there has always been a lot of seeming going on in tony jackson's world, and that's what he bases his opinion on, rather than facts and/or data. i have incredibly little respect for his work.

I am shocked, SHOCKED to discover that beat writers play favorites and carry water for the guys on the team they like, giving their readers a blatantly biased and misleading interpretation of events.

I am likewise shocked to discover that more and more fans are getting their sports news/analysis from sources outside the traditional media.

by the way, i went to the rockies game last night. coors field is quite nice.

It's posts like this that make me wonder about the possibilities of Jon being hired as manager.

When you're right, you're right.

a sidenote on coors, though: the concessions in my section were not very good in selection or in quality, and the aramark staff working the stands were extremely incompetant and apathetic. the atmosphere and view, the crowd, and the game were all good though.

I'm looking at Ethier's 2008 gamelog and still trying to figure out where the slump is.

Andruw Jones borrowed it and hasn't given it back.

1 In fairness to Tony, I have found that I get quite a bit of "breaking news" from his blog. He seems to often be the first with the lineup and often has news on injuries and such before anyone else. The LA Times blog sometimes does as well, but that is the value I get out of those blogs. That's where the "media credentials" come into play.

As for analysis, however, they can't compare to "alternative sources" outside traditional media. :)

7 - Yeah, I'm (nit)picking on Jackson's article, not on Jackson himself.

And there are plenty of times he could do the same with stuff I've written.

7 yeah, i should have been clearer: i was referring to his analysis. his straight reporting is fine, and it's good that he's quick and responsive in dispensing it. i think his opinion statements are mostly bunk, however.

I have one more thing to add to the discussion in the last thread. I don't believe Dewitt will outhit Kent this year either. A move to 2nd would make since for next year only in my opinion.

When, not if, JP is gone, will DT become an equal opportunity slag fest for Andruw Jones or Jeff Kent, or any other player on the roster?

It seems that no matter what JP does, he's the goat. Never mind that many of the overpaid "stars" in the game given the same sort of disrespect that JP has this season would be sulking and causing club house problems along with sucking in the field, not JP. He straps it on, plays his game the same way he's played it for years for better or worse.

If you don't think JP's game is not being noticed by other teams, you'd be wrong. He will be traded sometime this year to a team that wants his game and then who will people have to slag?

Thanks to Tony Jackson I have a very strong prejudice against the Daily News. I believe that their sports department is a breeding ground for monsters.

12 I can't speak for everyone, but my problem doesn't rest with Juan Pierre himself, but rather management's insistence on playing him even when better options are available. In Anaheim with the DH, we have four outfielders, so great, start them all. But why would Pierre play over Ethier? (For that matter why play Sweeney over Kemp......?)

There is a lot of JP bashing for sure, but I don't think Jon's post did that so much as it tried to debunk arguments in favor of Pierre's "type of play."

12 - "It seems that no matter what JP does, he's the goat."

I wasn't making him the goat. I was pointing out that he was getting praised for doing very little. When the same thing happens with Kent and if it ever happens with Jones, I point it out too.

You don't need me to point out that Jones is doing poorly. Everyone does that.

And by the way, Pierre was sulking when he was on the bench.

Pierre sulks all the time. Watch him when he's trying to swipe a bag and the pitch gets fouled off.

Pierre is the biggest closet I GUY on the club.

From Josh at ITD:

...don't forget to tune into the Sunday night show on KABC 790 from 7-10 p.m. tonight. Wes Parker is the 60s guest of the week...

Sounds interesting, but I think I'd rather have Jon and Steve Lyons guest host again...

15

"Sulking on the bench", YIKES. I watched JP last year, every shot the TV coverage gave of him. JP usually sits up by camera well, usually by himself, maybe that is the sulking you are reporting.

But face facts, there is story there for the media types to sell, including TV directors, the fourth outfielder sulking in the dugout. Quick, get me a shot of JP sitting by himself sulking, cut to it, that's the "story" we are selling. Any shots of Ether when he's sitting, any story line of him "sulking", somehow I doubt it.

16

Maybe JP can get together with Andruw and learn how to have that little smirk on his face when ever things don't go right, like chasing low and outside. I can see it now, JP gets this goofy smirk every time a ball gets fouled off, people will think he's happy, happy, happy, joy, joy, joy that he did not get a chance to steal a bag.

PalmdaleSteve, are you actually suggesting that the off-field side of Pierre has been treated unfairly? The guy gets praised up, down and sideways for his character, even when he tells the media how unhappy he is to be on the bench. I'm not saying he should be happy, but clearly he hasn't been.

Ethier has definitely gotten worse treatment. Please.

And remember, you're the one who brought up the sulking issue regarding players being benched, not us.

Vishal, pick me up a Broncos souvenir while you're there. ;-)

I found the discussion about DeWitt and LaRoche compelling in previous thread, though it sort of bothers me a bit because there's some misconceptions being bandied about, about what DT posters "want" or "don't want." I've been reading the comments here pretty consistently every day and don't recall anyone advocating LaRoche because of his lineage. That seriously made me laugh.

I also -- and I won't presume to speak for everyone here -- but I'm just tickled to death about how surprisingly solid DeWitt has been for the Dodgers so far. I really appreciate it and respect the heck out of how he's handled himself. I don't know where we'd be without him, given all the other injuries.

Like many people here at this point, I don't see sending him down either, and have been asking about the concept of having LaRoche play some second to give the team more of a reason to call him up.

My liking of and expections for LaRoche have zero to do with my liking of DeWitt and hopes for him.

I just don't like the idea of LaRoche being Wally Pipped before he even knew what hit him. My expectations and hopes for him have everything to do with observing him as a player in LA and Las Vegas (and little to do with his batting average in a pretty short stint in the majors, but in his patience at the plate, his power potential, and his eye. Again, this has NOTHING to do with DeWitt, whom I also really like at this point.

I don't like the idea of pitting one of them against the other any more than I like the idea of pitting one DT poster against another, beyond all reason.

There's room for them both. But it's up to the Dodger brass to really see things a little differently than they've been seeing things. That is MY opinion, but I may speak for a few others here at least.

I don't have a problem with sulking. I sulked when Kemp wasn't playing early in the year. I sulk when Pierre plays over Ethier. I've been sulking for days that Laroche hasn't been called up. I sulk when we start Loiaza or Park instead of Kuo. I've spent half or more of my career as a Dodger fan sulking. I have no problem with sulkers. I just want the best players to play.

What is it about Pierre that has the media in general praising him? Why do so many people seem to want to come to this guys defense? I feel like this year after he lost his "starting job" on opening day, everyone just starting defending the guy and praising him. I don't feel like the same thing happened last year...wasn't he crucified for his lack of production a lot more last year?

great way of breaking things down Jon, great right-up.

20

I did indeed bring the topic up, and you responded, I guess we disagree and would like to see "The hunt for Ether sulking" go just as forcefully.

Putting on my Oliver Stone hat, perhaps some of the positive coverage in the media is part of the media subtlety helping package JP for a trade, who knows.

As to Ether and worse treatment, that's part of the game really. Veterans with big contracts are always given the nod over younger players, unless the veteran player is really terrible, and unless the team goes completely young, aka Diamondbacks. I'd go as far as saying Grady lost the club house last year because of that tension, and a refusal to make the hard facts clear to everyone. Joe T. is playing who he thinks are the best 9 players every day, and I doubt ether veteran players or "the kids" are going to challenge Joe.

Joe T. is playing who he thinks are the best 9 players every day

That's exactly what disturbs me so much about Torre so far this year...

26

I'm not so sure that Joe knows these guys all that well. He's been with most of them sense what, Spring training. It's not like he knows these guys like he knew the boys in pin stripes but that will change over the season.

When Nomar is healthy and ready to be a BACKUP third basemen, it will be the perfect time to trade away Juan Pierre and combine him with LaRoche or DeWitt.

Teams won't complain so much about Pierre's high price if they are receiving such a hot prospect. I love both DeWitt and LaRoche and wish they could both play every day for the Dodgers, but it does not seem feasible. Also, we could probably get something very nice in return with a trade like that.

The idea of an either/or when it comes to LaRoche and DeWitt makes very little sense to me. What makes even less sense to me is believing that the team is better off to call up Maza rather than LaRoche (which the actions of the club would certainly seem to indicate). Was not Dewitt a shortstop? Can't most guys easily handle second if they can play short? Doesn't that mean DeWitt could fill in for Furcal and Kent? Couldn't we also stick Young (who is rotting on the bench for no good reason) at second to rest Kent, play DeWitt at short with Furcal down and have LaRoche at third? Hu could then go down to Vegas and work on hitting with less pressue. When Fucal is healthy we then mix and match LaRoche and DeWitt. Why do these Captain Obvious moves take so long to come to fruition with this team? Well, I guess I should learn to be content with having both Hu and Maza up here...

28 Yeah maybe we could get a journeyman reliever...like another Scott Proctor or something.

I'm not sure I trust Ned to make a trade. He seems at his best when he is, um, not really dealing. His best moves as GM so far have been not making trades.

I never thought Joe was the answer for us. I could have managed the Yankees the way he did. List the players in order of annual salary and play the top 9.

Not a lot of thought involved there.

The only reason there will be competition for 3B of Kemp/Ethier in the OF, is their salaries.

Jones plays, Pierre plays, Nomar when healthy plays, Kent if he feels like it plays, Furcal plays (ok, at least he deserves it)...after that Joe has to evaluate the players because none of them make anything (figuratively speaking in relation to others).

Does anyone here really believe Bennett catching and Martin at third is a better option than Martin catching and anyone else at 3B?

I meant 3B...or....Kemp/Ethier....

31

What is the longest period of time Nomar has been injury free sense coming to the Dodgers?

A month or is it six weeks?

Nomar is not a durable 162 game player, and needs to be gone when his contract is up.

30 Thank you!

Let's please not make the same move that we did a couple of years ago. Navarro could be Martin's back up right now. Instead we have Bennet and his lob.

There is no reason to purge the team of DeWitt or LaRoche. Third base has been a gaping hole for us since Beltre, why then would we send one of our 2 promising stars packing? I should stop myself now... that definitely sounds like a Colletti move.

30 Ned is not the worse trader around. It is his free agent signings which are more of a concern. It is obvious the team has a jam at two positions now and unless management and players are willing to learn how to play new positions, including the role of bench player, a trade must take place.

For clubhouse atmosphere concerns, I hope a trade is coming soon.

35 I agree, the old v young divide is not far away, Joe or no Joe...Kemp and Ethier both know neither of them should be sitting

34 I dont see how DeWitt and LaRoche can be on the same team and play everyday. It appears DeWitt has proven himself as an everyday player and LaRoche we already know should be. I would rather trade away one and not have the log jam at third.

By the way, wouldn't it be worth trading one away if it rid the team of Pierre at the same time?

Is Pierre really tradable? That's a serious question. I don't think he is, but I could be wrong. If we can trade him, great, but I am not in favor of trading our young players just because we have jam of positions...especially when that jam is created by veterans who should not be around longer than the rest of this year (or next).

35 Point taken on his choice of free agents. But what do you mean for clubhouse atmosphere concerns? How will trading LaRoche or DeWitt enhance our clubhouse? I've heard no stories of either of them causing any problems.

Also, given the small major league sample size for both players, who would you choose to get rid of? Would you flip a coin? DeWitt has been fielding balls at short, he's obviously willing to play other positions. Kent is gone next year. Raffy's back is troublesome. We need both DeWitt and LaRoche on this team and we need them both now.

It appears DeWitt has proven himself as an everyday player

The DT mantra is dead.

35

Everyone is traceable, if the deal is right and the Dodgers are willing to eat some salary. After all, ARod before his big mistake was being paid a big chunk of change in part by the Texas Rangers, deferred salary and all that.

Ned just has be willing to admit to Parking King Frank that he goofed up on the JP signing.

I haven't heard any stories of a poor clubhouse atmosphere this season, either. I sometimes feel like people actually want there to be, as a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy, to prove the point that there should be a clubhouse divide and therefore, ergo, etc. And I agree with 30 , whether there's a place for LaRoche right this moment or not, I seriously hope the team doesn't feel it needs to trade him right now, for anything, or we'll have given away youth a la Navarro and Jackson again. Keep him and use him.

39 When Nomar is healthy he will most likely be taking at-bats away from DeWitt. DeWitt was sent down when Nomar came back from the DL last time. DeWitt should not be happy about that and like 36 said, Ethier and Kemp can not stay quiet sitting on the bench forever.

I understand we need healthy young players this year and even more importantly next year, but we do have a lot of players that can play many infield positions. (Hu, DeWitt, LaRoche, Abreu, Young) Trading away one wont hurt the teams future.

DeWitts value has got to be very high right now, and like you said it is a small sample size, he would be my first choice to trade away.

I think a big part of media praise for Pierre has to do with society's tendency to root for the little guy.

37 It'd be great to see Pierre go but losing LaRoche would be terrible. I read a few people yesterday who said they're most excited when it's DeWitt's turn to bat. I agree with them. He's got a great glove and he's also the most patient Dodger hitter. We have another guy with a great glove, possibly even more patience at the plate and a track record for more power. His name is LaRoche. Having both of them in our line-up would be incredible.

Send Pierre with Delwyn (we never play the poor guy) and a pitching prospect.

Hey, that gamelog shows that Ethier hasn't gotten on base via catcher's interference. He's a failure, I tellya!

33 Nomar will be gone when his contract is up. I guarantee it. You can save this comment number in this thread and throw it back in my face if I'm wrong. Which I won't be. :-) (Who knows, he could retire and become a coach for them or something, but he won't come back again as a player.)

Was this posted in the previous thread? Sorry if redundant. From Tony Jax:

>>Jason Schmidt made his second rehab start fr Single-A Inland Empire last night against Lake Elsinore and did very well, getting 2 1/3 innings out of his allotted 30-45 pitches (he threw 34). He gave up one hit, walked one batter and struck out three. Not sure yet what the next step is. ... <<

44 The common man ruins everything.

My whole point has been lost a little I guess. I want Juan Pierre traded and grouping him with DeWitt or even LaRoche might make it easier to accomplish.

Keep him and use him. How can the dodgers use him and not bench another player who fans will be asking to see? Average fans want to see DeWitt, Kent, and even a healthy Nomar play.

43 I understand what you're saying. I guess I've kind of given up on Abreu, Hu looks completely over-matched and it doesn't look like Young will ever be given an opportunity. With that being said, I'd be far more willing to part with Abreu, Hu and Young (probably in that order) over LaRoche or DeWitt.

51

But a more far reaching question, will the Dodgers go full youth movement or stay with this mixed Youth/Vet hybrid?

50 I get that, I just don't think it's worth it. My point is there's still room for him - especially Kent clearly near his end of days and needing many more days off than usual. IF LaRoche can play 2nd then there's a place for him, especially with Hu a possibility to be sent down. That's all I meant. But perhaps the Dodgers will see it the same way; there's no room for both DeWitt and LaRoche and ergo we need to trade one of them in a package for... But for who exactly? I fear what Ned might get or want in return.

0 Apparently Ned is also not much of a magician since that lackluster effort at misdirection failed to convince just about anyone that this team's current struggles has more to do with it's overall mediocre starting pitching than it does with the mismanagement of playing time of its players, especially those of the over-priced and well-aged variety.

My lengthy contribution to the LaRoche-DeWitt debate was LAT'ed in the last post, but I will refrain from cut-and-pasting it here unless I notice the discussion steering heavily towards that avenue. I'll just assume anyone interested in that discussion will go to the last thread and start with Dodger Jack's catalyst at 381 . I will say though, that I'd much prefer to have this discussion be less about pitting Blake vs. Andy and more about how to incorporate both in the lineup over the likes of Kent and Mr. Hamm.

Perhaps the Dodgers can ask Kent to go on the DL. Who would argue that given his play?Maybe he'd get mad and retire? As for DeWitt and LaRoche? Is it completely inconceivable that either is not capable of playing 2nd?

Maybe Ned and Joe can get upset with all this old versus young talk, and in an attempt to shut up all the young-wanting fans goes with an exclusively young lineup till the All-star break to show they cannot win.

No wait, because of injuries a few years back, the Dodgers were forced to go with youth (Kemp, Martin, etc) and the Dodgers rattled off like 18 wins in 19 games.

Scratch that! Bad idea!

52 Given our track record, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Dodgers trade Pierre and Wade for Edmonds and DeWitt and Young for Eckstein.

"We added two proven leaders to our team today, "said Colletti. "Both of these top of the tier players are winners and they know what it's like to win a championship ring. Their experience will help guide our younger players."

55 yes and after proving themselves, now Kemp rides the pine...

55 And replace Kent with what, Maza?

56 I'd do the Pierre/Wade deal for Edmonds in a heartbeat if the Cubs would eat all the Pierre salary. I'd release Edmonds as soon as the deal was completed.

Was Gary Bennett's wild throw on a strikeout unprecedented in that a runner ended up on third?

Hardly.

https://griddle.baseballtoaster.com/archives/988515.html

58 I asked in the post if LaRoche or DeWitt can play 2nd. Absent that, can't Young or Maza hit .236?

The Dodgers were far more successful before Kemp and Loney got called up and Luis Gonzalez was playing every day last year.

I'm not saying that most of our answers aren't in our farm system, but it's no guarantee that calling them up will produce results, even if they are better players.

61 They can't. Where the heck did the idea that Andy LaRoche can play second come from anyway? He's never played the position in his life as far as I know.

62 I somewhat agree with you, but if playing the older players is not likely to yield results either, then why play them? It's not as if any or most of the old players will be around when/if the Dodgers do finally win.

This is going to be a very long day and I will be very grateful to be at work.

63 I'm not exactly sure where the idea came from, but I'm guessing it has something to do with wanting to see those 2 bats in the lineup a heck of a lot more then wanting to see Kent's bat in the line-up, so 2nd seemed one of the logical spots to place one of them there.

I'm grateful that swamp coolers are relatively inexpensive and energy efficient.

40 - What DT mantra would that be?

68 Small sample size.

So has anyone seen the new State Farm commercial with Torre in it? It has many cliches about life in L.A., but its worthwhile to see Torre stumbling over a yoga mat and paddling a surfboard wearing a wetsuit and a Dodgers cap.

LaRoche has had excellent minor league stats.
I don't disagree that he potentially is a better ML player than DeWitt.
That is, IF LaRoche could stay healthy...which I don't think he can.

A friend who was a Roto junkie in the late '70s used an expression that I believe applies to LaRoche:
injuries are part of his card.

I would not trade either of them away unless and until LaRoche demonstrates over at least a hundred or so games that his brittleness--unprecedented in my memory in such a highly regarded Dodger prosepect--is just an ugly coincidence.

63 Anyone, feel free to correct me on this, but I was under the impression that LaRoche did play some 2B early in his minor league career. I know DeWitt has with less-than-desirable results, but I was under the impression that Andy did better in that experiment than Blake. Also, IIRC there was talk of moving Andy LaRoche to 2B to spell Kent on the big league roster not too long ago when it became apparent that Loney deserved 1B and Nomar would be handling 3B for a while (or so we thought at the time).

The Cubs put old friend Daryle Ward on the DL and called up Micah Hoffpauir.

I really want to know how you pronounce "Hoffpauir".

Obviously those hundred games would seem to have to be over a couple of seasons...

72 He never did.

You know who I really wish we had at second base? Dustin Pedroia.

News flash Coletti says stupid things and his veterans are destroying another season yet it will be blamed on the youth.

I think a big part of media praise for Pierre has to do with society's tendency to root for the little guy.

According to Dodgers Dot Com Pierre is 5'11

76 Grins. As long as we're wishing, why not Kent as he was about ten years ago?

If the Dodgers blamed their disappointing performance in 2007 on youth, then why were all the young players brought back?

80 I'll go with the ever-increasing influence of Logan White for my answer to that query.

I blamed last year on the trash can.

Great post. Sorry if someone already noticed this, but Furcal's RC/G on baseball reference is 11. I know Ned is very proud of his ability to gleam knowledge without the use of fancy stats and computers, but come on!

Also, it didn't hurt that fans and media alike were clamoring for a full commitment to the youth movement in light of success experienced in Colorado and Arizona.

75 LaRoche played SS for Grayson County College. Concern about his range caused the Dodgers to move him from SS to 3rd base.

So, he never has played 2nd, but having played SS, is it inconceivable he could at least try 2nd in the minors?

I don't see DeWitt continuing this current streak anyway, so LaRoche should end up at 3rd in the long run, providing he can stay healthy.

anyone find today's lineup?

I left today's lineup in my other pants.

LaRoche had more than 400 AB's in 2004, 2005, and 2006.

A couple of injuries and all of a sudden he's fragile guy?

It was mentioned when we signed LaRoche that while he probably wouldn't stick at shortstop, he did (according to scouts) have the range and ability to play second base and the Dodgers were supposedly considering moving him there.

Also, it's kind of interesting that when LaRoche and DeWitt were drafted, each was mentioned as a possible candidate for conversion to catcher.

Anyway, put me down in favor of the idea of having one of them play second base. Particularly DeWitt, since he's played the position already, and his bat in the long term is likely to be more of a second baseman's than a third baseman's. Yeah, he might stink, but so what? We've had a second baseman who stinks defensively for a while. It hasn't wrecked the team or anything.

86 From Jackson's blog:

DH Pierre
LF Ethier
C Martin
2B Kent
1B Loney
RF Kemp
3B DeWitt
CF Jones
SS Hu

talking about Jacksons... Edwin Jackson is pitching today against the Cardinals 1-0 Rays 2nd inning I think.

Has any National League team made less efficient use of its DH than the Dodgers this weekend? Or ever? (That's a rhetorical question, by the way, since I find it inconceivable that the answer could be "yes.")

Let's sum up, shall we:

Game 1: Your DH, ladies and gents, is 10-time Gold Glove winner Andruw Jones. Brilliant! Especially since it enables Juan Pierre to play in the field.

Game 2: Your DH is Mark Sweeney, he of the fork marks in his back, who goes 0-for-4 as his average plummets from .143 to .125.

Game 3: Juan Freaking Pierre.

Meanwhile, a guy who would probably be one of the better DHs in baseball, Delwyn Young, doesn't have an at bat in the series. It makes me want to claw my eyes out. No, check that, it makes me want to claw Joe Torre's eyes out.

How foolish of me! I actually thought Delwyn would get a shot today.

Is Joe Torre Fireable?

I understand Ned must love him, but what if Frank M. tires of Ned and a new GM wants a new Manager. Then could Torre be fired or is that still impossible because he is Joe Torre?

At least we don't have that "terrible" manager Grady Little anymore.

I think point 3 should also note that our DH has a .178/.229/.200/.429 as our leadoff guy.

92 Gak!

Just be glad you didnt have to navigate thru the drunken fringes of Aay to Breakers today. That would put you in an even grouchier state. It sure did me.

Well, looking on the bright side, at least this series is only three games and not five games, so we've been spared the spectacle of Luis Maza and Hiroki Kuroda as the next two DHs.

Or bay to breakers, that is.

Btw that lineup is about as good as i couldve hoped for - except for dh. Agree with eric about the waste that is dh spot this wknd.

sigh....when will delwynn young EVER get a chance? i hope we trade him for the sake of him! my god

Tony Jackson also reports that Nomar has "hit a wall" in his rehab. I don't know if he ran into it or punched it, but I guess that's good news for anybody who likes the Dodgers' third baseman to actually be able to do things like hit and field.

Oy. Don't know why I'm so grouchy today. Anyway, I will now commence relaxing and enjoying our one-game winning streak.

As a young good prospect, I would CRINGE, absolutely CRINGE at playing for the Dodger orginization right now. Wouldn't you? This could really affect future drafts of a player on the fence about signing/college if we aren't careful...

they don't want to play Young so he doesn't injure himself, that way when he is traded at his "high" present value, the trade will go through

70 Isn't it terrible that the Dodgers are so cheap that their 67 year old manager has to take a day job as a clown in commercials? Has he no dignity?

Jackson says Nomar has hit a wall, needs more tests. Looks like they're building up to retirement. Think we could help that along by starting a movement to make him a coach? It would be an easy out for everyone.

Nomar could take Bill Mueller's job in the front office!

I just feel really badly for Delwyn. We know he can hit at this level, he knows he can hit at this level. And for him to never play and see his AB's go to guys like Mark Sweeney and Juan Pierre must be incredibly disheartening. Being in the majors is great and all, but just sitting there watching inferior players has to take its toll on you.

105 Nahh, he can take Mike Easler's job as hitting coach, end this silly business of taking pitches...

102 Pessimistic as I can be, I don't think I buy that last part. I have a hard time believing that decisions to sign/go to college are about anything but cold, hard cash. Anyway, with the turnover rate in MLB the way it is, there's always a very good chance that the GM and manager when a high school player is signed will both be gone by the time that player is ready for the major leagues. (As has been the case for every single one of the Dodgers' current young players.)

True, maybe I am a little past pessimestic right now :(

Torre has a Pee Wee problem.

we'll be alright, nothing wrong with us that a change of GM, manager, and 40% of our roster couldn't fix...

105. Have to give Nomar a contract extension first.

Since NL DHs came in to today's game batting 4 for 28, I can't say that the Dodgers DHs have been all that much worse than anyone else's.

I just read Ned's comments on pitching and immediately wondered what pitcher he's getting ready to deal for, and who he'll give up in addition to Abreu.

I am willing to cut Kent slack. JP is playing the way he always plays. This is his game. Andruw is clearly in decline and after 2007 this may be all there is of him. Kent, on the other hand, has been one of the most productive 2B of all time. He has never had a season like this and although he older than Moses I will give him a chance based on past performance. Past performance is what we horse players live for.

The Brewers are batting their DH in the #9 hole. And it's Tony Gwynn Jr. The Nats are using Dmitri Young. Houston is using Lance Berkman. San Diego's lineup isn't posted, but it will likely be Tony Clark.

The Mets used Damion Easley as a DH yesterday.

In yesterday's thread someone asked why Torre never uses Yhancy. Does framilarity breed contempt. Joe presumably knows Yhancy from his NY days. I wonder what it is Joe doesn't like.

So will Jackson write about that CS.

Juan Pierre: Speed Kills.

119 No, because got on base.

How much would Torre remember about Brazoban from his Yankee minor league days? At best he would have seen him in a spring training game or two four years ago.

114 - There was a dodger thought that it was misdirection and that he is not going to do anything about anything. Unless, picking up Maza is his first foray into trying to field eight Furcals.

Tony Jackson did blog about Pierre swinging at the first pitch the other day.

On second thought, Ned's comments strike me as those of a man simply worried about his job. "Don't blame me, or Jones, or Pierre, it's the pitching--I didn't sign the top three in the rotation.'

well although it was an unfortunate first with juan getting nailed, im glad we finally have our strongest outfield out there today. Lets hope for a little run production and some consistency from D lowe, I'll check in later..go blue!

102 I agree with Eric, baseball draft picks are so far away from playing in the majors that they would not even have those type of thoughts.

And baseball is set up against young players anyway, the way teams hold your rights for 4-5 years until you have to be on the MLB roster and then they you cannot be free agent for another 6 years.

So relieved to hear Vin's voice today.

Man, that's the livliest 92 mph ever. That ball is on the batter in no time.

Ever since his hot streak ended, Matt has looked pretty poor at the plate.

129

Weaver's fastball has always had a little jump to it. It just seems that halfway to the plate it gains some velocity and hits another gear. It is similar to Saito's. Straight, but with good velo and that little jump.

If I were a high school kid, the only thing that would worry me about being drafted by the Dodgers would be all the great young players in the starting lineup ahead of me. On any given day, there are four-five kids starting for the Dodgers: Martin, Loney, DeWitt, Ethier/Kemp if not both, plus a pitcher.

Kids play for the Dodgers. It mighttake longer than we like, but they play, and they're still kids.

Just to interrupt for a moment:

ABC caught a shot of Tom Brady at today's Celtics game sporting a Giants baseball Cap. Just for that, Brady has scored 1000 brownie pts for me! I am very pleased to see Brady stay true to his homeland in NorCal and not bandwagon onto the C's the way, say, Curt Schilling would.

That was hideous.

. . . and they're still kids.

Exhibit A: James Loney

Watch your lips! Flying bat!

Ouch.

Anyone think Lowe is tradable?

That's not a nice word, Mr. Lowe.

136

Do they get to keep the bat?

137. Very! Colletti should trade him to the desperate Yankees.

Do those all become earned runs becasue you can't presume the DP on Loney's throw?

SAD FACE.

If the Dodgers dont go hard after Teixera, they are nuts.

Loney is not the answer.

And DePo's probably right when he said the Dodgers would probably regret Lowe's 2008 season when he was signed to that 4yr deal in 2005.

141 You can presume one out.

Lowe cant keep the ball out of the middle of the plate. Terrible.

Trading your number two starter is the mark of every successful team.

If Torre wants Loney and Bennett to get some exercise does he just have them play catch together?

Hu must take a different route to 2nd on the 3-6-3.

139 The attendants take them until the end of the game, I think.

Billz is the #2 on this staff.
Not Lowe, at least not anymore.

Hu could of been standing at 2b instead of standing 3 feet off the bag.

147- You're probably going to hell for that, but it was funny.

Different from Furcal I mean.

Loney's throw was over the bag. Hu looked like he wasn't there in time.

148 He overthrew Furcal back in Arizona.

That throw was more on Hu than Loney, Hu was probably thinking about the throw that almost killed him yesterday.

143. I wonder if psychologically the A. Jones and Schmidt debacles will affect Frank's willingness to go after the big guns.

So now we are blaming the SS instead of Loney.

151-- It's an easier throw for the 1B when he's already coming in to hit the SS on the inside of the base vs. throwing to the bag where the runner is in that path.

Joey, do you think Penny is the ace? In my opinion, Chad is the best pitcher on the staff and it´s not even close.

When the SS isn't anywhere near the bag, yep.

So I guess Weaver is going to deal and this game is toast. I can watch Boston/Cleveland!

18-3 at the end of one quarter, you say? Ouch.

Error should have gone to Hu, not Loney. Anyway, Lowe shows his mental inabilities yet again by not being able to hold himself together. 4 runs, 4 hits & a walk in 2 innings.

#2 starter stuff? I guess by default, but not by talent!

158- As always, I blame Gary Bennett.

And Andreu chases down and away, comes up smiling....what a guy.

While Hu looked late to the bag, Loney threw to the wrong side.

160--Thats true. Based on peripherals and potential, I'd probably take Billingsley ahead of Penny right now and for the next couple season.

The reason Penny has been so good is his mysterious skill at preventing homers, despite not being that much of a ground ball pitcher. Not sure if he can keep up that skill.

143
Things that James Loney is not the answer to:
1) Who kidnapped the Lindbergh baby?
2) Who killed Davey Moore?
3) Boxers or briefs?
4) What was the name of the fifth vice-president of the United States?

End of list.

To think that Hu would have the only decent at bat of the past 6 for the Dodgers.

This could be a long (or short) game.

Sooooo....

I'm actually starting to miss the drunken hordes at Bay to Breakers.

Ned GMs like I play blackjack. Wins all the liitle hands, gets brazen, puts up the big money and loses.

I love that wimeriner commercial.

Blake DeWitt does it again, that catch would have put Nomar on the DL list for the nth time.

I think what the Dodgers need today is an anti-gravity machine. Can someone requisition one?

152. Small price to pay if it got a chuckle.

BH, I have class in an hour. Today is stocks. Nice day to spend 4 hours in the kitchen don't you think? At least I won't miss much of a Dodger game.

According to Stan Conte (according to Tony Jackson in his comments), Jason Schmidt was hitting 92-93 at times in his last rehab start.

170--He's lost the little hands too, if you consider throwing away Werth and Ross for nothing. Or Roberto Hernandez, Gary Bennett, etc..

Weaver almost punched himself in anger for missing that play.

That's just the kind of Scrappy McDribbler hustle-bustle we expect from our battlin' DH!

Argh, what was Andre swinging at there?

178

Nope, that was Scrappy, McSlappy Happy's aura of on baseness effecting Weaver. JP appealed to Jobu before the game to put the fog over Weaver.

Please do something positive, Kent.

Today's 4th inning will be watched exclusively by underdog and brought to you by Amazon Books.

I wonder if Jeff Kent remember how much he hates Jeff Weaver. He needs to pretend he's hitting off that damn hippie instead of Jered.

179. Andruw teached him some lessons.

Wow. thank you for swinging at that 3-1 pitch.

Jeff Kent likes to hit the ball hard when there are runners in scoring position.

Well, there we go - this game is at least... a game now.

Lucky hits sometimes banish slumps.

185 Well, thank him for swinging at that 3-2 pitch, though. ;-)

Vin says Kent's shot was not hit well, but my goodness, I will still take it. Happily.

Nice save by Kotchman

You have to wander what's going through Jered Weaver's head when he throws over to 1st to keep Jeff Kent from stealing.

I feel like something good is about to happen.

No question about Loney's, though. Nice!

Loney's glasses are hideous.

Hah. I love Crazy Eyes' sunglasses -- makes him look more like a fly. But nice bit of hitting there.

Is "hit with a man on base" a sufficient answer from James Loney?

Man, Kemp was late aagin on a 2-0 fastball. Sit on it, Matt!

Stay away from the DP Matt

Kemp's been having better Abs ever since he started taking pitches and working deeper into the count.

Here comes your pitch Matt. FB just wait on it.

I think Kemp is just sitting on breaking balls.

70 pitches for Weaver already thanks to this inning.

James Loney and the Kingdom of Dodger Thoughts
Chapter 1: Loney Must Go!
Chapter 2: Hurrah for Loney!

Swung at ball 4. Great.

Well, that was a great at bat. Except for how it ended.

202

He must be because he cant catch up to any fastball. Its not just Weaver, who has a good fastball. He hasnt hit fastballs all year this year.

204 I just skipped over chapter 1 of that book. I'm already at Chapter 3, "Dig My Crazy Sunglasses!"

Kent must be withering out in the sun for so long. SPF 40, Jeff.

Paul Pierce is having the game of his life.

Loney the Human Fly!

(OK, bad nickname)

I think Kemp is trying not be overly pull conscious so he waits on the outside fastball and can't get his timing yet.

Despite the Celtics hot play, its still a 10 point game so it will still be a game in the 2nd half.

DeWitt looks quick enough to play second to me.

It'd be nice if Lucas May develops into the Dodgers version of Mike Napoli.

Napoli has 35hrs in 574 career ABs.

Keep running on Martin, it's bound to work eventually!

LAT - stocks, sounds very serious.

The Angels' announcers {heart} Juan Pierre.

---

Ah well, there was some hope for this game for a brief period of time but now, not so much. So perhaps we will see Yhency today?

Sit down Vlad!

Man, just when it looked like Lowe was going to get out of that inning...

this may be Yankee fan bias, but I've never seen a ballclub who over a period of years could get cheap singles like the Angels--you'd swear getting cheap singles was an ability....

How on EARTH was Matthews not nailed at the plate there? Looked like he was dead to right (from left) on Ethier's throw. Wha' happen!!?

I think Lowe is hurt. Ever since he went out of the game on April 23rd where he had tightness in his arm, he has not pitched well.

I know Jon does not like the focus on the starting pitching and perhaps it will even out as the season goes on but the reason the pitchers are still averaging 5+ innings a start is basically Torre not wanting to blow out the pen, both Lowe and Penny pitched 5 and 6 innings despite giving up a number of runs.

220 I sometimes feel that way too, and was just thinking they got lucky on two singles that inning. But that's a part of baseball; the Dodgers had a few cheap singles in yesterday's win. But it can feel more apparent or exacerbated if the Angels often beat one's team, as they have with the Dodgers and Yankees over the recent years.

222 I'm a little worried, too, though he was pitching on 3 days rest today so I wasn't expecting much. But he hasn't been the same consistent effective pitcher he usually is, since then, you're right. The starters have generally been better the past 4 games before today, so there was some hope, but between Penny's iffy status and erratic results so far, and Lowe, the 1-2 punch for the Dodgers is a little worrisome. Bills and Kuroda have been much more effective. All the more reason to hope that Schmidt can come back and to hope that Kershaw can work out the kinks and be up soon.

It is hard for me to tolerate Colletti when he says things like the above. He could have spent 45 minutes on Baseball-Reference.com to confirm that he was wrong, as I have just done.

The Dodgers' SP have allowed 5.23 runs per 9. Only the Phillies, Rockies, and Pirates have allowed more. The league average is 4.89. However, this seems to be about timing, not talent. Using any run estimator shows the Dodgers' SP, by components, have been among the best in the league. The run estimator at tangotiger.net/markov.html is dead on in getting NL starters as a whole with a 4.89 RA. It gives us 4.44 for the Dodgers, which suggests that they've given up an extra 20 runs relative to the amount you'd expect from the hits, walks, etc. that they have allowed. So the Dodgers' SP components indicate a .544 winning% with average offense, but in practice they have been .469. This early in the season, the significance is just under 2 wins.

Instead of using Tango's estimator for each individual team, I just used linear weights to do a quick estimate of who was outperforming/underperforming their components. (SP lwts + (lg R/PA)*(SP PA)). I then compared that to actual runs allowed. The Dodgers are the worst by this measure, at +18, and the Dbacks are +17. After them, no one else is above +6. The Astros and Brewers have been -14 and -10, respectively.

So before even talking about the defense, we have a solid case that the Dodgers' SP have endured bad luck.

The Dodgers' szERA, which is simply (K - BB) per plate appearance scaled for ERA (the equation is 5.4 - 12*(K-BB)/BFP), is 4.51 against a league average of 4.49. However, if we add the third "true outcome" to our analysis, the Dodgers skyrocket, as they've allowed the fewest SP HR in the league. The league gives up 1.052 HR/G. The Dodgers have yielded .674 HR/39 PA, or .669 per 29 batted balls. The Braves are second with .786/.803, and the Marlins third with .906/.874. So the Dodgers are way ahead of the competition in HR allowed, giving them the third-best SP FIP in the league at 3.93 (ARI 3.86, ATL 3.89, league 4.48, MIL 5.19). That implies a win% of .560 with league average offense.

Let's check out a couple more simple run estimators that will moderate the impact of the Dodgers' luck on HR as well as take into account the expected value of their balls in play. Nate Silver's QERA and Tango's siERA (my name for it) both use K, BB, GB, and FB to estimate ERA - the former is exponential and the latter linear. In QERA, the Dodgers beat the league, 4.38 to 4.47. In siERA, it's 4.28 against 4.48.

Looking at balls in play, it is clear that the defense has been a problem. The Dodgers' SP have a BABIP of .311, lower only than the Pirates'. What is more is that the Dodgers have a below average number of XBH per ball in play. So the issue with the defense has been singles (and times reached on error). The league average for (1B + ROE)/(BIP - XBH) is .218, and the only teams north of .228 are LA (.240) and PIT (.248).

However, we would expect the Dodgers to yield more singles since they have a GB-heavy staff. Let's compare the Dodgers' SP to rest of the league on balls in play (relievers included, unfortunately, but Dodger SP excluded). For every 1000 BIP, the NL has 450 GB, 333 FB, 189 LD, and 28 bunts. The Dodgers SP are 497/317/168/18 thus far, so they have many more GB overall and a slightly low LD/FB ratio (a good thing). Here are the singles per BIP for the league first and then LA:

GB: .241, .258
FB: .059, .091
LD: .519, .590
Bu: .184, .308

So, across the board, the Dodgers have yielded more singles, which suggests a combination of poor defense and bad luck. Had they equaled the league average in singles/BIP for each type, they would give up 6 fewer GB 1B, 7 FB 1B, 8 LD 1B, and 2 Bu 1B. The run value of the difference between those singles and converting them into outs is 17 runs.

The obvious knock on the Dodger SP is that they don't last long enough into games, averaging only 5.4 IP/GS and 23.83 BFP/GS. The former is last in the league, the latter second to last. However, the Dodgers have also employed a tandem starter arrangement 7 times, with the nominal SP going a total of 22 innings. The rest of the staff has started 35 times and gone 205 innings, for 5.86 IP/GS, which is well above the league average of 5.69. The tandem starters have faced only 119 batters - meaning on average they haven't faced the #9 slot a second time. The big 4 is thus 25.2 BFP/GS against a league average of 24.8. What's more is that part of the reason the pitchers are being pulled and not accumulating innings is because the fielding has been poor. If we were to give the pitchers an extra 7 IP for the 22 singles that could have been converted into outs, then the IP/GS increases to 5.57, or 6.03 for the big 4.

Colletti's statement does not make sense regardless of how good the starting pitching has been, but his implied assessment of the starting pitching is thoroughly ridiculous.

I don't know what Colletti means by a team of Furcals, so let's try to answer a different question. Let's say the goal is 93 wins, which would pretty safely assure a playoff spot. If we remove relievers from the equation entirely, how good does LA need to hit to be a .574 team with the performance it has gotten from its SP? Below are the runs per game as well as the winning percentage that such an offense would have if paired with a .500 defense and a rough avg/obp/slg.

Actual RA: 6.13, .603, .290/.365/.480
Markov RA: 5.23, .531, .270/.340/.440
FIP: 5.05, .515, .267/.338/.430
siERA: 5.50, .554, .280/.348/.448

So if Colletti means "If Furcal was our only hitter and got the results he's had thus far this season, our SP is so lousy it wouldn't matter," he is clearly wrong. If he means actual Furcal, which is basically 4.9 to 5.0 runs per game, then he's only of "no help" in the sense that they would be a 76-win team with the SP's actual R/G; they're between 84 and 91 wins with run estimators and normal Furcal. Given the team's excellent bullpen, I don't know what universe Colletti's statement makes sense in. In fact, the Dodgers' offense has hit just like we expect Furcal to hit - .273/.347/.405.

Seriously:
"I want to see us win six out of 10, seven out of 10. We're not playing consistent baseball, mainly because our starters aren't pitching consistently."

What kind of complaint is this? Is he flat out expecting his team to win six of ten on average?

So after 4 months, Bynum is going to have surgery.

Those numbers don't include Lowe and his 8 singles + 1 ROE today, fyi.

223 Rule #13 violation on your part: excessively measured, reasonable response :)

226 I have to think there was a lot of hesitation by Bynum to have surgery since this basically means that the Lakers won't offer an extension this off-season.

I guess Mike Napoli will be the guest on the postgame show and be given FOUR $20 books of Union Oil Auto Scrip to boot!

225 didn't somebody do a fielding study puporting to show that Kent was world-historically bad these days at 2nd?

An honest question: At one point, if Andruw Jones it still hitting .165, will he be benched for good? June 1? June 26?

I'm not looking for snark, here. I'm serious. A $36 million loss is better than a $36 million loss and an an automatic out in the line-up.

I would assume that it's more likely that Andruw Jones will come down with case of Isringhausen's Disease first.

232 Does Don Mattingly make himself available to coach Jones more regularly after schools let out in Indiana? Is he freed up to travel, maybe with his kids, during the summer?

I get the feeling Jones benefits from having Mattingly around.

But otherwise...yeah, I think Torre will bench him sometime in June, assuming the Dodgers' place in the standings is roughly like it is now -- still in contention, but with ground to make up.

232 I dunno, but I suggest he be sent to AAA to work on his eye and swing. Maybe some cheap home runs would help his confidence, too.

232 At some point, Bowa said they'd know if he could pull out of it at 200 ABs--that's around June 6. But what happens at that point is anyone's guess.

232 I hope not. Because that would mean, instead of just playing who we have including some playing time for Young or Repko, Ned would go shopping for yet another overpriced, underperforming center fielder.

Where have you gone Ghame Over?

Yhency B looks like a Not Ready for Primetime Player today. Maybe it's the rust.

Ugh.

At least we are getting a chance to see Brazoban. Who was it that was asking why he wasn't he being used? I think we are getting our reasons! In the form of 2-baggers!

237 Uh, even Colletti will not dip into that well once more. I can't believe he would try yet another outside-the-organization centerfielder with Pierre and Jones both his signings. I don't think McCourt would let him. "Fool me once, shame on you..." etc. I think it's time to phantom DL Jones and have him go where Mattingly is for a time, I agree.

237 Can you sign a $36 million center fielder, let him be benched at .165, and survive to make future deals?

And there goes the bullpen era!

241 Well, we have had a fool me once (Pierre) and a fool me twice (Jones). So you are saying, no chance for a fool me 3 times? We can only hope!

But Brazoban is the only Dodger pitcher who can solve the Napoli Conundrum.

If the Dodgers were really concerned about just playing 3 outfielders, they would trade one of the 4 players. Which would basically mean trading either Ethier or Kemp.

Once the season started and they had those 4 guys, it seem destined that they were periods of time when one would sit and while the other 3 played.

Now, had Furcal been available, I don't think Pierre would have played non-stop for the last 3 weeks. But Kemp and Ethier platoon splits could allow Torre to sit them occasionally against certain pitchers.

I always thought Pierre was untradeable until at least next year where the Dodgers might be more favorable to eat some salary and he's now a 3 year contract as opposed to a 4.

Scioscia's got to be loving this. Beating up on two of his sworn enemies, combined in one uniform. Arte Moreno gets to be LA's best owner for another year. Plaschke doesn't have to edit the column he already stored in his computer in February for release tomorrow.

The Dodgers and Dodger fans simply do not hate Anaheim enough. Most of the fans are like me: I kind of like the Angels. I root for them in the American League. I like it when they beat the Yankees in the playoffs, and the Giants in the Series. If the Dodgers couldn't get Guerrero, I'm glad the Angels did. Etc. etc.

Interleague play probably means we have reconsider this appeasement policy against Anaheim. We play them almost as much as we play some NL East teams. We can't afford to be charmed by their scrappiness anymore. We need to HATE what is happening to the Dodgers today, and swear revenge.

Maybe we should throw Juan Pierre into a live volcano in expiation.

242 The rule states that you can, but only if you previously signed a $45 million center fielder and then replaced him with said $36 million center fielder while keeping the $45 million center fielder on the team.

But only then! Otherwise, no you cannot survive it!

Lebron James should not be shooting 3s.

247 I hate the Angels, if it's any consolation? It's none for me, of course.

Sigh.

Revenge when they come to LA -- the real LA -- in June would be nice, at least.

We need one of those cheesy science fiction machines that exchange brains between two bodies. I'd like to see a centerfielder with the body of Andruw Jones and the ridiculous self-confidence and work ethic of Juan Pierre.

One thing for sure, Juandruw would lose some of that weight.

Lebron and Pierce both have 37.

248

So the Ned Colleti dead pool starts about All Star break when Andru fails to break the Mendoza line?

247 Why is Arte Moreno the best owner, because his twosome of Mathews and Hunter is better than Jones and Pierre.

The Angels outside of this series were averaging less than 2000 a game than last year, the Dodgers are down about a 1000 right now.

But Moreno has not had to put any money into the Angel Stadium since he took over, he's been involved in litigation with the City of Anaheim over the name change, he's pulls the Angels onto a station that is hardly doing any advertising to publicize that fact.

253 Must it really take that long?

I'll say this on May 18, 2008.

The Dodgers could finish in last and Ned Colletti will still be the GM. But he will be a lame duck GM in 2009.

255

Sadly yes.

Parking Lot Frank needs time to get rilled up about Jones and Schmidt. I doubt Frank gets as riled up at JP as DT does, as JP is delivering the same game he has for years.

At the All Star game while all the other owners are picking on Parking Lot Frank, he'll get mad enough to do something about Ned, and there will be an opportunity to do a little GM shopping while everyone and their dog is at Yankee stadium and surrounding hotels.

Again, I ask,

Why does anyone care what Bill Plaschke writes about the Dodgers or Angels? If the McCourts choose to heed Plaschke's "advice" that's their funeral.

256--Why are you so adamant about that?

After McCourt dumped DePo even when DePo had a 5yr deal...what is stopping him from doing the same thing to Ned?

Even Frank has to look at how his money is being spent and be upset.

259 Because, I don't think he views things the same as he did in 2005. He also has 5 years of results showing that how the team performs on the field has no reflection on box office or other marketing oppurtunities.

Lebron with 44.
89-88 Celtics with 2 minutes left.

Sweeney for Loney. It's called playing the percentages.

He also has 5 years of results showing that how the team performs on the field has no reflection on box office or other marketing oppurtunities.

Shouldnt he have known that before he took over the team? The Dodgers will draw fans no matter what, and there's a reason why they dont need all the PVL or recognizable players (like Nomar) to still draw fans.

260

Parking Lot Frank can always raise the parking fees at Dodger Stadium a few bucks more, then blame it on Ned.

I've decided not to read any more calls for Colletti's head unless they rhyme.

fitting end

How fitting for the Freeway series.

Andruw Jones swings and misses at a ball low and away to end the game!

Any lip readers, was Jones mouthing, "I don't care, I don't care" as he walked away from the plate?

Man, Meloan did not have a good day today for Vegas: 3 IP, 6 runs. Bummer. Maybe they should've put him in Jacksonville again, or rethink the starting pitching idea. Either way, it's just a setback, though, hopefully he'll bounce back from his struggles.

265 I'm with you. Should we request iambic pentameter, too, or not push it?

Andrew says the time has come, the fans no longer roll the dice

Their prosey whiny mutters will no longer for effect suffice

Come one and all, ye Dodgers fans, come ye now and seek the head

The head of our mustiachio'd, our brilliant Dodgers GM Ned.

Bring on Kim Ng.

270
But she's a girl! And I don't want the Dodgers infested with cooties.

270 -- No, Logan White. There is no reason to believe that Ng knows anything more about player evaluation than Colletti.

271

Fire Ned at the All Star break, let Kim ride out the season and then maybe let her have the job if she does well with the back 9 of the season.

I like I like.

Ned Colletti will still be the GM unless they find him in bed with a live Scott Boras or a dead Kim Ng.

274

Yikes an ex governor Edmund Edwards reference!

If Torre wants Loney and Bennett to get some exercise does he just have them play catch together? Thanks LAT, where else can we get stuff like that?

"Bring us Ned's head," the fans cried aloud, "with another round of beer! We sit in these bleachers and boo who we want, but still we are bathing in tears."

"We've sat through the old, whose days have long passed, quietly gouging our eyes. While the likes of Pierre, and the one they call Jones, take innings from pups on the rise."

"Take leave of us now, ex-Giants exec, and take that ring of yours, too. We have higher demands for our warriors in blue than losing in 2002."

"We could have eight Jones's out there and it wouldn't hurt us, with the (starting) pitching the way it's been," he said.

274 - Ned Colletti will still be the GM unless they find him in bed with a live Scott Boras or a dead Kim Ng

The cost to bed a live Boras would cost more than a even NY Governor would want to pay

The best way for the Giants to beat the Dodgers is to infiltrate the Dodger organization.

Jones needs to agree on a minor league league assignment to see if he can start making contact.

You folks realize that if McCourt were to decide to fire Colletti, it could easily imply a repudiation of the youth movement, and that the mission of the next GM could be to empty the farm for the next Santana that comes along.

I'm not saying it will. I'm not saying anything about McCourt's current attitude toward Ned. But the better part of Ned's 2008 agenda was a commitment to the kids. Jones is pretty much the only exception. Kuroda too, although arguably, Kuroda was replacing an older player (Schmidt/Hendrickson/Tomko).

The kids are held to a higher standard than the vets in the mainstream world. It's strange but it's true - I guess it's because they don't have leadership value (except for Martin). If the team fails, if Colletti in turn is fired, the kids could very well end up with the blame in much of the mainstream press, like last year. And the next GM would be someone who was hired to take the team in a different direction, to make sure the 2012 renovated Dodger Stadium has an attractive team residing inside it.

Just a scenario you might want to consider.

Signs Ned is about to be fired:

Shaves his mustache

Appears in a "Just for Men" back in the game commercial

Appears in a State Farm commercial, offering to park Mr. Torry's car

Seen walking around Dodger Stadium in a reflective vest with a signal flash light

Apropos of nothing, but...
If you are dissatisfied with the service you receive from the women's shoe department at Macy's, calling the public library and yelling at your friendly local librarian over the phone will not be of any help.

282

That's pretty much what I would expect, too. The only way I could see it going differently is if Logan White were to be given the job.

But I do expect any perceived failures of 2008 to be blamed completely on the youth movement by our friends at the LAT.

285
I believe any failures the Dodgers have this year will likely fall at the feet of Andruw Jones first.

284 What the heck was she doing shopping at Macy's for shoes? Everybody knows you go to Nordstrom's for shoes!

287
It's a long, sad, boring, and ulimately pointless story.

288 Nothing is boring when you tell it. Tell! Tell!

Win still eludes Kershaw

>> Despite his 0-3 record, however, the 20-year-old left-hander might have pitched his last game in Jacksonville. Kershaw could be headed to the major leagues in the next 10 days and be in Los Angeles with the Dodgers when the Suns return home May 31. <<

## MLB.com reported last week that Dodgers manager Joe Torre said Kershaw's subpar performance against the Mobile BayBears (five runs in 31/3 innings) cost him an opportunity to be the Dodgers' starting pitcher Saturday. The Dodgers needed a fifth starter and turned to veteran Chan Ho Park instead.

"I didn't put much into that [report]," Kershaw said. "He's [Torre] not obviously going to tell somebody like that what he really thinks. I'm not worried about that. I'll just wait it out and wait my turn." ##

http://tinyurl.com/5bf79p

289
I've been screamed at by this person for not finding a supplier for a takeup belt on a 1960s era reel-to-reel recorder, not knowing why the clerks at Macy's don't know why they don't stock the shoes she wants, and most likely she will yell at me someday on the phone because she's upset that I'm not dead.

She's not a very happy person.

291 And you answer her calls because ... ? I think secretly Bob wishes he was a therapist.

Lindsey's three homers boost 51s to victory

>> Andy LaRoche walked immediately ahead of two of Lindsey's homers and had an RBI single for Las Vegas (21-21), which halted a three-game losing streak. <<

## Jason Repko and Terry Tiffee each had two hits for Las Vegas. ##

http://www.lvrj.com/sports/19053479.html

292
It's my job, sir. I'm a librarian.

291- Is there a policy of how much insanity you have to put up with? Are they recording your phone calls for quabity ashuance?

295
Since I'm the boss in these matters, I get to decide when to hang up.

It's a case-by-case thing. If you avoid swearing, you get a longer rope.

Does anyone know of a website which will tell us the name of a person in a commercial?

But the better part of Ned's 2008 agenda was a commitment to the kids. Jones is pretty much the only exception. Kuroda too,

Jones & Kuroda make up 30 mils of the 2008 budget. That 30 mils could have been spent on players that make the difference between winning 82 games, and winning 90. Thats the difference between good GM'ing and bad: Asset allocation and return on investment.

277---That was excellent.

290--I'm not sure who Kershaw would replace on the roster though. Schmidt/Loaiza would appear to be higher on the pecking order of hurlers joining the Dodgers before Kershaw would.

299

Back end of the bull pen I think. Ether as a setup man or an occasional closer.

Bloodies him so to speak without killing his arm by putting into the rotation.

226 I was wondering what was taking so long. I've dislocated each kneecap once. Couldn't stand the sight of the obvious deformity and so I accomplished what the doctors say never do, i.e., I manually reduced the obvious deformity myself as I couldn't stand the sight of it. Was good to fully go within 2 weeks. So when Bynum wasn't back in a month, two words were certain: internal derangement.

Another day I might relate the vitriol I endured from some of those in Lakerdom not wishing to face the truth when I suggested that internal derangement was certain. I knew it, well, not only the timing of it, but the manner of it. My two dislocations were from knee contacting the ground hard at an angle. That bumped the patella out of place. Bynum had no direct contact to his knee. And so the same leg/knee motion that displaced the patella accomplished some internal deranging as well.

I am presuming that he has a partial tear, since the hope with the partial tear is that it heals on its own and your good to go. The complete tear, well, maybe Gallardo might have gotten away with the conservative approach for the complete tear, but that won't work for basketball.

Dear Ann Landers,
Help,I'm in over my head!
Sincerely,
Flanders

298 Kuroda has been fine, our most consistent pitcher as a matter of fact. He hasn't pitched in a game that our hitters didn't have a chance to win. With a single exception where he gave up 5 ER, Kuroda has not had a start with more than 3 ER. 2 of 3 losses and he gave up 2 ERs. So I'd blame the kids and the oldies for not fielding well behing him, for not giving him some run support, and we can add in Saito for blowing 2 of his Ws.

The problem is Schmidt, Pierre and Jones, when it should have been, none of the first two and Rowand over Jones.

225
Great post. The games that featured Nomar at third and Kent at second led to many balls that went untouched, but would have been fielded by more athletic defenders.

Well, at least a former Dodger is doing well. The Rays blew a lead for Edwin Jackson, but he struck out seven and lowered his ERA to 3.29 today.

He now has more strikeouts than anyone on the Dodgers staff not named Chad Billingsley.

I don't get it at all. In the offseason, after a few moves had been made by other teams, I distinctly remeber a post that stated our offseason would be a great success if we signed Jones and Kuroda and traded Pierre. I remember that the vast majority of the community here was on board with this suggestion. Now that it has happened, except for the trade, we're calling out Ned? While I never liked the hiring of Ned, especially considering who he replaced, this board seems to be a little hypocrytical in hindsight. I remember how happy the mood was when the 2 aquisitions were made and how we thought that our season would have a big boost because if nothing else, they were replacing JP and Tomdrickson All and all, it is 1/4 way into the season, and while I share some of the same feelings that are repeatedly shared on this board, I keep my mouth shut as I too was happy when Ned aquired Jones (moreso because I figured it would dispell Pierre) and Kuroda (again because Hendrickson, Tomko and the likes would have 1 less spot to fill). I think Kuroda has been great, especially considering he came in to be the #5 starter. Jones has been all but great, but I'm inclined to hold off judgement on Ned for this move as I was on board with the pickup at the time. Hopefully he wakes up and figures out how to hit again.

Dodgers, Angels can afford to wait on signing players

>> Smaller-market teams try to lock up their young talent early in hopes of getting a discount on the back end when a player would be eligible for free agency. <<

## But the Angels and Dodgers can pay market rate, and they're better off paying year by year, minimizing the risk and saving the biggest bucks for free agents, or soon-to-be free agents. ##

%% Ned Colletti, the Dodgers' general manager, said he had approached Martin about a long-term contract twice. Colletti said Martin and his agent passed both times, with discussions never proceeding to dollars. %%

http://tinyurl.com/6ad7em

Colletti means no confetti.

Seriously...the veterans aren't really very important right now, since most of them will be gone by 2010. What we have right now is a typical Dodger team of the past 25 years. Pretty good, but not that good. The young guys' development is the interesting thing. But it's going to take awhile.

As long as he doesn't trade 'em, Ned can stay.

But Frank, who is writing the Jones/Schmidt/Pierre/Nomar paychecks might have a different opinion.

The danger is not what happens if we stay with Colletti. It's what happens if he's fired and replaced by a guy with a mandate to "win now."

The Mets traded for Santana and the Manager could lose his job soon.

The Braves traded for Tiexeria and last I looked isn't doing so well.

Would the Dodgers have a better record right now had Ned not signed Jones, Schmidt, and Pierre? I know it depends on who he might have signed instead and for how long, but for now, I think the Dodgers will go as well as Kemp, Martin, and Loney will take them regardless of who is playing around them.

If the Dodgers were playing about the same right now without the signing of Jones, Pierre, and Schmidt, the fans and media would be saying it was because McCourt was too cheap. It is safer to do what the Dodgers did. Now, it is time to say we tried to augment the young team with veterans and now we are going to edge more toward the youth.

306 I'd fire Honeycutt before Ned, though the exit door would be revolving to save Ned the trouble of having to open the just closed door. Should have canned Honeycutt long ago, what with the disturbing revelation that it was the recently traded to us Marlon Anderson and not Honeycutt who told one Brad Penny that he was tipping his pitches. That should have been enough. The pitching coach futzing around with the mechanics of our pitchers who can't even discern his guy tipping his pitches. As you can imagine, I won't be looking for Honeycutt to be of any assistance when it comes to righting both Penny and Lowe, and getting Bills to take that next step.

2008 wOBA Projections:
Jones - .347
Furcal - .333
Pierre - .311
Kent - .357
Nomar - .330
Aggregate - .337

2008 wOBA to date:
Jones - .255
Furcal - .449
Pierre - .308
Kent - .294
Nomar - .292
Aggregate - .326, 607 PA, 25 SB, 5 CS

So the high-paid veteran "core" of the team has played about a full season and has been, on the whole, 3 runs below average offensively. This is not bad since all but Nomar are being paid for premium defensive positions. The total salary is $52.5mm, so in the aggregate they are being paid to be slightly above average. So there is a decent argument that this group has been worth the money so far. $10.5mm gets you an average FA, so.

The obvious response to that is to question the wisdom of spending on so many FA players, especially with 5 FA SP on the roster/DL. The only FA-contract players they have who can be expected to play better than their 2008 salary are Lowe and Penny. Having quasi-FA Saito helps out, but the Dodgers have 10 FA players for $103.3mm (using Jon's sidebar numbers). In other words, 10 FA with the expectation that they'll be average (2.0 wins above replacement, or WAR). In actuality, Lowe and Penny are about 3 WAR each, Kuroda, Furcal, Jones, and Kent are around 2.5 WAR, and Pierre, Garciaparra, Loaiza, and Schmidt are around 1 WAR each. That's a total of 20 WAR we can expect, so the pay is in line with the current talent level, IMO, but Penny and Lowe carry the weight. The eight acquired (including Kent's extension) by NC are only 14 WAR for $83.8mm, or $6mm per win. I think it is really clear that the Dodgers would be in better shape if their GM was better at accurate valuations of free agent talent.

Ned Colletti, the Dodgers' general manager, said he had approached Martin about a long-term contract twice. Colletti said Martin and his agent passed both times, with discussions never proceeding to dollars.

I don't really blame Martin for scoffing at the extension talks. If I'm a star-on-the-cusp, I'd take a long hard look at how the Dodgers are managing their talent.

If I'm Martin, I see that overpaid underperforming vets get way more PT than their younger counterparts. I see my field manager and GM making illogical rationalizations about why the team is underperforming.

I wouldn't blame Martin at all for not wanting to commit long-term to the mess the Dodgers have.

Yeah, I guess it seems like the Dodgers don't appear to have the solid, trustworthy outline of a coherent long-term plan. I'm not sure if that's why such teams as the Brewers, Marlins, and Diamondbacks are able to sew up their long-term talent. It doesn't seem like it should be this way with LA's deep pockets. Sigh.

311 On a championship team, the pitchers ought to always be carrying the weight. They are singly responsible for more than any of the other 8, and so I'm wondering why we are considering it a good idea to compare this imagined WAR as between pitchers and hitters. Penny and Lowe otherwise need to have WARs at 7 and up. Oh, and there's that problem with the AVG again, since the trend here with Lowe is down, and considerably so [more days like today and it won't be long before some will be projecting, er, changing their projection, to less than replacement value].

I'd otherwise question the WAR in the first instance, since while Kuroda sits at 1-3, and Brad at 5-4, as I said, a single 5 ER outing and then all 3 ER or less. Brad is at 10, 5, 4, and 4. I'd rather have the 5 and 3 or less than the two 0s coming with the 10, 5, 4, and 4. The difference between Brad and Kuroda in terms of the W-L is simply that the team has hit more for Brad [5, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 11, 12, and 5] than Kuroda [7, 3, 4, 1, 8, 5, 5, 5, 2], and all but 1 of Brad's runs are earned, while 5 of Kuroda's runs are unearned. Oh, and did I mention Sammy twice and Broxton once grievously failing our man Hiroki? Given the respective ERs, the RSs by us, the errors allowing for the unearned run, and throw in some in rather untimely relief work largely affecting but the one soul here under review, you can see why Hiroki is 1-3 at 3.67 and 1.33 while the 5.09 and 1.49 Brad Penny sits at 5-4. Or more simply, Hiroki's 1, 2, 3, 2, 5, 3, 2, 1, 3 as against Brad's 0, 4, 4, 0, 1, 3, 3, 10, 5, well, I don't see how we get 2.5 against 3 from that, but that's just me. It helps when one considers Hiroki's line and then realizes that the first 1 is his only win. Would be nice if the team would stop throwing him under the bus, but again, that's just me.

One other comment I think should be made about Colletti. He has received praise for not trading away his best prospects, but I think most fans knowledgeable of the minor leagues agree that his record in trading away young players is not impressive. He has been decent in dealing young players for young players (the Betemit deals) or in acquiring young players (Ethier), but the young players that he'd dealt because he more or less felt like giving up on them and/or wanted a veteran (Edwin Jackson, Dioner Navarro, Justin Ruggiano, Jarod Plummer, Cody Ross, Travis Denker ... in return, Danys Baez, Toby Hall, Mark Hendrickson, Wilson Valdez, Ben Kozloski (who? he became a minor league FA at the end of the season), and Mark Sweeney). Only Guzman/Pedroza for Lugo doesn't look bad, and certainly that one is not a win.

If your plan is to fill out the entire payroll and 40% of the roster with average FA (I'm not saying this was NC's plan, but it's his outcome and was predictable given who he has acquired), then you need a very good farm system and the ability to acquire top-level talent in trade to expect the playoffs. Had Colletti held onto his secondary prospects, he probably could have used them to acquire an 'impact' player. Instead, he's discarded them piecemeal for players with no chance of being above average, and without acquiring anyone whose production was better than salary. Putting aside the logistics of it just to make the point, I think a package of Edwin Jackson, Dioner Navarro, Justin Ruggiano, Jarod Plummer, Cody Ross, and Travis Denker would get something pretty nice at this moment. Instead, Colletti got nothing of value in return. I don't say this as a criticism in hindsight, of course; every one of these deals was considered a bad one at the time by myself and in most or all cases most knowledgeable Dodger fans.

NC has addressed his job very much in terms of problem and solution. He identifies a problem with the existing team and uses the resources at his disposal to find a reasonable solution. Unfortunately, it is very accurate to say that what he is doing is 'identifying' problems - simply giving them a name, rather than discovering them through research and being open to further questioning. That is, he does not start with a general question or goal and then investigate it, but rather he decides that there is a problem (at present, it's the SP; in the past, there have been a whole lot of different ones) and then seeks a solution to the problem. Such an approach generally attributes characteristics to random groupings of phenomena rather than to the phenomena themselves. That is, instead of using research to develop a paradigm for investigation, he starts each analysis with an ad hoc decision about what constitutes the object of analysis. From there, he moves around organizational resources as a 'solution.' Since his moves seem to address themselves to the identified problems rather than specifically to the goal of improving the franchise, the string of solutions becomes its own problem.

Forget about stats vs. scouts for a second and let's assume that the GM only gets to evaluate players based on scouting. Wouldn't you still want the GM to know how to properly use stats for accounting purposes? I don't really think NC has a bad record in terms of getting good or bad talent in his moves. I do think he has a bad record in these moves, though, and the reason is that he does not have a model in place to assess the relative value of players.

313 It doesn't seem like it should be this way with LA's deep pockets. Sigh

It's the deep pockets that are killing the Dodgers!

If they were some small market team dealing with a small-market mentality, they would pass on players like Pierre, Schmidt, & Jones, and instead play players like Ethier, D. Young, and go with journey-men pitchers (like a Shawn Estes-type) until a Kershaw, McDonald etc were ready.

Thanks to the Dodgers deep pocket, instead of getting to watch the players we would like to see playing, instead we get crap like Pierre, Jones, Kent, and when healthy, Garciaparra. Not to mention holding on to the likes of Lowe, and Loaiza!

Isn't it great to have deep pockets?

Ned is underachieving. But do you fire him? As good as Logan White is, not sure his talent translate into the GM job. They might, but they're pretty different jobs. And his departure could hurt efforts in the draft and international market. If Ned got canned and Logan didn't get the GM job, Logan might be inclined to leave the organization.

I'm usually not big on firing folks, but I think Stan Conte should go. I'd cut Sweeney and give his ABs to Delwyn Young.

And I'd probably wait at least another month on Kershaw.

It shouldn't have to be this way. See: Red Sox, Boston. (McCourt's favourite team.)

Again, sigh.

314 My assessment of their respective values is not based on their results in the season's first month and a half. It's based on projections and mathematical modeling. The 3.0 and 2.5 WAR figures are about talent levels, not necessarily what their 2008 will end up looking like because there is variance/fluctuation.

An average SP is 1.5 to 2.0 WAR (the range is because there are different ways to define average in this context). Over 20 full games (180 IP), an extra win is .50 runs in ERA, and Penny and Lowe are about that good. Kuroda has been OK so far, but his RA is 4.50 and his peripherals don't suggest he should be faring any better. I think 2.5 is a pretty reasonable estimate of his talent, but I wouldn't disagree with anything from 1.75 to 3.25. 7 WAR is a pitcher with a sub-2.50 ERA in 225 IP. I have Billingsley as close to 4 WAR, for what it's worth.

The suggestion that position players and pitchers should not be directly compared in terms of wins above replacement is not without merit, but is basically erroneous IMO. Games are won and loss by aggregating runs, themselves an aggregate of hits, walks, outs, XBH, etc. Over time, players basically do not contribute to runs or wins any differently than they contribute to hits, BB, etc., whether it is by preventing them (Pitching and Defense) or by creating them (Hitting and Base-running). Games are won or lost for linear reasons (more runs scored, fewer allowed) rather than for exponential reasons or rule-based reasons (i.e., we do not have a requirement that a SP goes 5 innings for his team to win). And since runs are generated basically linearly, it's completely appropriate to evaluate pitchers and batters on the same scale. That scale is an estimation of run production based on projections of performance by component (K, BB, hits, HR, etc.).

I don't know what you mean by a championship team. If you mean a playoff team (one that wins the regular season championship), then the empirical evidence is quite strong that it doesn't matter whether you get there from hitting, fielding, a good bullpen, or good SP. Teams with good SP tend to excel because a good SP will have more PA on the mound than a good hitter will have at the plate. This doesn't mean that their contribution isn't basically linear and on the same scale.

If you mean a team that wins the pennant and/or World Series, then you're more right because in the playoffs the front-end of the rotation pitches more often. But even then, I think it is a bit of a misnomer that it is all about the SP; a team with five above average relievers could really dominate by having some tandem starts and getting their SP out of the game earlier. This doesn't diminish the value of a good or great starter, but there are ways around having mediocre starting pitching even in the playoffs.

318 If this were Red Sox thoughts, would we be threatening to set Theo on fire for starting Lugo over Lowrie, or signing J.D. Drew, or extending Ortiz when he's probably entering a harsh decline? Epstein is a better GM than Ned but he's made a lot of similar mistakes.

320

The difference is in degrees. Signing J.D. Drew is far less egregious than signing Juan Pierre.

Starting Lugo over Lowrie is not as terrible as starting Nomar over Dewitt/ LaRoche.

Not sure what your point is, especially considering that you're allowing for the fact that Epstein is a better GM than Ned in your own post. By virtue of the fact that the two GMs make mistakes in varying amounts of terrible, wouldn't that demonstrate that they are dissimilar?

If this were Red Sox thoughts we'd all have our hats on backwards and our collars popped.

And there would be lots of goatees.

I'd have to find a friend named Sully or Murph.

306 - If you're talking about me, I never wrote such a post, because I've never written about trading Pierre. Ever. (Other than to say it was possible, but that wasn't an opinion on the merits of it.) Once the contract was a fait accompli, I've always been content with Pierre on the roster as long as he was used as a fourth outfielder.

With Kuroda, I was mixed but giving the benefit of the doubt. With Jones, I was cautiously optimistic. And I've stood by that opinion even through this embarrassing slump.

As for Ned, the harshest I've been on him was for the Pierre signing and have been critical of him from time to time, but it's not like my opinion of him has changed in a while, since I retracted my column about the similairties between him and DePodesta.

306 - You canNOT be talking about me. I despised the Jones signing from day one, and have been pretty consistently against it ever since. His failure to perform subsequently has only cemented my earlier opinion.

324 - I vaguely remember you doing this, but I don't remember when you did this. Gotta link?

Incidentally, very interesting discussion, and in particular, good to see Tom Meagher back.

326 - You vaguely remember me doing the thing I never did?

I have a vague memory of someone calling for James Loney's ouster earlier today too.

328 - so, you're saying you didn't write a column retracting your earlier piece comparing how similar Colletti is with DePodesta?

320. The Sox have 2 WS rings under Theo. His mistakes are irrelevant. To the extent he has made any meaningful mistakes they have been offset by his exceedingly good moves. I can't get too worked up about the mistakes of the guy who wins it all. This leads me to my response to 306 . I may have been in favor of Jones, Schmidt or Pierre (frankly, I can't remember what I thought at the time) but my day job is not the GM of the Dodgers. I expect Ned and his $100 payroll to win. He has accomplished nothing since he has been here. Because I, as a casual fan, may have been wrong to agree with Ned does not shield him from my criticism. Now if his team had been ravaged by injury as was the case with Depo one year or Frank closed the bank on him, I would be more sympathetic but he has been given every chance and outside of Furcal, he has done nothing but raised ticket prices for a declining product. He has been wrong at nearly every turn. In fact, it would be difficult to replicate the staggering failure he has had. So hypocrisy is irrelevant, Ned has done a lousy job whether I agreed with him or not.

324, 325 I wasn't singling anyone out. I was refering to the majority of this community. I thought I made that pretty clear. What bothers me is that Jones is playing poorly. What really bothers me is that a lot of people here were for the signing and have since decided that Ned be fired for the signing, when 2 months ago, the majority here was happy with it. To me, Ned has made a poor move signing Pierre to his current contract, and I think we can all agree on that. Jon, I never said you wanted the trade, but deep down inside us all, after the Jones' signing, thought that might come to fruition as having 4 outfielders for 3 spots clearly suggests. You might not have said it directly, but the overall community tone suggested it. Either way, I remain faithful that Jones will come out of it and Pierre will be the odd man out and most likely request a trade. This is what the majority concensus was when Jones was signed, and that was the point I was trying to make, especially now with how he's played. I certainly was not pointing fingers at anyone.

330 - Oh, that. I did it in the comments - I never did it in a column. But I did and do retract that they are similar.

Anyway, the whole point of that column was that to that point, Colletti and DePodesta weren't that different, and I stand by that. It wasn't like it was a guarantee they would stay similar. But JoeyP would bring it up every time Colletti did something questionable, so finally I had to just acknowledge it was a mistake to link them together in the first place.

There's not much Joe Torre can do. There just aren't enough players having good years that it matters who is in the lineup and who is a sub. No amount of brilliant strategy will work here.

There's not much Ned Colletti can do. We are not going to be able to trade two or three average players for one good player.

Ned has not done a bad job really; he gambled that this collection of players would do better than it has, and I thought it was a pretty good bet going into the season. I hoped Loney, Jones, Penny, Kent, and Lowe would all be pretty good instead of pretty (or very) bad. I thought Billingsley would start to pitch smarter as he showed signs of doing last year. And I still hold out hope that Nomar & Schmidt will contribute a non-zero amount. I could see this team catching a few breaks and doing well. Then again, I could see the rest of the year going more or less like this.

334. "Ned has not done a bad job." How can you say that. Really, what GM has done worse? You or I could have done a better job and we have not been in baseball 20 years. I expect Ned with all the resources available to him to do better. I could have gambled and lost on Schmidt and Jones. Anyone here knew not to give JP five years. I am expected to win at my job. If I don't people lose confidence in me and start to distance themselves. Frank should move away from Ned but he can't becasue he has acted so irrationally with prior GMs. Sadly we are stuck with Ned because of Frank's earlier rash conduct.

Tough loss, 168 made me smile though haha..thanks Bob

335 - Really, what GM has done worse?

None that are currently active that I can think of immediately. Being unfamiliar with Omar Minaya, I would be tempted to say him (the Kazmir trade was a real owie), or perhaps any of the rotating braintrust in Baltimore. Seattle probably ranks up there; Richie Sexson, and now the Ichiro extension if his apparent 2008 collapse is for real.

337 - I should also add the Adam Jones for Eric Bedard trade looks awfully dicey, too, as does extending Kenji Johjima with a grade-A catching prospect in the wings (Jeff Clement).

335 - one other point on this:

Frank should move away from Ned but he can't becasue he has acted so irrationally with prior GMs.

This may be true, but the bigger reason is that Ned knows how to schmooze. So long as Colletti keeps the criticism at bay (and away from the McCourt brand™), he gets to keep his job.

335 I mean the team he has put together is better than a .500 team. A lot of individuals are underperforming their reasonable expectations so far, and only Furcal & DeWitt are really overperforming.
The blame for the season lies not with poor decision-making by the GM or the manager. The blame lies with the players and the coaches. Of course we can see decisions that could have been made better, but they honestly are unlikely to matter much.

312:

This clearly doesn't apply to Martin as he basically plays every single day, even on his off days. Martin is in zero danger of losing his job to a veteran right now. Plus if anything with the way we work him, he should be jumping at the chance to secure his 8 figure payday.

I guess I should say this in a post, but there is only one position in the Dodger lineup in which an underperforming vet is blocking a younger player who clearly deserves to start. And when Ethier and Kemp both play, there is no such position.

Instead, I have a different kind of NPUT.

Omar Minaya didn't trade Scott Kazmir. That was Jim Duquette.

Let me go on the record as saying that I thought Jones was a fantastic signing at the time, and I still think so. (That is, if we judge it not in retrospect, but by the information available at the time.) The reasons to fire Colletti are numerous, but for me at least, they do not include the Jones and Schmidt signings, which I think were both fairly brilliant even though they did not work out the way we hoped. The nice thing is that they limited the team's exposure because they were short-term signings. Ned may be catching hell now, but I still think when all is said and done the Hunter contract will turn out worse than the Jones contract.

Even at 1:42 a.m. I get LATed! Holy mackerel.

319 Tom, you don't get to say that your WAR represents "talent" and/or "worth", define WAR as last year projecting into today, use the same as the measure of talent/worth today, while in the meantime, today does not even get to speak for itself. And so I used today to explain why the projection doesn't explain the now and so does not define talent/worth today.

And, Tom, you wrote:

"Teams with good SP tend to excel because a good SP will have more PA on the mound than a good hitter will have at the plate. This doesn't mean that their contribution isn't basically linear and on the same scale."

Take line 1. That means that line 2 is false. The other reason why pitching prevails over hitting is that the pitcher gets to decide what and where he throws, and so he can influence the hitter's chance of success. The hitter doesn't have that same power over the pitcher, as he hits what's served up.

And you also wrote:

"The 3.0 and 2.5 WAR figures are about talent levels, not necessarily what their 2008 will end up looking like because there is variance/fluctuation."

What you are calling "variance" I prefer to call the failure of the model to predict the result. Chien Ming Wang isn't otherwise all that variable, though he has falsified the projection models for some years running now. He's falsified the projection models because the models' underlying assumption[s] re K and/or K/9 is/are false. Your statement is otherwise wholly contradictory, as the WAR that is the past is also the product of "variance", or so you must concede, and for all that you and I know, the past variance is not the true indicator of the talent that is there. In other words, the "variance" works both ways here. And might I ask how you even began to project Kuroda?

I'm not a big fan of Ned, but I do understand why he signed Druw and Schmidt. At the time of those signings they made sense,unless you had a crystal ball and could see into the future. The Pierre signing never made sense to me, and was for to many years. Trading away Jackson and Navarro for garbage was probably the worst thing he's done. Letting Werth and Ross go in hindsight were bad moves, but at the time were almost understandable. Ned's not great, but if he's fired unless we get the right person in the job, we may wish for the Ned Colletti days.