Consistency. That's what it's really all about. Chad needs to be more consistent.

LAT'd in last thread -

I heard about the Texiera deal from the bizarro world of the Rogan and Simers show. Their crack analysis - that the Braves stole Tex because, basically, they hadn't heard of the players going back. They clearly and obviously confused Saltalamachia with Jason Simontachi, and wrote off everyone else in the deal because they were just minor leaguers. They went on to incorrectly assert that Atlanta did give up their starting catcher, because they've apparently also never heard of Brain McCann. They then wondered how it was that neither the Dodgers nor Angels could match the Atlanta deal.

I wonder how McCourt thinks that Coletti is doing a great job.

Rank Team 2007

Dodgers $108,704,524
Padres $58,235,567
Rockies $54,424,000
D'backs $52,067,546

1
Well, that's hard to say because I haven't watched him pitch very often. But I agree that he needs to be more consistent. How well he pitches the rest of the way will depend a lot on his consistency and how well he pitches. If he can get hitters out, he'll do well. But if he gives up a lot of runs, he won't do well.

3 That is only one side of the balance sheet. Now show us revenue.

5
Looking at revenue is only relevant in this context to the extent that revenue is a function of salaries, right...?

If you're going to trade Salty and some other prospects--at least get something good.

Tex is an in-his-prime difference making 1st basemen.

Last big trade deadline deal the Braves made like this was Mel Nieves for Fred McGriff. That worked out quite well.

Texiera will likely have a bigger impact than McGriff.

By the way, did anyone see how close Andre Ethier's ninth-inning, two-out, 3-2 foul ball came to being a bases-clearing double that would have tied Sunday's game at 9-9? Missed it by that much.

I'm not sure if Loney would have made it around from 1st base on that play.

I don't care about the revenue. I care about my team treading water.

My take is that Coletti has 40+ million more dollars to put something on the field and what he put on the field is no better than those with 40 million less to play with. Gone are the days where our GM could blame our former GM's too. Any big contract on our roster is Coletti created.

I don't know any other way to show how much I think Coletti is a disaster and that we will never win with him in charge.

7 Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Braves made a bad trade. I'm saying if you're going to trash a trade on the radio, at least have some semblance of an idea of what you're talking about. If you don't know anything about the players involved, the responsible thing to do would be to say that you don't know anything about the players involved. Not that I'm under the illusion that there's any place for "responsible" on the a.m. dial, but one of these guys pulls a paycheck from the LA Times, and the other from Channel 4.

My take is that Coletti has 40+ million more dollars to put something on the field and what he put on the field is no better than those with 40 million less to play with

Plus, those making the most money on the team are generally performing less than or equal to those making less money.

Dave Roberts on the upcoming three days:

http://www.contracostatimes.com/giants/ci_6499927

"I give Dodger fans a lot of credit for being knowledgeable," said Roberts, a fan favorite when he played in L.A. from 2002-04. "This is going to be a test, whether they show their knowledge and appreciation and love for the game, or whether they go the other way."

This quote is sort of a double-edged sword, depending on your point of view.

8 - Loney was running on the pitch, so I'm thinking he would have - though he surely is slow.

More on the death of Bill Robinson:

>> Robinson, who was in town to work with the 51s, was found dead in his hotel room at Paris Las Vegas on Sunday morning -- only hours after he threw batting practice and coached first base for the 51s in Saturday's 5-4 win over Round Rock at Cashman Field. <<

http://www.lvrj.com/sports/8804557.html

5 That's not what I said. He wondered if McCourt was happy with the team and pointed out the expenditures. I think it's not possible to know if McCourt is happy with the team as a financial venture by only looking at one half of the balance sheet.

9 That is a different point than you were making in 3. None of us knows what the team budget is -- though I'll bet several of us can make educated guesses.

I don't know how you can say Colletti is a disaster. There has been no harsher critic of the Pierre signing than me, but my biggest worry with him in charge was that he would trade the Kemps, the Loneys, the Billingsleys, the LaRoches, for short-term gains. He has not done that. He has put the team in a position to let the rookies learn on the job and flourish.

He's not perfect by any means and we've done that to death here. But a disaster? We'll never win with him in charge? In my opinion, you're overstating.

7 Braves did well. At least the snakes didn't get Teixeira. As for the D's, I believe there was room to beat Atlanta's offer without giving up Loney, Ethier AND Kershaw.

7 With the absurd amount of talent the Braves traded away, it basically comes down to if the Braves win the World Series, it was a bad trade, if not, it was a good trade.

If Teixeira continues to put up the same numbers he has the last couple of years (.280/.380/.530), he's pretty overrated considering the park he plays in. People just look at the 40 bombs and assume he's a superstar. Now, the Braves first base situation was in a terrible place, but I'm not convinced that Teixeira will mean more than one win the rest of the way rather than just running Salty out at first.

The Braves had a similar conundrum as LA did when faced with acquiring Tex. Would they be better off with Tex at $20M per year, or installing Salty as their firstbaseman on the cheap for the next several years and spending that cash somewhere else? Perhaps the one difference is Atlanta is in more of a win-now mode than LA?

15 McCourt has said (and I belive him) that he won't be happy until the dodgers are like the Sox or Yankees. WS contenders every year. So that's where I get that from, not so much the financial aspect as I am sure McCourt is happy with the tons of money the franchise makes or if not making now, the value the franchise will be at if he sells.

I say Coletti is a disaster cause I think he is. I don't think I need to go into every single reason I feel this way (I can privately to you if you want). It would rehash alot of what many people have said, not just me.

I will back down off disaster, because your right, trading top prospects for veterans would have really been a real disaster. But I don't give points to people for not doing something stupid. It wasn't as if BASEBALL didnt know that the dodgers farm system was rated very high and that many of those players would be future MLB players.

But I do stick to never winning a WS with him in charge and that pains me, but its how I feel. I feel he was given every single advantage that the other 2 GM's didnt have (strong farm system, stable ownership, no huge albotross contracts) and has done little to show for it.

I feel we win despite Coletti, not because of him.

Without Furcal, Nomar, Maddux, and Marlon Anderson we don't win last year. Whatever your feelings for Ned, the we win despite Ned instead of because of him is shortsited and only focus on his weaknesses.

Ethier looked pretty locked in on that final AB, like he was not going to swing at anything even the slightest bit outside of the zone. I was praying for one last ball to get Kemp up there to do some damage. Too bad that he just flat out missed strike 3. Good AB though.

From the last thread, Jon asked and I didn't see an answer posted:

"Did Loney almost homer in the sixth inning today? I didn't see it."

Yes, it was close, warning track to left field.

Grady was quoted saying yesterday that young pitchers are inconsistent and it would not be too much of a stretch to believe that Grady would think that about position players as well. If Grady thinks that way I am sure Ned does as well.

Thus the Peirre's, Gonzo's, Nomar's, Kent's, Schmidt's, of baseball will have a place on the Dodgers while Ned and Grady are in town. The good news seems that as long as Ned and Grady have veterans they are willing to play prospects next to the veterans.

What Ned and Grady will do once the Loney's, Martin's, Kemp's, Ethier's, Billingsly's get two solid years experience regarding the mix of veterans or prospects with players that only have two or three years experience will be interesting.

19 I agree with you. As your payroll breakdown shows we are barely competing with almost double the payroll. He acquired Nomar, Pierre and Gonzo to address our offensive needs and yet we are still in desperate need of a bat. He acquired Schmidt, Hendrickson and Tomko and we are now in desperate need of another starter.

I really, really want to proven wrong on this but I have no faith in Colletti.

Signed,

Debbie Downer

19 I certainly see your point and I'm not sure how far I want to go with mine.

That said, I think you do have to give as much credit for not making dumb moves as for making smart ones -- though I wouldn't put it that way.

The Dodgers lost 91 games in 2005. If he had chosen to do so, he would have been given carte blanche to make the changes he deemed necessary. Choosing to put faith in the farm system WAS a move -- not merely avoiding the stupid -- and it has paid off. Colletti deserves credit for having that faith.

Colletti's record is, at best, spotty. But this team -- as flawed as it is -- could very well win the world series. They are in first place. They will need luck, but every team needs luck. This year's Dodgers are better than the Cardinals were last year.

Your overall point -- that non-moves aside, his moves have not improved the team -- may have more merit, but again, I don't know how to consider one without the other. You make moves based on need, and your needs are defined by what you feel your system is lacking.

If you told Mrs. Kavula that I was defending Colletti, she would look at you like you was crazy and ask you what you'd done with the real Humma.

Without Furcal, Nomar, Maddux, and Marlon Anderson we don't win last year

You don't know that. Even if it's true that those players made positive contributions, you don't know that their contributions were higher than those that would have been made by players obtained in their stead by another GM.

According to this line of thinking, since Juan Pierre's OPS is greater than zero, he's making a positive offensive contribution to the team for which Colletti deserves credit and he's beyond reproach.

19 I will start off and say that spending money on free agents is a big risk. Every GM, has good signings, bad signings and horrible signings.

Also, as I said on the last thread, in the last 2 years, teams are reluctant to trade any of their top prospects. With the Braves deal with Texas, that makes 5 players on last year's Baseball America top 50 list that are now playing for different organizations. So while some were fearful of Ned adapting the Brian Sabean win now philosophy (which is probably the way most players feel about deals, they are only playing for the present), he has been pretty much following the industry in keeping your own projected talent.

All that being said, the last time the Dodgers made the post-season in 3 out of 4 years was 40 years ago (3 out of 5 was 22 years ago) so to say Ned is a disaster is a bit of an overstatement and no matter who was in charge at the time of acqusition, the fact remains, Ned is the one who gets to set the roster, so while you may think they win despite him, they win because he put them together on the 25-man roster.

Grady was quoted saying yesterday that young pitchers are inconsistent and it would not be too much of a stretch to believe that Grady would think that about position players as well

Meanwhile, the Nomars and LuGos and Kents of the world are models of consistency.

I just want to cut and paste Eric Enders' "Hasn't proven himself" opus from a few weeks ago. That's my problem with Colletti. That your name or age gives you a longer leash. Even when you flat out aren't as good as somebody else.

Of course, there are still things that drive me nuts about the team. Regardless of the players acquired, regardless of the payroll, I feel like the team isn't playing the best players it can. We've done that argument to death, too, of course, but it never gets easier to watch the young players share time while Juan Pierre puts up a mid-500s OPS against lefties.

The D-Backs are playing with a small payroll to small crowds. They went very young a couple of years ago and were a terible team.

Would the Dodgers have the same crowds without Gonzo, Nomar, Kent, and Peirre all of whom get good cheers when announced at Dodger Stadium?

If the team Colletti puts on the field is in first place or very near first place and the seats are filled in Dodger stadium, McCourt will be happy with Ned, especially since he seems to like him.

30
It would be nice if Collittle were forced to answer the following question in public:

"Can Juan Pierre hit lefties?"

Course, it would also be nice if they were forced to answer

"Can Juan Pierre hit righties?"

31 Also isnt attendance the most important thing in McCourt's mind? I mean he doesn't have access to tv money since Fox has them for a good amount of time. Without attendance revenues get crippled.

27 Ned inherited the work of Dan Evans, Depo, Logan White and others so to say they win because Ned sets the roster is also an overstatement. My frustration comes from Colletti inheriting a good team with a fantastic farm system and yet I feel we haven't made much progress separating ourselves from the rest of the NL West.

33 Imagine what the payroll would be if McCourt owned the channel, and got all of that ad revenue. I'm guessing 180 million dollar payroll.

That would be nice.

32 Juan Pierre's slugging percentage against lefties?

268.

In 112 at-bats.

I wonder what Evan Grant thinks of the Teixiera trade. Were the Braves even on his radar?

I imagine him silently weeping at his desk while holding a picture of James Loney and Clayton Kershaw in each hand, and wondering just how badly the Dodgers want Eric Gagne back.

I'm expecting Ned's big, under-the-radar move to be with Tampa Bay. Kazmir would be great, but the cost would obviously be huge.

31 IMO, As long as the team is winning the fans will come out. It doesnt matter if it is Nomar or Loney, Gonzo or Kemp.

Boos are heard for Tomko and Hendrickson and not Pierre. Pierre seems to be a favorite of the masses. We all know that group IQ is less than individual IQ. People tend to dumby (dummy)down when in groups.

33 35 The Dodgers still get their share of the national TV package plus their local deals with Prime Ticket and KCAL, they don't have a package like the Yankees and the Red Sox but I think they do okay.

Certainly, attendance is key but there are a lot of inherent reasons why the Dodgers draw well regardless of who is wearing the Blue.

winning or loosing.

2006 .543 3,758,545
2005 .438 3,603,680
2004 .574 3,488,283
2003 .525 3,138,626
2002 .568 3,131,255
2001 .531 3,017,143
2000 .531 3,011,539
1999 .475 3,098,042
1998 .512 3,089,201
1997 .543 3,319,504
1996 .556 3,188,454
1995 .542 2,766,251
1994 .509 2,279,355
1993 .500 3,170,392
1992 .389 2,473,266
1991 .574 3,348,170
1990 .531 3,002,396

39 True and false, the Dodgers and D-Backs are tied but the percent of filled seats are drastically different.

41 Oh, I'm sure they do quite well. Absolutely.

But nothing like they could do with their own station. If McCourt wants the Dodgers to be the Yankees of the NL, it's pretty tough to do it without those resources. Not impossible, but much more difficult.

If Kent can't play who will be the Dodgers 2nd baseman during the Giants series? Wilson or Lucille ll?

>> Infielder Tony Abreu hasn't played since the Dodgers optioned him to Las Vegas on July 18 because of an abdominal strain that didn't stop him from coming off the bench in four games before he was sent down.

"They're giving him treatment for it, but we want to make sure he is 100 percent," Watson said. "He is taking batting practice, taking ground balls and doing some work on the treadmill." <<

http://www.dailybreeze.com/sports/articles/8803152.html

40 - In the games I've been to Pierre's introductions have been met by the same amount of cheers as the average Dodger. I wouldn't come close to calling him a "fan favorite".

I've seen a few posts defending the Dodger payroll because it somehow is justified because the Dodgers bring in more money. That line of thinking is absurd because Jason Schmidt is currently not putting butts in Dodger Stadium, nor is his Jersey flying off the shelves. People aren't buying more Nachos because we have an outfield that includes Pierre.

"But I do stick to never winning a WS with him in charge and that pains me, but its how I feel. I feel he was given every single advantage that the other 2 GM's didnt have (strong farm system, stable ownership, no huge albotross contracts) and has done little to show for it."

Ah, the woes of being mired in the cellar. Oh, wait!

I think you're jumping the gun. Colletti has had exactly one opportunity to win a WS so far. The Dodgers are still very much in the hunt in this, his second season. Not all of his moves have worked out, but not all of any GMs moves have worked out. He's made his share of unforced errors, but he's also been victimized (as DePo was) by injuries to some of his key acquisitions. And some of his moves have been good: Grady Little, Luis Gonzalez, Sammy Saito, Rafael Furcal, Andre Ethier, and the timely promotions of Billingsley, Broxton, Martin, Loney and Kemp.

Teixeira is now heading for Atlanta, and Loney, Kershaw and Meloan are still Dodgers. That's a superb move by Colletti, not to panic and get into that bidding war. We've got less than 48 hours left to see if he can continue his record of not throwing away the future for the present. So far, he's batting 1.000.

(P.S. Dotel for Hu would be a tolerable trade, imho, even though Hu could become a starter someday.)

46 - "People aren't buying more Nachos because we have an outfield that includes Pierre. "

If I go to the concession stand midgame, I would be more likely to do so when Pierre is batting than when Kemp or Ethier is. So maybe it is working.

There doesn't appear to be anything about Ned's performance that will preclude us from winning a WS, but that's really a separate issue from whether his performance has been good or bad.

47 - Dotel for Hu would be a tolerable trade

Is "Dotel for Hu" preferable to "Dotel for Abreu"? I know that perhaps Hu is playing over his head, in which case sell-high may be in order. But I look at Tony Abreu and I see Josh Barfield, and I'm just not sold on him long-term. At least Hu is a plus defender at short.

35 - Given Ned's spending patterns to this point, I'm not sure more payroll dough would be a good thing for the Dodgers.

49 - The offense appears to be in good shape for the long haul, but how Ned replenishes the starting rotation could determine LA's WS prospects over the next 5 or so years.

50 I might not know what I'm talking about, but in my opinion, Dotel for anybody would be a terrible trade, because Dotel is a middle reliever.

Dotel for free would be OK, but just how much better is he going to be than whoever he replaces? Half a win? A quarter?

47 We've got less than 48 hours left to see if he can continue his record of not throwing away the future for the present.

On the other hand, I kinda wish he weren't throwing away the present for the future.

The NL is winnable this year. Seems like Atlanta sees that and is going for it. If we don't try to fill some gaps, aren't we just hoping that we'll be stronger in later years with prospects who may or may not pan out?

I'm not necessarily advocating a Texeira-level move, but I'll be disappointed if we can't improve the team by Tuesday.

50- That's a question I've been wondering, too. Not that I'd give up either for Dotel, but which of the two (Abreu or Hu) should be properly valued more highly. I don't think as much of Abreu as some seem to.

How much trades impact the team's mental state heading toward the final two months is not measurable but as Derek Lowe was ending an interview on The Herd this morning, he said that he hoped the team will make a deal to improve the club in the next 48 [sic] hours.

Shaft at Russian summer camp: "It's my patriotic duty to please that booty."

http://tinyurl.com/3dbywa

55 I know there were serious questions about Hu's hitting, before he had a few hot months in a league known for extreme offense. I can't help but wonder if he's the next Cesar Izturis.

Of course, there will always be GMs who covet great-defending shortstops. But maybe, as was said earlier, his value will never be higher than now.

55 If his value will never be higher than now, and all the Dodgers can get for him is Dotel, what does that mean?

59 is in response to 58.

If the choice was Betemit for Scott Baker
or
La Roche for Matt Garza

Which trade would you pull the trigger on?

58
If so, then we should be able to get more then a middle relief pitcher with a long history of physical ailments who is not all that great.

Abreu's younger, and has been young for his league at every level, so that his numbers before this year haven't been great, either, can't be held too much against him. But it makes me uneasy. What's his ceiling supposed to be?

Regarding Loney scoring from first yesterday, he wasn't being held at first, and got a great jump. The Rockies' announcers made a point of mentioning that he "was a few strides from third" when Ethier's ball landed just foul. He would have scored easily.

If you were the Twins, would you do LaRoche for Garza?

FYI - Hu is now the 25th ranked prospect at Rotowire. Given that Rotowire could care less about defense that means his offense is being taken more seriously. John Sickels moved him all the way to his top 20. I think it is an over reaction to his great 1st half but I'm not sure I'd be willing to bet on it and we could sure use a cheap SS in 2009. Unless he's being floated for a solid starting pitcher I'm in no hurry to trade him.

60, 62 Fair enough, I wasn't really advocating a Dotel trade. He never seems to be healthy for long.

If I have one major beef with Ned's trades, it's not that he traded some prospects, but that he didn't get much for them.

65
I think so, they desperately need power and a 3b. They have young pitching and Garza has ticked off the front office with his behavior. Liriano comes back next year, so along with Bonzer, Baker, Santana, and Slowery they still have a 5 man rotation and Mansfield is coming on strong.
I think it would be a win win deal for both teams.

I know there were serious questions about Hu's hitting, before he had a few hot months in a league known for extreme offense

actually he did it in the Southern League which is known for pitching and big parks.

I'd rather do Betemit for Slowey.

67
Right, that seems to be the general beef. If Lugo had performed just at his historical level it would not have seemed so bad. I think it is funny that Lugo hit as bad as he's ever hit in his career while Marlon hit better then he's ever hit in his career. Baseball is still a crapshoot over a small period of games.

Mcdonald is finally gettting some pub...from BP

McDonald has been one of the minor's best breakouts this year, striking out 104 in 82 innings for High-A Inland Empire before getting promoted to the Southern League three weeks ago. Yesterday, McDonald had his best outing yet for the Suns, whiffing 11 over seven innings while allowing one run and four hits. In four starts for Jacksonville, McDonald has a 1.19 ERA while limiting hitters to a .192 average and punching out 28 in 22 2/3 innings. Better yet, his scouting reports are nearly as impressive as his numbers. A 6-foot-5 right-hander, McDonald has a low-90s fastball than touches 94 mph, plus a solid curveball and a very good changeup. He's moving up quickly, and is already a lock for my Dodgers' Top 10 list in the offseason, and has a good chance of reaching the majors at some point in 2008.

69 I'm surprised Nate isn't jumping up and down with the news of the Texas deal.

25.5 hours to go, remember last year, the Maddux and Lugo deals were not announced until just after 1:00 p.m.

70
I think Baker will still have the better career.

I think I rather have Farnsworth then Dotel.

1. he's going to be cheaper in terms of prospects
2. he's probably undervalued because of his down year
3. if scouting reports check out, he should be able to bounce back for a decent stretch run.
4. hes signed for 2008.

If the Dodgers really are sold on LaRoche, and he's close to coming back and being entrenched at third (big ifs), Betemit is a fantastic trading chip. Honestly, I'd like to see him get quality starting time somewhere else. I'd like to see him do well, albeit with another team.

Watching Farnsworth pitch in a Dodgers uniform would drive me crazy. He's got great stuff, but man, talk about a high-wire act out there.

69

I never really had that paranoid feeling that Colletti was going to try to acquire Tex at all costs.

I actually don't feel that anxious at all. Outside of Tex, there really isn't anyone available that we could conceivably throw top prospects at. Unless of course there are names available that have not been made available to the public yet.

Even better would be for LaRoche to learn to play 2nd base, and the Dodgers could still keep Betemit if they wanted.

The Braves gave up their top two prospects (and others) for Teixeira. Glad it was them and not us. vr, Xei

79 There's a huge difference between second and third. Since LaRoche isn't known for his defensive prowess, he'd probably be a disaster in the middle infield.

mlbtraderumors.com has a paragraph about a confrontation between Farnsworth and Posada yesterday. Farnsworth sounds like a headache.

79

They played Betemit at 2b in one game at Colorado. Laroche has not played a middle infield position in a long time...since he was an amateur.

73
Well they're trading players outside my cell I've got 25 hours to go
And the whole town's waitin' just to hear Nate yell I've got 24 hours to go
Well they gave me some prospects for my last meal I've got 23 hours to go
But nobody asked me how I feel I've got 22 hours to go
Well I sent for the GM and the whole dern bunch with 21 hours to go
And I sent for Kim Ng but she's out to lunch I've got 20 more hours to go
Then the sheriff said James, I gonna trade you now, got 19 hours to go
So I laughed in his face and I spit in his eye got 18 hours to go
Now hear comes Gammons for to save my soul with 13 hours to go
And he's talking bout' dealin' but I'm so scared I've 12 more hours to go
Now they're talking on ESPN and it chills my spine 11 more hours to go
And James and Matt head to KC aw they work just fine got 10 more hours to go
Well I'm waitin' on the correction that'll end this dream with 9 more hours to go
But this is for real so forget about me got 8 more hours to go
With my feet on the trap and my head on the noose got 5 more hours to go
Won't somebody come and stop this mess with 4 more hours to go
I can see the mountains I can see the skies with 3 more hours to go
And it's to dern pretty for a team that don't wanna lose 2 more hours to go
I can see the buzzard I can hear the crows 1 more hours to go
And now I'm swingin' and here I go-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o!

If you read the dugout regularly you kinda get a flavor for Farnsworth's special blend of craziness. Sure its exaggerated, but theres gotta be kernels of truth in there.

Even better would be for LaRoche to learn to play 2nd base, and the Dodgers could still keep Betemit if they wanted

LaRoche at 3B, Betemit at 2B

83 - I'd love for Betemit to grab the 2B job. A LaRoche/Furcal (Hu in '09)/Betemit/Loney infield sounds tasty to me.

LaRoche and Betemit might not win any gold gloves, but they'd hit enough to overcome that weakness. Plus Hu could be the Izturis-like stabilizer at short.

84 How long did that take to write? Whatever it was, it was worth it.

Nice.

88
Ask Shel Silverstein how long it took to write.

Except he's dead.

84
The man is back.

Evan Grant is one of my favorite people now. Because of the sheer buffoonery:

The Rangers have been trying to pry Highland Park lefty Clayton Kershaw out of Los Angeles with little success.

Um, yes. People been trying to tell you that for, uh, I don't know, a month?

89 Still, I've done those major cut and paste and reconfigure posts, and they take forever.

Dodgers $108,704,524
Padres $58,235,567
Rockies $54,424,000
D'backs $52,067,546

You left one out:

Giants $90,469,056

At least Colletti's in first place. What excuse is there for extending the SF GM?

Let's look at this from another perspective. The Dodgers rank 6th in baseball payroll. The top 10:

1. Yankees 195,229,045
2. Red Sox 143,123,714
3. Mets 116,115,819
4. White Sox 109,290,167
5. Angels 109,251,333
6. Dodgers 108,704,524
7. Mariners 106,516,833
8. Cubs 99,936,999
9. Tigers 95,180,369
10. Orioles 95,107,808

It's silly to decide whether spending that much money in 2007 is worthwhile until the 2007 season is over, much less calling it a disaster in July. In first place.

With the exception of the two Florida teams -- the purposefully depressed payrolls of which you could just about cover with our top four players -- every GM is trying to win within a certain budget. For some, that budget is astronomical; for others, it is constricting.

But whatever the case, you can't compare payrolls in a vacuum. Jake Peavy or his equivalent was not available at $4.7 million for anybody else but the Padres. Look at their payroll:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/teams/salaries?team=sdg

They signed Greg Maddux for $10 million in the off-season. He is the highest paid player on their roster. He was available. That was the going rate. Jason Schmidt's going rate was $15 million. How much would a Jake Peavy have gone for last winter, had one been available? $20 million? $25 million? Suddenly, the Padres are at $75 million. What about Chris Young at $600,000?

In the current market, no GM could construct a Padres roster for $60 million. Listing the NL West payrolls and standings and declaring Ned Colletti a failure doesn't make sense.

93 - Looking at that top-10 list sure goes a long way in explaining the AL's dominance in recent years.

83--Thats true, but the transition isnt as hard as some might make it seem. Plenty of utility guys end up transitioning around the infield.

Given the guy's excellent hitting ceiling, I'd put him at 2nd base right now and work with him on playing the position. Much easier to teach a player to field than to hit IMO.

Bill Walsh has passed away.

95 Players who aren't dazzling at their given position rarely get moved up the defensive spectrum. So I think you can forget that idea.

95 - But if part of the reasoning behind the move is to open up 3rd for Betemit, why not just have Wilson go to 2nd, and allow LaRoche to stay at his natural position?

96 - I knew it was coming, but that makes me very sad.

96 RIP Bill Walsh. What a great football coach.

The future. The future. 2007 was 2002's future, and how much nearer are we to a world series team? Each year I keep seeing the same prevailing sentiment. DO NOTHING, make to moves, wait for the future. The "future" is just some metaphysical concept, like the end of the rainbow. As we stand now in the year 2007, could someone give me an idea of what is actually meant by "the future"? 2010? 2011? When is YOUR Dodger future? In what year would you want the Dodgers to be in the world series again? Or are you content each year to just lengthen the concept of the future by another year. Don't ask me for my solution, because I am not the Dodger GM and I am not paid to provide such answers. But at least I am not cowering in a corner worrying and wringing my hands in fear that Colletti might make a move, any move, because some nebulous "future" might be jeopardized. I welcome any and all moves Colletti might make to make the present Dodger team a contender that will go way beyond the first game of a playoff.

To appreciate the greatness of Walsh, I suggest you take a look at his coaching tree on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Walsh_(football_coach)

Bill Walsh has passed away

The Genius™...?

New post up top.

101 If I gave you a long explanation about these youngsters, and contending for many years, could you honestly be swayed? I don't get the impression that you could.

101--I actually sort of agree. Its never about what you trade, its what you get in return for that trade.

105- I have a problem with you, but I'm not going to tell you what it is. Just fix it. And then thank me for having the courage to tell you that I had a problem with you.

Sorry if already offered. No time to read extensively today. Not "weird" at all.
Guys in Vegas love to bet against power pitchers after good game. Someone very close to me even predicted mediocre outing after Houston...
The consistency of his good/bad might be some outside the norm....

"Preclude" takes care of "from" (as continue takes care of on, and admit takes care of to). Prefixes are hired to do a certain job:-), though y'can't prove that by most text in this undisciplined age.

Otherwise, very nice, tight piece in "Fungoes." Keep up the good work.