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

More Simplistic Starting Pitching Rankings: AL
2007-12-21 10:43
by Jon Weisman

Right back into the breach today: I invite the world to examine American League starting pitchers on my idiosyncratic terms at

Once more, to reflect the community effort on the research for this column from several Dodger Thoughts commenters, I'm going to donate my pay for the column to the Kilimanjaro Climb for Clean Water.

Comments (176)
Show/Hide Comments 1-50
2007-12-21 11:22:12
1.   Jim Hitchcock
Time now to ask Marty what's on for Christmas dinner.
2007-12-21 11:26:23
2.   regfairfield
FJM is not going to be happy that you mentioned Meche's 9-13 record without his 3.67 ERA (albeit with only minor improvements to his perhiperals).

Is it sad that I think you were way to generous with the Rangers? McCarthy, Gabbard and Wright could have easily been zeroes.

2007-12-21 11:28:41
3.   Jon Weisman
2 - That W-L notation was edited into my story.
2007-12-21 11:30:57
4.   El Lay Dave
Whoa, I was LATed for Xmas!

103 from the last thread: Don't you have it all?

LOL, not nearly, but I do seem to have everything I need - what more could I ask for? (I am accepting applications for anyone who would volunteer to take over my mortgage payments, college tuition payments, etc., etc.

2007-12-21 11:32:26
5.   El Lay Dave
To everyone at DT: Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and best wishes to you and yours for whichever holidays you all celebrate. May 2008 be a year of improvement and upward movement for all of us, including the Dodgers into the playoffs!
2007-12-21 11:32:33
6.   regfairfield
3 Wow, that's awful.
2007-12-21 11:33:01
7.   regfairfield
What did you have there instead?
2007-12-21 11:36:40
8.   Jon Weisman
Nothing special:

The much-criticized Meche signing may have been over-criticized, but it's not as if he's some ace-in-hiding. Overall, the Royals figure to be overmatched by the other team's starting pitcher most of the time in 2008. I've left A-ball pitchers off the ratings, but could Daniel Cortes, 21 in March, make the leap?

2007-12-21 11:42:15
9.   bigcpa
Holiday Photo challenge:

What words are tattooed on Andruw Jones' fingers? I can only make out half of it.

2007-12-21 11:45:14
10.   old dodger fan
Interesting comparisons. I just when thru them quickly (hopefully not too quickly) and I counted 19 ALer's with a 4 or a 3 rating and 29 NLers with a 4 or a 3.

Do you think the NL has that many more above average pitchers than the AL or could better hitting in the AL have skewed the pitcher ratings?

2007-12-21 11:48:29
11.   Jon Weisman
10 - Maybe the latter.

More 4s in the AL, though.

2007-12-21 11:50:35
12.   old dodger fan
11 Seven 4's in the AL and only 3 in the NL but NL wins the 3's battle 26-12.
2007-12-21 11:50:48
13.   D4P
The latest post on that fire-baseball-announcer themed site has a link to a great piece on a new statistic: GRIT (General Requirements of Intangible Talent). Good stuff.

2007-12-21 11:55:24
14.   Bob Timmermann
I think it's Druw (for his son) and some version of "Niki" (for his wife).
2007-12-21 11:57:05
15.   regfairfield
11 It seems like you were a bit more generous in the NL.
2007-12-21 11:58:30
16.   Marty
I'm going to my sister's for Christmas and am not being asked to lift a finger as far as cooking goes.
2007-12-21 12:00:41
17.   D4P
Not a fin-guh!
2007-12-21 12:00:45
18.   bhsportsguy
Baseball America, who last year named the Dodgers as organization of the year, has now put them in their "Teams Trending Down" category.

I guess when you are in a division with two other teams that are at the top of your list and the Padres seem to win on the cheap and without a farm system, the big boy in the division is going to be judged more harshly.

But also seems that the September collapse plus all the bickering, true or untrue, that went on last year as given teams pause to wonder if the Dodgers were going to jettison some younger guys for vets. That hasn't happen so now two questions remain, will the Dodgers truly commit to their young players and can Joe Torre operate a cohesive clubhouse.

2007-12-21 12:02:02
19.   underdog
I was LATed in the other thread, too (but promise not to underdog this one):

103-Nice, Toy! I share that general wish, too, as well as many of the other specific wishes (including your wish for Reg about LaRoche).

"Is there anything sadder than homeless robots at Xmas? Only drowning puppies, and there would have to be a lot of them." - Amy on Futurama

Another thing that makes me sad - discovering that one of my favorite football players has written a novel that sounds absolutely horrible (though it did get a favorable review from well-known literary critic Tony Dungy). Jason Elam, I know you're a kicker and have a lot of free time on your hands, but... geesh.

2007-12-21 12:02:40
20.   Sam DC
Anyone want to go in with me on an astrolabe for Bob?
2007-12-21 12:14:05
21.   Jim Hitchcock
21 Then he'll need a sailing ship...
2007-12-21 12:14:39
22.   Bob Timmermann
I don't want an astrolabe! I never get what I want! You people never listen to me!


2007-12-21 12:15:51
23.   old dodger fan
Sextants available on ebay!
2007-12-21 12:17:55
24.   Sam DC
22 Aahhhh, now I know how to talk to you.
2007-12-21 12:18:19
25.   underdog
I'm telling ya, what Bob really wants is an alethiometer.
2007-12-21 12:25:40
26.   wronghanded
18 Is it reasonable to assume that the legitimacy of the titles they've handed us that past couple of seasons are wrong? Last year, I don't think we warranted the "Organization of the Year" title. Sure we were chalked full of minor league talent but our big league team had some serious flaws. This season on the other hand, we have still have all of that young talent and a lot of it ready to contribute regularly in the big league team. With a much improved (IMO) MLB team coupled with the fact that we've retained the talent in our farm system, shouldn't we actually be a team trending up?
2007-12-21 12:27:32
27.   trainwreck
Thanks for the well wishes. Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and Happy Birthday to anyone with birthdays that are going on vacation. Hope you and your families have a great holiday season and a great new year.

It is great to get to share the ups and the downs of the Dodgers with all of you.

2007-12-21 12:28:30
28.   Paul Scott

"Additionally, the ball looks gigantic to their tiny, elfin eyes..."

That was a fun read, with that line causing actual laughter.

2007-12-21 12:29:12
29.   trainwreck
And Bellotti just turned us down.

Damn, damn, damn!

2007-12-21 12:31:36
30.   regfairfield
18 It could be because 2005 and 2006 were not great drafts for us.
2007-12-21 12:33:35
31.   Bob Timmermann
Get your NCAA tournament bracket sheet ready then!
2007-12-21 12:35:04
32.   wronghanded
30 Those drafts would have to be the reason, other than that I don't how they could justify the "trending down" title.
2007-12-21 12:35:43
33.   trainwreck
I can't believe I am going to type this, but I wish we did not fire Karl Dorrell.

I would rather not cheat to be mediocre.

2007-12-21 12:37:51
34.   ChicagoDodger
26 Based on what they rated the Dodgers last year, they can't possibly be trending up this year. How do you trend up from organization of the year?

And since there is no where to go but down, once you have reached the top, trending down seems reasonable. I guess holding steady would be okay too.

2007-12-21 12:37:54
35.   old dodger fan
18 How accurate have past predictions of trending down been?
2007-12-21 12:38:39
36.   bhsportsguy
30 No, I don't think it was that, they even noted that despite the young players advancing to the MLB club, the system is constantly reloading.
2007-12-21 12:39:08
37.   Paul Scott
32 We have been trending down since October 2005.
2007-12-21 12:40:11
38.   berkowit28
25 What would that be?
2007-12-21 12:44:01
39.   wronghanded
34 We could be trending up and still have teams leap frog us right?
2007-12-21 12:45:07
40.   bhsportsguy
I should make clear that for the first time Baseball America is not using letter grades re the organizational report cards.

So the Dodgers could still be among the better organizations but with their finish last year, it would be fair to say that they did not have a great 2007.

I am going to lift one quote from their membership-protected piece because I think it is what most of the outside baseball world thinks about the Dodgers right now and it will be up to Joe to get that addressed right away when Spring Training starts in February.

"Despite leading the division for much of the first half, the major league team crumbled in September, underscored by a clubhouse feud between the team's veterans and youth" .

That has to be it because its other low points for 2007 dealt with what happened to Eddie Murray and Bill Robinson and the only mention of the farm system was Scott Elbert's injury (and he appears to be back).

2007-12-21 12:46:56
41.   68elcamino427
Here's wishing happy, wonderful days to all!

We are trending up, regardless of what the others say!

2007-12-21 12:47:00
42.   Eric Enders
In BA's list of bad things about the Dodgers, they don't mention the thing one would think they'd harp on most, which is the Kyle Blair fiasco. Instead, they talk about the death of Bill Robinson. Um, okay.

As for the bad drafts being the reason for the low rating: the 2005 draft had already tanked by last year, but the Dodgers were still named Organization of the Year. And 2006, well, most of it ain't that hot, but no draft that gets you Clayton Kershaw can be said to be a disaster.

Really, there's no reasonable way for any halfway intelligent person to argue that the Dodger organization is heading downward. There just isn't.

2007-12-21 12:47:52
43.   wronghanded
41 Should have kept your damn mouths shut Kent, Gonzalez and Lowe!
2007-12-21 12:48:28
44.   wronghanded
43 Should be 40 not 41 .
2007-12-21 12:49:42
45.   regfairfield
42 Are they referring to the farm system, or the organization as a whole?
2007-12-21 12:52:13
46.   Eric Enders
The organization as a whole.
2007-12-21 12:53:07
47.   regfairfield
42 Then yeah, can't see how we can be trending down when we should be building up for the next three years or so.
2007-12-21 12:53:28
48.   bhsportsguy
45 Organization as a whole, MLB team, front office, minor leagues, etc.

That is why San Diego is seen as a team trending up, their minor league system is getting better and they win at MLB level despite virtually no impact from their system but getting good value from moves that they make.

2007-12-21 12:58:03
49.   bhsportsguy
42 Don't you sense that whenever you read any outside writer whether it be Baseball Prospectus, Baseball America,, etc., there is just that sense that somehow the Dodgers can't help themselves and will blow this opportunity with all their young talent.

I think the Juan Pierre signing influenced some of this plus Jason Schmidt's injury.

Nate Silver says right now his NL picks is Arizona, Cubs and Dodgers (especially if Pierre is the 4th OF).

2007-12-21 12:58:13
50.   Paul Scott
42 There certainly is. It is a matter of how far out you look. I think the Dodgers are worse off today from a 2012 perspective than we were in 2005.

Is the major league club improving from 2007 -> 2008 -> 2009? Yes. So if that is all you mean, I agree it is undeniable.

The organization, however, is getting weaker. In 2005, we were positioned to suffer at most one more year and then 2007 should have been the start of a possible decade long run of excellence. With the trades and acquisitions and non-signings made in 2006 and 2007, we have both delayed and shortened that run and might not have it at all.

We will be a very good team for the next several years. Even our current front office would have difficulty making a complete mess of things. But our position today, for the future, is certainly weaker than it was 2 years ago.

Show/Hide Comments 51-100
2007-12-21 13:01:13
51.   68elcamino427
43 Here's a picture that I'd like to see.
Kemp, taking sliding practice at home plate, with the catcher (Bennett?) wearing a trashcan. Mug shots of Kent, Gonzo, and Lowe are taped onto the "trash can".

This could be Kemp's balseball card.

If Kemp excells, the "Trash can" might become a cottage industry.

2007-12-21 13:02:35
52.   Jason in Canada
31 I think Rick won the most money ever for that NCAA tourney pool. Something like 4.5 million...
2007-12-21 13:05:33
53.   underdog
Anyone catch this on the Rangers site today?
>>The Rangers have talked to the Reds about center fielder Josh Hamilton. The Reds want Edinson Volquez included in any return package. The Rangers asked the Dodgers about Andre Ethier, but he's not available. The Dodgers are trying to trade Juan Pierre, who is just one year into a five-year, $44 million contract. But the Rangers aren't biting on that one unless the Dodgers pick up a significant portion of his contract. {please do! - ed.} The Red Sox still could trade Coco Crisp, unless they need to include Jacoby Ellsbury in a trade for Johan Santana.

"I still think there will be a decent amount of trade activity," Daniels said. <<

2007-12-21 13:06:29
54.   Eric Enders
50 "I think the Dodgers are worse off today from a 2012 perspective than we were in 2005...our position today, for the future, is certainly weaker than it was 2 years ago."

I very much disagree.

In 2005, James Loney was an iffy prospect and Matt Kemp was a toolsy athlete whose baseball skills were undeveloped. Now they're both major league stars.

In 2005, Russell Martin was a pretty good, but not great, prospect, and it was being debated whether he was even the best catching prospect in his own organization. Now, he's the NL All-Star starter, Gold Glove and Silver Slugger winner.

In 2005, Clayton Kershaw was a 17-year-old kid none of us had ever heard of. Now the Dodgers possess baseball's best left-handed pitching prospect in a generation.

I could go on, but you get the point. Our future is a lot more secure now than it was in 2005 because the players have transformed from chancy prospects into relatively sure things.

2007-12-21 13:07:28
55.   Paul Scott
BTW, is Boras the only reason why most people here seem to agree with me that failing to sign Blair was idiocy on Colletti/White's part but that failing to sign Hochevar (equally - or more - stupid in my mind) was a great sign of things to come with the Colletti/White sticking up to Boras?
2007-12-21 13:08:57
56.   Eric Enders
I don't think the Hochevar thing was a sign of great things at all. However, it turned out that, by complete accident, failing to sign Hochevar turned out to benefit us greatly, since it got us Kershaw.
2007-12-21 13:09:27
57.   wronghanded
53 That would complete my Christmas wishlist:

1. Sign Andruw Jones (check)
2. Sign Kuroda (check)
3. Trade Juan Pierre to Texas even if we have to eat a year or 2 of the salary (please, please, please!!!)

2007-12-21 13:14:18
58.   Paul Scott
54 Actually, you couldn't really go on. Not without stretching it. All you have done is listed what was expected out of an organization as stacked as we were in 2005. In 2007, the difference is you are able to attach specific names. Two of those names even - Kemp and Loney (though Kemp, more so than Loney) - are far from the sure things you are portraying.

In any event, the point is, even if we accept your glowing review, all you are doing is listing the guys that made it. Statistically, in 2005, having something like this claimable in 2008 was a near certainty. So again, sure, the short term health of the major league team looks good. There is no denying that.

The front office, however, has really cost us over the last two years and we are weaker for the future. The obvious problems are the Two 2006 Devil Rays trades and the failure to sign Hochevar and Blair.

2007-12-21 13:19:18
59.   Paul Scott
57 Since Pierre would be one of the best 4th OF in baseball, why do you want to move him if we have to pay for him anyway? We should try to trade him, to be sure. But IMO we should not be looking to dump for dumping's sake. We need to get value for him, otherwise we should keep him as a back-up.
2007-12-21 13:22:06
60.   68elcamino427
58 Do you think that Torre now has any signifigant input into the decision making process that is the "front office"?
2007-12-21 13:22:19
61.   Paul Scott
56 I would not compliment the manager for sending Derek Lowe up to hit for Russel Martin just because Lowe happened to hit a Home Run. The decision would still be stupid, regardless of the outcome.
2007-12-21 13:23:46
62.   Paul Scott
60 No idea. I view the front office as Colletti, White and Ng. If I am given evidence to the contrary, I'll gladly change my take.
2007-12-21 13:25:08
63.   Eric Enders
58 Fair enough. However...

"The front office, however, has really cost us over the last two years and we are weaker for the future. The obvious problems are the Two 2006 Devil Rays trades and the failure to sign Hochevar and Blair."

The front office has cost us, perhaps, but the Devil Rays trades have nothing to do with it, as we gave up nothing that is likely to end up being of great value, unless you think Ruggiano's going to be a star. It would be nice to have Navarro as a backup catcher, certainly, but nothing about those trades is going to kill us. Note that I'm not saying they were good trades; they weren't, but we managed to get away with it. The front office hurt the team a lot more by signing Pierre, Nomar, and Schmidt (although I thought the latter was a good signing at the time).

Agreed on Blair. However, as noted in 56 , the failure to sign Hochevar actually benefited the organization greatly, albeit unintentionally.

2007-12-21 13:27:07
64.   wronghanded
59 I personally would rather have D. Young as the 4th (possibly starting) OF. I actually don't just want to dump Pierre, one of my old high school teammates is on the Rangers- RP Wes Littleton, so I'd prefer we eat some Pierre salary, move him to Texas and get Littleton in return (his numbers look pedestrian but he is going to be a stud IMO). If it wasn't for a horrible start to the season last year, Littleton would have actually had a good season.
2007-12-21 13:27:33
65.   bhsportsguy
58 I know there is this argument that we should have gotten more from those deals and we talking about the three deals, that sent Edwin Jackson, Chuck Tiffany, Jae Seo, Dionner Navarro, Joel Guzman, Sergio Pedroza and Justin Ruggiano for Scott Proctor (via Wilson Betemit in the Betemit, Willy Aybar, Baez deal to Atlanta), Chris Withrow and James Adkins (compensation picks for Lugo).

However, it must again be pointed out that still even if some of those guys were still here, their placement on the Dodgers depth chart would certainly put them not on the immediate path to Chavez Ravine.

The Hochevar deal (which falls between 2 administrations) has been documented and its not as if he was not getting a big deal, just not as big as he eventually got going number 1.

Kyle Blair, I guess we'll know in 3 years how that will turn out but would I rather have him, sure.

2007-12-21 13:29:23
66.   Eric Enders
"Since Pierre would be one of the best 4th OF in baseball, why do you want to move him if we have to pay for him anyway? We should try to trade him, to be sure. But IMO we should not be looking to dump for dumping's sake. We need to get value for him, otherwise we should keep him as a back-up."

That is a good point. I wouldn't go quite as far as saying he'd be one of the best 4th outfielders in baseball. But he'd be an acceptable 4th outfielder. However, (a) if he remains on the team, I don't trust management to bench him, and (b) he seems preoccupied with his streak and complains whenever he doesn't start a game, and we probably don't need any more Luis Gonzalez-type problem children in 2008.

Admittedly, both of those fears are completely speculative.

2007-12-21 13:30:54
67.   Paul Scott
63 In response to almost everything, please see 61 . Stupid decisions that appear to "work out" don't make the decisions less stupid.

Additionally, the case still remains that at the time of the trades, what we gave away was worth far far more than what we got. Thus, those trades hurt our organization, as a whole, as measured by lost opportunity, regardless of how the individual players given up are performing today.

As I said at the time of the trades, moves like that will kill a franchise in the long run. That we escaped any lasting damage from those particular moves is just luck.

2007-12-21 13:33:37
68.   Eric Enders
"Stupid decisions that appear to "work out" don't make the decisions less stupid."

True. However, if they work out, as this one did, then they do not "really cost us" and make us "weaker for the future" as you claim in 58 the Hochevar non-signing did.

2007-12-21 13:33:51
69.   68elcamino427
66 That is a great observation.
I don't think that is is realistic to believe that JP will sit quietly for very long, if at all.
2007-12-21 13:35:52
70.   bhsportsguy
Completely off-topic and a few days old so if it was reported, I'm sorry I'm late.

But it's cool nonetheless.

2007-12-21 13:40:48
71.   Paul Scott
68 The Hochevar non-signing made us weaker at the time it was made. I was not going to quibble, but I don't think it is fair to just say Hochevar non-signing = Kershaw signing and leave it at that. The fact is, the failure to sign Hochevar changed the Dodgers 2006 draft in a non-quantifiable "butterfly effect" manner. Because of it, the 2006 draft was almost certainly stronger than it would have been, however, whether Hochevar + 2006 Draft with Hochevar signing is better or worse than 2006 draft as it was made is pretty much impossible to tell.

Additionally, if we stay consistent with your reasoning on things (always taking present day value of past moves), then Kershaw is worth very little. We'll need to wait and see if he works out. I don't agree with that reasoning, but it seems you are mixing things around a bit much - choosing to point out what happened after the fact in some cases and choosing to value Kershaw based solely on potential.

2007-12-21 13:41:01
72.   68elcamino427
70 That is very cool. I have a ball signed by Sandy when I was 12. Kofax and Drysdale, that was fun.
2007-12-21 13:44:47
73.   ChicagoDodger
71 Please re-write the last 2 years and tell us how the Dodgers would have been better off then they are now for 2012. And, you can't list the Blair non-signing, because I don't believe there are any Dodger fans who do not agree he should have been signed.
2007-12-21 13:48:59
74.   Eric Enders
Actually, I think Kershaw has a lot of present-day value. He would have been worth Santana or Bedard, if we wanted to get rid of him and a few others. And he got a point in Jon's NL staff rankings, so that proves he has value!

Anyway, the Hochevar thing has been gone over before, so I hesitate to keep talking about it, but I think the effect it had on the 2006 draft is very much quantifiable. It's simple, really. Kershaw was Detroit's second target, after Andrew Miller. The Royals were trying to decide between Miller and Hochevar, and obviously took Hochevar. If Hochevar isn't there, then the Royals take Miller #1 and the Tigers take Kershaw #6. There really was no disagreement among draft insiders that that's what would have happened. And Logan White specifically said that if Kershaw had been gone, he'd have taken Bryan Morris 7th and Preston Mattingly in the Morris spot.

So basically, in that situation, we would have ended up with the same things we got, plus a #39 pick, instead of Kershaw.

2007-12-21 13:53:32
75.   Eric Enders
Anyway, I sure do wish John Sickels had gotten around to rating the Dodgers prospects before the stupid Yankee fans scared him away.
2007-12-21 13:54:17
76.   ChicagoDodger
53 The Rangers asked the Dodgers about Andre Ethier, but he's not available.

Doesn't that comment merit discussion? Or, is it now assumed that Ethier will not be traded? I certainly hope so!

2007-12-21 14:01:55
77.   wronghanded
76 While I like Andre Ethier, I think we can get similar production from D.Young. Hypothetically, if Ethier can get us a servicable prize in return, I would be all for it.
2007-12-21 14:04:50
78.   Johnson
74 All right, so who here would trade Kershaw for Hochevar and a #39 overall pick? Not many, I would think, given the general reluctance to deal Kershaw for Santana. So, as 68 said, bad move or not it made us better. Which, as I recall, was the original question: Are we better?
2007-12-21 14:05:26
79.   ChicagoDodger
77 I like D Young as well! What's wrong with keeping both, and getting rid of Pierre who more then likely would not accept the role that utilizes his skills best---late-inning base runner or bunter.
2007-12-21 14:06:05
80.   Eric Enders
I like having both of them around.
2007-12-21 14:07:50
81.   wronghanded
79 I guess that would all fall on what Ethier would bring us in return, but yeah I see your point, we don't have much ML-ready OF depth in the farm.
2007-12-21 14:08:57
82.   ChicagoDodger
78 So how are the Dodgers worse now then they were in 2005?

So far we have heard that the Dodgers are lucky that Kershaw is better then Hochevar, and that the Dodgers are lucky that all the players they traded to Tampa were terrible.

To me, that all adds up to the Dodgers being lucky! But it sure doesn't paint a picture that says they are worse now then they were in 2005.

2007-12-21 14:11:32
83.   Johnson
78 So how are the Dodgers worse now then they were in 2005?

I don't think they are. Did you reference the wrong comment?

2007-12-21 14:13:14
84.   ChicagoDodger
81 Ask yourself this: What could Ethier fetch that would be worth trading him for?

He certainly has much more value then a middle reliever. Much more!

Whomever they would acquire is not going to start for the Dodgers infield in 2008. He's not going to fetch a "better" outfielder.

And, he certainly is not going to fetch a starting pitcher that the Dodgers could use for 2008.

At best he could fetch some prospects, and not the most highly rated ones either.

His best value is with LA!

2007-12-21 14:14:36
85.   ChicagoDodger
83 No, I was just agreeing with you, that the Dodgers are not worse off then they were in 2005.
2007-12-21 14:15:41
86.   Eric Enders
84 Right on. I've never thought Ethier was better than a 3.5, and still don't, but he's a useful player. The only thing we need is a middle reliever, and trading young cheap players for middle relievers is a pretty dumb idea.
2007-12-21 14:16:59
87.   Johnson
85 Oh, I see.

Let it be known that though you did not reference the wrong comment, my question asking if you referenced the wrong comment actually did reference the wrong comment. Whoops!

2007-12-21 14:19:08
88.   Howard Fox
86 and that is right up Coletti's alley
2007-12-21 14:19:46
89.   GobiasIndustries

And Agreed!

Either is going to finally have this year to blossom into the player that he has shown flashes of being. I am not for trading him at all. Giving him and Kemp a shot at everyday OF jobs is the best possible thing the Dodgers could do. D. Young should also be our 4th OF, he can't be held back any longer and he certainly has more upside than Pierre. Trading Either or Young will not net us anything better or equal to their current value. Pierre however, just needs to go. Who cares what we get back for him and who cares how much money we have to pay to get rid of him. Just make him go. There is no dispute that the Dodgers will suffer as long as Pierre is on the roster because he will command playing time that will take away from
Kemp/Either/Young and or Repko. Ok Repko is a stretch but you get my point.

2007-12-21 14:22:55
90.   Eric Enders
What I would like to know is why Ned hasn't signed Otsuka yet.
2007-12-21 14:23:28
91.   ChicagoDodger
87 Too funny!

That sounds like Billy Crystal from the "Analyze" movie where he asks, "are you talking about the 1st part or the 2nd part?"

2007-12-21 14:24:14
92.   Howard Fox
90 he's waiting til he is linked to steroids
2007-12-21 14:27:35
93.   Howard Fox
I can't wait for the outpouring of support when Jones sits and its Kemp/Pierre/Ethier
2007-12-21 14:29:06
94.   wronghanded
86 What if we can snag 2 young middle relievers (one with the potential to start) by moving Ethier? I think Wes Littleton, CJ Wilson and maybe a young, B-level prospect might be a steal. I know in general everyday players for RPs are bad moves but getting a good left-handed RP (with Meloan-like potential to start) and a deceptive side-arm righty gives us great depth in the pen and if we're stuck with Pierre I guess you have to look at it like this:

Is Ethier/Pierre/Young more valuable than Young/Pierre/Wilson/Littleton?

Again this is all tongue in cheek commentary and I like to throw out different ideas to get perspective from other fans, I'm not trying to stir the pot.

2007-12-21 14:29:07
95.   ChicagoDodger
For many years now, the Dodgers have fielded a lineup that contained several players that I honestly didn't care to watch.

For the first time in an awful long time, the Dodgers could field a team that I would be interested to watch hit 1-8.

No grabbing for the remote because Cora, Izturis and the pitcher are up. Or Gonzalez, Nomar or Pierre.

Is that too much to ask for?

2007-12-21 14:29:11
96.   natepurcell

because he's trading Pierre (along with alot of money) for Benoit!

2007-12-21 14:31:55
97.   Howard Fox
96 Benoit Benjamin?
2007-12-21 14:32:01
98.   ChicagoDodger
94 Isn't Benoit a much better reliever then Littleton? I wouldn't favor a deal of Ethier for Benoit!

Pierre & cash (lots of it) to the Rangers for Benoit! Ned, make it happen!

2007-12-21 14:32:31
99.   underdog
I know - if Otsuka was still on the Rangers I would have argued for a Pierre for Otsuka trade, even if it goes against the principal of trading a "starting" position player for a middle reliever. But now that Otsuka is out there, I'd advocate signing him.

And then trading Pierre to the Rangers for someone else.

I'm glad that it's clear the Dodgers are trying to trade Pierre, or nobody, rather than force him into the starting lineup over Ethier if they can help it. A good sign...

2007-12-21 14:32:42
100.   ChicagoDodger
96 Sorry, a couple posts too late!
Show/Hide Comments 101-150
2007-12-21 14:39:10
101.   natepurcell
Reds just traded Josh Hamilton for Edison Voloquez.

why!! Voloquez sucks!

2007-12-21 14:39:40
102.   natepurcell
2007-12-21 14:40:37
103.   Bob Timmermann
Buying my lunch today, the guy taking my order asked my name. I was wearing an old style Cardinals cap. The guy said, "Bob. You remind me of Bob Gibson!"
2007-12-21 14:42:26
104.   Eric Enders
So much for getting rid of Pierre.
2007-12-21 14:43:00
105.   natepurcell

They need more outfielders!

2007-12-21 14:43:20
106.   Bob Timmermann
I believe Volquez has a different first name.
2007-12-21 14:44:22
107.   Eric Enders
Bob is known as the surliest and most intimidating librarian who ever lived. They had to make the librarian's desk shorter just so he wouldn't have an unfair advantage over the patrons.

Someone please ask him what the heck he was doing wearing a Cardinals cap.

2007-12-21 14:45:34
108.   Eric Enders
Was Hamilton the only major leaguer who had the same name as the county he played in?
2007-12-21 14:46:45
109.   Bob Timmermann
I wear a 1940s Cardinals cap a lot around the holidays to honor my late parents.
2007-12-21 14:49:58
110.   Eric Enders
The Rangers liked Hamilton because he's a throwback. A throwback to the days when players got suspended for good ol' recreational drugs.
2007-12-21 14:51:42
111.   Howard Fox
I long for those days
2007-12-21 14:54:46
112.   Jim Hitchcock
103 ,107 Ah, yes, the renowned Timmermann snarl.
2007-12-21 14:54:53
113.   Sushirabbit
Merry Christmas everybody in case I don't get back around before hand. Jon, careful on the book collecting. I was already out of hand and then married a librarian. It was a real pain both packing and moving all the books we have. And really, I don't read much quantum dynamics anymore. Anyway, 107 made me think about how we are making the "sitting room" into a library and calling it the "short room." (My wife has a thing about the Long Room.)

New dad's need to investigate the sleeper sack, if I have not mentioned that already. Trust me, you'll thank me later.

2007-12-21 14:56:47
114.   Sushirabbit
Probably should have included the following link in Referencing the Long Room:

2007-12-21 15:01:13
115.   Indiana Jon
101 I just mentioned yesterday the Dodgers should consider trading for Hamilton. If I had known he would be so cheap, I would have been adamant about it.
2007-12-21 15:04:00
116.   Howard Fox
115 that might have made the difference
2007-12-21 15:13:56
117.   silverwidow
White Sox just signed CF Alexei Ramirez.


2007-12-21 15:14:58
118.   Indiana Jon
116 At least it would have made me feel better. Hamilton will soon be a star. I'll miss watching him in Cincinnati, but I am excited that the Reds have once again made themselves a worse team. Most of my friends are Reds fans, so it helps to make my Dodgers better by comparison each year.
2007-12-21 15:15:15
119.   Bob Timmermann
For the record, the pitcher acquired by the Reds is EDINSON Volquez.
2007-12-21 15:22:32
120.   Jim Hitchcock
Well, outta here until Wednesday. Merry Christmas, everybody!
2007-12-21 15:44:23
121.   Benjamin Miracord
70 Woods asked an official at Upper Deck that if he ever ran into Koufax, would he ask for an autograph. The next time Woods saw him, the Upper Deck rep handed him a baseball.

I hope Papelbon's dog doesn't eat it.

2007-12-21 15:44:48
122.   Gagne55
117 Who? Seriously baseball-reference doesn't even have an Alexei Ramierez in its archives.
2007-12-21 15:48:01
123.   silverwidow
122 He's from the Cuban national team.
2007-12-21 15:58:50
124.   underdog
Alexei Ramirez? Who? He's no Juan Pierre, I'll tell you that!

Or I'll tell the White Sox, and Rangers, that, anyway.


2007-12-21 16:01:53
125.   Eric Stephen
Now Cuba needs an outfielder.

Problem solved!

2007-12-21 16:04:45
126.   underdog
As if Guantanamo wasn't enough punishment for the island.
2007-12-21 16:18:04
127.   trainwreck
What have I done to anger with the Sports Gods.
2007-12-21 16:19:25
128.   trainwreck
*What have I done to anger the Sports Gods?
2007-12-21 17:08:21
129.   Gagne55
123 That would explain why I didn't recognize the name. The WBC was so long ago... and won't be back again till 2009 sigh.
2007-12-21 17:19:56
130.   MyTummyHurts
101 106

His last name isn't Voloquez or Volquez, it's Volquen isn't it? [greetings earthlings!!]

2007-12-21 17:21:31
131.   Eric Enders
They would have been better off trading for Klaatu.
2007-12-21 17:27:06
132.   overkill94
But is Alexei Ramirez a proven leadoff hitter? Stolen base threat? All-around nice guy? You're not done dealing, Kenny!
2007-12-21 17:40:26
133.   Jason in Canada
Have no fear everyone, as a result of the Hamilton trade, I've now decided to use the rest of my vast fortune to hire and army of moles and gophers to dig ankle sized holes throughout the different non-dodger center fields of the cactus and grapefruit leagues.

There will be a demand for our little 4th outfielding millionaire in no time.

2007-12-21 18:16:34
134.   natepurcell
Please don't tell me how it ends but I'm watching the tape delay of the Laker game and so far in the second quarter Bynum has like 17pts and is looking like a BEAST.
2007-12-21 18:17:58
135.   natepurcell
Please don't tell me how it ends but I'm watching the tape delay of the Laker game and so far in the second quarter Bynum has like 17pts and is looking like a BEAST.
2007-12-21 18:30:32
136.   Daniel Zappala
Remind me to do my Christmas shopping early next year. Today was a mess.
2007-12-21 18:30:55
137.   Daniel Zappala
(You try driving all around town looking for a sextant.)
2007-12-21 18:55:14
138.   trainwreck
Richie Frahm starts for the Clippers?!

I did not even know that guy was still playing basketball.

2007-12-21 18:57:36
139.   Bob Timmermann
Didn't you go over to the Sextant District in Provo? I think it's on 3rd.
2007-12-21 19:26:06
140.   Daniel Zappala
3rd South, North, West, or East? We use the grid system in Utah. Boring names but easy to find anything.
2007-12-21 19:39:53
141.   Bob Timmermann
You can shop online and use Express Shipping.

2007-12-21 19:53:22
142.   Daniel Zappala
Sorry, my credit card is over the limit. I was shopping locally in the hope that I could barter some canned peaches and apricots from this past summer.
2007-12-21 19:58:37
143.   underdog
135 Makes it hard to believe that story in the Times this morning about how Bynum's not guaranteed to keep starting when Kwame comes back. My reaction: "Uh... HUH!?"

That's like saying Andruw Jones isn't guaranteed to start when Jason Repko is healthy. Well, sort of.

Speaking of which... re: 133 wouldn't it be easier to trade one of those teams Jason Repko, too, so that a starting outfielder is guaranteed to get hurt and thus they'd have to take Pierre, too.

Okay, I've got the Criterion DVD of Two Lane Blacktop so my night is just getting started. Toodles.

2007-12-21 20:05:04
144.   Daniel Zappala
I'm grading final exams. My night is just getting started too. Woo!
2007-12-21 20:26:11
145.   regfairfield
Jeez, you ruin the season of arguably the best player on the team just once, and then you never hear the end of it.
2007-12-21 20:43:59
146.   Lexinthedena
St. Louis, Baltimore, and Minnesota are now the only possible places I could see Pierre going, and thats with the Dodgers paying a huge amount of Salary.....I dread the idea of having to watch him play:(
2007-12-21 20:44:55
147.   Lexinthedena
BTW, geat move by Texas...I'm big on Hamilton....
2007-12-21 20:52:40
148.   Megaballs
The Cuban for the pale hose doesn't seem like a true CFer...has he been playing the outfild?
2007-12-21 20:53:37
149.   gpellamjr
144 I went out to a restaurant to pick up dinner tonight, and was ambushed by a student from this quarter who works there. "Oh, there's my history TA! You gave me a C! Because of you, I was kicked out of honors! Because of you, I didn't get an internship! Because of you, I cried for four days!"

I told her she deserved the grade she got. The combination of her impropriety and my distress at the thought of another year of watching Juan Pierre in a Dodger uniform (not that I think he actually looks bad in the uniform) made for little sympathy on my part.

2007-12-21 20:59:57
150.   immouch
I'm sure I'm late on this, but don't do it. No matter how much crap you got over your pitching stories; no matter how just the cause on the right end of your charitable donation, it is against the law of nature to toss off dough earned from freelance writing. The money made off your work was exponentially more than whatever they paid. Ditto the money the advertisers on made from their ads. The only person getting hosed in the freelance writing deal was you the only one who was, technically, you know, working. So giving the fee away - while right in a spiritual/karmic/kizmet level - is a horrific violation of... well, nevermind; it's Christmas... Very cool.
Show/Hide Comments 151-200
2007-12-21 21:07:20
151.   Bob Timmermann
With two sisters-in-law who are academics, they have ruined the med school and law school dreams of many.

They got over it.

2007-12-21 21:07:32
152.   gpellamjr
150 I would have told everyone I was donating the money, too. But I really would have kept it. Maybe that's Jon's plan?
2007-12-21 21:09:00
153.   gpellamjr
151 Yes, yes. I have a stunning rate of making female students cry. It's remarkable. I've even made a couple of young men cry about grades.

I once ruined the "radtech" school dream of one by awarding an A-. Turns out she got in.

2007-12-21 21:12:34
154.   Bumsrap
One of the side effects of Meth is that it takes calcium out of the body, bones, teeth. The Reds know Josh has super star skills but understand he might be subject to injuries due to past drug use.
2007-12-21 21:16:22
155.   Bob Timmermann
I had two professors tell me that I couldn't do graduate work in history because I didn't write well enough.

They were likely right.

2007-12-21 21:17:33
156.   Daniel Zappala
I generally don't get students crying about grades. That may be because I give them a formula to calculate their final grade, based on their assignment grades, so they can clearly see their own struggle down toward a C, if that is the case. I have had students cry when I flunk them for cheating, but I have zero sympathy in that case.
2007-12-21 21:27:28
157.   natepurcell

How do you usually catch them cheating?

2007-12-21 21:29:35
158.   regfairfield
146 Even then, I would rule out St. Louis and Minnesota. St. Louis' one good prospect, Ramsus , plays center and Minnesota has the same player in Jason Tyner. I'd only but Baltimore in there because, well, they're Baltimore.
2007-12-21 21:32:36
159.   Bob Timmermann
I believe the Twins nontendered Jason Tyner.

Jason Tyner actually homered last year!

2007-12-21 21:34:56
160.   Bob Timmermann
Nate needs to know if his cheating plans are going to work.
2007-12-21 22:07:58
161.   kngoworld
I am waiting with endless anticipation for the answer to 157 's question.
2007-12-21 22:08:07
162.   Wayne Wei-siang Hsieh
Re: 157 160

Sometimes, students don't realize that we can use google too. I know of lots of examples of plagiarism being discovered with nothing more than a google search by the instructor.


2007-12-21 22:13:09
163.   kngoworld
162 So will teachers plug in a few sentances from every student's paper or just the suspicous ones?
2007-12-21 22:57:33
164.   underdog
145 Aw, I love Jason Repko, we kid because we love. But he is a bit of a liability risk out there, more often for himself, and at least once, for someone else. So if he's going to be Mr. Destructo, might as well help the team out. But I'd rather have him as outfielder #4, or D Young, than YouKnowWho.

Man, I'm re-watching Once, and, wow, what a wonderful little movie. Little in the best sense.

2007-12-21 23:07:28
165.   Bob Timmermann
I just watched "Once". I liked it, but I guess I didn't love it. Or perhaps I wasn't in the mood for it.
2007-12-21 23:11:46
166.   Marty
Underdog, how did you like Two Lane Blacktop? I've always wanted to see that movie. Anything with Warren Oates in it is worth a look see.
2007-12-21 23:24:28
167.   Wayne Wei-siang Hsieh
Re: 163

Just the suspicious ones; a lot of times, it's painfully obvious a student didn't write the paper. The language is too sophisticated, or it seems archaic, or some other flag comes up. Then it's off to google (and other sources) to see if solid proof can be found. This sort of thing is an imperfect science, and most instructors (like me) usually give students the benefit of the doubt.

2007-12-22 03:06:51
168.   El Lay Dave
166 Is that the flick that features one of James Taylor's only acting gigs?
2007-12-22 03:09:01
169.   El Lay Dave
167 Nicolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky would really struggle these days.
2007-12-22 07:04:45
170.   Gen3Blue
"I have a friend in Minsk"?
168 Yes, that was JT; I saw it so long ago I don't remember much, but it didn't kick off an acting career, which is probably a good thing.
2007-12-22 07:13:53
171.   Ken Noe
167 I have all of my students turn in papers in hard copy and also as attachments. I run all the e-versions through Takes awhile but it picks up a lot more than a Google search--anything on the net, most of the pay sites, anything previously submitted. I'm averaging two plagiarists per semester, but more importantly getting that reputation, "don't cheat in his class."
2007-12-22 07:19:33
172.   Daniel Zappala
157 In my class, cheating typically occurs when someone shares their code, not by downloading a paper from the Internet. So I wrote my own program to compare the programs students turned in electronically. It's a simple matter to compare each student's program to every other student's program in the class.

Same thing when I ask students to write answers to questions for a programming assignment. They're only going to get that from another student, so it limits the scope of the problem.

2007-12-22 07:20:04
173.   Daniel Zappala
I wouldn't have gone to bed if I had known I would cause such anticipation.
2007-12-22 07:54:26
174.   Bob Timmermann
Back in the day, the only honorable way to cheat was to hire Ted Sorenson to write all your papers for you.
2007-12-22 07:55:57
175.   El Lay Dave
405 North Before Devonshire St Traffic Hazard - Debris/Objects 7:51 AM

Thomas Guide Map Coordinates: Page 501, Grid 5G
Trash Can in Slow Lane 7:51 AM

Matt Kemp was here!

2007-12-22 08:12:12
176.   old dodger fan
Prof: Mr. Davis, I am going to have to give you an F on this paper.

Davis: But why? I thought it was really good.

Prof: It is plagerism. I found it on the web.

Davis: Unbelievable. I wrote that 3 days ago and it's on the web already!

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