That was a really disappointing thing to wake up to over here on the east coast.

Stopper Guo to save the day.
vr, Xei

In a merciful turn of events I had fallen asleep but I was a bit shocked when I woke up and checked the box. But echoing your hopes, I decided it was a much better time for it to occur than that homer in Colorado last year. Its going to happen to every closer occasionally. Things are definitely not falling the D's way right now and I'm hoping it is like the losing streak we had last year right before a winning streak. I doubt its a harbinger of a year like (was it?) 2005.

My turn was not so merciful: I had some remote work to do which pulled me upstairs just after I arrived from work, and when I finally got back down, the score was 6-3, and the Dodgers had blown it. You couldn't tell by Saito's demeanor on the mound, though, and good for him.

Last night hurt. Bad.

Hell of a cookie he gave McLouth, though.

I was watching Baseball Tonight and they showed Sammy getting the K for out #2. Kruk said how Saito was his boy and it was a good "W" for the Dodgers. Then two seconds later they showed the homerun and Kruk did a Larry Bowa impersonation, it was pretty comical.

From: http://tinyurl.com/69sasf

Garciaparra suffered a broken hand in Spring Training and is currently on a rehab assignment with Triple-A Las Vegas. Torre said that he wasn't concerned with Garciaparra's lack of hitting with the 51s.

"It's a small sample," the manager said. "With a veteran, it's how they tell you they feel."

I would think that Nomar's lack of hitting with the 51's should be a concern. Or at least a concern if he's still not hitting in a week at AAA. If he can't offer more of a bat than DeWitt what is the sense of using him as the starting 3rd baseman? It won't be for his glove.

8. Didn't he go 3-3 with a double and a walk last night?

I think the issue with Nomar is his ability to play everyday at 3b.

When he gets activated, its likely that Dewitt will be sent down and Dewitt's started nearly everygame at 3b.

Is Nomar capable of playing everyday?

Is Hu the backup 3b once Dewitt is gone?

9. I see now that he did. The story was from yesterday before the game. Maybe Nomar will start hitting and that will be good. It was more that I was pointing out that it wouldn't bother Torre if Nomar wasn't hitting. It's about how he says he feels. And a veteran would never lie about how he feels. :)

I was at the game last night. Take out the 9th inning, and that was the most fun I had at a Dodger game in a long, long time. What a great game! 'Druw with a triple. I thought he was really seeing the ball well, and he had some good at bats. Bison gets on the board with a single. Great plays from Furcal and the Solution.

If the lead held, the Solution would have had the game winning RBI, I believe.

but the 9th inning................ that hurt. And what hurt more was sitting in front of a Mets fan the whole game. You could hear him hoping for a blown save and then when it happened he did a standing O and started shouting "DODGER FANS ARE LEAVING." Yea buddy, just like Mets fans left Shea when they were getting pounded by the Phils in September.

That hurt. I was close to tears after the game, then I went home and slept. I can't even eat. All I had for breakfast was a V8 Splash. How do I "deal psychologically with" THIS and baseball?

10. Hu is the backup at 3rd once/if DeWitt is gone. I think it is a concern if Nomar can holdup evryday at 3rd. That story I posted the link to also said LaRoche is coming a longer faster than they expected. Maybe Nomar's durability will be moot.

Last place is just first place turned upside down.

I am amused to see the sentiment that if Saito is going to have a blow-up, it is better that he got it out of the way in April rather than September. Where is it written that Saito will have one and only one blow-up per season, and once it occurs then everything is clear sailing.

Saito is just one symptom of a baaaddd Dodgers team this season. Injuries, bad signings, poor managerial decisions, overly-optimistc assessment of the young players, and poor team chemistry all contribute to a sad state of disarray.

Fortunately the season is a long one, and there is time to gel. But it seems that the class of the Western Division is Arizona and if the gelling time is too long the D-Backs are going to run away with an insurmountable lead.

As for the Dodgers, I have no idea what to make of this team. For one thing, someone please tell me what is this team's main strength?

12

I was being tongue in cheek with the last sentence. Its a very unusual game because as I remembered it, the game was almost singlehandedly lost by Saito. I don't think he'll do that the rest of the season. It was just one of those nights where he didn't have his usual control.

Not only that, but I really think the Pirates lineup looks pretty good now. Apparently, said Mets fans are bitter over losing Nady, and whoever this McClouth kid is, I'm going to do some research on him, to make sure his game wasn't a fluke.

This is no slam against current members of the bullpen, but I think finding a way to add Braboban would be a good thing.

15

bluegold, I haven't seen you on here before, so I welcome you to Dodger Thoughts, but if you really think the Dodgers are an outright BAD team, you may want to reserve some patience for the next month.

The team's main strength is pitching, plainly and simply. They have one of the better rotations in the division, top to bottom, plus a bullpen that I'd take over any other in baseball.

The team's secondary strength is youth. We have a bunch of great young players who can get on base "an awful lot". Not much for power yet, but there's upside

The team's third strength is defense. I mentioned two great plays last night, and I should add Loney does decently at first, and 'Druw has it covered in CF. Let's not forget the Bison's arm.

I am fully convinced this team will not be last place all year long. A bad team? Far from it.

A baseball season is indeed long and is always full of winning streaks and losing streaks. As we know, the Dodgers started out the hottest team in baseball not that long ago and ended up with a poor record. No one likes losing but it happens to every team, and this was a team I expected would need some time to gel. Your assessment in 15 is the most exaggerated, pessimistic way of looking at all of it, but you're right that there is time to gel. Like 90% of the season.

Strengths really haven't shown themselves yet - starting pitching, the bullpen, which has been both great and terrible, the young hitters (Loney's 12 game hitting streak to start the season didn't impress you apparently but it did me, Ethier's been very solid, and the other guys will come around), and some help on the very near horizon in the pitching dept. if they need it. who knows, maybe this will be a long, awful season, and certainly if Saito's as bad as he was last night all season, that wouldn't help (Broxton can close though), but as frustrating as the start is to watch I don't find myself being quite as pessimistic.

Btw, Jon Meloan starts tonight for Vegas, in SLC. 5:30 start Pacific time.

15 -- I don't think you know what you are talking about. This is one of the BEST Dodger teams in ages, player for player. We've just got off to a rough start thanks to some slumps that aren't likely to last.

15 - "Where is it written that Saito will have one and only one blow-up per season, and once it occurs then everything is clear sailing."

It's written nowhere, and no one even implied that was the case. It's just a hope.

15 One might say you're looking at the glass as half empty.

Your point about Saito is valid. The Dodgers have been very lucky with Saito. It's as if they are on borrowed time. A closer over 35 years of age for next to nothing going into the 3rd year. If the bubble bursts, how do you know when it's burst? It will likely take 5 or 6 blown saves to know he's no longer effective. I'm not saying he's done, but we shouldn't be surprised if it happens.

The team will be fine. I really wish Torre would pick a line-up and for the most part stick with it. It certainly can't hurt chemistry. 13 batting orders in 13 games... They will get on track, hopefully soon!!!

I get the impression that blugold accomplished what he came to do.

Every Dodger fan I've talked to has been excited about this team, prior to this poor opening. Look at all of the potential stars under the age of 26: Loney, Hu, Broxton, Martin, Kemp, Ethier, Kershaw, etc,etc. There have been some bad signings, questionable managerial decisions, but I don't think they are nearly enough to keep the talent on the team from rising to the top. So yes, bad start, but there are still many reasons to stay optimistic.

At least I can take solace that Pierre didn't start.

18 I think the main strength is a nucleus of very good young offensive players: Martin, Loney, Kemp, Ethier, LaRoche - with a lot of potential. Add Furcal, Kent and Jones and you have a very solid lineup - even if it hasn't exacty worked out that way. I'm leery about the picthing, even though it has been pretty good. It seems to be a similar problem to past years - not enough guys consistently getting into the late innings. Eventually this over works the bullpen and then you have real problems.

26

So how are the Dodgers '08 different than the Dodgers '07?

Gonzo gone

Kent still here batting pretty well

Andruw with "Bats that are afraid"

JP being, well JP

Nomar getting ready to come back and "dance" at the plate before his next trip to the DL.

More of the younger players playing every day, call it a youth movement but only kinda sorta maybe, but still the Dodgers '08 look a whole lot like Dodgers '07 and for matter a lot like Dodgers '06.

Joe T. may be a master manager, but let's face facts here, Ned built the Dodgers '08 team and Dodgers '08 looks like the same Dodger teams that have not been doing anything special for a quite a few years.

Not going youth like the DBacks, not going old folks home like the Giants. Something else instead.

What's that old song from the 70's:

"Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am
Stuck in the middle with you"

This is one of the BEST Dodger teams in ages

Whoa..how do you figure?
Does it have a collection of talent that could eventually (like 2-3 years down the road) be parts of a great team? Sure.

But this team won 82 games last year, and really didnt improve very much in the off-season. Unless you expect all the youngsters to become stars THIS YEAR, this isnt a "best Dodger team in ages..".

This is all going according to plan -- the Dodgers will start a winning streak tonight and proceed to win 97 games this season.

30

You mean like what happened with Arizona?

I think for this year's version to be a "great" Dodger team (meaning 90+ wins), that Kershaw, Penny, Billingsley need to be great. Not just good. But great.

Because IMO there's not enough power in the lineup otherwise to beat teams through scoring loads of runs. Its going to have to be the young power arms at the top of the rotation that just dominate for this team to be better than the 83 wins or so I had them pegged for before the season.

29 How are we not going youth? We have four to five players with less than two years expirience starting every day, and two more in the rotation. Juan Pierre was a mistake, but the mere fact he's getting sat with 36 million coming to him shows some commitment to the farm system. Yes in a perfect world, Juan Pierre would be in the Dave Roberts role, but baseball just doesn't work that way. Other than that, we're going with a young player wherever that player is the most situable player for the job.

Ned built one successful Dodger team and one that wasn't all that amazing, so you can't just say "Ned makes bad teams".

Kike everybody else, I am a huge Vin fan and have been one longer than most. So he surprised me yesterday with some of his analysis.

Although Vin Scully was his usual charming self yesterday, I think he shared a bad day with Saito. Vin repeatedly said Duke had no strike outs and that would cause him to be nicked up with hits that would just fall in or find their way through the infield. Vin said a pitcher has to be able to strike out a hitter to be successful. But he didn't say that about Kuroda who only had one strike out at the times Vin was saying that about Duke. It was annoying to keep hearing Vin say it about Duke and not mention it about Kuroda.

Vin also said a few times that the Pirates were doing the little things that cause teams to lose, like the catcher and pitcher getting crossed on a sign, the catcher dropping Martin's fop foul, and other misques. Maybe what Vin should have been saying is that a team that can't hit homeruns is like a team that can't get that key strike out--neither is going to win enough.

Its hard to be a "bad" team with a 120 mil payroll. But he didnt exactly add much value to what was already in place.

29- The '08 team isn't too much different from '07, you're right. Loney, Kemp, Ethier and LaRoche all figure to get more PAs, barring injury. We may see Kershaw and Meloan this season as well. That seems to be the biggest difference in the construction of this team- the GM is (somewhat) less inclined at blocking his young players. What I'm saying is, despite the sometimes mind boggling moves by Colletti, there is too much promising young talent here to get negative on this season.

From the game 1 post game interviews after the Ds first win over SF.

".....Bochy actually said that before Tuesday's game.... At that time, he added that he might have delivered a negative message to his club by altering the lineup for the season's second game.

"If I change the lineup now, it may send a sense of panic with them," Bochy said. "We want a little continuity. [Monday's] lineup was the first time we had that lineup. To start changing quite a bit now would be a little early, I think."...."

Maybe there's something to it, maybe there isn't. But if Bochy thinks it looks like panic to make a change on game 2 what would be think if every day for the first 2 1/2 weeks? Some baseball people think it matters…. Who knows. Clearly the team isnt clicking yet. Maybe the order doent matter, but for the most part its not a daily variable as far as I can remember....

30 --- I stand by my statement, but of course the term "ages" is vague. I am talking about the talent on the 25-man roster, and that has nothing to do with tactical and strategic mistakes, like using Pierre as a starter, for instance. We have a better team now than we did in 2004, when we won 93 games. Of course, the NL West is also better (minus the Giants). Our young players do not have to be superstars before we appreciate that they are GOOD now. They just have to be played (Kemp, for instance), and some of them, like Martin, have not got off to the best starts, but I am not worried about that being a long-term problem

It's also weird that the Dodgers used to have a ton of power back in the 90's and up until 2001, but still weren't that dominant of a team.

Given the choice, I'd take the arms instead. Yes, its frustrating that we don't have anyone, outside of Kemp, who can affect the game with one swing of the bat, but at the same time, the Red Sox didn't win the World Series with their sluggers. Ah, not at all! They won because they allowed the fewest runs in baseball, and Josh Beckett was amazing.

Blown save aside, did anyone else catch the totally awesome picture of Takashi Saito brandishing a samurai sword on the jumbotron as he was walking out.

My coworker just hopes he doesn't commit seppuku after the loss.

40 Scoring the fourth most runs in baseball probably did play a part in that.

The Red Sox did finish 3rd in the AL (out of 14) teams in runs scored.

They had both.
Sluggers and great pitching.

38 - Your point about lineup consistency has been made a sufficient number of times for now, I believe.

Here is one of the things I like so far:

We learned what DeWitt can do and DeWitt learned about himnself.

The Dodgers will soon be able to learn about what Nomar has left in his tank and what LaRoache can do.

43

They really were something to watch in the playoffs. I can't stand the Red Socks, but man, that was some good mashing and pitching

37

I think the term I'd use is "It is what it is" when it comes to the teams that Ned has built. It's this mix of young and old with what everyone would agree is a lack of any real power, Andruw being the supposed power hitter this year.

Joe will do what he can and I think that will be a few more wins over last year and no way Joe looses the club house at the end of the season, but Dodgers '08 is pretty much the team that Ned has been building with Parking Lot Frank's check book.

Who knows, maybe Dodgers '09 will be a full youth movement with Kent gone, Nomar's contract up I think, and Furcal going free agency but coming back. Look to see if Ned goes out and "buys" some names, or sticks with the kids and goes full fledged youth movement.

Boy, Jon nailed it with the tagline "dealing psychologically..." Lots of people moaning about the team's problems, but when one guy comes in and just says "it's a bad team," lots of people (and, sure, not always the same people) jump to the team's defense. It's like, "You can't dump on my team - only I can dump on my team!"

It is not inconsistent to see the current team as full of talent but not very good right now. Especially since it's young talent. The organization looks loaded, but that doesn't mean that everyone will figure it out in 2008. Part of being so young is room to improve, and there's no guarantee that improvement will happen this season. In fact, since most of those players are still a few years away from their peaks, and since most of those peaks will NOT be HOF-caliber or even all-star caliber careers (just good, solid ballplayers) it's easy to see how a talented team could be bad (relative to its opponents) in the short term. Throw in the premier pitchers in the NL West, and we could see an extremely talented, but young, team struggle to a poor record. And, for my money, it would still be lots of fun to watch, because of the talent and the potential.

By the way, I don't know what people mean when they say that the team has to "gel." If that means that each player, individually, has to figure out how best to convert talent into production (e.g., by mastering the strike zone), then OK, that's what I mean too. But if it means something like "coming together as a team," then I'm clueless. To me, that's meaningless in baseball.

44

wow

One thing about last night that seemed more obvious than before, at least for me, is that in addition to Kent not having much range at second, he really is now slow running the bases.

More and more I would rather watch Hu or Abreu play second.

We learned what DeWitt can do and DeWitt learned about himnself.

We learned that DeWitt can play above average defense at 3rd. But how is that different from LaRoche last September, whose defense was just as good?

I don't think you can argue that DeWitt will match LaRoche for power, though, which is why it's Andy's position to lose.

The team seems to be pressing. They just need to relax and play baseball. In their defense, when we have our 13th different lineup tonight, its hard for the players to know their roles when they arrive at the ballpark everyday.

Happy Jackie Robinson day everybody! Maybe the 42's tonight will light a spark with this team!

15 overly-optimistc assessment of the young players

Considering you wanted to trade Loney plus others for Teixeira, I'm not sure your own assessment of the young players even holds water to begin with.

44

Yes, I have brought it up a few times, I was hoping to hear some more discussion on it (since its still going on)- but given that some things are repeated literally thousands of times I was a little surprised to get shut down by you.

47

C.C would be nice,

47 If the Dodgers are out of the race by the trading deadline, they could trade Furcal and go with Hu.

49 - I would rather Torre experiment and "learn" the team than set a lineup that I don't like.

54.

I agree. Thousands of comments on Pierre, etc.

54 - And in prominent fashion I have asked people in the past several days not to repeat the same point over and over again. It's nothing personal, and you're hardly being singled out.

21. "I don't think you know what you are talking about. This is one of the BEST Dodger teams in ages, player for player."

You have the right to believe I am ignorant, or course. But by your second part of the above quote, your own credibility comes into question as well.

51 I think you can, actually, they had pretty similar home run rates at Jacksonville at age 21. (Andy had a ton more total, but he got to play in Vero Beach). LaRoche's patience is where he has the edge, but DeWitt has shown some encouraging progress there. If he can keep walking like he has been all year, there's not much seperating the two.

51
I don't think you can argue that DeWitt will match LaRoche for power, though, which is why it's Andy's position to lose

DeWitt will have to change his stance and use more of his back and legs in his swing before he gets more power. It seems like for now he wants to be mostly a line drive hitter going to the opposite field. Breaking into MLB at 22 and without AAA experience and limited AA experience, that approach is working for him.

Once he has the confidence that he can hit MLB pitching, he might change his approach and start using more of his legs and back and become more of a 20+ homerun a year type hitter.

58 My bad Jon,

Has anyone heard who will pitch for Glavine in ATL this weekend? Please let it be a LHP!

59 What do you think was a better team recently? I think you'd have to go back to '95 or so for a team that looked better at the start of the season.

I never read Timers or Plaschkie until recently.

Timers is probably the stranger of the two. There is something embarrassing about a grown man LOVING to call other grown men by disparaging nick names. He can't stop calling the PR guy, "The Dentist". How clever this must seem to him. Or calling Andruw Jones, "tubby".

He probably thinks they respect him in a love-hate kind of way. I'm sure they see him as just an annoying child.

He calls himself "Page 2".

He is a supporter of Kemp over Pierre and calls Torre out on it. So I can't hate him as fully as I'd like to.

(Please excuse this Timmers/Plasckie rant. I know they aren't even worth discussing. I just needed to get it off my chest.)

Argh - I have a new post on DeWitt and LaRoche coming up, and you guys are jumping the gun :)

60

It's all good. If LaRoche returns to the lineup, I can start calling him "Handy Andy," since he's so useful in several ways: taking walks, base hits, good defense.

"The Handyman" works too.

59 -- And yet, neither you nor JoeyP seem to be forthcoming with an example, even one, of a BETTER Dodger team from the past, oh, let's say 10 years. Come on, lets see the examples. And I think it was clear that I was talking about roster talent, not win-loss record (in case you are thinking of bringing that up), as there is no way now to foresee what the 2008 Dodger win-loss record will end up being. Some years you under-achieve, some years you over-achieve, given your talent.

65 - So you probably didn't want me to post this (which I started looking up a few minutes beforehand):

Dewitt's April '08: 51 AB's, 7 walks, 6 K's, .256/.373/.349 - .722 OPS
LaRoche's May '07: 53 AB's, 15 walks, 5 K's, .216/.444/.270 - .714 OPS

Dewitt's run has been favorably received, whereas LaRoche's performance was considered to be a real missed opportunity for him. Guess LaRoche should've steered a groundball or two into a hole somewhere.

NPUT

69 - Could have saved yourself some work.

71 - Ha! It was something I was thinking about last night and wanted to look at this morning. It's a very interesting point.

Given the state of the Diamondbacks and Rockies, the tenacity of the Padres and the perennial ability of the Dodgers to under-perform as a unit, it should not be a surprise at any moment to find them in fourth place in the NL West, and gratifying to find them above .500 at any point in the season. No hand-wringing needed - that's their natural position for 2008 and no amount of worrying away at the lineup will move them higher. Their young hitters are not as good as the Diamondbacks' or Rockies young hitters, their pitching isn't quite at the Padre level and way below the Diamondbacks' ( the Rockies can probably bail themselves out with their hitting as needed, something the Dodgers can't do ). It just is what it is. It is also where I've been predicting them to finish since pre-season ( but of course, since I never wrote it down, I can't thump that viewpoint now! )

The bigger question is, how can they manage to be even more inept than the Giants? I mean, really.

If they finish 2008 higher than 4th place, I will hand-write this post on rice paper with food coloring and eat it. In the meantime, I'm enjoying spending my summer evenings rooting for the Dodgers but not being downcast when they lose, and getting my baseball enjoyment from reading box scores from other games in the league and amusing myself with any oddities, or schadenfreude from occasional implosions by hated players/teams. Otherwise I won't be able to keep my sanity!