Baseball Toaster Dodger Thoughts
Jon Weisman's outlet
for dealing psychologically
with the Los Angeles Dodgers
and baseball.
Frozen Toast
Google Search
Dodger Thoughts

02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

09  08  07 
About Jon
Thank You For Not ...

1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with

2007-05-15 23:24
by Jon Weisman

We're gonna Furcalate and have a good time - come on now ...

Didn't get a chance to see tonight's game, but heartened by the news of the Dodger victory and Rafael Furcal's historic hot streak (first Dodger to have three consecutive four-hit games since Milt Stock had a major-league record four in 1925 - who knew?). Whew!

Stock had 202 hits in 1925 at age 32 and none for the rest of his career.

I'm also heartened by Hong-Chih Kuo's recall. I know it didn't go well for Kuo, and I'm still hoping he ends up as a starting pitcher, but knowing that so many will rush to the conclusion that he can't contribute as a reliever, let me remind people that the same was said about Chad Billingsley so very recently. In his major-league career, Kuo has still pitched only 36 relief innings. I still believe that if Kuo can succeed, he will succeed in whatever role the Dodgers need him to. If that comes as a starter, so much the better, but hide the jump-to-conclusions mat.

Wilson Valdez, thanks for all your contributions.

Update: Bob Timmermann takes stock of Stock at The Griddle. And Tot Holmes writes about Jimmy Johnston, who went 23 for 28 in 1923, at

* * *

New post at Screen Jam: "How Has No One Made a Movie About Kate Webb?"

Comments (255)
Show/Hide Comments 1-50
2007-05-15 23:59:38
1.   Eric Enders
It would be nice for Valdez to go unclaimed and be able to be sent to Las Vegas, because keeping him in the organization can't hurt. At the very least, he's better than Tomas Perez. But Colletti claimed there has been trade interest in Valdez, which I guess means he won't sneak through waivers.
2007-05-16 07:08:43
2.   Benaiah
Furcal is 14 for his last 16, with a walk, 2 doubles and a triple, which works out to a line of: .875/.882/1.125/2.007. That will put a little juice in the old stat line.
2007-05-16 07:14:37
3.   Branch Rickey
After a road trip that had us all a bit worried if this team could score runs, Dodgers have averaged more than 6 runs per game over the last 5 games (including the 2-0 win).
What, if anything, has changed? I think the main answer is Rafael Furcal. He is a very important part of an offense that can't afford to be missing too many important parts. He's probably not going to hit .900 all year but I think it's clear that if he's going to hit, we're going to be able to score enough to win. I still think we'll make a trade for one more big bat but it can probably wait 'till the trade deadline when there are more and better options.
2007-05-16 07:16:06
4.   Branch Rickey
2. Yeah but that ratio of BA to OBP is a little weak. Hopefully he can work on that. =)
2007-05-16 07:27:31
5.   Benaiah
Furcal still isn't hitting for power though.

2006: .300/.369/.445/.814
2007: .297/.362/.367/.729

Everything is identical, except for the power. I am not being pessimistic, I think the power will come, but it hasn't yet.

2007-05-16 07:57:09
6.   screwballin
3 I think we can score enough to win, but can we score enough to win a playoff series? I think playoff-caliber pitching will shut us down.
2007-05-16 07:58:24
7.   JoeyP
The Dodgers have just had more "clutch" hitting, and it wont last. It'll go in cycles.

Last nite they scored 8 of their 9 runs after two were out.

Offense is going to be a problem all season until Kemp/LaRoche are everday, and Gonzo/Pierre/Betemit are phased out. The starting staff is going to have to keep the Dodgers affloat.

Keep in mind, its not like the Dodgers have faced the best pitching the last week. Wainright's been really bad this year, and who is Brad Thompson?

2007-05-16 07:58:24
8.   Benaiah
So Delicious,
He's Furcalicious.
2007-05-16 08:09:26
9.   bhsportsguy
A look back:
2006, first 40 games
20-20, Tied for 4th (last) 2.5 games back
202 runs scored, 180 runs against.

Brett Tomko led the way with a 5-1 record, Penny was 3-1.

Today, 24-16, First with a 3 game lead over D-Backs and Padres.
183 runs scored, 152 runs against.

A year ago, Jon was writing about Sammy Saito getting his first save, his concern about Tomko having another 4 1/2 months to prove that his start was not a mirage and hoping that Rafael Furcal would begin to hit.

2007-05-16 08:19:09
10.   bhsportsguy
7 The Dodgers are third in the league, hitting .272 with RISP but they only hit .235 with RISP and two out (still top half of the league).

The Braves are hitting a very hot .302, scoring 88 out of their 190 runs with 2 out. The Dodgers have put in 63 out the 183 runs in with two out.

I wonder about whomever plays 3B, if Wilson or Andy keep batting 8th, its clear that they will get few shots at getting good pitches, I thought LaRoche could have gotten 4 walks last night but he just swung at some bad pitches just to get the bat off his shoulder.

2007-05-16 08:34:12
11.   bhsportsguy
9 And before someone starts saying, yeah but the Dodgers scored 23 runs in the last 3 games, they have also allowed 20 for a net gain of only 3 runs so if you take them out of the equation, the run differential doesn't change that much.
2007-05-16 08:34:28
12.   Suffering Bruin
We're gonna Furcalate and have a good time - come on now ...

Go Jo-o-on! Go Jo-o-on! It's your birthday... it's your birthday...

(yeah, my kids think I got no rhythym.)

2007-05-16 08:37:47
13.   old dodger fan
7 I don't think Gonzo is hurting us and I don't think Betemit will play much if he isn't hitting. We won't talk about the other guy.
2007-05-16 08:39:07
14.   bhsportsguy
6 Playoffs are about keeping the other team from scoring.

The fact that this team is in first place and playing pretty consistent ball without Jason Schmidt and only now getting some offense from Furcal does give one hope for the season.

And even Grady/Ned mentioning Abreu as the depth at SS, not Martinez, saying that Chad will be a starter sooner rather than later also gives me pause to think that they are not too far away of making changes to improve the team.

The key will be Jason Schmidt, if he is able to come back and show that he can pitch effectively, that should set some stuff in motion.

2007-05-16 08:43:51
15.   regfairfield
Right now the Dodgers are simply scoring more runs than they should be. Intuitively, this should make sense, prior to Furcal's hot streak, we had four guys in the lineup who were giving us nothing, with only Kent and Martin producing. Still, the Dodgers were scoring a respectable amount of runs.

While our hitting should get better, we should regress a bit on our ability to score runs without getting very many hits.

2007-05-16 08:56:19
16.   old dodger fan
15 Being a relative newcomer to the newer stats I wonder how you arrived at that conclusion.

I see that we are 8th in the NL in runs per game and tied for 10th in OPS. Is that the data you used? If so it seems like a small difference over only 40 games to conclude that we are scoring too many runs.

This was not written to criticize. I'm trying to get better educated.

2007-05-16 09:07:46
17.   Terry A
The Times and the Daily News report Mondesi was booed last night. Was he really, or were the fans just giving him the signature "Rau-u-u-u-ul" call?
2007-05-16 09:08:55
18.   regfairfield
16 I'm using BP's equivelant runs formula, which calculates how many runs a team should score based on team EQA. As of a couple days ago, the Dodgers had scored 170 runs when they should have had 160, the second biggest gap in baseball. This would have dropped the Dodgers from 7th in runs to tied for 10th if we looked at EQR instead of just runs.
2007-05-16 09:08:56
19.   Benaiah
16 - Andrew, the guy who posted 15, runs a site called He recently posted an article that used a lineup program to see how many runs the Dodgers should have scored so far this year, given the statistics they have put up. The bot estimated they have scored 10 runs too many.

2007-05-16 09:09:34
20.   Benaiah
18 - I was both beaten, and incorrect.
2007-05-16 09:10:40
21.   JoeyP
Wasnt Mondesi running for mayor or senator in the D.R a couple years ago?

Does anyone know if he came close to winning?

2007-05-16 09:11:58
22.   screwballin
14 So you don't have to score to win a playoff game? OK, cool. We should be fine then. ;)

Not trying to be critical, but your statement strikes me as one of those old-time baseball axioms that doesn't hold up to the scrutiny. BP tackled it a few years ago and concluded that the teams that win the World Series are just as likely to be leaders in offense as defense. Often, they're both.

2007-05-16 09:12:04
23.   Benaiah
Isn't there a line up program that estimates how many runs a given lineup with produce?
2007-05-16 09:12:19
24.   Hythloday
15 - The conclusion then seems to be that runs scored per game won't change as flukes and hits both regress to the mean.

16 - At 40 the sample size is still questionable, but it is approaching useable as far as I understand it, especially as a proportion of the total population (162).

2007-05-16 09:14:38
25.   Benaiah
22 - But aren't the things that have correlated the best with playoff success- high strikeout starting pitching, a dominant closer and a good defense- all on the preventing runs side of the ball? Don't get me wrong, this doesn't make very much sense to me, but that is what I have heard from statheads.
2007-05-16 09:16:35
26.   Jon Weisman
17 - I hate the idea that Raul was actually booed. For all his flaws, this guy gave us so many great memories. If it's true, what is wrong with Dodger fans?
2007-05-16 09:16:46
27.   Hythloday
25 - But if correlation doesn't equal causation couldn't that mean that winning increases your strikeout rate, makes your closer dominant, and improves your defense? Chemistry is clearly the intervening variable.
2007-05-16 09:20:07
28.   Michaelpop
Hahah, nice "Office Space" reference, Jon.

One of the things I love about baseball is that no matter how long you've been following the game, at any time there's a chance that you're going to witness something that you've never seen before. Last year it was the 4-home run game (which I thought I'd never see again... until I saw the Red Sox do it earlier this season) and now Raffy's four-hit streak. I think about Vinny and all the years he's been broadcasting the Dodgers in LA and to think that at no time has he ever seen a Dodger player hit at such a torrid clip, well, amazing doesn't even begin to describe it.

2007-05-16 09:20:45
29.   screwballin
25 I guess it can be tough to separate the two anyway. Did the Mets score 19 runs in our 3 playoff games last year because we didn't pitch well, or because they hit good pitching? And did the Cards go all the way because their poor regular-season staff suddenly got better, or because their offense was able to score against good pitching?

I'm not expert enough to answer those questions.

2007-05-16 09:21:03
30.   gibsonhobbs88
Was there a tornado at the North Pole last night? Were dogs and cats raining down from the sky somewhere? Was there any unnatural event taking place in the world last night? Dodgers beat the Cardinals? Was I dreaming? Will the sun still rise in the east and set in the west? :)
2007-05-16 09:26:03
31.   Benaiah
I think they were looking at regular season characteristics that translate to postseason success, not what characteristics are displayed in the postseason.
2007-05-16 09:26:50
32.   Jacob L
28 True, but not all torrid clips are of a kind. I remember Pedro Guerrero reaching base in something like 14 consecutive PAs in his incredible month of June, 1985. I'm sure there were at least a couple of homers included in the streak.

The thing that these streaks have in common is that Pedro was, and Furcal is, making it look too easy. Like you just go up there and get a hit. The best players in my coed slow-pitch leagues make out more often.

2007-05-16 09:27:30
33.   regfairfield
Here's the lineup analysis tool Benaiah was referring to:

2007-05-16 09:29:31
34.   old dodger fan
30 It rose here in the east right on schedule.

And thanks for the explanations above about run expectations. I wonder at the end of last season how many teams differed from the expectation by as much as we have differed which was 6.25% (10 runs divided by 160 expected). Are there enough teams that defy the stat to question it's accuracy? Are there some things excluded from the calculation that might explain it? Don't feel obligated to respond to this; I am just thinking out loud.

2007-05-16 09:30:49
35.   regfairfield
34 It's worth looking into, give me a few minutes.
2007-05-16 09:32:16
36.   Hythloday
31 - I think I probably violated rule 7 there. I actually agree with you and was just being snarky.
2007-05-16 09:33:39
37.   regfairfield
34 BP doesn't have any old versions of EQR, so I'd have to calculate it by hand. Sorry, I don't have the time to do it right now.
2007-05-16 09:36:25
38.   Benaiah
33 - Using that tool, and then plugging in our lineup splits from ESPN, I found that the Dodgers should have scored 4.358 runs per game. That comes out to 174 runs in 40 games, which is 9 runs less than they actually scored.
2007-05-16 09:36:31
39.   Hythloday
If you buy the argument that talent dilution and not PEDs are what lead to the offensive explosion of the 90s then I wonder if those three variables (High K Pitcher, Dominant Closer, Defense) are more independent or poor players. The last two strike me as definitely talent independent whereas the first is more questionable.

I also wonder (and know too little to address it) if there is a stat that measures performance (OPS for example) agaisnt quality of the competition and if that offensive stat might predict playoff wins as well as some of the defensive stats.

2007-05-16 09:37:52
40.   bluegold
Why do I have this queasy feeling that the Schmidt situation is going the way of the Gagne saga?
2007-05-16 09:38:56
41.   Benaiah
36 - I got that it was sarcastic, but it was a fair point. Usually the team that wins the World Series will pitch better than other teams. The point is, how can you predict which team is going to pitch well in the postseason.
2007-05-16 09:42:41
42.   Kevin Lewis

I don't understand a lot of the Dodger fans at the park. I understand Tomko got bombed the other night, but I don't understand the fans booing him off the field. Even our best pitchers are going to have awful outings (I am not including Tomko in the "best category). Is it the constant demand for a perfectly pitched game with incredible offense, or do our fans just not know how to stand behind their players? Or is it like this across the country?

2007-05-16 09:43:22
43.   Benaiah
40 - He is like a cherry on top at this point. I hope that he won't be Bill Mueller, but the Dodgers have so much pitching waiting in the wings that it won't that big a deal (like Mueller was).
2007-05-16 09:43:59
44.   D4P
Some of you may recall that PECOTA projected the White Sox to win a mere 75 games or so this year, to the chagrin of The Juice Blog's author Scott Long, a White Sox fan.

The White Sox record is currently 18-16 (a pace for 85.8 wins), which would seem to suggest that PECOTA was way off. But it's interesting to note that their Pythagorean Record (which is based on runs scored and runs allowed) has them winning 74.5 games, which is pretty much right in line with the PECOTA projection.

All of which highlights the fact that it's probably much easier to project how many runs a team will score and how many they will allow than it is to project how those runs will be distributed across games (and thus how man wins and losses a team will end up with).

2007-05-16 09:44:47
45.   D4P
how can you predict which team is going to pitch well in the postseason

Chemistry, Character, and Postseason Experience.

2007-05-16 09:44:49
46.   Michaelpop
32 Absolutely agree, but for what it is -- WOW. Furcal is absolutely wailing on the ball right now. Something about hitting into a sea of red jerseys has really gotten him fired up.
2007-05-16 09:47:14
47.   regfairfield
46 Maybe we need to give him Broxton's nickname.
2007-05-16 09:48:26
48.   PHilldodger
26. Josh at Inside the Dodgers covers the booing of Mondesi in today's post. Says fans were saying Rauuuuul, not booing. Josh also provides some information on the political situation for Mondesi (story linked there is in Spanish). Having lived in the Dominican Republic for a short time, I applaud Raul's efforts to make a difference there.
2007-05-16 09:51:24
49.   Jon Weisman
48 - I'm glad of that, but surprised that two sportswriters wouldn't be able to pick up on the difference between Rauuuling and booing.
2007-05-16 09:52:38
50.   BlueCrew Bruin
26 Kind of along those same lines, I was at the game on Monday when the crowd let Tomko have it and I have to admit that I was a little bit saddened.

I can understand that it is Tomko and it was probably predicated on the fact that most fans don't think he belongs in the starting rotation to begin with but it still bothered me a little. It just seems like the Dodger Stadium crowds are so quick with the boos nowadays. If it's consistant suckage then I understand but I don't think a first place team having a bad game (or a pitcher that has performed relatively decently so far) deserves to be booed by the home crowd.

Anyway, just wanted to get that off my chest. Thanks for, reading.

Show/Hide Comments 51-100
2007-05-16 09:56:01
51.   BlueCrew Bruin
4250 I knew I took too long to type that out. :)
2007-05-16 09:59:58
52.   imperabo
I have a theory about why the Dodgers have scored more runs than predicted by their raw numbers. Check out the OPS by batting order position:

1) 672
2) 686
3) 728
4) 833
5) 755
6) 791
7) 800
8) 609

All of the "good" performance are clustered in a continuous stretch from 4-7, and the bad one are quarantined from 8-3. This allows the good ones to benefit from each other, without a gaping hole in the middle. Also, while the 1-3 hitters suck overall they haven't been bad in OBA, all .335 or above. Through luck or design, the Dodgers have distributed their offensive assets about as well as possible so far.

2007-05-16 10:00:36
53.   WillieD
I love seeing Furcal come up with the bases loaded. Last night in the 3rd, when Raphael came up with 3 on base, on a 2-2 pitch, he hit a long fly, foul on the first base side, which may have been a HR if he had hit it a little straighter. Would have been his first career grand slam. Furcal looked quite annoyed at missing the HR. So he went right back out and hit a gapper for the triple to clear the bases. That guy is so much fun to watch. He's really slamming the ball now.
2007-05-16 10:01:21
54.   Curtis Lowe
34,37 - What good is that stat if it's projected runs and actuals runs scored differential isn't properly recorded for past season? How large would the margin of error have to be for this to be worthwile tool for predicting an offense's potential for run scoring.

38 - How much of a difference in wins do those runs create? How many of those games were blow outs on that would have been won or lost regardless of that 9 run differential?

2007-05-16 10:02:04
55.   bigcpa
Just observed the Dodgers lead the NL in non-pitcher sacrifices with 9 (6 for Pierre). AZ is last with 2. Last year LA was 12th in the NL with 27. I don't have sacrifice attempts.
2007-05-16 10:05:44
56.   Curtis Lowe
With all the offensive slumps that have taken place already this season from everyone but Martin isn't easier to say that the Dodger's offense has been unerachieving?

Especially in baseloaded situations.

2007-05-16 10:05:45
57.   PHilldodger
49. Yes, it seems odd that sportswriters who I assume are familiar with Mondesi's history in LA couldn't discern between booing and praise.
On another note, a friend who is a St. Louis fan says Bernie Miklasz (columnist for St. Louis Post-Dispatch and radio host in St. Louis) has floated the idea of a Rolen for Betemit-Ethier trade.
2007-05-16 10:07:11
58.   Michaelpop
I've been curious about something lately. It seems like Dodger pitchers are walking an awful lot this year -- anyone know how we rank in that department?
2007-05-16 10:09:30
59.   JoeyP
Also, while the 1-3 hitters suck overall they haven't been bad in OBA, all .335 or above

.335 really isnt a good threshold to use for OBP, especially at the top of the order. Thats really low. If the two 3 hitters had OBP's of at least .350, then it'd be ok.

But I dont think anyone would want even a .335 OBP at the front of the order.

2007-05-16 10:11:18
60.   Xeifrank
44. The larger the sample size the more likely the team's winning percentage will approach their pythagorean number. Check back after 162 games. :) vr, Xei
2007-05-16 10:11:38
61.   ToyCannon
I don't think I've been more disappointed in a sports decision then I was with the Suns/Spurs suspensions. I'm a huge basketball fan and would rather watch live basketball game then any other sport but right now I couldn't care less about what happens in the NBA. They have made a mockery of the playoffs.
2007-05-16 10:11:44
62.   regfairfield
54 I'm sure BP did their homework with regards to adjusted runs. I have confidence it's not something that they're just making up.

Losing those ten runs gives the Dodgers 22 wins, or it knocks one win off our Pythagorean record.

2007-05-16 10:15:05
63.   ToyCannon
Could be the sportswriters were unfamiliar with how we use to great Raul because it was so long ago and just assumed it was booing.

I don't understand the booing of our own players when they don't perform or the booing of our ex-great players. How can Dodger fans boo Piazza the greatest LA Dodger position player ever and yet they do.

2007-05-16 10:15:15
64.   Xeifrank
With Randy Wolf pitching this evening, which left-handed batters do you think the Cards will sit? Edmonds and Kennedy? vr, Xei
2007-05-16 10:15:44
65.   Bob Timmermann
The Dodgers have attempted 32 sacrifices this season.

The five that have gone awry (which doesn't count the busted squeeze play by Pierre), were three Ks (2 by Hendrickson, 1 by Lowe), one error on an attempted force (by Wolf), and a fielder's choice where the batter reached (when Adrian Gonzalez messed up Furcal's bunt attempt).

2007-05-16 10:16:24
66.   Jon Weisman
Someone just told me they thought it really was booing and not Rauuuuling. Do I need to go to the video tape?
2007-05-16 10:19:03
67.   regfairfield
Given Dodger fans general motivations, I wouldn't be surprised if they were booing. This seems to be the general routine for Dodger plans.

Is this player a former Dodger?

Was this player traded away by an evil, heartless G.M. who didn't understand the value of grit? If true, then cheer, otherwise boo.

2007-05-16 10:19:34
68.   Bob Timmermann
BTW, I haven't memorized every Dodger sacrifice attempt, but lets you mine that data using its Play Index.
2007-05-16 10:22:52
69.   Andrew Shimmin
It wouldn't surprise me if some sizable minority of the fans, hearing what they thought were boos, decided to join in and help boo a man they didn't remember, or never knew in the first place. Monkey see, monkey misinterpret, monkey do.
2007-05-16 10:23:41
70.   Michaelpop
67 Or, it's okay to cheer for Lo Duca, but we should shower JD Drew with unmerciful wrath.
2007-05-16 10:24:48
71.   Curtis Lowe
62 - Oh that clears it up.
2007-05-16 10:25:24
72.   Bluebleeder87

That's good to know, i kind of figured it was Rauuuuuling but i wasn't quite sure.

2007-05-16 10:30:49
73.   Marty
57 He also threw Kemp's name into the mix I think.
2007-05-16 10:31:24
74.   Xeifrank
The Dodgers aren't scoring alot of runs, but they are preventing alot of runs. All things being equal I will take the run preventing (due to it's 1:1 having a greater positive effect on our pythagorean record), but it's nice to have the best of both worlds. vr, Xei
2007-05-16 10:48:27
75.   Bob Timmermann
Bernie has a radio show, so he's got to come up with ideas. The Cardinals slump is cause for great consternation among residents of the Bi-state Area.
2007-05-16 10:54:19
76.   old dodger fan
57 Rolen is not hitting at all this year and seems to be getting worse (OPS for year is 615 but only 455 in May; no HR since April 22) Any ideas as to why?
2007-05-16 10:55:29
77.   Kevin Lewis

The only problem is I have hear LoDuca get booed at the games, along with Piazza and Green.

2007-05-16 10:56:29
78.   Kevin Lewis
76) I do not want Rolen by any means. If we are going to give up the guys rumored, I want Miggy.
2007-05-16 10:57:47
79.   rockmrete
I know what OBP, and OBS are. What is OPS?
2007-05-16 10:59:10
80.   regfairfield
79 On base percentage Plus Slugging percentage.
2007-05-16 10:59:44
81.   rockmrete
Rolen is too expensive both in contract, and talent going the orther way. And he seems to be on the decline...Thank You HSC
2007-05-16 11:03:33
82.   capdodger
81 All hail C--i, Destroyer of Cardinals, Scourge of the Twins, and Pinch-walker of Giants!!
2007-05-16 11:03:36
83.   Humma Kavula
Don't get me wrong -- I would rather take my chances with Betemit and Kemp (and LaRoche) than trade for Rolen -- but do you guys think he's really this bad? If he is healthy, he is likely to be quite a valuable player at 3B.

Yeah, I know -- that's a big if.

2007-05-16 11:04:14
84.   Benaiah
79 - What is OBS?
2007-05-16 11:09:54
85.   Benaiah
84 - This is the 20th entry in the acronym dictionary:

On-Base Average and Slugging percentage (baseball statistic)

So it is a synonym of OPS.

2007-05-16 11:10:28
86.   rockmrete
I got it from a stats program I use for keeping track of our season/scorebbok(Turbo Stats) means the same as OPS
2007-05-16 11:10:50
87.   El Lay Dave
84 My response to many a purported baseball analyst.
2007-05-16 11:22:12
88.   paranoidandroid
Nice win last night. Wish that Lowe was more conisistent but it was a gutty performance and I'd rather save a masterful performance for when we don't score 9 runs.

Broxton has to be the most sought after guy we have, like Mota was in 04. He is a closer for someone right now and ours for the future. I miss Gagne and the atmosphere surrounding him closing things out, but it seems like Ned made the right move to let him go at this point. We simply didn't need him with what we already had in place.

BTW, what ever happened to ABC sportscaster Bill Weir? He left LA and I've never heard of him since. I thought he was quite witty and now the best option is Roggin. I miss Keith too, but Weir was at the top of his game, I thought he end up on a national show. Anyone know?

2007-05-16 11:24:53
89.   Bluebleeder87

why do they do that it's kind of annoying. is OBA the same as OBP?

2007-05-16 11:25:34
90.   blue22
Just for kicks: Pierre and LaRoche for Rolen?

Rolen is on the hook for 3 more years (through 2010, one year less than Pierre), at about $13M per.

2007-05-16 11:27:46
91.   Benaiah
89 - Yes.
2007-05-16 11:28:11
92.   JoeyP
Given the Dodgers endless amount of capital, Ethier/Betemit for Rolen is a deal I would have made yesterday, today, and tomorrow. If thats what Bernie Miklasz is floating, Ned would be insane not to take that.

Rolen's only 32 yrs old and has had like 1 bad season in his entire career (2005 when he was hurt and only played 56 games).

Last year he played 142 games: .296/.369/.518.

That doesnt take into account his great defensive value either.

I probably wouldnt give up Kemp/Kershaw but everyone else would be on the table: Including LaRoche, Loney, Elbert, Ethier Billingsley etc. If the Dodgers could get Rolen for only 1 of those players, I think you have to make that deal.

It'd be different if the Dodgers were on a tight budget, but for a team that can pay Nomar/Gonzo/Pierre a combined 27 mils this year--I think they could afford to work Rolen's relatively modest salary into the mix.

2007-05-16 11:29:10
93.   Benaiah
I don't know the proper acronym for Isolated Patience. I see ISOd a lot, but that doesn't really look right. ISOSLG has a short version too (ISO I think) but I am not sure of that either.
2007-05-16 11:32:01
94.   dzzrtRatt
57 "Yes, it seems odd that sportswriters who I assume are familiar with Mondesi's history in LA couldn't discern between booing and praise."

I'm not sure if you can assume that anymore. The Times is on, what, its fourth or fifth wave of buyouts? Mondesi's last season here was 1999. The current beat reporters can probably fake a certain amount of Dodger history by looking at various archives, but while you might be able to call up Mondesi's OBP, the fans' favored greeting might not show up.

The Dodger media department could have headed off such a misunderstanding, except they probably didn't know from Rauuuuuuuuul either.

2007-05-16 11:32:04
95.   neuroboy002
61 I understand your sentiments. With 7 seconds to goo, the then reigning MVP gets blatantly shoved to the ground. I understand the suspensions, but I don't agree w/ them Missing Robert Horry does equate to the suns missing their two players. So completely classless.

A moot point, but if you were on Phoenix, would you rather have two of your players gone for one game or spread the suspensions out for two games (one player missing game 5 and the other game 6)?

2007-05-16 11:32:16
96.   JoeyP
The other way to look at acquiring Rolen--is whom do you think will be the better player at 3b over the next 3 yrs--LaRoche, Betemit, or Rolen. I like LaRoche, dont like the other guy...but Rolen's a probable future HoF still in his prime.

The odds that LaRoche can develop Rolen's power and defense over the next 3yrs isnt something I'd want to gamble on. If the Dodgers had the Twins budget--sure. But given the Dodgers budget, Rolen isnt a big risk.

2007-05-16 11:32:19
97.   rockmrete
I like LaRoache...but the imagined opportunity to rid ourselves of Pierre would be too great.
2007-05-16 11:33:44
98.   El Lay Dave
88 Bill Weir is a weekend anchor for ABC Good Morning America.
2007-05-16 11:35:22
99.   Humma Kavula
As a Dodger fan, I would trade Pierre and LaRoche for Rolen faster than you can say Jack Robinson.

I find it hard to believe that anybody even remotely associated with the Cardinals would think that trade is a good idea.

2007-05-16 11:37:20
100.   paranoidandroid
Rolen might bounce back like Lowell has, but he has had shoulder problems, right? That has led to power decline in the last few years. If he starts to hit again this year, that could be an option if it doesn't cost us much. Right now I'd rather have Betemit and LaRoche than a broken down expensive veteran who might bounce back. Let's see him do it first. He looked good in the WS after getting benched in the playoffs. But Jeff Weaver was the big stopper and Eckstein was MVP, so you can't base Rolen's current value on past years success or what he did in the WS. What will he be in the future? Hard to say, not worth 13 million a year if he was a free agent right now I don't think. He also would find it hard to get a three year deal.

I wouldn't trade Bills for him straight up right now. Miggy is a different story, watching him in blue for a few years would make me very happy. It would take a lot to get him and then a lot more than 13 mil a year to keep him past 08.

Show/Hide Comments 101-150
2007-05-16 11:38:30
101.   blue22
99 - Look at the Cardinals outfield situation (Rick Ankiel is becoming a very real possibility for them - Yikes!), and look at whom they batted leadoff until very so recently. I think the Cards might be one of the teams who wouldn't completely laugh Ned off the phone if Pierre's name were brought up.

That said, Pierre ain't gettin' traded anywhere. Sigh.

2007-05-16 11:39:03
102.   goofus
I guess I missed the posting about why the Gameday link isn't posted anymore...
2007-05-16 11:40:35
103.   dzzrtRatt
99 Coletti: "We've got this guy, Juan Pierre. He's like the love child of David Eckstein and Jim Edmonds. The fans will go crazy for him."

Yeah, maybe not. The only way Pierre goes is in a package with Billingsley or Kemp, and that's too high a price.

2007-05-16 11:42:31
104.   old dodger fan
99 Sorry to rain on your parade but nobody is going to take 5 years of Pierre unless we pay a bunch of his salary and I just don't see it happening. It would be like saying, "Wow, we sure made a big mistake".
2007-05-16 11:44:53
105.   blue22
99 - Yeah, what a silly idea Humma. :)
2007-05-16 11:48:29
106.   gibsonhobbs88
61 - Don't even get me started on what I think of the useless suit in charge of NBA punishment!! He has ruined and give the Spurs the series on a silver platter using the most inane logic to meting out these suspensions while letting actual cheap shots to the Suns star players go without impunity. I actually went on a rant about this on the Lakers Yahoo message board site. NBA is now a farce sport like professional wrestling to me-no longer trust the results as genuine. Winners are manipulated by Stern and Stu(pid) Jackson. Why wasn't Duncan suspended for leaving the bench in the 2nd quarter of that same game?
Now the most watchable team in the league will probably be eliminated! Enjoy the ratings, Commish Stern in the 1's and 2's!!
2007-05-16 11:53:38
107.   neuroboy002
Would anyone here want to trade for Lastings Milledge? Or do you think his acquisition would be pointless since we are stuck/on the hook with certain outfielders anyways?

106 And I didn't realize Duncan left the bench as well(?) Didn't see any highlights of that. The Suns are fun to watch and I hope they pull through.

2007-05-16 11:56:48
108.   Benaiah
107 - Duncan was on the floor at the end, I think. However, he left the bench in the second quarter of an earlier game but did not get in trouble because that was deemed to "not be an altercation" and you can leave the bench when nothing is going on. Someone at truehoop pointed out that the Suns player should have immediately punched the Spurs player in the face on that occasion, since Duncan and Bowen would have been suspended.
2007-05-16 11:59:15
109.   old dodger fan
107 Good contact hitter, no power (at least not yet-he is young). Where would we put him? I would rather have him in CF than the guy we have but I would rather have Kemp than Milledge.
2007-05-16 11:59:54
110.   blue22
Milledge may be on his way out of NY. He didn't endear himself to many people last year, has been passed in the organization by two other outfielders, and now is linked to a very derogatory rap song/artist/label. Minaya did not sound real happy about his involvement in the latter when I read about it today.

I bet Milledge is traded by the deadline for starting pitching. I'm not sure LA has what the Mets are looking for though.

2007-05-16 12:02:49
111.   Curtis Lowe
110 - Do they want young pitching? Stults,Houlton.

Do they want veteran pitching?

4th outfielders?

2007-05-16 12:03:24
112.   screwballin
104 Sorry to rain on your parade but nobody is going to take 5 years of Pierre unless we pay a bunch of his salary...

I refuse to believe that Ned is the only GM who thinks Pierre is a difference maker. The Giants were supposedly trying to sign him as a free agent, no?

I think the Dodgers could trade him. I just don't think they will.

2007-05-16 12:04:08
113.   Humma Kavula
104 Sorry to rain on your parade but

Don't tell me not to trade -- I've simply got to
Every day he's one-for-five -- I think that's squat! Boo!
Don't bring around a cloud to rain on my parade!

No one! Bettah! RAIN! ON! MY! PUH-HUH-RADE!!!

2007-05-16 12:05:10
114.   blue22
111 - I think a Kuo-for-Milledge deal is about the minimum that LA could offer that NY would consider (assuming Kuo gets it figured out). I wouldn't make that deal though.
2007-05-16 12:05:18
115.   old dodger fan
I would rather see us stay with who we have unless we can pick up a power hitter. If Ned can find a really good hitter for Hendy and Tomko that would be great but the more they pitch the less likely that seems. If Tomko has a great outing next time he pitches that might be our best chance.
2007-05-16 12:05:47
116.   paranoidandroid
107, 109

NO, NO, NO, NO, NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We have Kemp. We keep Kemp. We can even play Loney in right if we move Ethier.

Lastings= Meltdown Badly Part Two

2007-05-16 12:07:57
117.   regfairfield
I certainly wouldn't mind Kemp and Milledge manning the corners for the Dodgers for the next five years.
2007-05-16 12:10:34
118.   neuroboy002
107 made me laugh. Random, senseless punching.

"Shoplifting is a victimless crime. Like punching someone in the dark." Same holds true if anyone whacked Robert Horry.

110 I heard about that album as well (a little curious to how it sounds but won 't make the effort look for a link). I agree that he will be most likely traded for pitching. The Dodger outfield appears to impacted already, someone would have to get traded. Pierre is staying because of that contract. And I hope they don't get rid of Ethier. I really believe he is going to be a hit machine who will develop some power. We are off the hook with Gonzo for next year, but Kemp is in the wings.

2007-05-16 12:10:43
119.   neuroboy002
107 made me laugh. Random, senseless punching.

"Shoplifting is a victimless crime. Like punching someone in the dark." Same holds true if anyone whacked Robert Horry.

110 I heard about that album as well (a little curious to how it sounds but won 't make the effort look for a link). I agree that he will be most likely traded for pitching. The Dodger outfield appears to impacted already, someone would have to get traded. Pierre is staying because of that contract. And I hope they don't get rid of Ethier. I really believe he is going to be a hit machine who will develop some power. We are off the hook with Gonzo for next year, but Kemp is in the wings.

2007-05-16 12:12:49
120.   dzzrtRatt
117 For Milledge is not about manning the corners. It's about cornering his manners.

Yes? No? Okay, no.

2007-05-16 12:32:55
121.   scooplew
As someone who grew up when the key indicators were batting average, ERA, won-loss percentage and (sometimes) slugging, is there some place that explains such things as VORP, BABIP, OBA vs. OBP, and a myriad of others I have only a vague understanding of, and why they are considered important? Or perhaps someone can educate me on this thread. Sometimes I feel that some of you are speaking a language that I don't understand. That is not a criticism, just an observation.
2007-05-16 12:38:13
122.   bigcpa
Playing around with run distributions- the Dodgers have been held under 3 runs 12 times this year (30%) - 22nd in the majors. Last year they were 5th in the majors at 21.6% behind some strong offenses (CHW, ATL, PHI, NYA). They've overcome this problem by going 5-3 when scoring exactly 2 runs- best in the majors (and very lucky). They're 2-7 when scoring 3 or 4 runs which is surprising given their pitching. Conclusion? Small ball has not helped in run distribution at the low end.
2007-05-16 12:38:39
123.   JoeyP
If Ned does decide to trade with Walt Jocketty, he better watch himself.

Jocketty's pulled off:
Bud Smith/Polanco for Scott Rolen
Kent Bottenfield/Adam Kennedy for Jim Edmonds
Eric Ludwick, Blake Stein for Mark McGwire
???? for Larry Walker

The only time he's ever really got taken was:
Dan Haren for Mark Mulder

2007-05-16 12:39:24
124.   Benaiah
VORP - This is a hitting stat that ranks all players based on their performance versus a replacement player at their position. It is a simple way of looking at who is the most valuable player and it takes into account that a SS or a C who can hit is more valuable than a 1B who can hit. It is a propriety statistic of Baseball Prospectus.

BABIP - This is the batting average on balls in play. Basically hits/(at bats-strikeouts). BABIP has been shown to be somewhere around a player's Line Drive percentage plus .120. If a player gets line drives, 20% of the time, his BABIP should be .320. If a players BABIP is wildly off from its expected value, then there is a good chance that players average will go up or down accordingly in the future.

OBA vs OBP is a tautology since they both stand for the same thing: On Base Percentage.

2007-05-16 12:41:57
125.   JoeyP
Another one if IIRC:

Braden Looper + Pablo Ozuna for Edgar Renteria

2007-05-16 12:42:09
126.   bhsportsguy
121 This is a link to the Baseball Prospectus Glossary that should answer your questions. (Its free).

Whether or not these measurements are important are for you to determine, I like information, so that's why I subscribe to the site.

I think OBA and OBP are the same thing, On Base Percentage or Average, historically, Slugging and On Base have used the term "percentage" rather than "average" while its always been Batting Average not Batting Percentage. But its more just the way things have been done.

2007-05-16 12:44:16
127.   trainwreck
Well I would like to get Milledge to play CF, but obviously that is not going to happen.
2007-05-16 12:50:19
128.   bigcpa
121 Good intro articles at BP: - intro - OPS - EQA
2007-05-16 12:54:01
129.   DodgerBakers
No way would I trade any one of our prospects for Rolen. I view Rolen as a broken down 3B who maybe has another year or two of productive (i.e. .500+ SLG) seasons left. I'd rather have our prospects who could give us much more than that.

Okay, maybe LaRoche, but definitely not Billz or Kuo, or one of those "top shelf" prospects.

I'm also quite upset about the suspensions of the Sun's players. If they want to follow the letter of the law, that's fine, but suspend Duncan and Bowen too.

2007-05-16 12:55:26
130.   underdog
123 It wasn't just for Dan Haren, it was Haren and RHP Kiko Calero and minor-league catcher Daric Barton. Seems like the A's got the better of that one for sure. I always get nervous about any trade that involves three top young prospects for one veteran who may have already topped out. (See: Twins-Giants, AJ Pierznyrskiwhatever for Liriano, Nathan and Bonser.) And wouldn't trust the Dodgers if that were the kind of deal they were making. I'd rather see us deal veterans away when possible.
2007-05-16 12:55:29
131.   natepurcell
I think everyone should know by now how much i like milledge.

Kuo for Milledge for be intriging but Pierre is in the way of making that happen.

2007-05-16 12:57:23
132.   natepurcell
next superstar...justin upton.

so jealous of the dbacks.

2007-05-16 12:57:35
133.   El Lay Dave
Very nice "How I Became a Dodger Fan" story in a Cardboard Gods reply by berkowit28:

Maybe berkowit28 can confirm or deny some of Tommy Lasorda's stories for us?

2007-05-16 13:03:36
134.   scooplew
124, 126 and 128 -- Thank you all.
2007-05-16 13:04:22
135.   natepurcell
Xavier Paul update

after 145ABs...

297/372/455 827OPS 4hr 188bb 45k 6sb 1cs

still too many Ks, but hes showing a great eye and in his last 34ABs, hes been
353/450/557 6bb 7k 3sb 0cs

to put his numbers into perspective, the Southern League Averages are:
255/331/380 711OPS

by 2009, Paul might be ready to man CF for the Dodgers...

2007-05-16 13:06:29
136.   underdog
I'm just fine with keeping Kemp in the organization, and Ethier, over Milledge. I wouldn't mind a Rocco Baldelli type player but we're already stuck with Pierre for {mumble mumble} ... anyway...

I like how Cards fans wanted half our farm system for Rolen. But then again, a few of their commenters went off on how stupid Dodgers fans are on that same blog.

La di da, la di da, da da.

2007-05-16 13:11:00
137.   Suffering Bruin
136 Cardinal fans? Uppity and insulting? Nah...

Here's a thought during a lunch break:

If Kent goes down to injury or tires (two real possibilities), no Dodger will hit over twenty homeruns. He's all the longball we got.

2007-05-16 13:11:24
138.   El Lay Dave
135 Nate, what's the word on his defense? I vaguely recall that he needed a little work.

I wonder if he pronounces that "X" with an "H" sound, a "Z" sound or an "eks" sound.

2007-05-16 13:11:54
139.   Bluebleeder87
I think OBA and OBP are the same thing, On Base Percentage or Average

when you think about it OBA actually makes more sense than OBP.

2007-05-16 13:12:32
140.   Hallux Valgus
136- Stupid? Oh yeah? C'mere a minute...
2007-05-16 13:15:15
141.   Benaiah
139 - How so? I guess percentage generally refers to a two decimal place number, if that is what you mean.
2007-05-16 13:17:04
142.   JoeyP
130--Yeah I had forgotten about Barton. Calero might have some value, but he's really a dime a dozen middle reliever.

The A's should have kept Barton at catcher. They desperately need to replace Kendall.

Why have steroids not been associated with Jason Kendall, btw?

2007-05-16 13:17:30
143.   trainwreck
I have 0 problem with trading Ethier and Betemit, but we do not need Rolen. If we could get a quality outfielder, then I definitely would do it.
2007-05-16 13:19:25
144.   trainwreck
A's have Suzuki and they also have Powell, but Suzuki is their future at catcher. Barton is just not a good defenisve player at all.

Calero can easily close, he is a step up from a dime a dozen reliever.

2007-05-16 13:22:16
145.   ToyCannon
From BP Kevin Goldstein:
"Loel (Smithville): Mike Moustakas has taken most of the attention away from Matt Dominguez. What are your thoughts on Dominguez and his ceiling in the majors?

Kevin Goldstein: It's definitely a case of Moustakas' stock going way up more than Dominguez going down. He's a high-ceiling third baseman, and unlike some other patrollers of the hot corner in this draft, Dominguez will actually stay there. He's going in the 11-16 range I think."

How cool would that be for Chatsworth High to have two guys picked in the top20. I wonder what was the last HS to have two players picked in the top 20 and who they were.

2007-05-16 13:22:26
146.   natepurcell
The A's should have kept Barton at catcher.

but uh, he cant play catcher.


i havent heard any recent reports to play cf but i assume the dodgers feel he has the tools to play cf or else they wouldnt be putting him there at in the upper minors.

2007-05-16 13:22:34
147.   trainwreck
Why is everyone so quick to trade LaRoche? He has already shown that he probably has the best plate discipline of anyone on the team.
2007-05-16 13:23:29
148.   ToyCannon
He used to be. Both he and JDuch have struggled mightily this season. I think Calero's time has come and gone while JDuch needs to get healthy.
2007-05-16 13:25:30
149.   blue22
141 - Percentage isn't typically expressed in decimal form. Russell Martin's on base "percentage" should be expressed as 42% or whatever, like how the NFL states completion "percentages" as 62%, not .620.

Literally, an on base percentage of .400 is really bad, since it should be interpreted as 4 times in 1000 at bats (.4%).

2007-05-16 13:25:35
150.   bhsportsguy
147 While he is plate discipline has been good at all levels, I do think that his walk totals up in LA are slightly inflated due to situations he has faced batting 8th in the lineup.

However he does have an almost 4-1 ratio between walks and strikeouts so he has that going for him.

Show/Hide Comments 151-200
2007-05-16 13:26:49
151.   Benaiah
147 - Why is everyone so quick to make a trade, period? Our biggest problem is that our superior players (Kemp*!*) are blocked by inferior players (Voldemort). The only trade that would really improve the team would get rid of He who shall not be named, or would bring back an extremely special wizard (Cabrerra). Rolen is high risk and so far, low reward.
2007-05-16 13:28:12
152.   gibsonhobbs88
Please Ned, Resist the temptation! Do not trade a LaRoche for Rolen whose best years are behind him and has been breaking down physically every year the last 3-4 years. Every GM knows how many prospects the Dodgers have so they ask for the moon to Ned while dangling the "carrot" in a vet like Rolen knowing that Ned loves vets. It's a trap, Ned!!!
2007-05-16 13:28:17
153.   trainwreck
Calero's numbers have improved in May. He tends to start out slow. He still has a nice K/bb ratio.
2007-05-16 13:28:18
154.   Bluebleeder87

One Base Percentage also makes sense, i just thought One Base Average also made allot of sense.

ps why do they have to complicate things.

2007-05-16 13:30:42
155.   blue22
151 - Somebody's stoked for the new Harry Potter!
2007-05-16 13:32:21
156.   Benaiah
155 - I probably won't read it for months. I only read the last book recently.

Still, the bashing of our Center Fielder has reached the point where I wouldn't mind Voldemort treatment. Just don't mention him and hope that will prevent anything terrible from happening.

2007-05-16 13:33:15
157.   El Lay Dave
154 I find the word "average" a little strange. A ".300 hitter" gets .3 of a hit in an AB, on the average? BTW, the % sign means "per 100", so 42% = 42/100 = .420 It's different symbology, but .420 is 42%.
2007-05-16 13:39:56
158.   blue to grey
Scott Rolen is cursed. CURSED I SAY!
2007-05-16 13:40:27
159.   gibsonhobbs88
BTW, I received my Dodger Thoughts T-shirt yesterday! Looks great, will be wearing it at the game tonight! Have field level seats aisle 36!
151- I agree. If we are going to trade a couple top prospects,it needs to be for a stud like Miggy Cabrera that is young and has plenty of upside!!
2007-05-16 13:45:01
160.   ToyCannon
Have any of those trades taken place in the 21st century. Jockety has been a good GM but it has been a while since he made a great trade.
2007-05-16 13:47:29
161.   ToyCannon
Do we have to go to Toaster TV for Harry Potter talk even if it is a book?
2007-05-16 13:47:49
162.   blue22
159 - I think Greg Brock pointed it out the other day, but I'd noticed the same thing - Cabrera is getting fat. That would be very concerning to me, since he's still so young and there's been questions about his work ethic. What's he going to look like when he hits 30?
2007-05-16 13:48:12
163.   Marty
Maybe because they had to make 2 shirts for me is why it's taking so long.

Nice sentence structure, isn't it?

2007-05-16 13:50:29
164.   Westernmost in Flavor

The 2006 draft featured Chris Marrero (#15 overall) and Adrian Cardenas (#37 overall) from Monsignor Pace High in Opa Locka, FL for the most recent example of HS teammates drafted in the first round.

2007-05-16 13:50:38
165.   weatherman
157 - It is the average number of hits a player earns per at bat. Odd to think about it like that, but there you go.
2007-05-16 13:53:00
166.   trainwreck
The one player that I would not be upset about trading a number of our young players for is Grady Sizemore.

Just imagine going from Pierre to Sizemore.

2007-05-16 13:54:29
167.   Benaiah
161 - Jon wants to have Screen Jam have some serious literature talk on it. I don't have a lot to say about H.P., but I bet Jon would love a good Muggle talk session there.
2007-05-16 13:55:11
168.   ToyCannon
Thanks but if Matt goes 11-15 and Mike goes 1-10 that is two in the top 15 not just 2 in the 1st round.
2007-05-16 13:55:15
169.   thinkblue0
With all the Rolen trade talk I've still yet to see an argument that is pro-Rolen that makes sense.

If we're gonna deal Eithier and Betemit (which I'm not fully against) it's got to be for a power hitting corner outfielder. It HAS to be. The problem, what corner OF's are available? In a perfect world I'd love to see someone like Jason Bay but that ain't gonna happen.

2007-05-16 13:55:37
170.   JoeyP
Dec 14,1998-- Renteria for Looper, Ozuna, Almanzaa

Mar 23,2000-- Jim Edmonds for Bottenfield, Kennedy.

July 29, 2002-- Scott Rolen for Bud Smith, Placido Polanco, and Mike Timlin.

Aug 6, 2004-- Larry Walker for Narveson, Luis Martinez, and Matt Burch

Jocketty really didnt have to do much trading after he gathered the core of Rolen, Edmonds, Renteria, Pujols.
It was luck that Pujols came along right after McGwire, but the other core players were key.

I dont really like trading for washed up veterans, but its not like Scott Rolen is Luis Gonzales (washed up), or Juan Pierre (never good to begin with ).

2007-05-16 13:59:05
171.   blue22
169 - See 92. Rolen is a good bet to out-produce LaRoche and/or Betemit over the next 3 years. There's your pro-Rolen argument.
2007-05-16 13:59:56
172.   Westernmost in Flavor
I can't find anything that would be as impressive as the Chatsworth duo. The closest I was able to find was 2 top-20 picks in the same draft that attended the same high school: Barry Bonds and Gregg Jefferies. Of course, Barry was drafted out of ASU so they weren't really teammates.
2007-05-16 14:01:42
173.   JoeyP
With all the Rolen trade talk I've still yet to see an argument that is pro-Rolen that makes sense.

Rolen will very likely be better than any 3rd basemen that the Dodgers have in their current system over the next three seasons. His price tag is not outrageous either. IMO, it would be a clear upgrade at 3rd base to bring in Rolen.

Now, I can see the argument of trading prospects for say a LF'er rather than a 3b basemen. However, I believe its easier to find a LF'er in free agency or the farm system, than a 3rd basemen. While in an optimum system, the team could prioritize its holes and fix accordingly. But if you have a chance to fix a pretty big hole at 3b, why not do it? That doesnt mean the team cant fix the OF down the road.

Rolen is a difference making player. LaRoche has gotten off to a good start, but I'd still rather make him a 2nd basemen anyways.

2007-05-16 14:03:07
174.   Hythloday
Who is RAB?
2007-05-16 14:04:27
175.   Bluebleeder87
I think Greg Brock pointed it out the other day, but I'd noticed the same thing - Cabrera is getting fat.

Good point, I saw him on t.v. during the winter league & he was even chubbier then.

2007-05-16 14:06:17
176.   Westernmost in Flavor
I like the option of LaRoche as the 2B of the future if he's blocked at 3B by Rolen. Of course, if Kent's option vests for next season, it would make for a very crowded infield.
2007-05-16 14:08:39
177.   s choir
"Percent" literally means "per hundred." Technically, someone who has a .335 on base average has a 33.5 on base percentage. So I guess it is more accurate to use "on base average", meaning the average likelihood that a player's plate appearance will result in his safely reaching first base from a hit or walk.

But I'm willing to accept the common parlance. This is baseball, not math class.

2007-05-16 14:09:25
178.   Benaiah
173 - His salary is enough that if he is actually hurt (say his shoulder) not simply slumping, it would be an albatross. Especially if Schmidt is out for the year. He is risky because he might not play at all, while between Betemit, Nomar and Laroche I think the Dodgers have enough options to manage 3B as it is.
2007-05-16 14:14:01
179.   trainwreck
You can't just say well Rolen will be better than LaRoche and Betemit so it is a good argument to trade for him. Will he be that much better to off-set the fact that he is older and worth far more money? Remember, LaRoche is getting paid the minimum and we can hold onto him for a long time.
2007-05-16 14:14:20
180.   regfairfield
For what it's worth, PECOTA has LaRoche putting up the same MORP (which accounts for defense) as Rolen by 2009, then leaving him in the dust after that.
2007-05-16 14:15:10
181.   ToyCannon
Thanks for looking it up, I guess I'm not as old as I thought. Seemed like all those deals except for Walker were so long ago.
2007-05-16 14:16:39
182.   El Lay Dave
Rafael, please speak with Juan Pierre, immediately.

"I couldn't get a ball out of the infield, but now I'm seeing pitches and don't swing at bad pitches and I'm more patient at the plate and hitting the ball where I want," Furcal said. -- Gurnick's report on

2007-05-16 14:17:06
183.   Bluebleeder87

i say put in a work out clause or something to that effect if anybody signs him.

2007-05-16 14:20:20
184.   ToyCannon
If I cared for what Pecota says about a 22 year old and his future I might care.
Take a look at what Pecota said Marte would do for his career headed into 2006. Big difference between last year and this year and next year it will be even bigger. I love BP but I have no use for Pecota projecting career numbers for those have never played a major league game.
2007-05-16 14:22:00
185.   thinkblue0
169 - See 92. Rolen is a good bet to out-produce LaRoche and/or Betemit over the next 3 years. There's your pro-Rolen argument.

how is this a pro-argument? Outproduce by how much? Is the minor spike in production really worth 12 million dollars a year? Not to mention having to find someone else to take over RF immediately?

The Rolen thing just makes no sense. If this was the Rolen of years past then I wouldn't be against it. I just don't see how trading two players for a 12 million a year guy with a ruined shoulder and can no longer hit is a good deal.

No one advocates getting a power bat more than me...but if we're gonna go after a third baseman, why not just give up A LOT less for someone like Hank Blalock?

2007-05-16 14:22:52
186.   regfairfield
184 Which is why I added the "for what its worth" tag. It's definitely not a perfect system, but I think it at least provides a nice starting point, and it's at least as accurate as whatever projection I would provide for LaRoche.
2007-05-16 14:23:54
187.   regfairfield
185 I don't think I'd take Hank Blalock for free at this point.
2007-05-16 14:23:55
188.   Ken Arneson
Bonjour! I'm sitting in my hotel room in Paris watching two teams from Spain play the UEFA Cup Final in Scotland.

Unbelievable match so far. I'll keep trying to think about soccer to avoid thinking about 148 and how the A's are going to survive with their two best relievers hurt. Yeeech.

I saw a Dodger cap in Sweden last week. First time I can remember ever seeing one on this side of the pond. The only other non-Yankee cap I've seen on this trip is a Braves cap. And I saw a kid was wearing an A's jersey in the Louvre today.

2007-05-16 14:23:56
189.   Bluebleeder87

for the older folks of Dodger Thoughts

2007-05-16 14:27:53
190.   trainwreck
I am sure this rumor is unfounded, but I heard there is a small chance Harden could start in the bullpen as he is eases himself back.
2007-05-16 14:28:44
191.   blue22
185 - Yeah, no thanks to Blalock. He's got a lead glove and a career .261 EQA.

Rolen is off to a bad start, but he was a very very good player last year. Would seem that he could be a "buy low" candidate (if such a thing could exist for a $13M player).

Plus he hates LaRussa, so he's got that going for him.

2007-05-16 14:32:29
192.   thinkblue0

I don't want Blalock either, just making a point. I just don't think I'll ever be convinced that trading for Rolen is a good deal unless they cover some of the deal and/or we give up less.

I'd much rather take my chances on Betemit and Laroche than spend 12-13 mill a year on a guy with a bum shoulder for the next three years.

2007-05-16 14:33:06
193.   Hallux Valgus has posted a "projected" top ten for the draft. They've got Dominguez/ Moustakas going 8/9, and Josh Vitters going 3.
2007-05-16 14:36:01
194.   fanerman
Does this Scott Rolen trade talk have actual substance?
2007-05-16 14:38:43
195.   trainwreck
It seems like a St. Louis writer just threw it out there.
2007-05-16 14:41:19
196.   Bob Timmermann
In 1973, Eddie Murray of Locke High was drafted in the third round and teammate Darrell Jackson was drafted in the sixth. Jackson didn't sign and went to ASU and was later drafted in the 9th round.

Chris Brown was a year ahead of Darryl Strawberry. Brown was picked in the 2nd round in 1979 and Strawberry was the #1 pick overall in 1980.

My alma mater, Kennedy HS, has had only one player picked in the first round, Jon Garland. Garret Anderson was a fourth round pick and Terrmel Sledge was an eighth round pick.

Jim Anderson was a second round pick back in the day in 1975. The Angels weren't all that astute in judging talent then.

Moutsakas and Dominguez are unusual in that they are a pair of highly touted prospects and they play at a PUBLIC school.

2007-05-16 14:42:18
197.   bhsportsguy
170 One thing you notice about those trades, particularly the Edmonds and Rolen deals was how big the threat of free agency played into the Angels and Phillies making those deals.

Edmonds was coming off a year where he only played 55 games and while he was no J.D. Drew, he was certainly due to make a lot of money the following year. He signed a 6-year extension during the 2000 season and while it wasn't a discount, after his big year, he was going to get around 49 million for the next 5 years, Manny Ramirez and A-Rod certainly set standards that off-season that might have given Edmonds a few more bucks.

Rolen put the same pressure on the Phillies, refusing a ten-year extension for about 50 million less than what he signed for with the Cardinals.

However, in recent years, teams have been less inclined to deal top prospects and also their high priced players for fear of alienating their fan base.

Generally only in rare circumstances (Phillies dumping Thome because they had a reigning Rookie of the Year in Ryan Howard in place) are teams able to make big trades.

2007-05-16 14:45:23
198.   bhsportsguy
197 Let me clarify a couple of mistakes, the Drew comment was about Edmonds injuries, he played more games than Drew but his agressiveness could have meant more down time.

The Rolen comment should say that he eventually signed an extension with the Cardinals for 50 million less than the one offered by the Phillies.

2007-05-16 14:50:16
199.   bhsportsguy
Right now, I think the only teams that would consider economics in making deals would be Florida, Tampa Bay, Kansas City, Pittsburgh and maybe Washington.

On the bubble, Minnesota, Toronto, Cincy, Milwaukee, Arizona and Colorado.

What I mean is that teams are getting lots of revenues so outside the a salary dump like what Florida did a few years ago, just because someone makes a huge salary or is due to get a big bump in free agency, doesn't mean that team will deal him.

2007-05-16 14:55:45
200.   overkill94
For those who haven't noticed, Blalock has actually picked it up lately and is now sporting a respectable .857 OPS. He has been pretty sub-par the last two years, but if he can get back to his 2003-2004 production, he'd be a nice bat to have in the lineup.
Show/Hide Comments 201-250
2007-05-16 14:57:13
201.   overkill94
But, too counter my own argument, he still seems to benefit a lot from his home park:

Home - .315/.375/.575
Away - .273/.315/.439

2007-05-16 14:57:24
202.   El Lay Dave
196 My foreign student is at Chatsworth High; she ran track this spring. I attended a couple meets, but did I walk over to the adjacent baseball diamond for a peek at the prospects? Noooooo....
2007-05-16 14:57:31
203.   overkill94
Dammit, "to" not "too"
2007-05-16 14:58:39
204.   El Lay Dave
202 There was supposed to be a [smacks forehead] at the end of that.
2007-05-16 14:58:44
205.   blue to grey
The Cards best take heed and trade Rolen immediately. While he still has value. I see a huge plunge from this guy with the recent developments.
2007-05-16 15:00:46
206.   regfairfield
200 I recommend reading Marc Normandin's player profile on Blalock to get a handle on where his true talent level lies.

Basically, he's a guy that became overrated based on small sample size as a prospect, took advantage of a hitters park, then probably snapped back to reality in 2005.

2007-05-16 15:03:10
207.   Bob Timmermann
I still give Chatsworth just a 50/50 chance of winning the LA City Championship this year.

A single elimination baseball tournament is a tough thing no matter how talented you are. One stud pitcher starts against you and that could be it.

I believe in Kennedy's 4-2 win over Chatsworth in the championship last year, the Cougars just had one hit that left the infield.

The LA City baseball championship will be on Saturday June 2 at Dodger Stadium. There are three divisions this year: "small school" which I believe is for the magnet schools, "the Invitational" division (the NIT), and the "City Championship" division (aka the Chatsworth, ECR, Kennedy division).

It's pretty cheap, usually $6-8 and you can get a great seat at Dodger Stadium. I don't know if they are going to charge $15 to park though.

The first game will start at 10 and the third game should start at 4.

2007-05-16 15:06:59
208.   blue22
200 - Even in his big years ('03 and '04) his eqa's were only .279 and .274.
2007-05-16 15:10:09
209.   Andrew Shimmin
199- I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Why shouldn't every team always consider economics? Aren't the Giants, lamentable as their situation might be, much better off for not having a raft of eyesore contracts on the books? Financial flexibility is a good thing.

I bet Seattle would sell Richie Sexson for a nickel on the dollar if there were any takers. Seattle hasn't got an infielder OBPing .300 or better.

2007-05-16 15:10:50
210.   Lexinthedena
Of course trading for Rolen would be a bad idea(BTW this is my first post on Dodgerthoughts...nice to be able to talk baseball with thinkers)....LaRoche looks like he is going to be a very good player...the hardest thing for a player to develop is strike zone judgment, and he seems to have that there are so many infield options, that the last thing The Dodgers need is another overpriced vet clogging it up....a la Useless Luis Gonzalez in the OF....
2007-05-16 15:14:47
211.   overkill94
Just wanted to say that I got my t-shirt yesterday as well (I guess I ordered one after all) and I'll be sporting it in the all-you-can-eat pavilion tonight. I'm not a big eater (wasn't my idea to sit out there), but I think I'll be able to eat enough to make it worth the $30.
2007-05-16 15:17:02
212.   trainwreck
Welcome and feel free to post as much as you like.
2007-05-16 15:17:38
213.   DodgerJoe
In regards to Chatsworth baseball and Moustakas...I have spoken to opposing head coaches and athletic directors. They indicate that he is a great talent but somewhat overrated because of the lack competition.

All the talent in the valley are now playing football. Baseball is not what it once was. Back in the early '90's when I played, there was a year when we faced Jeff Suppan, Russ Ortiz, Randy Wolf, Jim Parque, and Jeff Weaver and played against the likes of Brad Fullmer, Gabe Kapler, and Robert Fick just to name a few.

There is no way the region will produce that many MLBers from the area in that span for a long time.

Sorry for the long tangent, but I have a rooting interest in high school athletics because of who I associate with.

2007-05-16 15:21:30
214.   Eric Enders
JoeyP: "The other way to look at acquiring Rolen--is whom do you think will be the better player at 3b over the next 3 yrs--LaRoche, Betemit, or Rolen. I like LaRoche, dont like the other guy...but Rolen's a probable future HoF still in his prime."

Rolen is not a probable future Hall of Famer. He's a guy who's a possibility, but a longshot. He won't end up with any kind of career numbers, and will likely be able to join Ron Santo, Ken Boyer, Ron Cey and Darrell Evans at the local watering hole for third basemen who were really good but not good enough for the HOF. I'd say Rolen has a less than 20% chance of getting elected, particularly given the steroid suspicion that all players from his era will bear, deserved or no.

As for the notion that he's still in his prime, well, that's downright false. Rolen is a 32-year-old man who has posted a collective OPS+ of 108 over the past three seasons. This is not outstanding; it's probably about average for a third baseman. Baseball players, expecially those not on the juice, generally peak at age 27 and decline steadily from there. The exceptions to this are few and very noticeable. So far Rolen's career has followed the typical aging pattern, except that he is more injury prone than the average player. Which means we can expect an OPS+ of 100 or maybe a little better from him over the next three years. And that is assuming he is actually on the field, which is a very big assumption in his case.

So, to answer Joey's question -- "whom do you think will be the better player at 3b over the next 3 yrs--LaRoche, Betemit, or Rolen?" -- I think any of the three could conceivably turn out to be the better player over the next three years. But in order of likelihood, I'd put them: LaRoche, Betemit, Rolen. Scott Rolen is simply a poor gamble, a piece of pyrite that appears shiny because he has a level of fame that no longer correlates to his actual performance. Over the next three years, either Betemit or LaRoche would (a) Likely be better and (b) certainy be cheaper. It's really a no-brainer. When you add in the fact that Rolen has recently caused turmoil on his team because he couldn't handle getting benched, I think the answer is clear. Let the Cardinals find someone else to rescue them from this particular albatross.

2007-05-16 15:25:05
215.   ToyCannon
So true our team in 75 had the stud pitcher and nothing else. It was like the Dodger 88 team and Orel. I think only one run was scored on him during the playoff run which ended up with a victory at Dodger stadium when Stan Williams son was bested by our pitcher, Chuck McMichael.
2007-05-16 15:26:52
216.   Jon Weisman
211 - Don't get any mustard on it.
2007-05-16 15:29:18
217.   Bob Timmermann
In 1975, Granada Hills beat Westchester 4-3 in the championship in 8 innings. Future major leaguer Dave Schmidt was the winner and Bob Grant of Westchester became the first prep player to hit a homer at Dodger Stadium.

What high school are you talking about?

2007-05-16 15:29:27
218.   ToyCannon
Wouldn't you say the competition is down all over the United States? I was a marginal player 31 years ago but when I watch HS baseball these days I'd have done very well. The skill level for the secondary players seems to have dropped off quite a bit.
2007-05-16 15:29:36
219.   Eric Enders
A poster named "Trent" was kind enough to post on the SABR listserv the complete list of players with three consecutive four-hit games:

G Player Team Start Date End Date
3 Joe Cronin WAS Jun 19, 1933 Jun 22, 1933
3 Walt Dropo DET Jul 14, 1952 Jul 15, 1952(2G)
3 Tim Salmon CAL May 10, 1994 May 13, 1994

G Player Team Start Date End Date
4 Milt Stock BRO Jun 30, 1925 Jul 03, 1925
3 George Davis CLE May 13, 1891 May 15, 1891
3 Jake Stenzel PIT Jul 15, 1893 Jul 18, 1893
3 Bobby Lowe BOS Jun 16, 1894 Jun 18, 1894(2G)
3 Ed Delahanty PHI Jul 13, 1897(1G) Jul 14, 1897
3 Stan Musial STL Aug 11, 1946(1G) Aug 12, 1946
3 Mike Benjamin SF Jun 11, 1995 Jun 14, 1995
3 Brett Butler NY Jul 18, 1995 Jul 20, 1995
3 Marcus Giles ATL Jul 27, 2003 Jul 29, 2003
3 Rafael Furcal LA May 13, 2007 May 15, 2007

Interesting that Bobby Lowe and Ed Delahanty are also two of the 15 players in history who have hit four homers in one game. In neither case was the 4-homer game a part of their streak, though.

2007-05-16 15:29:59
220.   ToyCannon
Hoover High
2007-05-16 15:32:00
221.   Bob Timmermann
Correcting myself, in 1975, Schmidt left after just 1/3 of an inning and a reliever named Dave Finch got the win.
2007-05-16 15:32:26
222.   Bob Timmermann
Ahh, wrong CIF section there. Sorry.
2007-05-16 15:33:06
223.   Bob Timmermann
That "Trent" is Trent McCotter and the New York Times has already been quoting him.

I believe he's 18 years old.

2007-05-16 15:34:21
224.   Eric Enders
223 18 is a little young to be going the Cher/Madonna/Ichiro route, isn't it?
2007-05-16 15:34:58
225.   ToyCannon
Can you direct me to where you found the info. For old times I'd like to read about the game.
2007-05-16 15:37:44
226.   Bob Timmermann
OK, tracked it down. The 1975 Southern Section 4-A Final saw Hoover beat Lakewood 2-1.

Hoover scored twice in the ninth on an error, balk, error on a pickoff for one run, then two singles and a walk to load the bases and finally a wild pitch.

Lakewood scored a run in the bottom of the seventh and had runners on second and third and nobody out and bunted into a DP on a squeeze attempt and then McMichael got a K to end the game.

In the 3-A game, Bishop Montgomery had future USC star and big league washout Bill Bordley starting.

2007-05-16 15:39:02
227.   Eric Stephen
I got my white long-sleeved T-shirt today, and I will wear it proudly on the mean streets of San Diego!
2007-05-16 15:39:10
228.   Bob Timmermann
I just emailed you the pdf.
2007-05-16 15:39:40
229.   ryu
Count Yahoo!'s Tim Brown as another reporter who heard "Rauuuuuul" instead of "booooo" last night.

2007-05-16 15:41:20
230.   JoeyP
Scott Rolen is simply a poor gamble, a piece of pyrite that appears shiny because he has a level of fame that no longer correlates to his actual performance.

I think you are letting Rolen's 2005 injured campaign, and this year affect your judgement too much.

Rolen's 2006, just last season--was terrific. I doubt LaRoche/Betemit ever come close to putting up a .296/.379/.518, at least in the next three seasons. Maybe Rolen's about ready to fall of a cliff, but I doubt it. He's only 32. Jeff Kent's played in the steroid era, and he's still putting up numbers as he nears 40.

Putting together the "best" team in baseball almost never correlates to putting together the most "efficient" team. Is Roger Clemons worth in dollars what he's getting paid? Of course not. But he's going to make the Yankees better, and thats all that really matters.

I'm not sure why so many are concerned about money, when there are far greater in-efficient uses of funds on the Dodgers currently than what Rolen is making (13 mils).

If the Dodgers were ever in a penny pinch (not likely), they should look at these guys before a player like Rolen:

Juan Pierre--9 mils a year in CF
Nomar--10 mils to play 1st base
Gonzalez--7.5 mils to play LF
Tomko/Hendrickson--another 8 mils.

I think fans of thhe Dodgers should want the best players possible on the team. Most here dont like Pierre/Gonzo--not bc they make alot of money--but bc they just arent good players.

If you think Rolen is going to become Edgardo Alfonso overnite--then ok I agree with the argument. But i dont agree with the Rolen arguement based on salary dollars, bc there's many more poor uses of funds even currently on the team.

I'd rather spend 13 mils on one Scott Rolen, than spend 13 mils on two medicore veterans. Bc with Rolen, he could at least make a difference bc he has the talent to do so. Its when you spend money on 'depth' and the inconsequential players that get teams in trouble financially.

2007-05-16 15:43:30
231.   overkill94
216 I hate mustard!
2007-05-16 15:45:59
232.   Eric Stephen
But i dont agree with the Rolen arguement based on salary dollars, bc there's many more poor uses of funds even currently on the team

JoeyP, aren't the "poor uses of funds...currently on the team" a huge reason why the Dodgers shouldn't spend $13m on Rolen? The budget is finite.

That said, I agree with your general point that Rolen is a decent to good use of $13m.

2007-05-16 15:46:41
233.   overkill94
Has there been any word about Willy Aybar yet? The last I heard, he still wasn't talking to anyone and that was almost a month ago. Has he just plain given up on baseball?
2007-05-16 15:46:42
234.   trainwreck
We already have bad contracts on the team, so why compound the problem?

I have all the confidence that LaRoche will be a good player.

2007-05-16 15:47:11
235.   bhsportsguy
Shirt update, due to poor Paypal planning, my shirts ended up at my old work so now I have to pay for shipping again, to get them sent to me, but they made it into West L.A. so I guess starting tonight and for the foreseeable future, we all be looking for those blue and white DT shirts.

Next, special monogrammed shirts for DT commentators with more than "blank number" of posts.

2007-05-16 15:48:54
236.   Andrew Shimmin
Baseball-Reference's new splits break down OPS+ by position splits--sOPS+. Which is pretty awesome. It lets us know that Ch-i was just about a dead average 1B in 2005, 99 sOPS+ (if a remarkably bad PHer). And it lets us, without straining, learn that Rolen's sOPS+ for 3B was:

2004 151 over 593PA
2005 84 over 222PA
2006 119 over 594PA
2007 67 over 129PA

2007-05-16 15:50:36
237.   ToyCannon
Yeah, I remember that squeeze. It was sweet to see it turned into a DP. McMichael was a monster during the playoff run. He was drafted by the Met's but chose to goto one of the Arizona schools but I understand he blew out his arm pitching in the Alaskan summer league between his fresh/soph years and I never heard about him again. He was a lefty and he struck me out everytime I faced him in Babe Ruth but he did that to everyone. I once googled his name and found a Chuck McMichael working in the scouting dept for the Braves.
2007-05-16 15:55:53
238.   Jon Weisman
I'd love to see pictures at the ballpark of anyone wearing a DT shirt.
2007-05-16 16:00:23
239.   overkill94
238 I'll send you the best that my camera phone can give.
2007-05-16 16:00:48
240.   Lexinthedena
Colleti seems to let his anxiety get the best of him....signing Gonzo out of fear that Kemp wasn't ready...Trading for Rolen would be anoher of those mistakes.....he doesn't stay healthy anymore, and with so much young talent in the system, the options that will present themselves will be far more interesting than a guy who will at best give you the production of a decent #5 hitter....
2007-05-16 16:06:43
241.   Eric Enders
230 "I think you are letting Rolen's 2005 injured campaign, and this year affect your judgement too much."

Fair enough. I think you're letting them affect your judgment too little. Chances are very good that that's the way it's going to be with Rolen from here on out.

"Maybe Rolen's about ready to fall of a cliff, but I doubt it. He's only 32. Jeff Kent's played in the steroid era, and he's still putting up numbers as he nears 40."

He's already fallen off it, and is tumbling in midair as we speak. The only question is whether he'll be able to grab hold of a ledge.

"I doubt LaRoche/Betemit ever come close to putting up a .296/.379/.518, at least in the next three seasons."

You may be right. But they're probably more likely to do it than Rolen is.

"Roger Clemons worth in dollars what he's getting paid? Of course not. But he's going to make the Yankees better, and thats all that really matters."

That's, well, pretty silly. If he helps the Yankees win, then of course he's worth the money. If he doesn't, then he's not. Same with Rolen or with any other player. To assume that money isn't a consideration is to assume that the Dodgers have an infinite payroll. Clearly, they do not. To pay Rolen $13M a year would mean $13M less in the Andruw Jones fund or whatever it is we decide we need this offseason. Baseball America has rated 3B as the deepest position in the Dodger farm system. We have 2 guys already on the team who may already be as good as Rolen (and if they're not yet, they likely will be soon). Why trade for a washed-up malcontent at a position where we already have plenty of reasonable options, with more perhaps on the way?

Let's give Rolen the benefit of the doubt and say his production over the next three years will be equal to that of whomever is better between LaRoche and Betemit. Even then, you still have player A producing the same as player B, except that player A earns an 8-digit salary while player B gets close to the minimum. Why on earth would you choose player A? Because he's a "proven winner" He's "good in the clubhouse"? Because he's shown that he will pout selfishly when he's benched for the good of the team?

2007-05-16 16:06:47
242.   Andrew Shimmin
The Tigers are bringing up Andrew Miller to start Friday.
2007-05-16 16:08:11
243.   Doctor
"Schmidt gradually lengthened his throws until he could launch baseballs from the edge of the warning track in center field to Conte, who was standing on the left-field foul line near the tarp. Schmidt was easily throwing 275 feet on the fly and showing no signs of discomfort at any point.....As a side note, Conte's arm looked playable."

So the D's TRAINER can throw a baseball the entire length of a football field.

Good news on Schmidty.

2007-05-16 16:08:17
244.   ToyCannon
Shocking as it is, I'm with Joey on this one.

I don't think the question is if La Roche will be a good player but if he will be good enough this year to get us to where we want to go.

There is just as big a risk that La Roche will pull a Marte or Gordon as that Rolen will get hurt, or that Rolen is already done. Sure the salary is high but if Rolen is healthy he would become the best hitter on this team the day he dons a Dodger uniform. Certainly the future would be all about La Roche but if you can have your La Roche and eat it to by packaging Betemit for a high OPS/Defensive stud like Rolen I'd be all over it as long as the package does not include(Billingsley, Kemp). Given the contracts I doubt the asking price would be very high. If he gets hurt then you turn back to La Roche. Let us say they took Betemit/D Young for Rolen would you really not want Rolen over La Roche for 2007?

2007-05-16 16:09:37
245.   still bevens
Inside the Dodgers is giving us the exact same lineup for tonight as last night. Can we get an over/under on how many times LaRoche walks tonight? I vote for 2.
2007-05-16 16:12:22
246.   Eric Enders
One walk for Andy tonight. Not as much reason to pitch around him with a decent hitting pitcher batting 9th. Not to mention that every time they pitch around him to face the pitcher, he seems to score a run.
2007-05-16 16:19:56
247.   still bevens
Just looking at this weekend's schedule. Anyone know why Saturday's game is at 600pm?
2007-05-16 16:22:17
248.   Curtis Lowe
247 - Most likely they planned it that way so I will be forced to take glassell instead of the 57 due to the lame traffic.
2007-05-16 16:23:38
249.   Dodgers49
I happen to know there are a lot of Bill Plaschke fans here: :-)

Big hits, big future, without the big head

>>> Moustakas is the greatest prep home run hitter in California history, but he's no Barry Bonds -- and that's a good thing <<<

2007-05-16 16:23:47
250.   Bob Timmermann
The Angels are playing most of their Saturday games at 6:05 pm.
Show/Hide Comments 251-300
2007-05-16 16:24:24
251.   Greg Brock
174 Regulus A. Black...Brother of Sirius, cousin of Narcissa and Bellatrix.
2007-05-16 16:30:50
252.   DodgerJoe
(218) Not sure about across the United States, but across the valley and SoCal, baseball is down and football is way up.
2007-05-16 16:31:22
253.   Greg Brock
Some of my co-workers and I were talking about the Dodgers today. They seem to be the only team with

A) No glaring holes
B) People who will not be traded
C) Not enough to win the pennant.

First, second, and short are locked in. Nomar isn't good enough to be a stud 1st baseman, but won't be traded. The Player isn't a quality CF, but won't be traded. He isn't a total trainwreck. Luis Gonzalez isn't a really good LF, but isn't going anywhere.

LaRoche and Betemit are total wildcards. The staff is pretty good. The bullpen is outstanding. Ethier might be traded, but we won't get a monster for him.

This is the team we'll have for the season. Take that for what it's worth.

2007-05-16 16:32:20
254.   underdog
I'm gonna say even, that LaRoche gets those two walks. I wish they'd try him down a slot or two (and put Pierre 8th) so he can get a few more pitches to hit but glad he's showing a good eye and scoring some runs.
2007-05-16 16:33:25
255.   Jon Weisman
Game thread is open for business.

Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.