DePodesta also makes a brief appearance in today's RGC at The Griddle.

The Depodesta link is not working for me.

I think the link problem was the other end.

As for me, I was shamelessly going for a DePodesta reference to attract readers.

I found the link independently of Jon and it doesn't work.

One more from the Boswell chat at washingtonpost.com: "Bowden analyzed every home run Soriano ever hit __distance, direction, park__ to see if RFK would hurt him. He concluded that RFK couldn't hold him."

I report; you decide.

Jon, I'm saddened that TJ Simers was brought into our little world here. I think he is simply a bad human being and makes the world a worse place for being in it. He's not a journalist, he's basically paparazzi and the worst kind at that. But it's your world, I just live in it on game days.

Anyone want to read a joke?

-----------------
Knock Knock

Who's there?

Paul DePodesta

I still have some sympathy for Milton, but, really, I'm happy he's off the Dodgers. As a ballplayer, he's injury-prone, as a human being, well.... Kent's no saint, and I'm actually willing to believe that Milton couldn't run that ball out because of his knee, but playing the race card strikes me as profoundly unfair, and a mask for Milton's own inadequacies as a human being. And, really, Milton, don't go trashing your former team-mates's personal problems in the press when you have so many of your own.

Good riddance....

WWSH

I got through about half the Bradley article and it made me sad. What a Jekyll and Hyde. Why does Simer even bother with him? Even for T.J., it's too easy and cheap. It's like Howard Stern making homeless people take a history quiz.

The other thought that crossed my mind: The Dodgers have been very lucky lately with personnel moves that, at the time they were made, looked like crapshoots. Bradley for Ethier, letting Beltre go, Nomar playing first base, signing Lowe, dumping Weaver, getting whatever was left of Sele, signing Saito, and then the immediate impact of Martin, Kemp, Aybar and Broxton. All these things had to go right, or they're in last place, buried in the standings. Somebody's living right over there.

Re: 9

It's regression to the mean after last season's litany of catastrophes, where everything that could go wrong did go wrong.

WWSH

Beltre's numbers so far this season:

231/295/333

For 2005:

255/303/413

Extraordinary isn't it? I don't think anyone really thought he'd be this bad. I remember Tom Meagher making a strong argument against Beltre, but I don't think he would've predicted just how bad Beltre's been.

I wish we'd play an inter-league series with Seattle, if for no other reason to see how Plaschke and Simers would spin what they saw as a disastrous mistake in not renewing Adrian.

WWSH

9 I think this is so dead on correct. It is amazing how winning makes everyone look like a genius. Every one of those moves you mentioned could have just as easily been big dud. None would have been a shock. If they had, the Dodgers would be 12 back and this would be a very different forum right now. Glad they've worked though!

I wish we'd play an inter-league series with Seattle

You have four days to wait.

Speaking of Jekyll and Hyde, who will be pitching for the Dodgers tonight? Tomko Jekyll or Tomko Hyde?

Stay tuned...

Speaking of bad sports columnists, I made the mistake (out of desperation) this morning of picking up and reading the SF Examiner - a once proud paper now free and terrible - to find for mer Chron columnist Glenn Dickey (always horrible) writing about soccer. His take? Americans can't succeed in soccer because not enough kids are playing it these days.

Is he kidding?
The point that not enough of our best athletes are playing it may still be true, but that kids aren't playing it... Anyway, it's a poorly written piece of drivel.

I love this excerpt from the DePodesta article:

" By terms of his financial settlement from the Dodgers, DePodesta isn't allowed to discuss publicly any aspect of his time with the team."

I'm sure that there are many people that would choose to read that sentence as "DePodesta isn't allowed to tell anyone what jerks the McCourts are or he won't get paid."

Re: 13

Wowzers... Didn't realize that. I remember the LAT doing a big story on Beltre's struggles last season--it'll be interesting to see what they do this time around.

WWSH

7. How exactly is that a joke?

I don't think every one of those moves worked out due to luck - although certainly injuries or lack thereof are luck - but the Dodgers did their homework on Ethier and knew from scouts and what they saw that he not only had a lot of talent, but a lot of poise and character. He was the antithesis of Bradley in some ways. Now it's hard to know what the future holds with both of them but it seemed getting rid of Bradley was a plus and then adding a highly regarded young player like Ethier was a double plus. With Beltre, it seemed crazy to a lot of people (including myself) to not resign Beltre at the time but a streaky hitter with one super season mixed in with a lot of mixed seasons - it was a risk but I think they were pretty certain he wouldn't be worth the expense.

Some of the other moves mentioned were definitely crapshoots but for the most part with low risks (Nomar didn't come with much risk or cost versus the potential upside) and so on. It's luck. It's also good scouting, and taking the right kinds of chances.

18 Of course every move a GM makes is a calculated risk. The point is, it would have been of no surprise to anyone if any of those had gone quite badly. Could you easily imagine Bradley being a perennial All-Star and Ethier hitting a ceiling when he saw MLB pitching for the first time? Or Nomar contibuting nothing due to injury? Or Weaver winning 15? Or Beltre being an MVP? Or NONE of the rookies conributing? There were very good reasons to believe any of those could and would happen.

I think we have not only walked a high wire up to now, we've danced across it without looking down.
I'm off to Oakland... have fun!

19 "Calculated risk" and "crapshoot" (from 9 are two different decisions. Underdog is pointing that out. (So there's no need to fear.)

I'm surprised at the sentiment that everything has worked out. For all those moves you correctly cite, you have Tomko, Seo, Hamulack, Baez, Carter and Furcal as negatives.

Some of these players have had good moments mixed with their bad, some of them are acquisitions I endorsed, but you could hardly say all has gone right.

21 I guess my point is that without the benefit of hindsight, those moves look a lot more like the latter than the former.

The McCourts bought his silence. Thats funny. Of course, DePodesta really doesnt need to say anything. His acquisitions and the people he let go state it all.
I think the Dodgers are worse off with Colletti, but that wont be seen for a few years.

18 Or Weaver winning 15?

You almost had me.

22 I certainly don't believe all has worked out. I think we're very fortunate that enough has worked out that we are in 1st place and now look like we may actually stay there.

22. You're exactly right. It kinda reminds me of Dan Evans' tenure as a Dodger GM. Evans' did mostly nothing, gave some big contracts to middle relievers, but the team won 85-92 games so people just assumed he was doing a good job.

Its no different than Colletti. He signed Nomar which has been great. But everything else has been largely non-consequential or just bad. However, its been at a cost of +20mil to the payroll.

I think the team would be better if DePo were still the GM. But like I mentioned just above, that wont be seen by the common person for another 2yrs. Drew/Kent/Lowe/Penny/Aybar/Kemp/Martin + 100mil payroll can make anyone look good.

Most people in positions like DePodesta had, have to sign similar agreements. It's also not polite to slag your former employer in the press unless he was Kenneth Lay.

Let me belabor a favorite point here. Barring physical problems we don't know of, a good part of Beltre's decline could be due to the pressure of huge expectation in a new franchise. I never thought he would quite equal his one amazing year, but this is a kid who had been in the D's family since he was seventeen( or perhaps earlier).
Boras is beginning to build up a list of possible lives ruined, and I expect it to grow.

I aspire to get to a position where someone makes me sign a silence vow and pays me a lot of money to go away.

"Lives ruined?" I don't think Beltre or many others would tell you his life was ruined.

Was Harrrington a Boras client? He's the only one I can think of that might qualify - and even Harrington had the power to eventually make a deal, and as far as I can tell, he's still has a life.

I love Milton Bradley:

"They swore they wanted character guys, but then they signed a DUI guy and a guy sleeping with a reporter and that's fine," Bradley said, "but I got character issues?"

He's Scott Boras, not Svengali.

27 We'd be better with DePodesta? Really ... ?

I seem to recall beginning the 2005 season without a quality 3B, LF, CF or C to speak of on the opening day roster. 2006 would have opened with more Robles, more Repko because, heaven forbid, we "start the clocks" on any of the kids.

That virtually everyone DePodesta traded for is now out of the Dodgers plans could be spun both ways, I suppose: I say they weren't everyday MLB talents (Navarro, Werth, Heep-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named) you could say the new regime can't evaluate talent. And certainly Tracy could have been part of that problem.

Anyway, all I know is that I tuned out the Dodgers - for the first time since 1977 - right around May last year, and tuned them back in when Coletti signed Furcal ... at least it's going to be interesting, I figured.

(Meanwhile, Tiger just missed the cut at the U.S. Open. Ouch.)

Just because Furcal and Lowe may be dopes doesn't mean Milton isn't a head case. A constantly injured head case to boot. I'm so happy he's not on the Dodgers.

Thinking of DePo still makes me angry. I don't trust Colletti the way I trusted DePo.

If having a ruined life means you have $65 million coming to you for not only playing a child's game, but playing it poorly, I wouldn't mind having my life ruined.

22 Jon -true enough-should have said perhaps careers and even that would be a stretch. Once a young Latin American player gets a contract like that, he has insured his future financially. (and of course Boras) And very few young players can see, or perhaps even should see any factor outweighing the money.
We certainly did get a bunch of questionable pitchers in this years deals and many middle relievers at that.
This I hope is another case of revision to the mean, which someone mentioned above. I think our bullpen work has to improve, as everything and everyone that could go wrong seemed to at the worst times.

34 Correction to my mini-rant: Milton Bradley was in CF to open 2005.

Though you can spin that either way, I'd guess.

Well yeah, I think the biggest thing that's "worked out" is keeping Logan White and Terry Collins, and drafting pretty darned well the last few years. That, and a few other moves (Nomar, Ethier) have been what has really worked this year. As Jon pointed out, hard to say that Seo, the relievers, and so on, have been a plus - though the jury is still out on a few of those moves.

Man, I do need a super energy pill so I can get to work.
And I guess I need to talk in rhymes to stay in character and not be a jerk.

Btw, darned fun game this morning - Ivory Coast and the Dutch, if anyone wants to watch the second half it's coming right up.

Valentin at 3rd was just as sound idea as putting Bill Mueller there. Valentin was coming off a 30HR season, and you had AP as part of the platoon too.

C- Jason Phillips was a stopgap until Navarro was ready. What more do you want?

In terms of LF, Surely you thought Werth deserved a chance to start after his 2004 season. Are you blaming DePodesta for Werth breaking his wrist on the first day of spring training in 2005?

It is interesting that so far, what seemed like Colletti's safest moves have been the ones that have been his stinkers.

Furcal seemed like the only sure thing Colletti did the off season, and so far that's been a disaster, and Seo seemed like he should have at the very least been not absolutely horrible.

Meanwhile, high risk signings like Lofton and Nomar have worked out beautifully so far, and his next best signing so far has been one that no one cared about, Sele. While right now, it's tough to call Ethier either way. Of course, other mid-high risk moves like Tomko, Mueller, Baez have blown up in his face as well. I guess this means Colletti's best trait is that he isn't Jim Bowden.

There's still a lot of baseball to be played, but it is pretty amazing that the one player that everyone agreed would have been good (overpaid or not) has been his worst move so far in terms of results.

42 Not being Jim Bowden is a very important trait for any decent GM to have. It would also be good for them not to be Allard Baird or Chuck Lamar.

Colletti strikes me as a Dan Evans but more willing to trade prospects (which considering the current crop may be a bad/good thing). They each leave alot to be desired in terms of cost benefit analysis.

22. *You're exactly right. It kinda reminds me of Dan Evans' tenure as a Dodger GM. Evans' did mostly nothing, gave some big contracts to middle relievers, but the team won 85-92 games so people just assumed he was doing a good job.

Its no different than Colletti. He signed Nomar which has been great. But everything else has been largely non-consequential or just bad. However, its been at a cost of +20mil to the payroll*

Ok, when did Ned give a big contract to a middle reliever? He did trade for two, one in the minors, and one likely to leave after this year. He also made a great signing of a guy from Japan, who Jon called "Nori pitching version," and has an ERA under 2.And of course, there is Broxton, Kuo, and two mop up guys (yes, the Seo trade has been bad, but Perez is Depo's fault).

Also, moves Ned has made:

Ethier for Bradley/Perez. Great trade.

Lofton, fairly non-consequenctial, but we didn't know at the time that Ethier/Repko would have been able to play, so it was pretty decent at the time.

Furcal, while he hasn't played to his ability so far, he was hitting about .220 at this time last year, and he is in the top 10 in runs scored. Yes, we vastly overpayed him, but without signing him, would we have been able to sign Nomar? He was the first domino that showed the FA's that we want to win.

Baez/Carter for Jackson/Tiffany. Non-consequential yes.

Saito signing, great signing.

Sele signing-great signing, yes his defense let him down last start, but so far, 6 quality starts is far more than we could have hoped for, so it is a good signing.

Seo for Sanchez/Schmoll, so far, bad.

Nomar-good move.

Mueller, I think Non-consequential only because Aybar has filled in well, and Mueller hurt himself.

Tomko-bad so far.

So yes, like Paul, Ned has made both good and bad moves. But Ned doesn't seem like the kind of GM who would spend all his money on Howrys, and Eyer's. And he doesn't appear willing to trade his top prospects.

I don't think we're going to lose because of Colleti, and I really think we're going to be a dynasty. I mean, we really are set up, with Penny, Lowe, Billingsley, and prospects like Elbert, Kershaw/Morris later, and Orenduff.

And with position players, we're really set, and can even afford to trade guys like Guzman and Navarro.

I think the biggest thing about DePo was that he had a plan and it had pretty much worked in Oakland. It would take time to work and there would be growing pains, but he knew what he was going towards.

This point was made on Dodger Math. I don't really know what Neddy's plan is, if he has one. The moves he's made haven't been bad when taken separately, but together, they don't make as much sense. Maybe the rookies are his plan or maybe the rookies can mask his lack of one. I don't know. Here's the link to the Dodger Math entry:
http://dodgermath.com/?p=343

34

don't forget he signd Choi

34 I seem to recall beginning the 2005 season without a quality 3B, LF, CF or C to speak of on the opening day roster.

I'd have to respectfully disagree. As you pointed out in your additional post, Bradley was the CF. I think Werth (before the wrist injury) was a good bet to put up some power numbers and certainly a healthy outfiled of Drew/Bradley/Werth is as good or better than Colletti's Drew/Lofton/Cruz/Repko at the beginning of this season.

Also, in 2005 Kent replaced Beltre's bat in the line-up and Valentin replaced Cora in the line-up. Shuffle the positions and actually you could argue that 2B/3B was upgraded in 2005 over the previous year. C was a hole but Navarro was acquired during the offseason and he did come up and produce later in the year.

Ned's best move.

Hiring Grady Little. This was the biggest move he made in the off-season and yet we tend to look at his player personnel moves more closely.

Some may feel it was luck and that he and Ned (and McCourt) have no claim to the development of the young players but Grady has done a good job of putting these guys in positions where they could fail but not be crushed under the club's expectations.

Not only has he done that, Grady recognized that these guys could play and did not allow the veteran status of his bench players to cloud his thinking about who to play.

So Martin gets the majority starts at catcher, Aybar plays instead of Martinez or Saenz, Kemp has started 12 out of 16 games. And both Broxton and Saito got moved to more prominent positions in the pen as the season went on.

To some of you, these all are probably no brainer moves but I think that not a lot of managers would react the same way.

And look at how he has handled Seo, Perez, Hamulack, Osoria, and Carter. Now their performance got them to where they are today but he did not let their salaries or experience get in the way of how he used them.

Whether you like Ned and Grady and the moves that have occured since October, the thing you cannot argue with is that this duo is working together and the team is in first place.

I'll get to the player moves later, I know you can hardly wait.

Yes, we vastly overpayed him, but without signing him, would we have been able to sign Nomar?

Nomar went to the highest bidder. Like most every MLB player does.

Ok, when did Ned give a big contract to a middle reliever?

Doesnt Baez make like 4 mils?

Baez/Carter for Jackson/Tiffany. Non-consequential yes.
I'd put this one into the bad category. It would have been better if Jax/Tiff were simply in the minors, and Baez/Carter not on the Dodgers. Baez/Carter actually have had a negative impact on the team.

Ethier for Bradley/Perez. Great trade
I dont think getting a 4th OF'er for Bradley/Perez was enough.

I agree on most of the other stuff you posted. Good discussion.

46.

Yes, exactly what was DePodesta's plan? Try to wait for the rookies, but in the meantime, try and win with a couple good players, and others that have upside, and others that have mostly been mediocre with decent OPS their entire careers? Seems like that, seeing his plan for the opening day line up was:

Izturis
Werth
Drew
Kent
Bradley
Valinetin
Choi
Phillips.

Yes, it appears so. The good players were Drew, Kent, and Bradley, but 2 of those three are extremely injury prone. The ones with upside are Werth and Choi, and the medicore vet with decent OPS was Valinetin. Izturis and Phillips were just bad offensively.

What kind of a plan is that?

A few comments after yesterday.

Someone needs to inform Orestes Destrade of ESPN's Baseball Tonight that Chad Billingsley did NOT win his first professional major league start. Yep, that's right folks. During the end of his analysis of the game he congratulated Chad for his "W" and said that he's got a bright future ahead.
Our apologies Mr. Broxton.

Also, why no mention of the fact that Grady removed Aybar in the double switch when he brought in Baby John after pulling Beimel, putting Martinez in at third IN THE MIDDLE OF THE INNING? It was clear he pulled Aybar for the boot he had just made. Obviously Grady was doing his best Frank Robinson impersonation and the press did not even mention it.
I wonder if Grady is still crying in the dugout?

52 It's true that Aybar came out just after his error, but he was also the last guy to bat in the previous half-inning. I'm pretty sure that was a textbook double switch... but others know more about this and I'll stand corrected if somebody else is more informed.

50.

Ned didn't give Baez that contract, and it is up at the end of the year.

Also, yes Carter hurt us, but at least Baez is a decent middle reliever, and is better than any other option we have in the middle relief role. Yes, Broxton and Kuo will be better, if they aren't already are, but after Saito, Broxton, and Kuo, imagine our bullpen without Gagne AND Baez? Baez is not a great reliever, but he gets the job done a lot of the time, and is a good option this year.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=2486615

"Billingsley started, Jonathan Broxton got the win and Takashi Saito finished the game in the Dodgers' victory. It was the first time in 25 years that the Dodgers had three different rookie pitchers start, win and finish a game. The last L.A. trio of rookies to do that was Fernando Valenzuela (starter), Tom Niedenfuer (winner) and Dave Stewart (finisher) on Aug. 16, 1981 against the Braves. "

Not much different than:

Navarro has upside.
Drew, Kent, Nomar (2 of 3 have injury concerns)
Cruz/Mueller/Lofton are the mediocre vets
Furcal--should be classified a good player but he hasnt been.

Ned didn't give Baez that contract, and it is up at the end of the year

He still traded for him and his contract. I'm almost certain the D-Rays arent paying it. Its similar to Evans trading for Shuey and Quantrill. Both those guys were salary dumps.

Baez is a decent middle reliever, and is better than any other option we have in the middle relief role Its a compliment to Baez that he's not the worst reliever in baseball.

imagine our bullpen without Gagne AND Baez?
I can imagine it without Baez. That would be a dream.

56.

But would you agree that Nomar>Bradley, Mueller>Valinetin, and Furcal> Izturis?

Also, again, Ned didn't want to take a risk of not having a proven closer in the case Gagne went down. Look, Baez is probably gone this year, and I don't see Ned signing a bunch of middle relievers.

58.
Yea, just imagine Tim Hamalack AND Osoria still in our bullpen.

But then again, if Ned didn't trade Sanchez, we still would have had him. But the point is, if Ned did everthing else EXCEPT the Baez deal, we would have had an even worse bullpen.

I have scoured the comments today and am quite surprised really that the one word that describes the team success this year has not been mentioned once:

Chemistry.

To me that has been the most glaring deficiency of the Dodger teams of the past (sans '04). Others have called it other names, like "underachieving". But those who remember the Piazza article from ten years ago about the multi-cultural makeup of the Dodgers and the difficulties therein remember that this has been a core issue surrounding this franchise. Leave it to a Giant to fix that problem. But it makes sense as the Giants main strength has always been team chemistry.

The other difference this year versus years past: less tolerance of children at ballgames.
No other contending team in any other baseball market has the problem with children coming to the game as the Dodgers do. Just simply look at Cranky Stadium and Queens and there isn't an infant within twenty miles of the subway. Just big nasty hairy men. Men talking baseball and cursing and sweating and shoving, the way the game should be watched.
I definitely see a sea-change at the stadum with more dad's telling their kids to shut-it because they want to watch the game. More fathers teaching their kids the nuances of the game rather than the nuances of the wave. While we will still always lead the league in the amount of diaper changing stations, the surliness at home is quite promising.

The best move Ned has made was that 6 or 7 rookies have been called up and they have produced. Otherwise we would be worse off than last year.

But it makes sense as the Giants main strength has always been team chemistry.

I completely agree.
I'm a believer in the Giants type of "chemistry".

61 First off, I find the "multi-cultural" comment irrevelant at best and offensive at worst.

Chemistry is much more important from an organizational standpoint than from the composition of your players. With 25-30 guys, not everyone is going to be buddy buddy with all of them, the main thing is can they be professional and do their jobs.

Now, it doesn't hurt that key members of the team have previous relationships, Mueller, Nomar, D. Lowe, Lofton, and Kent on the veteran side and all the kids from either the minors or the Arizona Fall League.

But those relationships don't mean anything unless the team wins, so to me the combination of the team's play and the cohesion of the front office and the manager is what is making up that undefined mystery known as "chemistry."

61 "Chemistry" is nothing more than that warm fuzzy feeling you get inside when a team wins. If our pitching problems dump us into a lengthy slump, I guarantee you won't be saying, "But we've got great chemistry!"

I am willing to admit that bad chemistry can cost a good team, hypothetically, but there's no way good chemistry helps a bad team. I can't think of a single Dodger team of the past 15 years that has underachieved. They just haven't been very good.

I'll also concede this: It's probably a good thing that so many of our up-and-coming players played together in the minors and succeeded. But that's not chemistry, exactly. It's confidence-building.

45 Why perpetuate the ridiculous theory that over-paying Furcal has anything at all to do with signing anyone else? If anything, not signing Furcal for $39 million would cause other players and agents to think that they had a better chance to sign with the Dodgers. Nomar for instance would have signed a lot quicker if there was a vacancy at shortstop. And there was the perception, even here, that Flanders was on a very limited budget. That big signing could well have scared players away. And the next player/agent that signs with Team X for less money than Team Y is offerring, just because Team X says they want to win this year, will be the first. Furcal was overpaid and signed by Flanders simply because he failed to sign Giles and he was afraid McCourt would get antsy and fire him too if he didn't make a big splashy deal. And that is exactly what it was, just a big splash; the ripples went away and we are left with apparently nothing---with a $39 million price tag on it. We ought to nickname Furcal 'Flander's Albatross'.

I think DePo, if he had kept his job, also had Nomar high on his list of coveted free agents. So I'm not sure his signing is a point of differentiation between DePo and Ned.

Anyway, one point seems clear to me: If DePo had signed a bunch of long-term free agents instead of the stop gaps he did, we wouldn't be seeing all our rookies this year. THAT was his plan, and we're seeing it bear fruit this year.

there's no way good chemistry helps a bad team

I don't think you can back that up.

...if Ned did everthing else EXCEPT the Baez deal, we would have had an even worse bullpen.

I disagree. Not having the false security of Carter and Baez would have provoked Ned to sign or trade for someone else. Perhaps even someone who doesn't suck.

The Giants had chemistry?

70 Yeah, mostly in Barry's syringe.

70 Certainly. How else do you make steroids?

Colletti's plan is very clear: be successful by taking over a team stocked with stellar minor-leaguers on the cusp of breaking the door down, then spend a bunch of money on shortstops with questionable fielding abilities.

I kid. :)

Seriously, though, the timeline of prospect arrivals is what's kept this team from being .500 or worse this season and not Mueller, Furcal, Lofton, of Baez (none of whom are cheap players).

I took 61 as a joke. That thing about the kids?

61 was a joke, I think. I hope.

My beef with Coletti is that everyone saw what our biggest deficency was last year: starting pitching.

He did really nothing to fix that problem this year, either via trade or free agency. (Wasn't Tony Armas available?)

61 either has to be a joke or blatant flamebait.

If you thought 61 was serious, you need to get a new sarcasm detector.

Yeah, like that would be a worthwhile invention!

"Furcal was overpaid and signed by Flanders simply because he failed to sign Giles and he was afraid McCourt would get antsy and fire him too if he didn't make a big splashy deal."
- you cant actually believe this

Your points have some logic behind them, but theyve been largley proven wrong by the event that followed Furcal's signing. Ned was basically able to sign everyone he wanted after the Furcal signing, to our best knowledge, which is pretty amazing considering that prior to the signing the Dodgers were a laughing-stock and it was assumed no one was interested in coming to play for the McCourt's. Furcal changed public perception, rightly or wrongly.

And, Furcal is not nothing. I think you're paying too much attention to the last two months and too little attention to the previous six years.

I think something that has also gone slightly unnoticed is that, although I don't agree with all of Little's moves, he puts good lineups together and makes decent gametime moves. He actually gives this team a competetive roster day in and day out rather than trot guys like Edwards and Grabowski and Phillips out there in positions that they cannot play, granted he has a little more to work with than Tracy did.

78 By "no one was interested in coming to play for the McCourt's (sic)" do you mean players like JD Drew, Jeff Kent, Derek Lowe, and Brad Penny (who signed a contract extension)?

78
"which is pretty amazing considering that prior to the signing the Dodgers were a laughing-stock and it was assumed no one was interested in coming to play for the McCourt's. Furcal changed public perception, rightly or wrongly."

I secon that (I still don't like his D though)

Dodger draftpick, D'Alessio is batting for Clemson right now on ESPN2

80. no, i meant after Depodesta and Tracy were let go mere weeks before the winter meetings and McCourt was getting skewered by the press. All those players signed well before the chaotic offseason.

80 So do you mean that Colletti possessed some rare skill and that any other GM would ahve been unable to sign players in that circumstance? I'm not sure you've actually got a point there. Even if we both decide to assume that Ned is a fantastic GM, to say that the handfuls of other older player that he signed as free agents last offseason was a result of his unique interpersonal skills or leadership styles and not the millions of dollars Colletti offered them seems very hollow to me.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting your point, but that seems to be what you're arguing in 78. Even if Colletti is a great GM, I think that giving him credit for that is really a stretch, to say the least.

While Furcal has been a huge disapointment up to this point it wouldn't take much imagination to see Furcal put up the same 2nd half he did last year and end the year as our shining light. If he does continue to blow at least it is just money and we didn't lose any players in the attempt to upgrade at SS. I'm fairly confident his bat will come around, I'm not as confident in his fielding which just leaves me stunned at how bad it is. If Nomar wasn't at 1st his error total would make BJ Upton look like a viable SS. I've yet to actually see him do anything well. He doesn't go back on flyballs well, he doens't got to his left well, he doesn't go to his right well, he doesn't set his feet correctly, his arm is strong but inaccurate, his relays are usually off the mark. He can't catch loopers or high line drives because he's gravity impaired. How did he ever get such high defensive rankings?

The signing players argument is bizarre. Players generally go to the highest bidder, so if the team has funds then those players will sign. It has nothing to do with who owns the team or who is the GM. It all comes down to money.

77 The part about big hairy sweaty men seemed bizarre, but I think a lot of sports fans feel that way. Southern California's emphasis on making its ballparks "family-friendly" is uncommon, and doesn't always deliver. You don't see a lot of little kids at sporting events in the northeastern and midwestern cities like Boston, New York, Philly or Cleveland. So, weird as 61 read, I thought he was sincere.

If he does continue to blow at least it is just money and we didn't lose any players in the attempt to upgrade at SS

So you dont consider Furcal's salary, and the opportunity cost it presents, when trying to court other players?

Or are you under the impression that McCourt doesnt have a budget, and will spend whatever it takes?

Signing Furcal to 13mils a year cost the Dodgers a chance to sign other free agents. Mainly starting pitching. If McCourt didnt have a budget and Colletti was free to spend as much as he wanted, then they wouldnt have ended up with Tomko, Seo, Sele in the rotation.

Does anyone else think its plausible that Mr. McCourt fired Depodesta for planning on relying on the kids this season?

1. Depodesta had called up Navarro (at a very young age), Perez, Aybar, he was at the least willing to give young players a prominent role.

2. In the last free-agent class, there were not many candidates that I could see Depodesta willing to give a big-deal to.

A point people always miss, is that Colletti was given $15m-$20m more in payroll to work with than DePodesta. Everyone knows the Dodgers were better than their record last season; whoever the new GM would be, he was pretty much walking into a "can't lose" situation.

I think most everyone can agree that Logan White and Terry Collins deserve far more credit than either DePodesta or Colletti for the team's success this season. If not for Kemp, Aybar, et. al, we'd be heading back towards 71 wins again.

I think McCourt fired DePodesta because he didn't like him personally. McCourt probably felt that he needed a more PR-oriented GM than DePodesta whom he couldn't "sell" anymore to the press.

84. youre reading way too much into what i was saying, I dont think Ned is a fantastic GM nor am I saying Ned has any special abilities to get old players to play for him. All I was saying was that before Furcal signed the perception was that premier free agents wouldnt want to play for the Dodgers, and that that perception was gone after Furcal signed. Perhaps the notion that free agents wouldnt want to come play for the McCourt's was wrong, I dont know, but the idea that it hurt Colletti's abilities to go after Nomar, Lofton, Tomko, ect. seems counter-intuitive.

91 Not sure if I agree with the first sentence but the second is much more likely.

BTW it all comes down to the players on the field, look in Philly, they fired their GM, hired someone that Tommy had on the top of their list and now they are struggling to survive in their race.

90 - I agree people miss this. I also feel that some assume that DePo would have stood pat this past offseason, or at least don't think about what he would have done - which is strange, considering how much he did the previous offseason.

I agree with 67, and I continue to believe (despite my detractors, which is fine) that the similarties between DePo and Colletti are more compelling than the differences.

I said before that Ned is the Adum Dunn of GM's. His home run of Nomar makes everyone who counts forgive the strikeouts. The media and the 45,000 fans who go to the games and the millions who watch the game on TV count.

88
Name me a starting FA pitcher that we missed out on because of salary that would have helped this team? We could have signed Kenny Rogers, he was cheap, we didn't and it had nothing to do with money. Would you have liked Burnett, Morris, Jason Johnson, Loaiza, or Weaver, who exactly was a FA pitcher this winter other then Rogers and Millwood who hasn't been a complete hole? And don't tell me your personal pet Ted Lilly because he wasn't a free agent. If you study Kenny Rogers you will see that he's always been a great 1st half pitcher and a terrible 2nd half pitcher thus making him the Paul La Duca of pitchers.
Now it is possible that if Furcal continues to blow at this rate the sunk money will effect the Dodgers in 2007 and 2008 but I don't think it had any effect on the winter of 2006.

88. What pitchers would you rather spend money on in the offseason? Id rather spend $39m on Furcal than $40m on AJ Burnett. In fact, to date, Tomko has been more productive than Burnett. I like the idea that if pitching is overpriced and you need to improve your pitching staff, you instead spend money on a good shortstop. There were more reasons to sign Furcal, but thats a pretty good one.

I think the Saito signing is being vastly underrated and understated. Without him right now, we'd be having discussions about what closer to trade for or whether Broxton is ready to step into that role. Where did this guy come from and why wasn't there been opposition from other clubs to sign this guy? The guy's K/IP and whip line is ridiculous. After Nomar, I think he's been the most important signing/move thus far.

I think the Saito signing was just good fortune. He was a so-so pitcher in Japan for a team that was often at the bottom of the standings.

He was a starter who pitched in a bandbox.

The fact that he has become an effective closer at his advanced age is just "one of those things."

95. But that doesnt fit the storyline! Scouts and stats hate each other, blah, blah, blah ...

Even my brother a fairly stubborn man has finally admitted that most of the issues he had with Depo were wrong and that time has shown that Depo made more good moves then bad and the moves he didn't make have saved this team from having no financial flexibility.

Course as Joey has pointed out if Furcal continues to play terrible during his 3 year contract then what Depo gave us in financial flexibility by not signing Beltre and Finley may have already been used up by Ned. I'm still hoping it was not a boondoggle signing but I'm less confident then I was in November when I was estatic to land him.
Of course the cheap kids may allow him to withstand the contract and still field a World Champion contender.

while we're complaining about ballparks, i want to point out that when i went to PETCO the other day, the ONLY beach ball i saw the entire game was brought to the stadium by the dodger fan seated directly in front of me. i was a little ashamed by it.

99 - well in that case, WHY THE HELL DID WE SIGN SAITO!!???!! BAD MOVE! BAD MOVE!!

You could say Saito's success is just good luck for the Dodger's or just "one of those things" but i think, as Branch Ricky said, is a product of design. The Dodgers brought in a handfull of potentially usefull relievers in ST, most didnt work out, as expected, but a few (Beimel, Saito, Sele) have turned out ok. Hopefully Colletti sees how that's a better strategy than overpaying for easily recognizable names, ie Baez and Carter.

Another thing people forget is that DePodesta WAS a scout for the Indians.

Either this or Christian rock....

http://tinyurl.com/k6m98

A few things about all this:

1. We should all realize that Colletti has been a major league GM for less than eight months, and was hired in the middle of the offseason. He will make his mistakes, but I think he needs to be given time before we judge him. After all, everyone is upset that DePodesta didn't get enough time.
2. That said, it seems that alot of people here bend over backward to praise DePodesta, who's track record is mixed, while going out of their way to knock Colletti, whose track record is also mixed. Unfortunately, we will never be able to adequately judge DePodesta's tenure as Dodger GM because he wasn't given enough of a chance to be the Dodger GM. If and when DePodesta gets another job, we'll see what kind of GM he will be.
3. One of the major problems of the DePodesta era was his relationship with Tracy. It is quite obvious that Colletti and Little have a good working relationship, and I have been surprised how good a manager Little has been, and how much he has gone against the book--playing the rookies, letting relievers go two innings, etc.
4. Even if Furcal doesn't get any better this season, I would rather have at short that Oscar Robles or Ramon Martinez, who would have been our SS's until Izturis came back.

I personally like the way the dodgers are set up for the future and future sucesss.
Now ned could screw that up by trading prospects for rentals or trading too many prospects for 1 guy.
I know i'll get blasted for this statement, but here goes: I don't think the dodgers have enough of what it takes to win it all this season even after acquiring a starting pitcher, so i'm hoping ned doesn't trade prospects for a so called chance this season.
And i'd rather have a team that makes it to the playoffs consistently with a world chapionship here and there then a team that wins 1 championship then falls off the map, and that is where the dodgers are at right now in my opinion, ned could blow the future for 1 chance this season or he can stay put and allow the dodgers to get back on the map and stay there for awhile.

105 What people don't know is that DePoesta really didn't like himself.

102 I have been thinking about the beachballs. Considering that they become a problem at every game, why do they let anyone bring one in? And if it's possible to smuggle one in, why not simply kick out any one who starts playing with it? It is not a playground; if your kids aren't interested in baseball, leave them at home...If I paid $20 to $200 for a ticket and I couldn't see the game because of it, I'd be pissed. Any beachballs that got close to me would unfortunately develop a leak.

107 No, I would rather spew irrational thoughts than have a intelligent discussion about the off-season.

110 The problem is that beachball vigalantes get beer cups thrown at them. This is why the subtle jab with a pen is the best tactic (plus it gives you a good incentive to keep score.)

110 Is it really kids that are causing the beachball problems?

113 Kids came in all ages, Sam.

Even if Furcal doesn't get any better this season, I would rather have at short that Oscar Robles or Ramon Martinez, who would have been our SS's until Izturis came back.

If he doesn't get any better this season, what's the difference between them except for about $13 million?

I just get the feeling that aside from Soriano, there is not going to be a big sell-off players, remember last year, everyone kept waiting and nothing big happened.

The team everyone will be watching is Tampa Bay, now that have a new GM, they may trade some of their guys but other than that and a DC selloff, I don't see anyone being available that would be worth it to trade one of the Dodger's top prospects.

I think adults buy the beach balls at Satan's Shop, aka The 99 Cent Store, and bring them to keep their kids occupied.

I have never popped a beach ball although I've wanted to. I took one off the head once.

3. One of the major problems of the DePodesta era was ... Tracy.

4. ... I would rather have ... Oscar Robles or Ramon Martinez, who would have been our SS's until Izturis came back.

I now agree with everything in 107.

http://tinyurl.com/juptq

From the Peninsula News-Review, the Saanich Peninsula's newspaper of choice since 1912.

*

Victoria Mariners slugger Kyle Orr is taking his time to make a decision whether to sign with the Los Angeles Dodgers or attend the University of Kentucky this fall.

Orr's mother Leslie said her younger son, in Grade 12 at Lambrick Park secondary, is busy studying for provincial exams and gearing up for grad and hasn't really had much chance to think about his plans.

The Major League club has sent preliminary paperwork to Orr's Gordon Head home but is granting his family's request for some time to consider his options.

Orr is also in the middle of the B.C. Premier League baseball season with the M's and hopes to help lead them to the club's second provincial championship this summer. Orr was one of seven current Premier League players drafted.

Though on point 4, that is a current assessment based on Fur-kel being completely lame. If you took away that two-homer game, etc., etc.

Jon, I know zip about Blogs or even software in general, but there is a bulletin board I go to that has nice software; posters can correct/edit their posts, post pictures, smileys, etc, directly from our hard drives. I was told it wasn't too expensive. If you are interested in it, I can put you in touch with someone who can tell you more about it.

121 - Ken Arneson is working on the latest evolution of our publishing system.

As far as one thing you mentioned, I sometimes type smileys at the end of my posts, but the idea of actually having those yellow faces added on hits me like a beachball to the head. :)

[117] the offenders in this instance were childless twentysomethings who apparently brought them for their own amusement. or perhaps, (and this would be truly sad) their formative experiences in dodger stadium have them thinking that no baseball game experience is really complete without slapping a beach ball about in the stands?

[122] the current version is pretty good, but i am excited to see what types of added functionality we'll see in toaster 2.0!

120 Why are we always taking away something to make a point, if we took away Nomar's month of May or Russ's hot June (not compared to Matt but pretty good) or how about Gagne's 86 consecutive save streak. If your take the game that Wilt scored a 100 points, he doesn't average over 50 points a game that season.

Is Furcal having a bad couple of weeks, yes, but taking away is best game during that time doesn't make the argument about whether or not is was a good deal to sign him any stronger one way or the other.

125 Thank you!

If you take away the seven at bats in which Matt Kemp has homered, then they should trade him for a mediocre 5th starter...

113 & 114

good one LOL!

77

And don't tell me your personal pet Ted Lilly because he wasn't a free agent.

so JoeyP is oldbear?

Yankee Stadium is very kid friendly.

-- Jeffrey Maier

My wife once made a kid cry at a game when he was screaming so loud in her ear for the beachball that she turned around and told him to shut up. He burst into tears even though he was like 12 years old. Whenever we go to a game now I make sure to ask her not to make the kids cry if they are sitting behind us. It never gets old for me, but I'm sure she's tired of it.

Good timing: Franklin Guttierrez was called up by the Tribe.

132 As long as you're still laughing at it, that's all that matters :)

132
I don't like to use the word "hero" too much, but Toy Cannon, your wife truly defines the word.

I would say "heroine" but it ruins the joke.

Chris at Capitol Punishment has a nice and well-written reminiscence up about growing up a Yankee fan and how he feels with the Pinstripes coming to town this weekend, if you're looking for side reading.

http://dcbb.blogspot.com/

108

I think your right on the money there bro

133

this is when I wish I had a baseball packege on t.v. darn it.

After enduring my 1-year-old son's crying for an entire minute on an airport shuttle bus late last year, a woman said "Shut up" to him. When we defended him, she said that he should have learned better manners by his age.

108
Our team is flawed but what other NL team do you see that isn't flawed that makes you think we can't compete this year for the NL title.
Mets - Pedro/Glavine/Traschel/Solar
Cards - Carpenter/Marquis/Suppan
Houston - Oswalt/Clemens/Pettitte
Dodgers - Penny/Lowe/Billingsly

The back end of all those rotations are just as suspect as ours. Don't you think we have enough prospects that we could do one or two deals and move several of them to help this years team and not really infringe on the future as long as were not talking dealing Billingsly or Kemp?

140. Regardless of whom you are moving, moving "several" prospects will compromise the future of the team, perhaps a few, but several and only protecting two of them is the very definition of selling the future for the now.

For kids at Dodger Stadium, the beachballs are like crack.

I had seats one time way down the leftfield line in the field section. A mom was there with her three nacho- ice cream- and ketchup-smeared kids. Anytime a beachball was in the air anywhere in the stadium, her kids would stand up in hopes they might be able to whack it -- blocking my view of home plate. I was also afraid that, in the frenzy to touch the sacred beachball, some of that ketchup, ice cream and cheese would wind up on my clothes.

After a couple of innings, I finally told the mom that her kids should sit down. She did as I asked, but then complained to me that "baseball is supposed to be fun!"

Suddenly, I felt old.

If I could pick in advance a night for a Dodger Thoughts get together, would there be someone who would be willing to be the ticketing point person on it: take note of ticket requests, handle the purchase of the tickets and distribute them at the game? Obviously we'd have to make sure someone isn't left holding a bunch of unpaid-for tickets.

My suggestion would be the Reserved Level or Top Deck - that way, last-minute decision-makers could just show up and at least get to walk over and be part of it unless it got really crowded.

Alternatively, we could schedule the night but have all the ticket purchases be done on your own, and we just meet before the game.

[143] i'd like to lobby for a game in the june 23rd-25th series against the pirates, though obviously there's not a lot of lead time at this point.

140 To move any of the serious prospects, it would have to be for an outrageously good player, who also happened to have a favorable contract. People here have talked about Cabrera or Willis from Florida, but they aren't costing Florida much, so I doubt they're on the market. I'm hoping the rumors of our interest in Soriano are being spread by Colletti's enemies to make him look bad.

144 - I could do it June 23, but that's Fernando bobblehead night and I wonder if it's sold out.

143
I could do it. You pick the night and I'll do all the gruntwork. Reserve section is best to do a group buy and that way those of us who have season seats can just make our way upto the reserve level.

Since I brought it up before, sure I would do it, pick some dates and then we will go ahead, if we can get 30 or more folks, we can qualify for group tickets.

143 I'll bring the Beach Balls.

Tough to do group buys for give away nights.

140

The thing is that if ned subtracts too many prospects (and he will have to do that), he will have to dip into the free agent market too much for 2007 and beyond and in my opinion it will handcuff him money wise and unable to unload wise (ala perez).
No doubt in my mind that we have enough prospects to deal for a championship this year, but then we are right back where we were before we started developing prospects.
If ned wanted to, he can improve this team so much that we can become the clear cut favorites to win it all this year, but the price will be our future.
All i see on the upcoming free agent market that will be worth it is zito, there are a couple other guys that are interesting but they are listed as having team options that i would think those teams will exercise those options and keep them.

To me, if the dodgers acquire 1 good starting pitcher (and it will cost a lot of prospects), i still think the mets, cardinals, yankees, white sox are all still better than us but not by much, they are clearly better than us without us acquiring a starting pitcher.

Last week in July is also a possibility. I'm trying to find dates in between various in-law visits.

I'm confused at the worry over Furcal. Yes, he hasn't played well so far, but his hitting should bounce back to his average numbers over the past few seasons. That would be a .770 OPS instead of .663. On the other hand, his errors are about normal for him. Some have made a big deal that he has 16 errors so far when he had 15 all last year, but he had 24, 31, and 27 the three years before that. He's on pace to be a little above his own average, but could come out about even still. He will definitely be worse than Izturis with the glove (at least, when measured by errors), but his batting should be a lot better.

disclosure: i'm selfishly hoping for the june pirates series because i'm leaving LA on july 3rd and i won't be back until maybe a short visit next spring.

http://minorleagueball.com/main/1

sickels just did a matt kemp crystal ball.

Izturis had a fielding slump last year, remember?

I'm not drawing any conclusions about Furcal now - I'm very open to the possibility that he could either be what was hoped for or become a huge disappointment.

It is interesting, though, to compare the grief the $13 million Furcal has gotten vs. the grief the $11 million Drew had gotten at this time last year.

153 But he is making 13 million a year. The problem is that Colletti gave a decent SS superstar money.

156 Grief from who, us, or the media?

158 - The media, I guess, though not entirely

The success of Nomar has taken a lot of the scrutiny away from Furcal. The success of Kent in 2005 did not take as much hand-wringing away from Drew, even though Drew was having a better year last year than Furcal has had this year.

[155] that's an eye-roller. i'd like to see the dartboard where he got those numbers. good to know that havana will get an expansion team, though.

159 You're right, and the weird thing is that Furcal is not playing (IMO) that much worse than he has in years past. He always has had a lot of errors and his career on base percentage is .346. The only thing that is really down is his slugging. Drew did everything right last year, unless you fault him for getting hit by a pitch.

159 Two words, Injury proned

158 I was refering to the grief he has taken mostly from us here at DT.

157 He's historically better than decent -- I would say above average, but I agree not worth 'superstar money' if that's what $13 million is.

156 Granted, Izturis had an off year, for him, but Furcal is usually much worse. Going back four years, he is usually at or near the bottom for zone rating and fielding percentage.

If Izturis was going to continue his slide with the bat, then Furcal is potentially a huge upgrade, even with the worse glove. I think he'll progress toward his typical OPS as the season goes on.

163 I can live with above average.

139 Ha ha. I went to a party at a friend's house, and my 14 month old son was running around everywhere, getting into things. My 55-year-old co-worker, who has grownup kids now, told me that he should be taught not to touch things. Then she proceeded to demonstrate by repeating to him, "This is not good; this is not good; this is not good." My son just smiled in bemusement.

I found out from asking my parents for child rearing advice that most people forget how infants were. When I told my dad about how my son did this and this, he'd often say, "Hmmm...I don't remember if you guys were like that or not."

Jon, I just purchased 30 seats for the 6/23 game in the upper reserve for Dodger Thought readers and posters. The cost is 12.00 per ticket. Sorry if I jumped the gun but I've seen these things happen before with nothing happening. If we don't get 30 people I can always donate them to the boys club in Woodland Hills.

For those who would like to go, contact me at molokai@yahoo.com
put DodgerThoughtGame in the subject header.

157 I'd say he's better than decent. After the huge drop off from Mike Young, Derek Jeter, and Miguel Tejada, Furcal is probably next in line in terms of overall ability.

Keep in mind that we are overpaying the guy so he would take less years. Given the size of the Dodgers payroll, I like this strategy.

ToyCannon really takes the initiative.

Wow, rough couple months for Devil Rays prospects. Hope he wasn't with Redick:

http://tinyurl.com/zmbmo

167 If you are isolating offense. I think Orlando Cabrera is probably better than Furcal also. I know he is hot right now, but I still would rather have him in the long run.

170 I'm not. Jeter, Tejada, and Young are so much better on offense that their defense is pretty much irrelevant. For now, I'm assuming that Furcal's defense is an anonomly, and he'll get back to his above average offense and defense combination.

166 - Yikes! That is frighteningly proactive. But thanks.

Okay, I'll create a new thread for the get-together.

FYI - The tickets will be in section 12, starting with rows EE on up. We will be high but it is a decent section especially for group sales on a give away night.

166 A two-fer! Fernando bobblehead and Boo Jim Tracy!

I wish I had some Mileage Plus miles left; I'd fly over and join y'all.

166

o.k. so how dose this work? do we pay you at the dore or how?

{171] I don't know how you can assume it is an anomaly when he has had 4 years with more than twenty errors. His slugging is definitely above average for a shortstop. Although, it doesn't look like he'll hit 20 HR's so to me it seems like he is overpaid.

Okay, the new thread is open. I'll have a separate game thread later as well.

Thanks again to ToyCannon for the surge of momentum!

I'm sure Nate and Bob saw this happen live but a good day for a Dodger draftee.

http://tinyurl.com/l9kxf

177

yeah thanks again ToyCannon (coming up big!)

176 -
Career rate2 at shortstop:

Furcal - 102
Izturis - 101

Career eqa:

Furcal - .265
Izturis - .226