gosh jon, you talk so much sense. it's one of the things i really admire about you, but just once i'd like to see you really let someone have it. an impassioned, scathing diatribe or polemic :)

i think you've pegged colletti pretty well though. still, it's hard not to look at some of his individual head scratchers and think that no matter how insecure colletti is, how could he possibly think THAT guy is gonna be worth it?

"Colletti isn't stupid; he's just insecure or cautious - pick your preference. He's the guy that got both Andre Ethier and Mark Hendrickson, who got both Greg Maddux and Lugo. He almost seems to know he's fallible, so he's always trying to solve both problems that exist and problems that might come up - and this includes problems that he would consider of his own creation (Jae Seo). ... Colletti knows some moves work out and others don't, and that's going to keep him shopping."

While it should be noted that one man's "zip and dip" is another man's Jeckyll & Hyde, I think your portrait of Colletti's work is spot on. In my book, his biggest asset is his willingness to admit he made a mistake and then move to correct it. And he seems to have a relationship with Little that will prevent any roster staredowns (see Tracy v. Depo in the Battle of Choi) over those mistakes.

2 And he seems to have a relationship with Little that will prevent any roster staredowns (see Tracy v. Depo in the Battle of Choi) over those mistakes.

...the importance of which should not be underestimated.

Bowden also traded Daryle Ward who has been a decent lefty PH for the Nationals yesterday for a once and future high ranked pitching prospect (Braves number one pick in 2003, but 35th overall, I think). But the guy had TJ surgery last month. Interesting.

It's a good and fair review of Colletti, but on the other hand I see something decidedly uncautious in trading away so many young players. Just as you describe his peripatetic style as growing out of a recognition that he is fallable and that not all deals will work out, trading these prospects seems to flow from a contrary belief that he (and his team) can meaningfully project which prospects are likely to make it and which are not. (In other words, Colletti is very confident that Kemp has a lot of promise but Guzman did not.)

That may be a smart approach, but it in important ways it marks a risky path.

To be clear, I don't think Choi's place on the 2004 or 2005 rosters was necessarily a mistake on Depo's part. We never learned whether it was or wasn't, thanks to the Tracy v. Depo cold war. (Which also taught us that Mutually Assured Destruction does indeed work.)

4 - One hopes Logan White is (A) as smart as we all think he is, and (B) consulted early and often on any and every prospect move.

Jon, good summary of Colletti's reign so far. He may have really figured out Joel Guzman -- Mike Emeigh at BTF has this to say about our old friend at http://tinyurl.com/l9rp9:

"Joel Guzman has fallen so far off the prospect map that he's going to need a guide dog to find his way back. I saw him play three games this past week in Durham, and he has (a) a very slow bat and (b) slow reflexes in the field. He totally misjudged two popups (only one of which cost him an error), was caught flatfooted on a routine grounder (which he booted), dived for a grounder that wasn't more than about two feet to his left (making what should have been a relatively simple play took hard) and didn't hit a single ball with any authority whatsoever. I have no idea what happened here, but he's not someone who I'd even take a flyer on at this point."

Also look for a brief comment on near-old friend Luke Hochevar.

1gosh jon, you talk so much sense. it's one of the things i really admire about you, but just once i'd like to see you really let someone have it. an impassioned, scathing diatribe or polemic :)

Look back a couple of days to when someone called him a fascist.

I am relieved that Colletti wouldn't make a Wells-Kemp deal. I'm not sure I was as confident as Jon. One regular here said"if Kemp goes, I go",and that pretty well said it.

6 I was just gonna mention that, too.

I guess the question is at what point do you consider trading prospects, and which ones? Clearly, not every prospect in the organization can play for the major league team. Hoarding the best prospects against the day the team needs them is ideal, but where to you draw the line between the best and merely serviceable players who will probably never make the big club?

9 - wherever its drawn, its not drawn at a 20 year old rookie league pitcher.

Does anyone know the corresponding roster move yet for the Dodgers 25-man roster?

Right now, there are 26 players listed on the 25-man roster. I have not yet seen reported what player was taken off the 25-man roster to allow Marlon Anderson on.

Hopefully, Hendrickson will go on the DL with a strained ability or something.

11 Rosters expand today.

I got scared late last night when I saw the news crawl on ESPN mention this lil' trade and read it wrong for a second - I thought the Dodgers had acquired Daryle Ward! Whew. Once was enough for him. I'll take Anderson, though I agree I'm not exactly sure what he adds at this point (except more speed off the bench?) and all I'd remembered about Jhony Nunez is that he went to the Yhency Brazoban school of nomenclature.

But then I remembered he'd actually done pretty well so far. So we'll see - four years from now this could come back to haunt the Dodgers.

Btw, continuing from Jon's post, I did appreciate this bit from Colletti (in today's Times) (re: Wells):

"The price never came down, and at some point it went up," Colletti said. "We didn't need somebody so bad we'd give up more than one guy.

"I'm not afraid to make a move. But you have to do what is right. This time of year, I expect to pay a bit of premium, but I'm not going to pay five times the premium."

We didn't need somebody so bad we'd give up more than one guy

So he wasn't willing to give up more than Kemp...?

I think Kemp = two guys. ;-)

You keep sticking your hand in the fire, sooner or later you will be burned. No need to express my opinion of this moron again...

What's wrong with this picture:

Alexandria, Va.: Boz,

If Soriano goes 50-40 and does not win the MVP, how big of a travesty will it be?

Tom Boswell: The A.L. MVP race is going to be a tough decision. Wilbon and I were talking about it at the Skins game last night. Of course, Michael's pushing Dye from Chicago! (Who's having a great season.) Jeter will get lots of support. The M & M boys in Minnesota may split some of their vote. With the offensive stats so huge this year, I doubt Soriano or David Ortiz has much chance with their teams out of the race. Travis Hafner has had a monster year, like Sorinao's, which has been largely lost in the Indians disaster year.

Nonetheless, if Soriano gets 50-40 we may be talking about it for many years. Especially if it's his only year as a National. He's driving his market price to the moon. The better he plays the more it hurts the Nats ability to pay an astronomical "market price" for a 30-year-old player in his absolute prime who is at the very top of its value.

Marlon Anderson played for Tampa Bay in 2003. I'm just sayin'.

18 You'd think the teams beat writer would know what league the team played in.

Jeez, Boswell sounds more like Criswell in that response. He must be sleep deprived or brain deprived.

20 It is pretty odd; the way he analyzes the players, it doesn't look like just glitcing and typing AL instead of NL.

He's not the beat writer, in fairness, but an opinion columnist.

18 Don't we need another 2nd baseman? We don't have a six pack yet. If we signed him, I'd find someplace for him to play.
Martin, Loney, Kent, Furcal, LaRoche, Soriano, Drew (or Kemp), and Ethier.... We might score enough runs to make Hendrickson a winning pitcher.

Closing the loop (and touche Boz on a pretty funback comeback):

re: Soriano/MVP: Did the Nationals get transferred to the AL without our knowledge? The chatter asked about Soriano for MVP and you answered talking about the AL MVP race.

Tom Boswell: Sorry, up into the a.m. last night with the Skins. Not enough coffee this a.m.! I hope Bowden hasn't traded the Nationals into the A.L. in return for two young pitchers coming off arm surgery.

Soriano has an uphill battle against players like Carlos Beltran, David Wright, Ryan Howard, Albert Pujols and Jose Reyes who play for teams which will or might make the playoffs. Also, Soriano's defense, while much improved, is coming off a very low level.

Ah, the joys of chatting on short sleep!

"funback" -- a colloquialism combining "funny" and "comeback."

17 "No need to express my opinion of this moron again... "

Should we hold you to that? ;-) Or do you just mean, "...in the next ten minutes"?

If Colletti had traded James Loney and/or Matt Kemp for David Wells I would have shot him.

The thing about the four pair of pants analogy is that you can apply it to minor league players too. Instead of going on the assumption that some prospects pan out and some don't, and you never really know, what they're trying to do is decide who's going to succeed in advance and converting the others. The trouble is they're trading uncertainty with an upside for known mediocrity. It's like buying a pair of pants that's kind of ugly but won't embarrass you with an unknown amount of money in a sealed envelope, which might contain a thousand dollar bill or a car wash coupon. In the long run "Man, I wish I had that thousand dollars" tends to trump "Boy, I'm glad I didn't get stuck with that car wash coupon." (That is, instead of the guy who was with you for two months and hit .250.)

Jon uses the word that comes to my mind whenever I think of Colletti: "insecure." In the previous thread I said that I distrust people with a penchant for engaging in busywork, and I peg Colletti as somebody who is really afraid of being perceived by either the L.A. media or by his boss (McCourt) as a do-nothing GM, which is the way Stoneman is regarded by the L.A. media because he rarely trades away even second, third or fourth tier prospects.

Alternatively, Colletti may just really love making trades, like they were an end in themselves. A Canadian TV writer/director/producer I admire whom I am sure none of you have heard of, Ken Finkleman, who spent time working in Hollywood before returning to Canada, once said that in Hollywood it is the DEAL itself that is the orgasm, while making the actual movie or TV show is the prodding-the-girl-to-get-out-of-your-apartment part of the process. Having already made a number of trades that have not turned out well, Colletti should have learned by now that making a trade is not synonymous with actually improving the Dodgers. And yet he still goes out and trades for a Marlon Anderson. There is just no other way to explain it outside of either the "busywork" theory or the "deal as orgasm" theory.

Hey everyone, I'm a long-time lurker who finally decided to chip in. The thing about the pants analogy, if I get home from Old Navy and decide I don't like how the pants look in my mirror, I can take them back and get a refund. No refunds here, we are stuck with Anderson. That's what worries me about Flanders and his busy-work.

Anderson's OPS against righties this season is .799, about the same as Saenz's .792.

Interesting to note, though, that Anderson has a .348 OBP against RHP. While not stunning, that beats all but the following players on the Dodgers:

JD Drew (.390)
Kenny Lofton (.376)
Andre Ethier (.375)
Nomar Garciaparra (.363)
James Loney (.357)
Rafael Furcal (.350)

Now Lofton and Loney potentially could be just as good, but given that they have pretty good likelihoods of starting (Loney due to Nomar's nagging knee injury), Anderson's not a bad guy to have on the bench. If he adds to the already NL best .348 team OBP, more power to him.

I realize it is the principle of what colletti did and not who he gave up but i dont think it that big of deal. It seems that Coletti has consulted with his scouts and minor league development crew and has a read on who to trade and who to keep. It also helps him that basically almost every young player he has traded away has practically imploded or their progress has stalled.

For the most part, Colletti is shopping at Old Navy and not Barney's, so the cost isn't overwhelming - but there is a cost, and one of these days he's gonna really regret what he spent on a pair of ill-fitting slacks.

In fairness to Colletti, I'd say he's been shopping more at Costco, where they don't have dressing rooms.

Jeez, somebody really needs to change that headline/subheader combination on the Dodgers.com story about the Anderson trade. I almost had a heart attack before I got to the "...to be recalled..." part.

http://tinyurl.com/eax9q

"He almost seems to know he's fallible"

It would seem that that is one of the first things you look for in a manager, of any type. It is the general managers that don't think they are fallible that scare me. I do not have any real hestiations with the minor leaguers dealt so far. White, Colleti and all know far more about these kids than we do. Ya, we may let one get away. But, so far I don't think it's happened at all. I think history will show that to be the case, but we won't know for a few years. So, I don't see Colleti trading "possibility" for proven "mediocrity." I see it as trading what you are pretty sure is not worth anything, for pieces to a motor that will make the whole thing work better.

31. I think you are exactly right. And, it may begin to hinder his ability to make a deal if he keeps up like this.

31 The problem is that even if Colletti knows that these guys will implode, he's not getting any value for them.

31 - good point with almost, though. Navarro's .271/.352/.379 shows he's not hitting the ball really hard, but his isolated patience is nice, and he's thrown out 15 of 40 basestealers in Tampa.

But at least the Dodgers held onto the right catcher.

36 Exactly. He's been consistently unable to extract a value premium for the potential of the guys he's dealing away. A trade in which the only way your side can "win" is for the guys you deal away to be a complete bust is not my idea of a good roster management strategy.

36

yes i agree on that. that seems to be where his faults lie. The players he doesnt like, or the ones his minor league development people tells him are okay trading away, are players that it seems like he believes hold no value and he cant wait to get rid of them.

that is something about him i dont agree with him. a 22 yr old catcher with good patience is worth more then the 8th best left hander in the american league.

but, maybe not. The padres just gave up their best catching prospect for basically a mark hendrickson but with all the fancy accolades.

trading is an inexact science and no one is perfect. sometimes you win big (ethier), sometimes you win (betemit), and sometimes you lose (hendrickson i guess).

Does Anderson mean that Hendrickson won't be on the playoff roster?

40 - It would seem that one of Hendrickson, Kuo, Sele, or Dessens is getting the short end come playoff time.

36 - I'm not entirely sure that's true. If his objective is to help the big club win now (not a bad objective), then he's either got to trade a bevy of prospects for a superstar or he's got to trade a couple of prospects for role players who can contribute in certain circumstances (think Dave Roberts in Boston and all the credit he's given for starting the comeback against los Yanqis with the steal of second).

I think the Dodgers have a nice balance of now and future players but as more of the future guys become now guys (Either, Martin, Kemp, and soon Loney and LaRoche), prospects become less valuable because the team has filled all the big holes at the major league level.

[31, 35] I'm agreeing with the Nate-ster here. I think Colletti is listening to his scouts and dumping stock that he/they deem worthless. I was a big DePo fan, even in the the face of the debacle last year, but I've got to give Colletti his due. I don't think he's just creating busywork but seeing what fits and goes together (to carry on Jon's shopping analogy a bit). We're not building a team around Anderson, he will be a bit/role player & emergency fill in, tops. Colletti is just aiming towards the post season here, and I think adding bit pieces like Anderson is appropriate...moreso than adding somebody like Wells.

39 While it is an inexact science, you should be looking at the aggregate. The way Colletti has been running his trades, if any of these guys we've given away pan out, the Dodgers lose in the end.

The problem is that everyone wants immediate results, but we won't know how this ends up until 2010 or so. What if it takes Guzman a few years, but he figures it out by the time he's 25? The only trade we can say we definately won is the Ethier trade, primarily because that's the only trade where the Dodgers got younger.

People point to Guzman and Edwin Jackson's struggles and say that it doesn't matter that we lost them. We won't know the true effect of these trades for years, and that scares me.

As far as Anderson goes, is there anything he does that Delwyn Young couldn't?

42 43 That's a fair way to look at the situation. I would argue that the key to your points is whether or not you're adding incremental value to your ballclub when you give away a player with potential.

We don't yet know how much Anderson will help the Dodgers to win between now and season's end, but it's fair to say that it's doubtful he'd add anything more, incrementally, than the pieces we already had. If so, giving away Nunez's potential didn't do much for the "win today!" side of the present/future equation.

31 - I agree with Nate. For all that can be learned from stats, we must realize that the people within the organization have info about their minor league players that we do not, and make their decisions accordingly.

Plus, they have arcane rules about protecting players, draft pick compensation, etc. that come into play. For example, will we get a draft pick when Lugo signs elsewhere as a FA after the season?

47 - For example, will we get a draft pick when Lugo signs elsewhere as a FA after the season?

Usually, LA would get two, but this offseason is up in the air.

https://griddle.baseballtoaster.com/archives/490657.html#comments

47 At least in my case, my view of Guzman was almost entirely caused by scouts telling me this guy will be good. Aside from 2004, he really hasn't been that impressive statistically.

45 -- And that is the downside of only trusting "seasoned vets" to fill small roles in a pennant race: prospects who don't have the hype and big upsides of our more elite prospects (like Delwyn Young) get no chance to show that they too have value, perhaps a lot more than the Marlon Andersons of the world. Because we didn't get Wells, Kuo may now get a chance to take some starts away from Hendrickson. What bothers me is that Kuo is Plan B while Plan A was the fat 43-year-old with the 5.00 ERA. It really is Colletti's way of thinking, and the principle involved, that is worth worrying about, rather than the chance that Jhonny Nunez is going to come back and haunt us someday.

What Nate and Dag said. I really don't see what the big deal is here. We strengthened the bench a little bit. We gave up a guy who is a fairly old rookie leaguer who may or may not someday be something. He's not Kershaw or Morris or Elbert. We have those guys to look forward to.

Compare the Dodgers starting line-up and bench at the moment with last year's team. As my optometrist likes to say, "Better, or worse? Worse, or better?"

Of course, compare the current roster with the '88 World Champion team and this one looks better, too, but that team had a great pitching staff and, specifically, Orel.

Anyway...

Greece 101, U.S. 95

Wow. It wouldn't be correct to call it an upset. It's another loss to confirm the fall of the U.S.A. Basketball empire.

And we can't even say to the world, "We'll get you in baseball or soccer."

26 Over and above expressing my "right" to state my opinion as much and/or as often as you or anyone else does, I am really not comfortable anywhere I am not wanted, so I will be glad to make you a present by terminating my presence here. You 1, me 0.

50 I do agree with you there - it would be nice to see Delwyn Young get a chance. I'm not sure why he doesn't. Maybe they'll still call him up next week for at least a taste.

53 Huh? I was just teasing you for setting yourself up by saying you wouldn't mention your feelings about Colletti again when we both know you will. You're welcome to. (Though I don't see how calling him a "moron" repeatedly adds anything to the discussion.) I'm not really sure why or how that turned into a request to leave?

46 Of course you are correct, but there's uncertainty around any transaction. It's the basis of statistical estimation and calculating projections. What's Nunez's 5 year projection? How much uncertainty is there around that? What factors, statistical and "gut", go into making a decision today about whether a key pinch hit or two by Anderson this year is worth what Nunez brings down the road? Making those calls is why Colletti, White et al make the big bucks.

It can all go wrong, like the other Anderson trade (Larry Anderson for Bagwell). I guess they feel the odds are against that happening.

Colletti continues to buy biege Dockers from Nordstroms Rack. The problem is we have 6 pairs of Dockers hanging in our closet already. I wish he would look for that pair of Ben Sherman slacks hidden in the middle of the sale rack.

More importantly, who will my Broncos name as starting running back? Looks like no one will know until next weekend, which means us fantasy football players should stay away all together - though as a Broncos fan I also am perfectly confident in the committee of guys they'll have. (Sounds like Dayne is on the way out...)

For all those watching at home, the passed ball in the top of the 10th inning at RFK last night that allowed the Phils to briefly go ahead was not, in fact, a passed ball:

"As it turned out, Rollins tipped the ball with his bat, but neither Schneider nor home-plate umpire Bruce Dreckman heard the ball hit the bat."

From the mlb.com gamestory.

44 But on that basis, should we be upset about David Ross seems to have found his swing after two years.

Edwin Jackson is out of options so he will need to lurk on someone's 25 man roster next year, while he is still young (23 in a week), right now it does not appear that he has done anything to assure anything above a 10 or 11th guy on a staff.

I still say that when you look at the two local teams, the best prospect traded this year was Alberto Callaspo, 23 year old 2B prospect, named to the PCL All-Star team, who led the PCL in hits, from the Angels to the D-Backs for a 27 year old (28 in December) pitcher who is still in Salt Lake City.

Now, tha argument for that deal was that Callaspo was not the prospect that Kendrick, Wood and Aybar are so they needed to free up the space so those guys could advance.

After that, Stoneman stayed really quiet during the season, which I guess to some here, is the approach, Ned should have taken.

I'm just pointing out that for now, Ned has done a good job balancing the present and the future and with 29 games to go, made this September a fun time to be a Dodger fan.

Delwyn against right handers this year: 390 ABs, .295/.352/.500. Too bad he lacks veteran-ness.

However, Delwyn may need to give up switch hitting, his split against lefties is ugly: 120 ABs, .208/.246/.342

From the brilliant mind of John Heyman at SI:

"By far the biggest winner on Thursday's second deadline day would appear to be the San Diego Padres, which brought proven playoff performer David Wells back home."

(some raves about Wells and Kevin Towers, then...)

"Talks with the Dodgers, considered the runner-up in this derby, were believed to have centered around first baseman James Loney, a fine fielder and contact hitter who at one time was considered L.A.'s top position prospect. However, Loney's power potential has been questioned lately, and failing to homer in a brief Dodgers stint (72 at-bats) didn't help matters."

What bothers ME is all this concern over a 20 year old in the GCL! Hey, and how about all the trades we NEVER made...everyone talks about Pedro for Delino but how about

Jackson for Zito

Jackson and Miller for Konerko

Joel Haranan and Andrew Brown for Jermaine Dye

etc. etc.

This move is a payroll dump by the nats and Nunez is a long long long shot to make the majors let alone do anything significant.

Don't judge the incremental value of these moves until the seasons over either...but at least we wont have robles, kinkade, grabowski, edwards, etc. taking huge amounts of PT with the ML depth we have

61 Yeah, wasn't someone here recently asking why some hitters stubbornly remain a switch hitter even when it becomes clear they're severely weaker from one side? The Dodgers have a couple like that...

55 Not just you; I feel that my opinion, while apparently shared by lots of others here, is ignored and disregarded. I think others have that same feeling at times so maybe it is just my problem that I let it bother me. And maybe part of it is feeling somewhat that I'm making a fool of myself by even having an opinion on such a subject as this with all the important things in the world I should be more concerned about and put forth more effort to correct. Too complicated. I'm going to write 500 times:"I won't let anything Flanders or anyone else in baseball does upset me." Maybe I'll start a list of things that need to be ranted about... Top of the list would be the incredibly bad calls major league umpires make... All in all, a time out from posting, anywhere from a day to infinity, won't do any harm and may even improve the world. That I can live with.

60 Maybe it's my Pro-DePo bias, but I consider Ross a special case. We gave that man every chance in the world, and all he had to do was not go 0 for Spring Training and he'd be the Dodger catcher in 2005. Maybe the information Colletti has avialable tells him that these guys will never pan out, but since we don't know what he has or how he's getting it, we can't make that judgement.

It brings up the question of how much credit can you give a GM for a teams success? You can do everything right and get hosed by injuries or random collapses, but you could also sign Scott Hatteberg and trade Wily Mo Pena for Bronson Arroyo and have them suddenly get way better. Let's not even get into things like bullpens which are almost entirely based on dumb luck. All a GM can do is put the best team out on the field and pray. Is it his fault if the team vastly over or under performs?

63 At least for me, it's not about giving up Nunez, it's about acquiring a guy that's no better than players we already have for 15-20 at bats.

20 at bats is absolutely nothing. You could grab any player in the bigs or AAA and there's pretty much an equal chance he'll be better than Anderson.

Baseball Prospectus weighs in. A snippet:

"...Dumping Ledee and (now) replacing him with Anderson is an upgrade, but mostly a cosmetic one—there's not a lot of difference between them in what they can do, and if Ledee was hurt much of the season, it isn't like a healthy Anderson is so much better that it was worth giving up a prospect as promising as Nunez to get him...Certainly, discarding Nunez looks gratuitous, and the product of particularly poor planning."

http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5481#LAN

67 Unfortunately, the way baseball works, for guys on the bench, it is that one at bat that could make the year, even David Ross had a big home run to win a game in the last week of the 2004 season, Ramon Martinez may do nothing else but he had the big HR the other night, Sandy Alomar had a big pinch hit in Colorado.

So while it may seem rather silly to get a guy for a few at bats since the rate of success is so low, it is the times they get that hit that become memorable moments to a great season.

The point that all the guys we gave up aren't doing anything isn't completely true, is it? Navarro has been worth a bit more than Hendrickson, and I believe the two lesser prospects we gave up to Tampa are doing well.

Anyway, acquiring Marlon Anderson does not make your bench better. He is redundant. Somebody brought up that he would be a "role-player" but what role would he play? The Dave Roberts example used doesn't work because Dave Roberts can steal bases, he has a role. What role does AMrlon Anderson fill?

69 But couldn't anyone fill that role?

68 Baseball Prospectus is also the same publication famous for the acronym There Is No Such Thing as a Pitching Prospect.

Also, and while no one there will admit it, I still think unconsciously the folks at BP are still slightly miffed at how Depo was treated since he was a big proponent of what they do.

was worth giving up a prospect as promising as Nunez to get him

They hadn't even heard of this guy.

69 That's exactly why you don't give away value (whether real or potential) for a slightly better bench hitter. The odds that it will make a difference are near zero. Even bad hitters can make something happen in one of ten or twenty at-bats.

For Nate, now maybe you can concentrate on your studies...

B-List (Austin, TX): Wouldn't throwing sick money at Logan White be a better investment than throwing money at a Paul Byrd or someone of that ilk? It would probably cost significantly less and pay off a helluva lot more. For a team trying to "build from within," the Indians are a whole lot better at identifying other people's prospects than they are at drafting their own (their 5-year draft record is atrocious). What would White cost?

Christina Kahrl: It's a good question, because while I agree with the basic suggestion, I'm not so sure there's enough money to get White to leave where he's at. He's apparently pretty well-compensated doing what he does with the Dodgers, and there's a suggestion that he might be the new Sherman of player development, unwilling to throw his hat in the ring, run, or serve in higher office.

BTW, is no one going to comment on my little rant about Callaspo, if Ned had done anything close to that, he would be skewerd everytime Alberto got a hit.

72 Are you implying that BP's take on the trade should be dismissed because they have a cute acronym to describe the uncertainties inherent in prospects panning out? Or because you think they hate Ned Colletti because he isn't Paul DePodesta?

It's nothing more or less than another perspective worthy of being shared with this group.

It's quite possible that Marlon Anderson may have the same impact on the Dodgers as the following guy:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/clarkda05.shtml
did at the end of the 1996 season.

65: I have trouble understanding how your opinions are both ignored but also shared by many others here. Now that the Era of Choi has passed, Colletti's plusses and minusses are probalby the most discussed subject here and critical views are widely aired.

If you mean that you feel that your particular comments don't get direct responses, it may be a tone thing -- harsh comments usually (though not always) don't generate a lot of discussion/response.

76-

Bill Stoneman hasn't made four or five Callaspo type trades, though.

I feel like a Xerox machine. Great post, Jon, and mostly a fair analysis of Colletti's moves so far. I agree completely with Sam DC in 4 as to the reservations -- he's taken some big risks by trading the younguns he has, and so I hope he knows what he's doing, or at least is consulting with Logan White. Or, as Elvis Costello once put it,

Why do you have to say that there's always someone
Who can do it better than I can?
Don't you think that I know that walking on the water
Won't make me a miracle man?

Hi all,

Off-topic question. A friend of mine wants to go to the Sunday 1pm game, but would like to avoid sitting in the sun. I know the sun sets behind the 3rd base-side of the stadium, but can't say with any precision what seats might be shaded for most or all of an afternoon game. Obviously, something under an overhang. Do any of the season-tix holders or other frequent visitors have any suggestions? I guess reserved/inner reserved is the most he'd want to shell out.

Thanks

60, 80 - I'll bite. Callaspo's 2006 season was a little bit of an outlier, even by his pretty good standards, and Jason Bulger was one of the Snakes' top prospects whom BA ranked 23rd in their system, claiming he was good enough to vie for a job in the Arizona bullpen. Injuries have hurt Bulger's playing time this year, but the real harm was only getting one 27-year-old reliever at the start of the season. I think his upside is still something like Brendan Donnelly if he gets lucky.

On the other hand... looking back at the Edwin Jackson deals that didn't go down, it's becoming clearer that that wave of prospects could have been profitably traded, but as with all such matters, it's all hindsight. I'm becoming increasingly convinced that the Angels' offensive prospects are somewhat overrated because of the hitting environment they're in, and their pitching prospects a little undervalued.

78 What impact.

Who's Carl South?

Tonight's Nats-Diamondbacks game has already been canceled due to rain and reset as a d/n doubleheader tomorrow. Of course today is the first day of Nationals' games being available on cable to DC residents.

Livan's return is set for tomorrow pm. He should get a nice big ovation.

The Nats and DBacks are destined to never play each other this year.

With the cancellation, they will be the last two teams to meet for the first time. The Padres and Reds play for the first time tonight.

And, according to the Elias Sports Bureau, there is no such thing as a day/night doubleheader. It's just two games that happen to be played on the same day.

Changing that definition is has been officially certified as a quixotic battle.

A quixotic battle for you, or for Elias? Or are the quixotic battle's of Elias necessarily yours as well?

Sam,
I'm going to send you an email I wrote about this to the SABR records committee and then a followup response I got from one of the members.

They're too long to post here.

Whew, when I saw 88 was addressed to me I figured it was because I hadn't had time to get back and correct "battle's."

I sent the messages to your evil cable company address.

Not Earth-shattering news or anything, but the Dodgers have extended their affiliation with the Las Vegas 51s through 2008:

http://tinyurl.com/erpj6

I know that some have questioned the hitting environment in Vegas and its effect on our players there, but so it shall remain for at least a little while longer.

I wonder whether Mike Emeigh about James Loney circa 2004. Or 2005.

We're going to try that again, given that statement's lack of any sense:

I wonder what Mike Emeigh would have said about James Loney circa 2004. Or 2005.

Geez.

Overall I like what Coletti has done. My complaint is that I wish he would be more patient and think a move ahead if that were possible.

I think that David Wells is a big pickup and wish that the Dodgers would have gotten him. If Coletti had held onto Navarro he may have been able to get Wells for him since the Red Sox wanted a catcher.

I think that David Wells is a big pickup

Yeah, Wells is way too big to pick up

94 Wells being a big pickup and all, it's probably good that he isn't a Dodger or Jeff Kent might break a wrist trying to wash him.

91 I guess there wasn't really anywhere else to go, but that disappoints me as I don't like how there's such a big difference between the 2 parks. The Marlins, who have a similar problem with Albuquerque, were one of the first teams to extend their affiliation this year. The AAA teams that have yet to be extended are Charlotte, Columbus, Norfolk, Pawtucket, Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, Iowa, New Orleans, Sacramento, Tacoma, and Tucson.

i love you're read as always Jon, but i can tell what kind of "flavor" you like, i for one love Ned love that he knows when he messes up.... i don't wanna get to into it.

96 - LOL. (Well, really not OL 'cause I'm at work, but it was darn funny and worthy of note.)

Here's one for the teachers, that has nothing to do with baseball, and is sort of wonderful and sort of awful. http://tinyurl.com/mv5fz

97. I think Hobos gets it right - there aren't any other good options that are close (for callups) and in decent sized cities, so as to make a little money on tix. Albuquerque was even worse than Vegas (elevation wise). But where else would one want a AAA team? In California, Fresno and Sacramento are taken. Bakersfield is still too small, I imagine (though growing fast). Santa Barbara is probably too small. Outside of California, Portland, Tucson, and of course Phoenix are taken. Salt Lake too (as it's even higher than Vegas).

Bakersfield might be the only option, and probably not for 10 yrs.

I was skating to class today and I went over a mini pot hole and really Tony Jackson'ed it. The worst part is, just as I was eating it, my friends were passing by. First time I've fallen in months. My ego is badly bruised. It was kind of funny asking the professor if I could go to the restroom to clean it up. The reaction from the girls in the class was priceless.

Skate or die, Miltie. Skate or die...

100 Sam, ouch. I'm no teacher, but I'd be a tad annoyed/frustrated/exasperated by that article.

I went to high school in Alexandria at the school which became TJHSST; I don't recall that there were AP courses offered. ETS offered exams for AP, and I took a few my senior year, but semester-long courses? Nope.

103. I think it's more like "skate and die" (not a wish for Uncle Miltie, but a prediction). Actually, I'm not sure if "skating" refers to skateboards or in-line skates (I'm old you see, and unfamiliar with your argot) but to my eyes, both (esp the former) are paths to Darwinian self-selection.

Anyone have any insight on the shade-seating question in 82? Thanks.

Nationals acquire Nook Logan for a PTNBL.

??

106 I think you're hosed in the reserved section for a day game. There's a much better chance of getting shade at the back of a lower level such as loge of field level. Outer loge tickets aren't too expensive (I think $18?), and if you order over the phone you might be able to specify a row close to the top of the section, under the overhang of the reserved level.

107 Nats press release rejoices that Logan is the third fastest player in the American League.

It's not eighth best lefthander, but it's something.

94 He's more of a dump truck.

My question in 11 was more centered on what the Dodgers "frozen" roster on 8/31 was. These 25 men are the ones eligible for postseason (I do realize that DL moves can and probably will be made to adjust later), and as of this morning the 25-man roster had 26 names.

106

You better buy "inner reserved" or loge to guarantee shade. Or you can buy reserved tickets and sit in the upper sections. Those seats are shady, but also a very long way from the action.

You can also wear a hat and sunscreen.

Outer loge doesn't get shady, much less slim shady, until 3:00 at least.

101. Ventura County would probably be better than Santa Barbara, given the population difference and the fact that the Blue Jays single A team use to play at Ventura College a few years back. There really isn't a AAA quality facility in the area but if the Dodgers and or host city was willing to pay for a small stadium upgrade then it could be done. vr, Xei

112. Thanks. It's not me, but I imagine hat and sun screen are already accounted for. It's just that day games on hot days can be ridiculously hot if you're in the sun. And it's supposed to be hot this weekend. Sunscreen might protect one's skin, but it doesn't lower the temperature like shade does.

Outer loge and outer field level are also good places to meet people who like to throw objects at outfielders and generally be the most obnoxious fans in the stadium.

114. Where in Ventura County? Oxnard? It'd have to far enough from Dodger Stadium to draw a different fan base, I'd think, but close enough to civilization to even have a fan base.

I have thought that the reason minor league teams dissappeared from places like Ventura was because of the cost.

101 At a population of 311,824, Bakersfield has a larger population than 13 different AAA cities (Pawtucket, Round Rock, Allentown, Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, Syracuse, Salt lake City, Richmond, Des Moines, Tacoma, Rochester, Norfolk, Buffalo, and Toledo). Of course, the metropolitan area of several of the cities outrank the greater Bakersfield area of 451,800. Pawtucket and Round Rock actually serve the much larger Providence and Austin. The largest AAA city, Ottawa, will no longer have a AAA team after next season.

Las Vegas has had an overall attendance of 339,840 this year, an average of 4,997. Those both are more than any Cal League team. Rancho Cucamonga's 3,721 a game is only larger than Ottawa, although it's comparable with Colorado Springs. Here's all the Cal League teams attendence: http://tinyurl.com/j7uhz

119
Who in Bakersfield is going to want to bankroll a AAA-quality stadium?

AAA stadiums are not cheap. Even an A-level stadium requires a lot of capital.

Ottawa will move to Allentown and I have no idea where that place is getting the money to build a stadium.

116. Yeah, I always avoid anything out there. I generally just sit in the top deck. For me, being behind home plate is more important than being lower. I think my friend shares that preference. But the top deck will be scorching hot.

So inner reserved, 3rd base side sounds best. I guess my question is whether the overhang of the top deck shades the inner reserved section even on the first base side. Any clue?

120. Well, Billy Joel is livin' there...

Oh wait, that was 25 years ago. And it was just a song.

122
I think Billy left. It got very hard to stay.

28 - They showed Finkleman's farcical show about a TV news program several years ago on PBS. It was really good, and the finale was outstanding. Thanks for reminding me of it.

I think Ledee's number was up when Colletti become GM. The Giants acquired him for a stretch run a few years ago and he completely flopped so I doubt if Ned wanted him for his September run this year. Anderson is an upgrade over Ledee but if Ned had been on the ball he'd have acquired Delucci early in the year when Delucci could have been gotten fairly cheaply. Of course Ledee did well against a certain RH all-star in the WS so he has shown he can excel when playing in the most stressfull situation a baseball player comes up in but he failed miserably for the current Dodger GM and I guess that holds more value.

Comparing D Young to Anderson is nice and and over a full year I'd expect D Young to outperform Anderson but if Sept is close do you really want a AAA player giving you an important at bat over Anderson who has been to the wars? I know being a veteran holds no cache here but I'd rather have Anderson up in that moment then a border line major league prospect whose 1st stint in the major leagues comes during a pennant race. It is not like Young has had any time in the bigs to prepare himself for these huge at bats. Anderson is not Neifi Perez or Royce Clayton with the bat but a decent LH option. I'd rather have him then Mabry or Norton who were the other players mentioned that we were pursuring in that Anderson can play both infield and outfield and give us a pinch runner who we can use freely when the rosters have expanded.

Many feel that Ned is just doing busy work and I might agree but if we win the division by 1 or 2 games and the aggregate of Lugo/Anderson/Hall/Hendrickson/Betemit give us a net win of those 2 games I don't really care how anyone does that we gave up 2 or 3 years down the road unless they become serious difference makers and other then possibly Navarro I don't see anyone in that category. If we don't win and the net gain of the players he's picked up don't help then he did a lot of stuff with little result but the future impact on the Dodgers should still be minimal.

The other opinion is that Ned is not getting much for what he's giving up even while most are agreeing that he's not giving up much. Can't have it both ways. It would seem the players he's moving aren't bringing back much because they aren't considered highly amoung current baseball GM's. It is not like he's had other teams knocking down his door for the players he's moved. He either needs to give up more to get more or do it the way he's doing it. The stealing of Kearns is just way out of the ordinary. Or of course he could go the Stoneman way and we'd still have
Seo, Navarro, Aybar, Baez, Nunez, JtD, Izzy, Cruz, and Ledee instead of Hendrickson, Betemit, Anderson, Lugo, and Maddox. Easy to cherry pick and wish he'd only made the Maddox and Betemit deals while passing on the other deals and I'm sure in hindsite he wishes the same thing. I know I wish he'd never heard of Hendrickson not so much because Hendrickson has been any worse then Seo would have been but because Navarro is the one player I feel he didn't get value for. The 2 number one picks for Lugo make that deal a slam dunk for me since JtD has proven to be anything but a destroyer with a huge hole in the bow that is taking on more water everyday.

The Phillies and Braves are rained out for tonight. They have to play four games in two days. That means they will have to play a pair of games that happen to be scheduled on the same day for two consecutive days.

116
On sold out games the outer Loge is a great place to be as the season ticket holders are a nice group. The worse time is when the game's no longer in doubt and the season ticket holders go home and the 1st 5 rows are then snagged up by the drunken walk in crowd. Most of us who have season tickets in the outer loge just steal seats behind the dugout usually around section 131 from AWOL season ticket holders during the weekday games as their are plenty of great empty seats begging to be used.

The Reds will have Gary Majewski back for their make or break series against the Padres!

The Reds really do have to win that series or else they will sink in to oblivion.

100. Sam, what's funny about that is that I think I scored a 3 or 4 in European History-- And I still can't get my Cromwells straight. (that was about 25 years ago, though. :-P )

125 While Anderson has "been to war", he really has had no pressure of a pennant race. His teams have either been way out of it, or had the division wrapped up at the beginning of September except in 2001.

Even so, September has always been Anderson's worst month. So how is he an improvement? He's never felt the pressure of a post season race, and he crumbles at the end of the season. If you putting value in veteran presence, shouldn't he actually be able to step up at this time of year.

Also, you mention Betemit as a good deal, but at this point, he's barely been replacement level thanks to his .305 on base percentage with the Dodgers.

On an unrelated note, guess who leads the Dodgers in VORP.

VORP for hitters, I mean.

129 Actually more like 400 years, I think, at least for Oliver.

More importantly, what number will Anderson wear? Was it announced already?

He wore 8 in Washington, but that's taken by Olmedo Saenz. Saenz now gets to hang out with fellow Panamanian Einar Diaz in the dugout.

I know being a veteran holds no cache here but I'd rather have Anderson up in that moment then a border line major league prospect whose 1st stint in the major leagues comes during a pennant race. It is not like Young has had any time in the bigs to prepare himself for these huge at bats.

The broad-brush overgeneralizing of what does and doesn't have cachet "here" notwithstanding, I think I agree with this. Of course, there's also a school of thought that young rookies are too naive to even be nervous. That they just make it simple - see ball, hit ball. I don't know which version of folk wisdom is correct, but I think I lean toward the possibility that, nerves or not, a veteran might actually know something about the pitchers he's facing, and that if I had to choose one or the other for 2-3 ABs in September, I'd choose the vet.

Many feel that Ned is just doing busy work and I might agree but if we win the division by 1 or 2 games and the aggregate of Lugo/Anderson/Hall/Hendrickson/Betemit give us a net win of those 2 games I don't really care how anyone does that we gave up 2 or 3 years down the road unless they become serious difference makers and other then possibly Navarro I don't see anyone in that category.

Wow. That's quite a sentence. Again, I agree with the sentiment here, but not the logic. First, it seems entirely possible that that group of Colletti-vets will NOT make a 1-2 game difference over the players they replaced (Navarro, Aybar, Izturis, Guzman in a callup, and the extra ABs for Martinez et al.). Second, while I respect your preference for doing what it takes to get into the playoffs this year as long as you're not trading away anyone really special, I'd also accept that many feel that the cost could be too high even if the caveat about a special player is met. That's a matter of preference, not a matter of fact.

If we don't win and the net gain of the players he's picked up don't help then he did a lot of stuff with little result but the future impact on the Dodgers should still be minimal.

True. But I suppose that also depends on your definition of "win." The division? Any playoff spot? A first-rd series? The pennant?

The other opinion is that Ned is not getting much for what he's giving up even while most are agreeing that he's not giving up much. Can't have it both ways.

Sure you can. He could still be getting less than he's giving up. Whether the difference is important or not is debatable, but there's no logical fallacy here.

According to Yahoo, Marlon Anderson has a favorable matchup against Jason Jennings.

So that was Colletti's plan all along...

aggregate of Lugo/Anderson/Hall/Hendrickson/Betemit give us a net win of those 2 games

Does this mean Betemit has to win four games?

For all the talk of giving up on prospects too early and not getting the right value for potential, wasn't Marlon Anderson supposed to be the Phillies next great CF a few years ago?

131 The guy who plays the position with the lowest replacement level?

Marlon Anderson was supposed to be the Phillies next great second baseman, not center fielder.

138 Anderson played second for Philadelphia. You might be thinking of Marlon Byrd, who at last sight was toiling in the Nationals' minor leagues.

139 Depends on what position that is.

131- Fookie?

Huh, my mistake in getting my Marlons mixed up. Interestingly enough, they've had similar career paths.

143 You are correct.

I wish the Dodgers had an affiliate in Santa Barbara.

Maybe we should take a flyer on Marlon Wayans - for those long flights back home.

I believe that Anderson will be the 65th player to be both an Expo/Nat and a Dodger.

Pedro Astacio and Marlon Anderson have joined that exclusive club this year.

142 According to Baseball Between the Numbers, SS has the lowest replacement level OPS in the NL. It's at .631, catcher is the next lowest at .656.

148 Daryle Ward?

149 Ah, that's what I was curious about.

145- Furcal has been really solid. His walk rate is the 2nd best of his career. He has seen a lot of pitches at the plate and has racked up a good number of extra base hits.

He's been an all star caliber player since the all star break:
.321/.383/.529 5 HR (24 total XBH) 11 SB

Not worth $13 million, but $10 million sounds about right. Not really a bad player to overpay by a bit.

146 They once did. Growing up in SB, I used to hear stories of the Dodgers single A team in Santa Barbara, which I think was in the 50s and 60s? There was a baseball field on Laguna Street I believe which is no longer there. I always wished the team was still around when I lived there... But it is true these days it would be way too expensive for the franchise to run a team there, and too expensive for the city, even a single A team. Ventura Cty would be more likely place for a single A team but it's so spread out, sprawling that I'm not sure where the team would best go or where the fan base would be. I mean, San Jose, which is now a very large city, only has a single A team.

For now, if the Dodgers are going to keep a PCL team, Las Vegas seems as good a place as any.

Ventura had a Cal League team in the 1980's, right? So did Fresno, Reno, Riverside. Dodgers' A team was in Bakersfield. The good old days...

118,119,120. Not sure what the cost of running a minor league team in Vta County would be. Not even sure what costs go into it. Yeah, real-estate is expensive up here but other than that?? As far as the population base in Bakersfield being 339k, I think Vta county beats that out as a whole. If you take the longer commute of Slimi Valley out then it's only slightly ahead. Sure the team would be too close, but it would be easy to grab players and get them to the stadium if the team was playing at home. If not the Dodgers then why not the Angels or Padres? Right now all we have is a recycling or musical chairs of minor league affiliations. Dodgers move from Albuquerque to Las Vegas, someone else moves into Albuquerque and someone moved out of LV etc... vr, Xei

Looking around the league at other options at SS id have to say that Furcal has been producing whats to be expected. 13 mil is alot but considering his input from his position id take it anyday over izturis at a forth of the price.

Furcal's rate2 is also up to 107, which is astounding considering it bottomed out about 83 earlier this year.

149 That SS replacement level was for 2005. My rough calculation using BP's equation says this year's replacement level is .238/.297/.369, moderately better than last year's .234/.283/.348. The equation uses a variable R that they don't give me (they say it's .8 for most positions), so that's likely not exactly what replacement level is this year.

Furcal has been worth 6.4 wins since game 81. If that's not amazing, I don't know what is.

Maybe Ned acquired Lugo to light a fire under Furcal

I remember when Tyler Houston lit a fire under Beltre.

155 According to Wikipedia, the current estimate for Ventura County is 813,052. I'm sure there's a better source, but that seems reasonable.

160, 159, 152 - Furcal has traditionally had a very slow first half; and he plays like gangbusters in the second half. This year is typical for him.

160 Problem is Furcal did slightly better in July without Lugo. Furcal's July OPS was .900, August was .896.

161 I remember when Roger McDowell literally lit a fire to wake up some bats.

Trade last night was to bolster the bench for the last month and possibly the playoffs with another veteran. They gave up a Rookie league pitcher which in the scheme of things how many rookie ballers make it to the show out of a percentage. The trade at worst will be inconsequencial
for this year and at best maybe Marlon provides a couple key pinch hits. I am mainly relieved we didn't send Loney or Kemp for the over the hill Fatman. The Padres can have him and if he leads them to the promise land, hats off to him but they had to give up a AAA prospect to gamble that Wells will be the answer. I really don't get all the fuss over such a petty looking trade. He either could have made the trade or stayed pat, the overall makeup of the 40 man roster is in tact and that's fine with me.

166 - I meant as a percentage of the whole populace that is rookie ball.

167. It would be interesting to see a study done on what percentage of players who make Rookie Ball, A, AA, AAA (and whatever other levels there are, throw Division 1 college in there if you'd like) actually at one point make it to the MLB level. I'm sure Bob could whip out the numbers in an hour or two if he didn't have that rotator cuff injury from all those Griddle posts of late. :) vr, Xei

168 I heard somewhere that it's two out of the team from rookie ball, but don't hold me to that.

165 - Or Mickey Hatcher in 1988 who had some dry ice and he was fanning the white steam and it looked like some type of witches magic potion to attempt to break a Dodger slump.

151
I thought Daryle Ward was already on the list, so add one.

So Marlon Anderson is #66.

The question should not be how many rookie ball pitchers make the big leagues on average, but rather how many rookie-league pitchers with Nunez's profile make the big leagues, on average. At least based on the small number of innings pitched, he looked like a pretty good rookie-league pitcher.

172. I guess it would be nice to know both.
vr, Xei

What - no in-depth discussion of the Giants 6-2 loss to the Cubs today? The Giants are basically tired, huddled masses yearning to breathe free, or retire, after their Atlanta trip. I'd love to see the Cubs come out of hibernation for this series. One of their just called up prospects, Theirot, hit his first ML homer...

The Red Sox disaster of the last few weeks has managed to get worse. John Lester has been diagnosed with lymphoma and will begin treatment later this week.

My mistake - was confusing Theriot with another youngster - he's been up for awhile, though that was his first major league homer.

169 - 2 out of 25 players on a ML team roster or is there more allowed in the minors to allow for promotions, ect..
That's 8% chance to make the majors.
172 - Even if he had a good profile, many pitchers may start out great but could turn up with a myriad of arm problems or confidence and mechanics problems when they get promoted to a new level and start to get whacked around. Lot of factors including luck and timing come into play.

175 God, that's horrible... I will keep my fingers crossed for him. Yikes.

----
I just saw Jeff Passan's notes on Yahoo today, on baseball as we hit September. Note #16 on the list:
"16. Talking rookies, huh? This is the best class in years, and one guy buried behind Dodgers teammates Andre Ethier and Russell Martin is Chad Billingsley. Next to the Oakland Athletics' Esteban Loaiza, who sported a 1.48 ERA in August, Billingsley was the game's best starter for the month, with a 3-0 record and 1.50 ERA."

163 Telemachos

I've heard the Atlanta announcers say the same thing.

172 I'm guessing most pitchers with Nunez's profile don't make the majors. He had nice numbers, but he had been a Dodger since 2003. It's not like he was recently signed, he had been playing in the Dominican, and the Dodgers had felt he wasn't worth pitching in even the GCl until he was 20.

177 I'm not sure, it's just something I heard in passing once. I'm guessing it's two from the team, which can max out at 35.

175 - That's tragic! My prayer's go out to him and his family. That goes beyond baseball, that's a tough life break!

174 - The "BenGay Giants", hope they slide right into oblivion! No tears here.

166 gibsonhobbs88

I agree with that. But wish that the Dodgers still had D. Navarro to offer for Wells. Wells could be (and of course is :)) big in the play-offs. Does anyone think that Penny will stretch himself and throw 120 pitches during the play-offs?

183 He better not. Penny should never throw more than 105 pitches.

183 - given what Penny did in the 2003 WS against los Yanqis, I'm not too worried about having him instead of Wells.

So, anyone else going to be rooting for the Bucs this weekend as they play the Cards? Half game difference for home field advantage at the moment.

When did Jhonny Nunez become such an interesting prospect?

I'd be more worried about loosing Pimentel or Blake Johnson than Nunez, and Im not really worried about loosing either of those guys.

In my book, its more about keeping the right guys from your farm system than making sure you get maximum value for the guys you don't want. So far, I'd say that Colletti has done a great job of keeping the right guys aroung and trading the others. He may not have gotten top value for Tiffany, Jackson, Guzman, Johnson, Pimentel, Perez, Aybar, Navarro, and Nunez, (although its likely that we were overestimating all those guys) but those guys have proven to be the right players to trade, even if its still early to make any lasting judgements.

Tonight's lineup

Furcal
Lofton
Nomar
Drew
Kent
Ethier
Betemit
Martin
Lowe

186-I concur. It's easy to become afflicted with a kind of...prospect hysteria. I love our prospects--especially the ones Colletti did NOT trade. I regretted losing Guzman, and feel the Hendrickson deal has turned out poorly (and predictably so,) yet don't find even that move indefensible. It was a risk, yet the alternative was to go on letting Seo be awful (alongside Perez, and a shaky Sele) every five days. The fact there were doubtless other alternatives doesn't mean any of those were necessarily better, and the slim chance Henrickson would've improved as indeed some scouts seemed to think...not a bet I would've made, yet not proof positive Colletti's a "moron" either. Not at all.

The assumption we could've gotten a better return in any of these cases is purely speculative. And I feel Colletti's done about as well as we could wish in terms of preserving the future and answering to whatever "win now" imperative may exist from McCourt, the media et al. The latter may be short-sighted, but it exists. All in I think Mr. Ned has walked that line more-than-adequately.

135
For me a WIN is getting to the postseason. We are not the Yankee's where only a world championship will do but this is strictly my opinion as I'm sure others do feel that unless you've won a world championship you've accomplished nothing.

I enjoyed your comments on my post but I'm not sure why you used the word "fact" when everything I expressed was strictly my opinion.

185 KG16

It would not be an either or situation.
It would be nice to add him to what they have.

189 ToyCannon

I appreciated your comment...:)

I'm not upset about losing Jhonny Nunez, it's just that Marlon Anderson doesn't help the team in any way, shape, or form. It's impossible to make an impact in just 20 at bats through anything other than dumb luck.

192
Is that a fact or an opinion?

193 Check out True Blue L.A. for the details, but basically, it's just too hard to make any real impact in 20 at bats when you only hit .265. Sure he could go on a random home run binge, but anyone can do that.

For example, if we brought in a guy that hit .100 and gave him 20 at bats, he'd still out play Anderson 6% of the time through dumb luck. Once you get up to a guy who would hit .220 or so, Anderson would only make a difference once every decade, and even then it's a minor one.

192 I think that just having left-handers on the bench makes an impact all by itself, namely, it affects the opposing team's bullpen strategy. Most teams just have one reliable LOOGY. If you bring in Anderson and force the other team to use the LOOGY in a close game, he's then unavailable to come in at another crucial moment.

It also helps to have lefties off the bench to force the other team to take out those sidewinding righthanders.

And you can't just depend on Loney for these crucial at-bats. You need someone who's an experienced pinch-hitter. Coming off the bench cold is a learned skill.

195 Is it, or does someone look good because of small sample size? Anderson lead the league in pinch hits the last couple years, but he's terrible this year off the bench. Did he suddenly forget how to pinch hit, or is it just a sample size issue?

I'm also going to continue to play up the Delwyn Young angle.

It also helps to have lefties off the bench to force the other team to take out those sidewinding righthanders.

So Marlon Anderson's job is to bat against Cla Meredith?

So Marlon Anderson's job is to bat against Cla Meredith?

Well it certainly isn't to have him bat against Jake Peavy.

I don't understand this. Neifi went to the Tigers for some kind of catching prospect and he is getting a billion dollars. We gave up nothing. We are paying anderson almost nothing in 2006. He will at best next year, replace Lucille (who by the way has had himself a year). If not, he will be DFAed like Carter was. In the meantime, he can do no harm, and doubly so because he's hardly going to have any atbats. I understand the philosophy type arguments, but the philosophy here is standard trading philosophy - low risk, low reward. This is municipal bonds. Every portfolio should have some.

How many side arming righties are currently in the majors? Meredith, Bradford, Neskek, and who else? All 3 of those guys are on teams competing for the playoffs, so Anderson has a purpose!

I think the game that Jose Lima pitched in the 2004 playoffs was dumb luck and of course the Hatcher home run in Game 1 of the 88 series was dumb luck not to mention the Scoscia home run off of Gooden in the 88 playoffs to even get us to the series. One of these days Julio Lugo is going to actually win us a ballgame and while Steve may think it will be dumb luck it will actually be about time.

197
Given that we play 4 games against the Pod's this month having someone to face Meredith, Linebrink, and Hoffman is not a bad thing is it? Remember this is Sept so we can play loosey goosey with the pinch hitters and pitch runners which to me makes M Anderson a little more valuable then in Aug but again that is just an opinion not a dumb luck fact.

200 I'm having a problem with names today. That should be Neshek, and earlier when I mentioned Lester, his name is Jon, like the philosopher king.

201 - I have confidence that lugo can slug above .270, if only .350. But if that means we are in for a .350/.450 month from him, then start printing out the playoff tickets (actually, you can go ahead and start doing that anyway).

Thanks for the discussion, off to the game in the outer loge where me and my wife will join the other holigans that populate that downtrodden area of Dodger Stadium as we toss profanity laced tirades at any player who doesn't give us the proper attention we deserve.

Marlon Anderson has not batted against Cla Meredith.

He's 1 for 3 against Linebrink and 1 for 4 against Hoffman. But he's 2 for 3 against David Wells, whom he will likely not face.

The only Padre pitcher he's faced much is Woody Williams against whom he's 5 for 17, which should make him feel right at home with his fellow Dodgers flailing away at Williams.

204
Good thing the riffraff is gone!

205 A .294 average is considered 'flailing away'?

I enjoyed your comments on my post but I'm not sure why you used the word "fact" when everything I expressed was strictly my opinion.

I didn't mean to imply that you thought it was a fact. I was merely adding a footnote for the reader. Occupational hazard - I tend to copy-edit as I read.

Oops. 208 was in response to 189.

203 Sweet confidence. :D

192. regfairfield
I'm not upset about losing Jhonny Nunez, it's just that Marlon Anderson doesn't help the team in any way, shape, or form. It's impossible to make an impact in just 20 at bats through anything other than dumb luck.

And it's worth remembering that when it comes to adding depth, well, you can't just add in the bench players stats, because the opportunity cost of that guy getting ABs is that someone else doesn't (think Jason Phillips at 1b).

So the question is really (1) whether Anderson is worth it as insurance (in case someone gets hurt) or (2) whether his few ABs are likely to be better than the sacrificed ABs for someone else.

The answer to (1) is probably not, considering he's the 14th middle infielder on the team now. The answer to (2) is who the heck knows? But it the cost of finding out worth paying?

BTW - note that all of the above is without reference at all to value of Nunez.

A compliment concerning the Dodgers' 4 shortstop rotation, courtesy of the Dayton Daily News [http://tinyurl.com/khxca]:

"In addition to getting hits when it counted, the Dodgers spent three days putting on defensive Emmy and Oscar Awards, making sensational play after startling play after magnificent play.

'They have four shortstops playing in the infield, so they have a chance to make great plays and they did it,' said Narron, referring to shortstop Wilson Betemit (playing third base), shortstop Rafael Furcal (playing shortstop), shortstop Julio Lugo (playing second base) and shortstop Nomar Garciaparra (playing first base)."

1. This has been a unique year in baseball - the trade market has been totally a sellers market and if Colletti was to make a major trade, he would have had to give up our best prospects. No one here wants that!

2. Last I checked, we had a 40 man roster. You can't keep everyone (and we have a lot), so you try to get something rather than nothing in Rule 5.

3. I think the only players REALLY available were the Betemits, Lugos, Hendricksons, et al. To say that Ned is insecure is one spin, but it may not be correct considering the climate of MLB this year. Saying it doesn't make it so.

4. Of course, Colletti is cautious! I guarantee he consults Logan White and all the rest of the Dodger braintrust before making a trade. Cautious is good!

5. It's rare that you are in position to win a World Series - and we ARE in that postion. It's not ONE big thing that does it - It's 100 little things, thus the Anderson trade, and his 20 AB's could win us the pennant!

6. DePodesta is gone. Sorry for the luck!

1. This has been a unique year in baseball - the trade market has been totally a sellers market and if Colletti was to make a major trade, he would have had to give up our best prospects. No one here wants that!

2. Last I checked, we had a 40 man roster. You can't keep everyone (and we have a lot), so you try to get something rather than nothing in Rule 5.

3. I think the only players REALLY available were the Betemits, Lugos, Hendricksons, et al. To say that Ned is insecure is one spin, but it may not be correct considering the climate of MLB this year. Saying it doesn't make it so.

4. Of course, Colletti is cautious! I guarantee he consults Logan White and all the rest of the Dodger braintrust before making a trade. Cautious is good!

5. It's rare that you are in position to win a World Series - and we ARE in that postion. It's not ONE big thing that does it - It's 100 little things, thus the Anderson trade, and his 20 AB's could win us the pennant!

6. DePodesta is gone. Sorry for the luck!

How did I do that?

How did I do that?

How did I do that?