While I felt for this guy, as did the rest of the community who drove by his house on Leffingwell Road, seeing this burned out wreck of a car sitting on a trailer with a lemon tree planted right in the middle of it, I asked my Dad, "Why on earth he would have ever wanted to buy a Ford?"

And that's what I feel about J.D. Drew.

79 I don't want to sound like I'm coming down on you. I want better pitching too. I just don't think that scenario worked. I don't have others to better it though :)

And Darren Dreifort, and Todd Hundley, and the list can go on infinitum....

80 - The M's don't want Izturis. They're high on their Cuban import Yuniesky Betancourt, who is apparently a wizard with the glove, is hitting decently in his current cup of coffee and perhaps most importantly of all, has a complete set of ligaments. They also like Jose Lopez a lot as their 2B and think he's ready. However, their M's bench is woefully thin, and they could desperately use some outfield power. Bavasi knows he's on thin ice, and he might be desperate enough to work a deal for MB.

82. Tommy Naccarato

I see him as a preowned non-certified Saab. :)

If we find a solid lead-off hitter (Aybar, some alternate signing in the off-season), who isn't happy with Izturis batting eighth? I'm all for maximizing talent, but Izturis is not hugely expensive, is an excellent defender, and is a perfectly fine #8 hitter. Plus, any team needs some continuity with its players, and really Gagne and Izturis are the only two left on the Dodgers.

Drew is like a Jaguar, one of the best available, but too often breaks down. After repairs, you think that there can't possibly be anymore problems and then it breaks down again.

88. Uncle Miltie

LOL

Whereas Dreifort was a Fiat.

I'm not letting Tommy anywhere near J.D. Drew with a lighter.

88, 86- LOL.

I love having a Jaguar as long as we have some Accords standing by to replace him temporarily.

Both applicable comparisons, both Saab and Jaguar! (pronounced "jaggy-wire")(according to the commercial)

My sister wanted to buy a Saab once and being that she is as mechincal as a Bic pen, had me go down with her to look at it. She even had the color and model all picked out.

Upon seeing some difficulty in the engine compartment, I asked the guy how you changed the spark plugs. To change the spark plugs in that model Saab, you had to actually take the engine to get to the back plugs! I then asked him what about the tranmission service, and he replied that it was quite costly, that you had to remove the engine to service the automatic trans.

Needless to say she bought a Honda.

Maybe this is what the Dodgers need to do.

Telemachos,
That's exactly what Honda she bought!

Bob,
Don't let me near the McCourt's car either...

Marty,
Driefort was without doubt, Found On Road Dead (FORD) with no body parts or organs usable for donation.

I drive a Saab. It's leased, though, and I have to part with it in about nine months. I'm going to miss it, but I'm trying to comfort myself by the knowledge that I may miss some costly repairs that way.

Before that, I drove an '85 Scirocco for 17 years and close to 200,000 miles. It was running smoothly when I donated it to fight Lou Gehrig's disease (no, not through Cars for Causes).

94- Brilliant!

Of course, this means we now need to explore the entire Dodger team, if they were car models.

Robles is a Hyundai. Decent performance, cheap price, good warranty.

Jeff Kent is a Ford F-250.

97-does that mean kent will get injured taking a shower?

I'd be careful about stocking up on Hondas if I were DePodesta. His manager seems a bit hesitant to play Asian imports.

Jon,
Is there anyway we can part with J.D. Drew in 9 months instead? I know I would feel much more comfortable knowing you were safe in your car, needed work and all; while the Dodgers would be free of a lemon.

99-This is true.

What kind of cars then do they manufacturer in the Domincans? (Raul if your listening, please help!) :)

Telemachos,
I would equate Kent to be more like a Mack truck.

He's carried the Dodgers all year; and it looks like he'll be doing that next year.

101- jt only dislikes driving kia's. He likes older hondas. Remember, he nearly drove the wheels off his old Nomo.

You would have thought he would have learned from the last KIA! (Chan Ho Park)

Choi must be a Hyundai. Low-priced, good numbers, but nobody wants one.

I'd both keep Drew and the Saab if I could. I'm just that way.

Marty
And we have the lease on him for how many more years? (Whether we like him or not)

Reflecting on all of this, going into this weekend and comparing it to last year at the sametime--do some of you remember how exciting it was last year--the closeness of some of those games? We should have known the season was going to be one huge gigantic turd by looking at the closing schedule. Pittsburgh and Arizona at home, and then San Diego in Doggy Do-Do Park.....

Jon,
Do you have AAA? Make sure you call them up and get extra towing coverage as well as extra insurance on Drew when he tanks in 06'.

I would also make sure Drew doesn't do any home gardening. We don't want or need any lawn mower accidents.

Remember, he nearly drove the wheels off his old Nomo.

Hilarious.

That was sweet. Just saw the replay from last nights game. Wanted to see Kuo pitch and it was worth the wait. Nice play by Aybar to end the inning.

You guys are funny today.

SAAB: Something's Almost Always Broken.

Runs nice when it runs, but that's not often enough.

Nice analogy.

For those of you interested in beating this metaphor into the ground by filling out the lineup, please don't get hung up on nationality. After all, Drew ain't Swedish.

Also, SAAB is now a GM car (hmm....).

And Jaguar is a Ford. So now Jag is much more reliable (it's a fancy Taurus), but much less interesting.

So who is a Volvo (also now owed by Ford, I think). To me, Volvo is Swedish for "paranoid." Or for "I stop suddenly for no apparent reason because a random thought scared me." People buy it to maximize their chances of surviving a car accident. Safety is more important than anything else. OK, so which Dodger fits that bill? It describes Tracy's managerial style, but not Tracy himself. I throw it to the crowd....

I say lets all "Cruz" the boulevard in our Chevrolets in 06'!

Truthfully, if we pick-up anybody, I think we need some speed. Aybar is certainly an exciting player in the opening; and I like Repko's intensity, not as a starter, but certainly as great back-up on the bench. Who knows, maybe some new sort of "magic" cream (The same one Barry Bonds is now using) and the bat may liven up.

I also think we need one or two guys to finish as closers. No telling how Gagne is going to be when he comes back. As Depo says, better to look WAY ahead!

Like the Dodgers, I am awaiting my new car (a Prius), which may or may not arrive, although I've put money down for it, and I hope that my investment in it pays off in the future.

Or you may just see me at the side of the road with the hood up wondering what in the world is wrong.

I think Broxton has the stuff of a possible closer -- he just needs to work out the kinks so his control improves. Kuo also looked good last night. With the two of them, and with Duaner and Brazoban getting a taste of closer-dom, AND with Gagne coming back, I think for the moment our closer situation looks positive.

I agree about the speed, not necessarily for stealing bases (though with a high success rate that would be a positive) but also because it just adds more pressure to the other team's defense. I'm not interested in another version of the Dodger Dave Roberts (middling average, doesn't walk enough, no power, but fast on the bases), but someone with speed AND some base-running savvy to go with it.

Perez has had limited success this year, but he probably won't play much next year (unless somehow he's seen as our new third baseman).

Any barnburners in the farm system?

115 The minors don't have much speed. There's Donavon, who's 27, and fits perfectly into the "middling average, doesn't walk enough, no power, but fast on the bases" mold. After him, we had 4 guys with 10+ steals: Jon Weber (10), Matt Kemp (23), Chin-lung Hu (23), and...Russell Martin (15). A catcher is our closest speed prospect to the majors...

116 Ruggiano did his best to trick me, he had 24 steals

We also had 4 guys in Rookie Ball with 10+ steals (Soto, DeJesus, Godwin, and Richmond)

Dreifort really was a Ford: Fix Or Repair Daily.

As for Drew, what worries me is the clause in his contract that allows him to opt out after next season. If he has a good year, the Dodgers have to shell out extra to keep him; if not, they're on the hook for his current salary for the next few years. The logic of that clause for management still doesn't make sense to me.

Well, maybe a Edwin Jackson/Yhencey Brazoban trade will bring that "speedy*" talent. I know this gets rid of one potential closer (who the Dodgers have seemed to rush a bit too soon) but we need to make it up for some speed.

("*speedy" as in faster then a Prius)(Bob, I guess this would be for a better parking spot at the Main office, correct?)

Anybody have an ideas what happened to Jackson? Why the rapid depreciation and lower Kelly Blue Book value?

119 I'm not convinced at all about the importance of speed. It's a nice bonus, but it's probably not worth paying for (which is to say - it's overvalued on the market).

That said, if we need a CF too, then we could do worse than Brad Wilkerson. And Washington swalled Guillen - they might swallow Bradley too. Others have mention BW here before, so this is just a reminder of funny stuff you already knew, but forgot to laugh at the first time (apologies to George Carlin).

118- B-O-R-A-S.......

But thanks for reminding me of that clause. I forgot about that. I think we all know from experience that the Dodgers will be responsible for the ENTIRE contract. But a good thought would be that he performs reasonably well so they can dump it. Why it's as almost if FORD has given us a one hour window to return the lemon before it breaks down.

I also had buyers remorse before we even obtained him. That's not good.

The BIG question here is: Do the California Lemon Laws pertain to Major League Baseball?

118 - It's almost been a year, and the fuss about this clause still escapes me. Rich Lederer of Baseball Analysts has made an economic case against it, but I still think too much has been made of it.

It would be preferable for the Dodgers not to have included this clause. It would also have been preferable if the Dodgers were paying Drew $300,000 a year. The clause is simply part of the package that was used to sign Drew. You can argue whether it was worth it to offer that package, but singling out the clause makes no sense. What's the logic for management to include the clause? They wanted J.D. Drew.

Bottom line: if Drew opts out, that means he's done well for the Dodgers, and they have $33 million back in their bank account. If he doesn't opt out, it's as if it never existed. It's just not that big a deal. Player and management options are included all the time in contracts and they are often not mutual.

Tracy has an opt-out clause too, and no one seems to be complaining about that.

Wilkerson seems to be a less then selfish player. Maybe more in line with what Moneyball is all about.

I also have a question:

With Moneyball, in a market that literally markets players in terms of popularity (marketability) how does one market a "no name" (loose term) roster of faceless players to the general public. Not certified wackos such as us?

I guess I mean, that this team is going to have to compete with the team across town thats in a completely different league, and certainly the powers that be have to be thinking of that, correct? How does this owner(s) think a $65 Million payroll is going to suffice in what is now a very competitive marketplace?

119. Tommy Naccarato
"Anybody have an ideas what happened to Jackson? Why the rapid depreciation and lower Kelly Blue Book value?"

Someone put a governor on his fastball.

Hmmm, let's see here.

2003 Edwin Jackson.

Relatively low mileage

Good to Excellent physical condition

Low mileage

Seems to have problems starting

I'll give you $3000 for it.

123 - I'm not entirely sure I understand your question, Tommy.

But every baseball player begins his career as faceless. There were barely 20 people who knew who Paul Lo Duca or Jose Lima or whoever were when they first became Dodgers. Players perform well and then become popular. Even a guy like Mickey Hatcher didn't become a folk hero until he raced around the bases after his first World Series home run.

So the goal is, get good players. If they're good, they become names. And whatever one's criticisms of the McCourts are (I have my own), they aren't against getting good players. They may well have a spending limit, but they've never indicated that they've sought out bad players.

My fear about the recent discussion of prioritizing character is that the McCourts could decide to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and get nice guys who can't play ball. Trust me - nice guys who can't play ball will not be the least bit popular in Los Angeles. If they could be, I would be the starting center fielder.

In any event, the payroll is only $65 million today. That's the starting point. It's not the end point.

Jon,
So if we use the used car analogy that if it's a Porsche, it must be a good car right?

Another Naccarato Used Car Story:

I bought this really cool brand new black 1977 Chevy LUV truck shortly after I got out of high school back in 77' The monthly payment was $99.00 and insurance was cheap, so was gas. I eventually put a really cool shell and carpet kit in the back of it worked even better then having to sneak girls out of my bedroom at home, barely making it out before my parents caught me.

It was a fun existence, and a really affordable one too.

By that time I was making pretty good money for a young kid my age, working as a electrician. I decided that it was time to step-up in class, and I saw this used red Porsche that I just had to have. The only problem was that it was the Porsche 924. A lemon if there ever was one in the Porsche class of cars.

Thankfully common sense prevailed and I didn't get it, opting out on a BMW 320i which I could not afford to maintain and would eventually crash and total in a horrible accident that would change my life as I knew it.

To this day, I'm thrilled I didn't buy that Porsche.

I wonder if Depo regrets buying J.D. Drew?

I guess the other aspect to 123 is the competition with the Angels. This to me is also a misguided worry. If the teams are worth seeing, there are plenty of fans for both - just like any success UCLA has in football won't take anything away from USC's. Los Angeles fans adore winners.

The Dodgers should not be drawn into a marketing competition with the Angels. They should just worry about putting the best team they can on the field.

Jon beat me to it... I'd be surprised if the payroll next year is significantly less than this year. Preferably, we'd be in the $90-95 range with around $10 million to spend on a trading deadline guy if we need him.

123 I think it's very simple: win. If a no-name player produces and the team wins, the fans will follow. The only thing fans like more than winners is home-grown winners -- which is why the next couple of years could be very fun and exciting.

And for all the competition between the Dodgers and Angels and the recent success of the Angels, it's the Dodgers who have booted the Angels off of KCAL and left them wandering in the broadcast wilderness.

And now Vin Scully will get to collect a complete set of L.A. VHF independent station IDs.

Jon,
My question was more in terms not with the current roster, but the future rosters. Is it going to take big name free agents to fill the seats of Dodger Stadium? This is more a reality question in regards to keeping the money rolling-in, because frankly, I don't think Downtown Disney in the back of the pavillions is going to do it.

Do the Dodgers need a name? Or can they be like an Oakland, where marketability of te players isn't at the forefront? Do the Dodgers need a Franchise Player to compete with the team across town, or can a young group of really talented no names do it in say like two years? (become popular AND win at the same time)

I'll bet that everyone's favorite teams had a nucleus of players that they liked to watch. Something that is missing from these Dodgers.

Tommy Naccarato ---similar to me. I crashed a girlfriends 318i in 1986 that changed my life.

131 - We can make our own names. It's fine to bring in a name that does well, like Jeff Kent. It's even better if he has a personality, like Kirk Gibson. But Darryl Strawberry proves that names alone don't do the trick.

The Dodgers don't need to worry about the Angels. Period. They just need to worry about themselves. Put the best 25 out there that you can - names or no-names - and trust me, they'll be fine.

Exactly the responses or answers I was looking for. You see, I think there are definitely two ways of looking at this. One I hate: Marketing vs. one I think carries the most merit: Winning.

But with the Yankees as proof, buying players is neither a good way to do it, nor very interesting to me. I like to see the organization succeed at every level, esecially when its been built from the ground-up. That's what "organized" baseball is supposed to be all about, correct?

Yes, put the best team on the field--build it and they will come, but it would be foolish to think that there are a lot of so-called fans that are out there that are "fair-weathered." They'll jump sides faster then a New Orleans flood. Still, they pay the same price for tickets and probably out-percentage us by a very large margin.

I bet you can go to Anaheim Stadium and find a bunch of them out there tonight!

132 - because they are losing. That's the only difference.

The list of likable 2005 Dodgers is long. Robles, Izturis, Choi, Penny, Brazoban, Sanchez, Antonio Perez, Aybar, Repko (and of course Gagne), etc., etc., they're all likable. The problem - the only problem - is that they're losing.

I don't think people liked Bill Russell because he was Bill Russell. I think people liked him because he played on winning teams year after year.

Jon, When was the last time we had a PROVEN farm grown superstar?

Yes, Piazza was good, he could be considered. Beltre could have been there. I don't want to think about Pedro Mart, which I think we are paying some sort of penance for.

It still hurts everytime I think of Delino DeShields.

My Mom would give you a huge argument there. She LOVED Bill Russell when I was a kid. You should have seen how much she was blushing when he sat behind us a few years ago.

Are you a fair weather fan if your team stinks and you watch every game on television but when they get better you decide to shell out the 100 bucks to take your family because you know you have a better chance of enjoying the experience?

136If Piazza is not considered a super star by you then nobody could meet your standards. He may not be the best all around catcher but he is without a doubt one of the top 5 hitting catchers in history.

Which players are the nucleus of this team? Who has been a Dodger for several years? My favorite teams had a group of players on it for many years. It's not much fun to be watching new set of players every year or so...especially if they lose.

140 - Ugh, I can't believe I'm being drawn into this discussion. I so need to just walk away.

You have to start somewhere. Garvey, Cey, Russell and Lopes ... , Hershiser, Guerrero and Sax .. they did not arrive as seven-year veterans. They succeeded where many others tried and failed, and then became beloved. (Valenzuela was a unique story.)

Your favorite team had players return for several years becuase they performed well. They also, I guarantee you, had even more players that didn't stay. The turnover in the past year is not that remarkable - just hyped beyond belief.

The Dodgers have recently been in flux, no doubt about it. But believe me, it's not because players in the past returned for several years that you liked those players. You liked them because they were winners. Or is your favorite Dodger team the 1967-72 group?

1)82-Tommy, I'll always remember taking a grade school fieldtrip thru the Ford Pico Rivera plant to watch them build LTDs with vinyl roofs and stationwagons with fake wood on the side. There's a good reason why the property is now a Wal-Mart.

2)Winning creates stars. In 2003 most fans wanted to run Beltre out of town at the trading deadline, by 2004 Beltre could do no wrong, and had sportstalk radio clowns like Vic the Brick slobbering all over him.

141 Ha Ha , mine is because that is when a 9 year old fell in love with the Dodgers. They sucked but they were my Dodgers. That team changed quite a bit from 67 to 72. They kept changing it until the boys of Spokane came up and stayed. I'll always have a place in my heart for the Bill Sudakis's of the lost years.

135
I find Weaver and Lowe likable. Don't much care for Penny. Jeff Weaver always reminds me of Clint Eastwood on the mound.

136

Jon, When was the last time we had a PROVEN farm grown superstar?

I'm not Jon, but I think Eric Gagne qualifies as a proven farm grown superstar.

142

There was still talk of trading Beltre prior to the 2004 season if you believe Peter Gammons. Supposedly the Yankees were interested, but they got someone else to fill-in at 3rd base.

Barry is making up for lost time.

144
Did that player pan out that the Yankee's got instead?

Jon,
From the beginning of spring training to the tonight with just a few games left in this season, I have not felt one sense of emotion for this team other then the rookies who seem to be giving it there all. The team, disabled list and all, just didn't have a sense of attraction for me.

You see, I like Jeff Kent as a Dodger, but he's a former Giant and I don't like Giants. (This should be the ultimate compliment to Jeff Kent because he is indeed one of the prime players in the Game today. But I'm a fan first. I'll learn to like him more if he just gives up those Giant ways!)

Kirk Gibson, as well as Kent brought a no-nonsense attitude to the Dodgers. They are consumate professionals. I don't think Milton Bradley is much different. I think he likes to win, wants to win and will do anything to get there. I also think he hates losing so much he welcomes trouble when he puts his foot in his mouth. It's easy to snap, I know this! :) But was Gibson called a maniac and sentenced by the fans and the media to anger management when he literally wanted to kill whomever black shoe polished the rim of his hat?

Goosefraaabahhhhhh!!!!!!!
Goosefraaabahhhhhh!!!!!!!
Goosefraaabahhhhhh!!!!!!!

With Kent, the thing I do like is akin to The Godfather. He always seems to keep his mouth shut. (unlike me, I'm like Sonny.)

"Never let anyone know what your thinking." "Never let them know the family business..."

He comes out the good guy in all of this because he keeps his mouth shut for a brief period of time then defensively suggests, "Ask Dusty Baker, Dave Winfield, etc. if I'm a racist...."

Case closed.

You know, you read that Russell, Lopes Cey and Garvey didn't get along all that great, but they were professionals that kept it professional--that built character in them as ball players. IMHO, The 2005 Los Angeles Dodgers didn't have character. But the young talent looks like they could be really enjoyable players to watch in the future.

141. Jon Weisman
Ugh, I can't believe I'm being drawn into this discussion.

I can. You drive a Saab.

But believe me, it's not because players in the past returned for several years that you liked those players. You liked them because they were winners. Or is your favorite Dodger team the 1967-72 group?

My favorite teams in the 70's were the Tigers and the Angels. The Dodgers were a distant 3rd. So, I can't believe you...that it was only because they won.

144-Yes, absolutely.

141 Please don't pick on Billy Grabarkewitz, Alan Foster and Sandy Vance. Some of us still believe that the '69 NL West pennant could have been won if only Wes Parker hadn't gotten appendicitis in mid season.

146

Well, I hear that he isn't a "true" Yankee, so the jury is still out.

148 - Okay, I take back my assumptions about you personally :)

But I still don't think lovable losers is going to fly in this day and age. And I think the Dodgers will have their nucleus of popular players again - we just happen to be in the midst of a transition.

Jon,
I've rooted for every Dodger team ever put on the field since the first time I can remember them taking the field.

I've said this here all year long--that this Dodger team since the beginning of spring training--this Dodger team--is the most disappointing Dodger team to have ever rooted for, and not because they are losers.

Gvette, Drove by their a week ago and was in complete shock to see all of that up, and the original buildings down. SHOCKED!

Well at least they didn't get the Dal Rae!

Including the team with Gabarkowitz (at that time a La Habra resident) Valentine! (at that time a La Habra resident)

152. Jon Weisman
148 - Okay, I take back my assumptions about you personally :)

I'm learning about yours...

153 - Tommy, if the 2005 team had won 95 games, what would have prevented you from enjoying them?

With perhaps a couple of exceptions, they all seem like nice guys. Yes, many are new - but you say you like the rookies who have given their all.

Wouldn't the 2005 Dodgers have grown on you? If Brad Penny had gone 19-5, 2.80 and been best buds with a 30-homer hitting Hee Seop Choi, who engaged in cross-cultural hijinx with an All-Star Cesar Izturis and a 1.000-OPSing J.D. Drew, and if they won a division title and there was playoff fever here, and if you knew they were all coming back next year as enthusiastic Dodgers, to be joined in the coming years by Dodger farmhands, would they have all still depressed you?

I think many fans (myself included) view a player's attitude based on his on-field results.

For example: Drew is a very quiet, internal player. When he's hurt and/or playing poorly, I've seen a lot of comments saying he's too quiet, lacks intensity, etc. However, if he's tearing the cover off the ball, you'd suddenly see him described as "cool, collected", "intelligent, a thinking player" etc.

155 - I'm not following.

I had assumed you were a Dodger fan from a ways back - which was wrong.

156 Did you leave out the Bradley-Kent chapter thinking it doesn't happen if they are winning ballgames?

If that happened in a 95-win season, it would still leave a bad taste in my mouth and I'd still feel the same about Bradley.

159 I think the Kent/Bradley situation doesn't happen in a 95-win season. These guys were practically best buds during the winning days in the early portion of the season.

Jon,
The point is that this team had bad vibes about it from thevery beginning. If its all about winning, then how come they got rid of the guys that helped them win?

(I know you don't want to hear that argument again, but its fact. You can't deny it. Why else would this team be 67-83 after a 12-2 start?)

152 Well at least they didn't get the Dal Rae

Hate to tell you Tommy, but the only reason the Dal Rae is still in town is because the City kicked in a ton of money to keep them from moving to another location. Actually got Tommy Davis' autograph there a couple of years ago, but that's another story.

Still a great place for a martini, and if you squint hard enough, you can still imagine Lee Iacocca 41 years ago doing a power lunch in the back booth with the local Ford brass to tell them about that new car he's building, the Mustang.

161 - Between injuries and bad vibes, I'll go with injuries as the cause.

160. Telemachos

I think that it would happen. Kent would push anyone at anytime if he felt it would help them win...and certainly if he thought that they were dogging it. He said that he wished that he would have provoked a fight with Bonds to help them win the WS.

This is true...

In the meantime, thoughts and prayers to the people on the JetBlue flight iniating an emergency landing at Long Beach. I have been flying Jet Blue to the East in the past years and they are consumate professonals

164- But my point is that tempers on both sides would be much much lighter. Winning forgives a lot of issues.

Winning vs. "vibes": vibes are unquantifiable. The Dodgers started struggling when Valentin and then Bradley went down.

If the current lineup/team re-played those games, I think we'd have a far better record; I think players struggled with their new roles (or weren't certain about their roles), and I think it took Tracy a while to come to terms with the whole situation too. We were playing games with an ice-cold Izturis leading off and a non-hitting Repko batting second.

#27:

Old Bear, Lilly is as much an injury concern as is Burnett, who of course has far more talent.

#59: Exactly, Jon, I had the same thoughts. One disappointing year and DePodesta is ready to bail? I don't think so--he is so confident and calculating.

Nightengale contradicted himself because the previous week he stated that DePodesta wants Tracy back while the McCourts want him gone, with Tracy being the odd man out. Now, all of a sudden, DePodesta is on thinner ice?