Bleacher Report - Articles by kensai

Los Angeles Dodgers: Matching Up with the St. Louis Cardinals: Pitching

kensai — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 00:15:00 -0400

Whenever the topic of the playoffs comes up in baseball circles, the first thing fans address is the pitching matchups. Therefore, it's only fitting that I start this set of matchup posts with the pitching staffs of each team.

On the Dodgers front, the starting rotation has been much maligned, and the bullpen has been called into question for most of the year by national media and local media alike.

All of this despite the fact that the Dodgers have the best team ERA in the league. The Cardinals are on the opposite end of the spectrum, as they enter the postseason with a heavily lauded rotation and a rarely mentioned bullpen.

Hype and perception aside, the aim here is to get down to the reality of the situation, and that's exactly what I intend to do.

Rotation

To tackle the rotation comparison, i'm going to look at the four best starters on each team.
As many already know, the hype about the Cardinals rotation is not at all unwarranted. They have two of the three Cy Young contenders in the National League in Carpenter and Wainwright, Piniero has been a huge surprise this year, and with the inclusion of Smoltz, that group has combined for a total WAR of 17.6.

The Dodgers' rotation is not as bad as the fans or media seem to think. While it's clear that they are inferior to the Cardinals best, the Dodgers have still accumulated a competitive total WAR of 12.6 from their best four. Wolf has been a pleasant healthy surprise and Kershaw has emerged as one of the best pitchers in the league.

Unfortunately, Billingsley has had a nightmare second half in 2009 after looking like a staff ace in 2008 and the first half of this year, while Kuroda's neck injury has been a huge blow to the playoff rotation. Padilla likely represents the best remaining of a shaky back-end of the rotation, but he's still a respectable fourth option in the series.

Overall, the Dodgers prove inferior in the Wolf/Carpenter and Billingsley/Piniero matchups, but the Kershaw/Wainwright and Padilla/Smoltz contests are basically tossups. It's not the complete blowout that everybody, including me, thought it was.

Bullpen

Next up is the all important bullpen, and to measure their respective strength, I'll take the five best relievers from both squads and compare their numbers. I suppose you could examine either four or six guys if you wanted, but I feel five is the number of relievers that should have a significant impact on the series.

The relatively unknown bullpen of the Cardinals is a lot better than I think most people would expect, me included. Franklin has had a great year, albeit a relatively lucky one, and the rest of the bullpen have held up well despite generally mediocre careers.

For the Dodgers, the bullpen is the strongest part of the team, and it might be the best in the league. Broxton's skills are arguably the best of any reliever in the majors, and the eighth and seventh inning duo of Sherrill and Kuo may well be the best in the bigs as well.

Belisario and Troncoso were both setup options at some point during the season, and both probably would still be on different teams, which reflects the depth of this pen.

The skills of the Dodgers relievers outclass the Cardinals at every turn, but that difference should be expected. In fact, from the Dodgers' perspective, that difference needs to exist, considering the skill disparity between the rotations.

Moving On Up With ESPN

kensai — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:30:00 -0400

Recently, a lot of you have been asking me about what's going on here, and since Rob Neyer has already broke the silence over at SweetSpot, I figure it's about time that I post a short blurb about what has taken place.

Apart from the obvious, there's honestly nothing to explain. Memories Of Kevin Malone has joined ESPN as an affiliate through the SweetSpot Network.

It all started with an e-mail from Rob, and since I try not to get overly positive about anything, I thought it was one of you jokesters pulling a prank on me. Fortunately though, it was a very real opportunity, and i'm pleased that everything worked out in the end. More than that though, I was surprised that anybody in the mainstream knew this site existed. Needless to say, i'm excited about the opportunity, so i'm going to run with it.

For all you long time readers/commenters that helped me get to this point, let me just say that not much will change at all, so don't worry about that angle.

SweetSpot Network

Fire Brand Of The American League (Boston Red Sox)
Mack Avenue Tigers (Detroit Tigers)
Go Halos (Los Angeles Angels)
Memories Of Kevin Malone (Los Angeles Dodgers)
Nick's Twins Blog (Minnesota Twins)
It's About The Money Stupid (New York Yankees)
Crashburn Alley (Philadelphia Phillies)
Fungoes (St. Louis Cardinals)

Divisional Series Playoff Roster

kensai — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 07:30:00 -0400

Like everybody else, I am extremely excited that the Dodgers are returning to the postseason. However, there are still decisions to be made between now and the first game, mainly setting the playoff roster. I obviously don't have any control over the matter, but what I can do is give my two cents on the topic.

Starting Lineup

C-Russell Martin
1B-James Loney
2B-Orlando Hudson
3B-Casey Blake
SS-Rafael Furcal
LF-Manny Ramirez
CF-Matt Kemp
RF-Andre Ethier

The eight players listed above are obvious inclusions on the Dodgers playoff roster, and all but one of them are an easy choice to be named starter as well. Of course, that one other case is the battle for second base between Hudson and Belliard.

I've compared the two players on this site before, and little has changed since then. That shouldn't be too surprising, since both Hudson and Belliard still have the same talent level they did two weeks ago.

I'm favoring Hudson simply because I think he's the player with the better skills. In general terms, he's a better hitter (.339/.331 wOBA), a better fielder (2.4/0.4 UZR/150), and a better baserunner (+18/-5 Net Gain) than Belliard is. However, if Joe Torre were to go with the hot hand in Belliard, I wouldn't mind so much in this case, because the difference in talent between the two individuals is not extreme.

My conclusion is basically to pick whoever you prefer, because in the end, the difference probably won't be much. That said, I would urge you to keep in mind what I wrote in that comparison post about hot streaks.

Everybody is reeling off these comparisons to Marlon Anderson in 2006, but while he may have had a 1.243 OPS for the Dodgers that year, his OPS in the postseason was .692. I don't blame him though, he was never as good as he showed during the regular season after that trade. And neither is Belliard.

Remember, hot and cold streaks start and end quite randomly. That's not a stat nerd thing either. Everybody who has played any sport knows that there's no switch you turn on and off. Sometimes you just feel like God and you're drilling everything. A week later, you go 1-4 in a game, then 0-4 the next day, and before you know it, you're 1 for your last 21, and everybody's asking you why you suck. Point being, if you want to chance it that Belliard's hot streak will continue, I don't have any real issue with it. Personally though? I'd rather not risk it.

To that point, even Belliard admits he doesn't know how he'll get back in the groove. His current health is a concern of mine as well.

By the way, and I find it sad that I even have to bring this up, but the Dodgers should not be starting Pierre over Manny. I know the temptation is there because Pierre is fun to watch and he always looks like he's doing more, but that's just not reality. For instance, all of us Dodgers fans agree that the problem in September was the offensive production, right? Well, as terrible as Manny seemed to have been down the stretch, his September OPS (.849) was still 56 points higher than Pierre's career high OPS (.793) in a single year. Think about it.

Bench

C-Brad Ausmus
IF-Ronnie Belliard
IF-Juan Castro
IF-Blake DeWitt
OF-Juan Pierre
PH-Jim Thome

Ausmus, Belliard, and Pierre are easy inclusions, and I doubt anybody would protest their spots on the roster.

Thome is in question to some because all he does is pinch hit, and he's having health problems with his foot. Plus, he has a terrible .471 OPS with the Dodgers. However, I want him on the bench because he's still a huge power threat that can work a walk, and that's more than I can say for the rest of the bench options.

Castro is there simply because he's the only one that can play shortstop besides Chin Lung Hu. I actually think Hu is a better player than Castro (.333 Second Half OPS), but he hasn't played nearly enough to be ready.

DeWitt is included because his presence on the roster allows for managerial flexibility. He's a great defender at third, is decent at second, and is a solid left-handed bat off the bench. Sure, DeWitt struggled while being shuffled up and down between the majors and minors, but in limited appearances down the stretch, he looked great.

I put DeWitt over Mark Loretta because Loretta offers almost nothing. Sure, he plays third and first, but he doesn't do either particularly well anymore, and the guy can't hit. I'm sorry, but a .585 overall OPS, and a .509 OPS in the second half just isn't going to cut it from a player who is supposed to be primarily a pinch hitter.

Starting Rotation

SP-Randy Wolf
SP-Clayton Kershaw
SP-Chad Billingsley

That's right, I would go with three starters. Why? Because I absolutely want the best pitcher on the team (Kershaw) to start a Game 5 on regular rest, if necessary. I would also rather start Wolf on short rest than go with Jon Garland or Vicente Padilla. An alternative to this would be pitching Kershaw in Game 1, but something about throwing a 21-year-old lefty into his first playoff start in the first game of the NLDS screams Rick Ankiel to me, and while i'm sure Kershaw would be fine, he's too valuable to risk it.

As far as Billingsley goes, I choose him over Garland and Padilla because he's a better pitcher. I've gone over this before, but i'm taking true talent level over finishing hot every single time.

Look, i'm fully capable of recognizing that mediocre players like Marlon Anderson, Ronnie Belliard, and Juan Uribe have the ability to go nuts from time to time. My problem with those players, as always, is that doing so is simply improbable, and from my experience, you never want to bet against stacked odds.

Is it possible that Garland and Padilla win six postseason games for this team? Sure. And if they start in the playoffs, I hope they do. However, I just don't think it's a probable occurrence. To me, it seems like many fans are in a war against logic, and like betting against stacked odds, that's not a side I want to be on.

If the Dodgers have to take Billingsley out after five good innings because of worry about his sixth inning troubles, then so be it. The Dodgers don't have the best bullpen in the majors for nothing, and they should end up leaning on them, it's their strength after all.

By the way, if you're one of those fans who still believes Billingsley is struggling because of mental issues, read this. Furthermore, I still don't think there's a huge difference between Cole Hamels and Billingsley.

If Hiroki Kuroda was healthy, he would be my choice over Billingsley, but alas, he is not.

Relief Corps

Jonathan Broxton
George Sherrill
Hong Chih Kuo
Ronald Belisario
Ramon Troncoso
James McDonald
Scott Elbert
Vicente Padilla

Broxton, Sherrill, Kuo, Belisario, and Troncoso are no brainers. That leaves Guillermo Mota, James McDonald, Jeff Weaver, Jon Garland, Vicente Padilla, and Scott Elbert to duke it out for three remaining spots.

Since I only have the Dodgers using three starters, I would prefer to keep two relievers that can go multiple innings just in case.

Between Weaver, Garland, and Padilla, I marginally prefer Padilla. In general terms, Garland and Padilla are both slightly above league average pitchers, while Weaver is about league average or slightly below. The difference maker for me is that Padilla's explosive stuff should serve him well in the bullpen. Plus, he can still go multiple innings or take an emergency start if need be. There's just more flexibility and upside with him than there is with the other two.

Out of McDonald, Elbert, and Mota, i'm going to take McDonald and Elbert. I know Mota is the easy choice because of all he's done this year, but he hasn't been great since July, and he has only thrown 3 1/3 innings since his toe injury.

McDonald has been solid since moving to the bullpen, posting a 2.77 ERA as a reliever. However, a lot of fans still don't like him because he loses a lot of games. To me though, that's just a byproduct of his role. He's the guy that usually comes into tie games in the late innings, and that's generally going to net a lot of wins and losses. Hence, the 4-4 record as a reliever.

I believe Elbert is the most controversial choice here, as even I admit that he hasn't been great this year. However, the Cardinals are atrocious at hitting lefties, so just having a third lefty out of the pen with plus raw stuff could end up being a difference maker. He could be the wild card producer out of the pen like McDonald was last year.

Realism

Torre isn't likely to take the roster I suggested above, so to add a bit of realism, i'll predict the changes he'll make.

Mark Loretta Over Blake DeWitt
Guillermo Mota Over James McDonald
Jon Garland Over Scott Elbert

Besides Torre's love for using a bad hitter in Loretta at every opportunity, there isn't likely to be a large difference between the ideal roster and his own. I hope.

National League Divisional Series Dates Are Set

kensai — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 07:00:00 -0400

As it turns out, the Dodgers may only need three starters anyway.

NLDS 'B'

Game Matchup Day Date Time TV
Gm 1 STL @ LAD Wed Oct. 7 TBD TBS
Gm 2 STL @ LAD Thu Oct. 8 TBD TBS
Gm 3 LAD @ STL Sat Oct. 10 TBD TBS
Gm 4* LAD @ STL Sun Oct. 11 TBD TBS
Gm 5* STL @ LAD Tue Oct. 13 TBD TBS

If Randy Wolf can go on short rest in Game 4, then Clayton Kershaw can go on regular rest in Game 5. Hopefully neither game will be necessary due to a Dodger sweep, but it's something to think about, especially given the fact that Kershaw has technically been our ace this season.

********************************************************************************************

There are some entertaining celebration pictures over at Sons Of Steve Garvey.

Here are more from nwhdave on flickr.

Los Angeles Dodgers Down on the Farm: Arizona League Season Review

kensai — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 08:15:00 -0400

MVP

Nick Akins|OF|21

120 AB/.333 AVG/.397 OBP/.658 SLG/1.055 OPS/22 XBH/7 HR/11 BB/30 K

Akins held the best OPS out of all the regulars on the squad by a large margin. He also led the team in AVG, OBP, SLG, HR, XBH, and RBI. An easy choice for MVP.

While that's all and good, his potential as a prospect is less rosy. The AZL line looks highly impressive, but Akins hit a much less impressive .260/.359/.480/.839 in Ogden.

While he has power and plate discipline potential, he's also limited to the corners in the outfield and has some sizable holes in his swing.

He thrived against a more fastball-happy AZL, but struggled against more breaking stuff in Ogden.

Cy Young

Carl Webster|RHP|19

47.2 IP/2.08 ERA/1.03 WHIP/56 K/14 BB/2.05 FIP

He led the starters in both ERA and WHIP, all while posting a dominant strikeout rate. Webster had the best overall statistical performance on the staff by a large margin.

Best Hitting Prospect

Jonathan Garcia|OF|17

138 AB/.304 AVG/.362 OBP/.500 SLG/.862 OPS/.196 ISO/20 XBH

He was supposed to be raw and inexperienced, but once he got into game action, he was anything but that. For his age and inexperience, what he did in the Arizona League was nothing short of excellent.

He's going to be a corner outfielder in the future, but his plus power potential should carry him, especially if he continues to develop like this. His walk (6.8%) and strikeout (26.8%) rates are not great, but he's 17, so it's hard to be overly concerned about that.

I'm not sure if the Dodgers want to push him to Ogden at just 18 years of age, but it's a possibility if they think he's mature enough to handle regular professional ball. If not, he'll return back to Arizona and look to show that this performance wasn't a fluke.

Best Pitching Prospect

Carl Webster|RHP|19

47.2 IP/2.08 ERA/1.03 WHIP/56 K/14 BB/2.05 FIP

I have yet to see Webster actually pitch, so I have no clue as to whether or not his stuff backed up his statistics.

Recently though, Baseball America reported that Webster's stuff includes a fastball in the mid-90s, a plus breaking pitch, and a change.

That report was enough to win me over for the time being, and I can't wait to get some video on this kid now. Talk about exploding onto the prospect radar.

Notables

Danny Danielson|RHP|20

61.1 IP/3.08 ERA/1.26 WHIP/2.48 FIP/77 K/12 BB

He finished the year strong to cap off a successful season in which is flashed both significant dominance (11.30 K/9) and command (1.76 BB/9).

He has a solid fastball and two above average off-speed pitches. Danielson should get his chance in Ogden next year, and given his age, how he does will be an important step in his development.

Rubby De La Rosa|RHP|20

16.1 IP/6.06 ERA/1.71 WHIP/2.89 FIP/22 K/11 BB

Still a project, De La Rosa had a solid 2009 that was cut short when he was sent home with disciplinary issues. Those issues aren't thought to be a long-term problem, so Rubby's development should continue next year as planned.

I know most people don't associate a 6.06 ERA with "solid," but he did flash the dominance that I would expect from a guy with a plus fastball.

His breaking ball and command could use work, but anybody that can touch upper-90s deserves to be followed.

Roberto Feliciano|LHP|18

24 IP/1.50 ERA/0.92 WHIP/1.83 FIP/27 K/6 BB

Feliciano had an absolutely dominant presence in the Arizona League. Good control paired with elite dominance rates are always a recipe for success, and Feliciano had both.

His command has progressed significantly from last year, thus giving me reason to think that there's more to come from him.

If this continues, he could be pushed up the ladder relatively fast, as he already looks probable to start low-A at 19.

Jimmy Marshall|RHP|22

11 IP/4.09 ERA/1.27 WHIP/4.38 FIP/12 K/6 BB

I haven't seen anybody else even mention him yet, and I suppose his lack of actual performance gives them good reason. However, this athletic former Florida State closer does have good stuff.

I saw him sit around mid-90s in college with his fastball and his slider has plus potential. The Dodgers will probably start him at low-A due to his college pedigree and age.

Brandon Martinez|RHP|18

21 IP/9.86 ERA/2.33 WHIP/4.39 FIP/23 K/11 BB

His ERA and WHIP were atrocious, but I actually think he had a very successful professional debut. Martinez is extremely raw, and a lot of his value lies in his projectable body frame.

Therefore, it's promising that even with his current lesser stuff, he was still able to post a respectable walk rate and excellent dominance numbers. Martinez sits about 87-89 mph right now, but if everything goes well, he could end up in the low-to-mid 90s range.

Carlos Frias|RHP|19

61 IP/4.28 ERA/1.44 WHIP/2.59 FIP/67 K/24 BB

His surface statistics don't paint a special picture, but his FIP frames him well. I suppose the surface stats are why I haven't seen anybody mention him yet, but like with Marshall and Martinez, there are positives in his raw stuff.

Frias sits 92-93 mph with his fastball while touching 95 on occasion, and has two good off-speed pitches in his change and curve. I have him above both Martinez and Marshall for now, but his raw stuff puts him in a position to be the best on this list.

Around the Web: Matt Kemp Love

kensai — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:30:00 -0400

Mike Scioscia's Tragic Illness: Mike took on the same Paul Oberjuerge piece that I did...

True Blue L.A...and so did Eric Stephen.

Los Angeles Times: T.J. Simers writes that the Dodgers have a dynamic duo in Andre Ethier and Matt Kemp. You know they must be good if they motivated Simers to write a positive article. In fact, that might be the most convincing piece of evidence to date.

Baseball Prospectus: Joe Sheehan seems to think that the Dodgers have a top tier bullpen.

The more you watch the likely post-season teams close out their seasons, the more you think we might be in for some very long nights next month. The number of teams with questions about their bullpens seems to be awfully close to the number of teams who will get to play in October.

Set aside the top tier for the moment. The Yankees, Red Sox, and Dodgers have three of the top four bullpens in the game by total WXRL, and those rankings are warranted...The Dodgers are bolstered statistically by two rookies, Ronald Belisario and Ramon Troncoso, but their postseason core will be closer Jonathan Broxton and two left-handers who weren't around for much of the year, George Sherrill and Hong-Chih Kuo. Kuo may in fact wind up being the best reliever in the NL postseason, a power lefty capable of throwing multiple innings and getting right-handed batters out.

Somebody let Steve Berthiaume know.

NBC Sports: Mike Celizic brings us this piece of unintentional comedic genius.

For all the hype, Los Angeles has done very little when it counts

That line doesn't get the article off to a great start considering the Dodgers don't get any hype at all. Matt Kemp goes 80-80 with 43 HR in a game and the lead story on every mainstream publication is about the Yankees fighting, Joba Rules, or how Mike Lowell grooms his goatee (impeccable, by the way).

Mike Scioscia's Tragic Illness: Mike thinks Chad Billingsley has done enough to earn a starting spot. At least I have one ally.

FanGraphs: Marc Hulet has a solid overview of the world of prospect writing. I would have included both Baseball Intellect and Project Prospect in there as well.

In the comments, there are people mentioning the site that covers their favorite team's prospects the best. I guess you could say my goal is to one day get such a mention. After all, it's one of my main interests.

FanGraphs: How are the starter stars being acquired?

That works out to 11 pitchers acquired via trade, 13 in the draft, three as amateur free agents (read: intentional in this case), and three as actual free agents.

FanGraphs: How are the relief stars being acquired?

The count:
Seven traded
Four drafted
Three free agents
One Rule Five

FanGraphs: How are the catching stars being acquired?

Scoreboard:
Six drafted
Two traded
One free agent
One amateur free agent

FanGraphs: How are the infield stars being acquired?

All told we have a breakdown of: 18 drafted, 16 traded, three free agents, and three amateur agents. I’m sure most people see the developing theme here, but let me state the obvious: the best players in baseball this year were not acquired on the free agent market.

FanGraphs: How are the outfield stars being acquired?

Plus, there's this great conclusion to the whole study.

Overall, we sampled 115 of the league’s best and brightest. Of those, a combined 54 players were either drafted or signed as an amateur free agent by their current clubs. An additional two were plucked on waivers or through the Rule Five draft and 44 more were traded for. Only 15 players were signed as major league free agents, and it’s hard to classify many of those signings as blockbuster in magnitude.

There are some teams that take the scouting and drafting game less seriously than they should. I doubt those teams read this website, but if they did and wanted to take one statistic–one message–from this series, it’s this: 47 percent of 2009’s best players were “just prospects” at one point or another. That’s not to include all of the players traded at early points of their career either. Meanwhile only 13 percent were signed as free agents.

Free agency may get all the hype and buzz, but the draft is where teams find impact talent.

This is precisely why I care so unbelievably much about keeping and developing talent from within. It's not just because i'm crazy. :o

Sports Illustrated: A sad story about Sal Fasano's motivation for trying to get back into the big leagues. Gah.

Los Angeles Dodgers: Now I'm A Bit Worried

kensai — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 07:00:00 -0400

My concern has little to do with this team's recent performance, and more to do with this team's health entering the postseason.

Hiroki Kuroda originally was scheduled to pitch Saturday, but a stiff neck has led to his being scratched from his last start of the season.

"Probably from turning my head around so often the last time I pitched," Kuroda said, jokingly referring to his start in Pittsburgh on Sunday when he gave up seven runs in four innings. "Maybe it was the last home run."

Kuroda guessed that the cross-country flight from Pittsburgh to San Diego soon after pitching might be the source of his neck pain.

"I feel my age," said Kuroda, who turned 34 in February.

Another funny comment from the recent Memories Of Kevin Malone favorite, but any setback and the Dodgers are faced with a serious problem.

Out for the last three days because of a strained groin, Ronnie Belliard admitted to being concerned about how many at-bats he'll be able to get before the postseason.

Belliard, who is hitting .342 since being acquired from Washington on Aug. 31, said he felt better Wednesday but had no idea when he would play again.

"Timing is something that can be lost very quickly if you don't play games," Belliard said.

Bad.

Torre said he anticipated that Belliard and Casey Blake, who has sat out the last eight games because of a strained left hamstring, would at least be available to pinch-hit when the Dodgers play Friday.

Worse.

I previously mentioned the injury concerns in passing a couple days ago, but I wasn't particularly convinced that they would have an adverse affect on the postseason back then. However, with Kuroda, Blake, and Belliard all missing regular starts for the final series of the year, it's hard not to be a tad more worried.

Combine those three injuries with the questions about Clayton Kershaw's shoulder, Jim Thome's foot, Guillermo Mota's toe, and Hong Chih Kuo's elbow, and there's a recipe for disaster in there somewhere.

It seems and sounds like the trio of Kuroda, Kershaw, and Thome will be fine. However, I'd like to see Kuo and Mota show their previous effectiveness, and getting both Belliard and Blake in regular game action would soothe my fears as well.

I never want to assume the worst with injuries, but in recent postseason campaigns, the Dodgers have been adversely affected by Joe Beimel's bar incident and Hong Chih Kuo's color changing hand, so it's difficult not worry.

Record Amounts of Fail

kensai — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 02:00:00 -0400

Harry Doyle: That's all we got, one goddamn hit?
Assistant: You can't say goddamn on the air.
Harry Doyle: Don't worry, nobody is listening anyway.

Nothing I said yesterday changes after today, but this was one of the worst games i've seen the Dodgers have in a long time.

It's not the fact that the lineup can't hit that bothers me, I'm used to that, but the constant errors in the field is getting on my nerves.

On that note, why is Mark Loretta playing on this team? What does he do that Blake DeWitt doesn't do? Can somebody answer that for me? Thanks.

As far as Jon Garland goes, I think he just lost his playoff roster spot. There's no use for him if he isn't starting, because I think Vicente Padilla is better in short spurts as a two or three inning guy out of the pen.

Either way, don't feel so bad, things could always be worse. For example, you could be the kid at the 90-second mark in the following video.

Ned Colletti: To Extend Or Not To Extend

kensai — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:00:00 -0400

With the Los Angeles Times reporting that the Dodgers are in contract extension talks with Ned Colletti, now is as good a time as any to briefly address the elephant in the room before returning to your regularly scheduled playoff talk.

As Dodgers General Manager, there's no doubting that Colletti has made his share of terrible moves. However, in a general sense, it's hard to argue that the Dodgers haven't been better under him than under the previous regimes. Hell, I remember the times when you'd question whether the Dodgers would even finish above .500, much less make the playoffs. Yet, under Colletti, the Dodgers will now have reached the postseason for the third time in four years.

Of course, my problem with those who extol the positive attributes about Colletti's term is that they only look at one side of things and their analysis barely skims the surface of the happenings. Speaking about the team's success is great, but that doesn't actually evaluate Colletti's ability to make good moves.

It's easy to give Colletti credit now for bringing the organizational shift in philosophy back to the youth development, but he had nothing to do with it, and neither did his predecessor Paul DePodesta. Rather, that shift clearly started under Dan Evans when he hired Logan White and Kim Ng.

Neither DePodesta nor Colletti deserves credit for that stroke of genius that has almost single handedly marked the resurgence of the franchise. Regardless, many still credit Colletti with developing and refusing to part with prospects.

While I suppose Colletti deserves some credit for not selling the farm at the beginning of his tenure, I don't get how that is supposed to be one of the reasons to hire him back. What sane person would trade away the best prospects from the best farm system in the major leagues?

Coming from my perspective, as somebody who knows the value of prospects, it's absurd to me that people want to credit Colletti for not packaging Kershaw and Kemp for Jake Peavy or whatever those ridiculous rumors were. Let's be serious, nobody outside of Bill Bavasi would have done such a ridiculous deal.

Another point of criticism about Colletti is that a lot of his accolades are lessened by the fact that the farm system has driven much of his success. I don't believe it's an actual skill to be able to let great prospects become great players, especially when the people crediting him forget that Colletti has zero problems with trading away front line talent for mediocrity, as evidenced time and time against throughout his tenure.

Sorry, but the fact remains that Colletti has wasted a ton of money on utterly useless free agents, and a good majority of his trades have been of poor value.*

*I realize this is an unsubstantiated opinion as it stands, but I'll be bringing back the 'Chronicling Uncle Ned' section in the off-season to clarify.

Rather than piling on the praise for Colletti, it's more interesting to wonder how bad a GM he would have to be in order for the Dodgers not to be a playoff worthy squad. Year after year he has been awarded huge payroll flexibility by these young stars, and I honestly don't think there are many GMs out there who would be worse. In other words, if there was a WAR (Wins Above Replacement) for GMs, I doubt what Colletti has done to this point would prove to be that much above replacement level.

On that note, it should be no secret that I want Colletti out, but only if White or Ng take over. If White and Ng stay on board for the long term, then signing Colletti to an extension becomes easier to swallow. The nightmare scenario has the Dodgers signing Colletti to a long extension while both White and Ng bail on the franchise for better jobs, leaving Colletti's main source of success (minors) completely impotent.

Despite the risk of that scenario, wanting Colletti back is probably a common feeling, and I'm not surprised at all that fans want him to return. After all, it's the comfortable and easy thing to do. The Dodgers are winning again, so there's little incentive to mess with a good thing.

Personally though, I'm not one to settle for mediocrity at such an important position just because it's easier. Besides, things are only going to get harder for the Dodgers from here on out. The young stars will need extensions, more positions will need filling, a new managerial search may need to be conducted, and there are lots of potential trades to be made. While nobody knows exactly what will happen in the years to come, I do know that Colletti's isn't the one I want making important decisions in that pivotal future.

Los Angeles Dodgers: Problems? What Problems?

kensai — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 04:00:00 -0400

What is wrong with this team? Nothing.

Just like all of you, i'm not at all pleased by this team's play on the current road trip, but in the grand scheme of things, how much does this really matter?

As both Eric Stephen and Tom Verducci have proven, being hot going into the playoffs, holding a higher seed, and having home field advantage, doesn't really seem to factor in the playoffs at all. The challenge is getting to the playoffs in the first place, and the Dodgers have already jumped that obstacle.

In the end, all that matter is how the Dodgers play in the postseason. Remember last year's team? That squad finished 5-5, but they seemed to fare just fine against a superior Cubs team.

So to me, the most important factor in the final week is to have all your horses healthy going into the playoffs. The health of Kershaw, Blake, Thome, Belliard, and Mota are my main concerns, not necessarily how many games the Dodgers win against the Pirates and Padres.

************************************************************************

As far as Billingsley goes, he turned in a strong performance through five innings once again, but faltered in the sixth by walking the bases loaded. Less runs scored against him today than in his last start, but his last outing was more impressive.

Still, I can't help but feel he's at least partially back on track. He's still prone to bouts of trouble with his control, but the fact that his strikeout totals are finally returning to normal after the minor hamstring issues are a positive sign.

In the playoffs, and I do believe he's as solid a fourth option as you'll find (seriously, look at everybody else's fourth starters), it would probably be best if the bullpen is on call as soon as Billingsley enters the sixth inning. That's fine with me, as there's nothing wrong with getting the Dodgers through five frames unscathed with this relief corps. Ideally though, he won't even be needed after a Dodger sweep, right?

L.A. Dodger Matt Kemp is the Man, Critic Implores Childish Argument to Contrary

kensai — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 03:30:00 -0400

Paul Oberjuerge seems to think so.

Wait! Bone-headed plays, mental lapses, poor decisions?

That reminds me of Matt Kemp!

Really? "Budding superstar", "elite center fielder", and "most valuable Dodger" are the phrases that remind me of Matt Kemp.

Matt Kemp gets lots of love, of late, for his raw talent. Well and good.

But imagine how good this guy would be if he weren’t an utter dolt.

I actually can't imagine, so care to paint a picture for me with evidence? Thanks.

Is there a dumber guy in baseball than Matt Kemp? Not talking real-world IQ (but maybe we could), but “dumb plays involving a guy who no longer is a kid.” Baseball IQ, that is.

And on that scale, is anyone dumber than Matt Kemp?

You're a professional writer? Really?

You just stated that Kemp is dumb three times in four sentences. Geez, excuse me while I contact the journalism department of redundancy department.

By the way, still zero evidence to be found, unless you consider first grade name calling as evidence.

Matt Kemp, that poopie head.

Search your mind, for a moment, and consider how many times you have seen Matt Kemp thrown out on the bases. Yeah. A lot.

Not really. Even T.J. Simers, who is practically a real life troll, acknowledged recently that Kemp has been much better at limiting silly mistakes.

Regardless, I assume you have more evidence than just stating "I believe to have seen this happen a lot, therefore it is true", right?

Somebody somewhere must have that stat, Matt Kemp outs-made on basepaths …. and I will bet you $5 that (subtracting caught-stealing) no one in baseball has been tagged out on the bases more often than Matt Kemp.

Nope, no evidence, just more unsupported claims. Okay, I guess evidence was asking for too much.

Please though, don't dig yourself an even deeper hole...

Matt Kemp tries to take extra bases all the time. And often doesn’t make it. He gets doubled off a base. He strays too far off the bag and gets picked off. He’s just a disaster out there. And this has to do with a really low baseball IQ.

Oops, too late.

Actually, I'm going to go on the other extreme of things and claim that Matt Kemp is very valuable on the bases. Except that when I go on to explain my opinion, and here's the kicker, I'm actually going to use this thing called objective evidence.

Even aside from stealing bases, Kemp has either been the best or second best baserunner on the team.

In fact, the one area where Kemp performs well below expected is advancing on pitches in the dirt, as he should probably be more aggressive than he is. Ironically though, not only is it pretty much the only thing Oberjuerge doesn't mention, but he wants Kemp to stop trying to take the extra base. How grand.

Some Matt Kemp gaffes (including one on defense) from just the past week:

–In Washington on Thursday, bottom of the sixth, lazy fly ball to left-center. Kemp is playing center. Manny Ramirez is playing left. Repeat: Manny Ramirez is playing left.

Yeah, I agree that this was Kemp's fault. Then again, what exactly does this prove? You're saying that even the best defenders don't screw up once in a while?

Oh that Ozzie Smith, everybody thinks he's so good, but I remember this one time he lost a ball in the sun. Boy, what a crappy defender he is.

At the end of the inning, Dodgers broadcast analyst/apologist Steve “Psycho” Lyons talked about how playing center field is a learning experience for Matt Kemp. This is the same Matt Kemp who is now 27 and has played 152 games in center field this year.

Wow. Actually, Kemp just made 25, genius. It's funny because that's the one objective piece of information you've included all article long and you still managed to screw it up. I haven't seen this much fail since I watched Jake Delhomme against the Arizona Cardinals in the 2008-2009 NFL playoffs.

Usually I don't bash on people for mistakes like this, but he wrote a five paragraph rant and attempted to summarize it with the point about Kemp's age, yet he can't take the time to check his bio page to make sure the point he's making is actually relevant?

It's like me going on a rant about how Clayton Kershaw still hasn't fully developed yet at 31 years old. It would kind of ruin that entire rant if I got that small little age problem wrong, wouldn't it? Exactly.

No, Psycho, there is no such thing as a learning experience for Matt Kemp. He is a gold fish in the fish bowl that is baseball; every trip around the same small world somehow is a brand-new experience for “Goldy” Kemp.

Now this sounds more like genuine hate than criticism. That explains a lot.

Top seven, same game, in Washington, no outs. Kemp hits a ball to deep left that Josh Willingham tracks to the wall … and doesn’t catch. The ball hits the top of the wall, falls to Willingham’s feet, and he can’t find it. He’s looking everywhere for it, and he’s almost standing on it. It’s almost comical.

Meanwhile, Matt Kemp is running … that Kemp is no longer running toward third … he is running toward a point somewhere 30-40 feet up the foul line. When Kemp finally looks around to see where he is … he is in short left field...Arguably, he could have scored if he hadn’t run 350 feet while getting to third base. Just another example of his brain-dead work on the basepaths. Oh, and he was stranded at third.

Am I the only one who didn't see it like this? Was it really Kemp's fault for not getting an inside of the park homer out of Josh Willingham losing a double by his feet? What if Willingham had found the ball, picked it up, and gunned Kemp out trying to take the extra bag at home? By Oberjuerge's previous logic, Kemp should then be criticized for trying to take that extra bag. It's a Catch-22.

Besides, the whole rant is pointless, because he's criticizing Kemp for something that even he admits arguably could have led to a run. Way to point out those firm game changing mental errors.

–Today, in Pittsburgh. Top second, scoreless game. Matt Kemp leading off. He reaches second on the Pirates’ second error of the game. James Loney follows with a shallow pop to shortstop … which turns into a doubleplay when lookie-loo Matt Kemp decides to jog about halfway to third … and can’t get back to second in time to avoid being doubled up.

If he says alive, maybe he scores when the next batter, Mark Loretta, singles, and the Dodgers lead, and perhaps what finished as an 11-1 humiliation goes in some other direction entirely (Pittsburgh’s first five runs were unearned, by the way) and the Dodgers did the champagne in the clubhouse thing today — instead of lugging it all to San Diego for a game tomorrow.

So if Kemp doesn't get doubled off trying to score on a blooper, the Dodger staff wouldn't give up 11 runs? Cool assumption.

By the way, "maybe he scores" and "perhaps [the game] goes in some other direction"? Hahaha. Again, not exactly a solid game changing event he's whining about here.

I’ve been thinking about this for some time, while watching Matt Kemp play. And marveling at what a complete dope he is. He is a valuable player because he does so many things so easily … hit, hit for power, run. But he could do so much more if he brought, say, the brain of Torii Hunter to the game instead of the brain of Abby Normal. (”Young Frankenstein” reference there.)

The problem with this whole article is that it's one big exercise in confirmation bias and selective sampling. Worse yet, it's more about spewing ad hominem attacks about Matt Kemp than it is a true criticism of his play. Simply put, most of it is childish at best.

What Oberjuerge is basically doing is saying that Tom Brady might be useful because he has elite skills, but he would be so much better if he wasn't so dumb. Then Oberjuerge would list three marginal decisions Brady has made over the last month, that had nothing to do with the outcome of the games, and extrapolate those marginal decisions into Brady being the dumbest quarterback of all time.

Of course, the problem with his argument is that he has no real evidence to support the overriding theme of his article. So instead of trying to say something relevant about the argument he's trying to support, he just continues to badger the reader with first grade insults about a perceived low intelligence level.

Sound like a pathetic argument? It is, and that's exactly the point.

Down on the Farm: DSL Season Review

kensai — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 18:00:00 -0400

MVP

Enlly Morales|2B|19

243 AB/.317 AVG/.406 OBP/.440 SLG/.847 OPS/23 XBH/31 BB/23 K

Morales led the team in both AVG and OBP, and he finished second in SLG and OPS.

Impressive offensive numbers from the second base position, but better yet, he made only 10 errors in 29 games while reaching more balls than the other four infielders who shared the position.

That error total may sound atrocious, but within the context of the league, it's actually quite solid.

Cy Young

Yimi Garcia|RHP|18

54 IP/1.67 ERA/0.96 WHIP/51 K/15 BB/.202 BAA

Garcia threw the fourth-most innings, dealt the second-best ERA, and had the best WHIP on the team. He induces a good number of grounders, and has a solid K/BB ratio.

I'd like to see how his arm handles more innings next year, and whether he can increase his dominance and command.

Best Hitting Prospect

Enlly Morales|2B|19

.317/.406/.440/.847

In addition to the stuff I mentioned before, another reason I like Morales is his growth. This isn't the first year he has impressed, therefore there's more history to build on. In 2008, he hit .292/.353/.416/.769, so he has continued to take steps forward.

Players in complex leagues can luck into a good stat line quite easily with the small sample sizes, but since Morales has last year as a reference point, i'm more likely to believe his legitimacy.

Best Pitching Prospect

Gustavo Gomez|RHP|18

60 IP/2.70 ERA/1.23 WHIP/63 K/19 BB/.241 BAA

Gomez threw the most innings on the team and he finished fourth in both ERA and WHIP. I pictured him as a better prospect than Garcia, because I believe his frame has more room for growth, and he is already flashing more dominance potential.

Notables

Bladimir Franco|3B|18

.282/.401/.479/.880

Franco led the team in SLG and OPS, and ended up as the most polished pure hitter on the squad at 18. He has problems with contact (75 K/213 AB), but he works the count well (39 BB) and has pop (9 HR/21 XBH).

The only reason Franco isn't both the MVP and best prospect is because he has little track record of success and has made 24 errors at third.

Going forward, he needs to solve questions about his defense and prove that he's not a one-year wonder.

Alexis Aguilar|2B|18

.275/.377/.344/.720

That line might not look like much, but at a mere 18 years of age, he has plenty of time to develop. Aguilar is already flashing much better power than he did last year, and his plate discipline is advanced. His development needs to continue taking upticks.

Arismendy Ozoria|RHP|18

57 IP/2.53 ERA/1.18 WHIP/54 K/23 BB

An impressive ERA backed by an impressive WHIP and solid peripherals at 18? Sounds good. While it's clear he must work on his command, he has promise.

Jose Dominguez|RHP|18

59.1 IP/3.64 ERA/1.28 WHIP/57 K/24 BB

His 3.64 ERA and 1.28 WHIP are quite average, but his strikeout rate is solid, and his walk rate is improving.

He has shown much improvement from last year, especially in the realm of control, but he did so by sacrificing some of his strikeouts. Regaining his previous dominance and continuing to refine his command will be the key to Dominguez's progress.

Los Angeles Dodgers: Riding The Hot Hand

kensai — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 09:00:00 -0400

Just curious, but for all the fans out there who want to "ride the hot hand," would you be in favor of yanking Kershaw from the postseason rotation if he gets shelled today? After all, if he gets hit hard, he might be rusty due to the time he missed. Can't have that in the playoffs, right? As for me, I think you all know how I feel about that idea, so I'll just leave it be.

I do have another question though, and it's for what I believe to be a similar group of individuals. May I ask how you feel about these performances?

STL, @STL, PHI, @PHI

Two absolutely horrid starts, one solid start, and one mediocre start. I don't know about you, but I don't come away impressed. If you think you can't wait for Garland to start in the playoffs, well neither can Albert Pujols.

The only thing I find interesting about those four games is how good an average pitcher can look when he starts twice against Arizona, twice against Pittsburgh, and once against the Giants.

I know the next question asks how Billingsley fared, but everybody knows he has had a poor second half, so I doubt the answer will change anybody's mind.

@PHI, @STL, STL

One horrid start, one great start, and one solid start. Not elite by any stretch, but he fared better than Garland did. And for all you win maniacs out there, can you guess which team Billingsley's last win was against? Yup, St. Louis.

Regardless, this post isn't so much about proving that Billingsley is better than Garland in a broad context, as anybody with a brain should be able to see that. Rather, this post is just me, once again, pleading with people to remember that just because things are possible doesn't mean they're probable.

Look, I'm fully capable of recognizing that mediocre players like Marlon Anderson, Ronnie Belliard, and Juan Uribe have the ability to go nuts from time to time. My problem with those players, as always, is that doing so is simply improbable, and from my experience, you never want to bet against stacked odds.

Is it possible that Garland and Padilla win six postseason games for this team? Sure. And if they start in the playoffs, I hope they do. However, I just don't think it's a probable occurrence. To me, it seems like many fans are in a war against logic, and like betting against stacked odds, that's not a side I want to be on.

Los Angeles Dodgers: One Magic Number Down, One to Go

kensai — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 05:30:00 -0400

Credits on the wonderful picture go to commenter Juice. :o

Despite clinching a berth in the playoffs, there was no celebration from the Dodgers today. I'm sure they are waiting until the division race is settled, rightly so, and that magic number is down to two after Colorado faltered in St. Louis.

To be honest though, I'm sort of sad that they might be clinching the division on the road. The celebrations at home are always more entertaining. Plus, rookie hazing usually starts after the season is decided, and I'm sure we all love that.

Speaking of the playoffs, it seems the Dodgers have their rotation aligned for the time being. With Wolf pitching yesterday, Kershaw starting today, and Kuroda going tomorrow, those will probably be the exact three guys who will go in the series against Colorado, which also sets them up perfectly in the playoffs.

Guess who goes on Tuesday? Billingsley, of course. Though I'm not convinced Torre really wants to pitch him. As such, I believe it's imperative that he does well, not because it would change my mind at all, but because it will probably change Torre's.

Let's Try This Again

kensai — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:00:00 -0400

I was going to draw a tutu on Orlando, but I got lazy. I suck.

Casey Blake should be available to start today, and I'm assuming Joe Torre wants to get Ronnie Belliard back in the lineup, so could Hudson be the odd man out again? Or maybe James Loney gets a day off?

******************************************************************************************

Since I use my weekends to work on my thesis and have a life, I wouldn't expect a whole lot of posts on Saturday and Sunday until after some time in December. This is just an FYI in case anybody was wondering why I just post game threads on the weekend, yet have this huge influx of posts during the week. I'm still trolling around the site all the time though, because I can't resist. :o

On that note, starting Monday, i'm posting my minor league review for each Dodger affiliate.

The Dodgers Have the Worst Playoff Rotation Ever

kensai — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:00:00 -0400

Or something like that.

8. Dodgers

Prospective rotation: (1) Randy Wolf, (2) Clayton Kershaw (if healthy), (3) Hiroki Kuroda, and (4) (pick one) Chad Billingsley, Jon Garland, or Vicente Padilla.

Every time we asked one of our panelists about the Dodgers' rotation, we got a variation of the same response: "I don't even know what their rotation is," said one NL scout.

Uh, that's OK. Neither do they. Wolf, to even their surprise, has morphed into their Game One starter thanks to a great year (11-6, with seven blown saves behind him and more quality starts—23—than any NL pitcher except Tim Lincecum or Dan Haren). And Kuroda (5-1, 2.34 the past two months) has finally righted his ship.

But the often-dominating Kershaw is still inching back from a separated non-pitching shoulder. And the big enigma is Billingsley, who started out 9-3, 2.72, and then unraveled so mightily, he pitched himself out of the rotation—but then might have pitched his way back in with six one-hit innings Wednesday in Washington.

"He had so much trouble commanding the strike zone last time I saw him," said one NL scout, "I thought something [physical] was going on. He's too good to become that ordinary."

Garland and Padilla will be around just in case. So the Dodgers have options. But they also have way too many questions to sit near the top of this list.

That's right, the Dodger rotation is ranked eighth out of the eight current playoff teams despite the fact that the Dodger starters have the second-best ERA in the big leagues.

That doesn't matter though, because Joe Scout thinks Aaron Cook is the key to the Rockies' playoff chances. Cool.

Joe Scout doesn't need to pay any attention to the stuff done on the AL and NL playoff rotations at Beyond The Box Score. Why would he? Watching the game is all that matters!

See? It's just a bunch of statistical mumbo jumbo.

Worse yet, those jokers at Baseball Prospectus threw in their two cents as well.

They just don't get it, do they?

Gah.

In all seriousness, I understand that the strength of the Dodger rotation is in depth and that it's not necessarily top heavy. However, to exaggerate that truth into a suggestion that the Dodgers basically have no worthwhile top four is a bit much, don't you think?

I don't know about you, but I'm now beyond the point of caring about the national media giving the Dodgers respect. I know this is hilarious coming from me, especially since I do nothing but whine about how dumb the mainstream media can be, but I'm going to try and look at the positive side of things for once.

For example, by getting no respect, outside expectations are lowered. When external expectations are lowered, it often ends up being a win-win scenario for everybody involved.

If the team loses, fans will have expected it anyway. If the team wins, fans will be ecstatic that they pulled off an "upset."

I'm sure Frank McCourt, Ned Colletti, and Joe Torre would love for the Dodgers to be written off as an easy match in the playoffs. That's the kind of under the radar coverage that does nothing but help a team in the end. Not only from the fan perception angle, but also for the players.

After all, there is no better motivator than feeling slighted. So go ahead, peg the team with the best record in the National League as the four seed, it's better that way.

If the current talk surrounding the Dodgers sounds familiar, it should—the team was treated similarly last year and it resulted in a first round sweep of the heavily-favored Cubs and the first Dodger playoff series win since 1988.

Yet, despite similar media disrespect, this year's squad has a decided advantage over last year's squad: They're better. Simply put, they have more talent, which is why they deservedly have more wins. It's the simple truth, regardless of whether people around the country want to recognize it.

Playing the role of the underdog once again, plus having significantly more talent, will hopefully equal one step further into the playoffs. Or perhaps, with a little bit of luck, two.

Looks Like Jim Rice Won't Be a GM Anytime Soon

kensai — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 06:00:00 -0400

Well, ironically, maybe he would have a chance with the Kansas City Royals.

Zack Greinke didn’t really impress me last night. He pitched well and maybe I caught him on a bad night, but to me he didn’t seem dominant. Greinke has may have the lowest ERA in the AL since Pedro Martinez in 2000, but he doesn’t strike me as the dominant force that Pedro was during his statistical peak. Don’t get me wrong, Greinke pitched very effectively but he was not the unhittable beast on the mound that Pedro or Clemens (or even Johan Santana) were during their reign of dominance.

He only gave up two hits in 6 innings but struggled with his command and, with 5 strikeouts, it’s not like he was punching tickets up and down the Red Sox lineup.

He reminds me of a right-handed Roger Moret. He has that long and lean frame but good speed on his fastball and sporadic command.

Being a good player doesn't mean you're good at evaluating talent. Like Michael Jordan. Nor does it mean you will be a good coach. Like Wayne Gretzky.

Remember, Zack Greinke isn't impressive because he doesn't compare to 1999 Pedro Martinez, who posted possibly the best season by a pitcher in baseball history. Sweet insight.

Los Angeles Dodgers: Almost There

kensai — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 02:15:00 -0400

After today, the Dodgers have clinched at least a playoff for a playoff berth, but nothing short of a division title should satisfy them.

Matt Kemp On The Verge Of History

If he manages to keep his .300 batting average over the next nine games, Kemp will be the first player in Dodger history to put up a line of .300 AVG/25 HR/100 RBI/30 SB. Hell, he even has an outside shot of making the 30-30 club, and he's 4 runs short of 100.

Eric Collins And Steve Lyons

I don't necessarily enjoy listening to them, especially because they sort of have similar voices. However, their discussions about statistics are hilarious to me.

Every time Collins brings up some "new" statistic like OPS, I can almost hear the growing anger and confusion in the voice of Lyons.

O...P...S? OBP...+...SLG? Addition? So hard...brain...melting...

Orlando Hudson Is Okay...Casey Blake Isn't

I have little concern over Hudson, but more concern over Blake.

A postgame examination by trainer Stan Conte showed that the part of the wrist that Hudson hurt wasn't in the same area that he had operated last season and that he hadn't lost any range of motion.

Told that he was listed as day to day, Hudson was able to joke about the incident at the expense of Dunn, his teammate in Arizona last season.

Good to hear.

Casey Blake was held out of the lineup to rest his left hamstring, which he strained again Tuesday. Torre guessed the third baseman would be out for a couple of days.

More and more this is sounding like a nagging injury that will affect him for the rest of the year. Not something the Dodgers need from at this point.

Rafael Furcal Has Lost His Mind

After tonight's 4-for-5 performance that included two doubles and the go-ahead homer, Furcal's September line reads .345/.415/.559/.974. Here's hoping this is a hot streak that will last through the playoffs. The Dodgers will need it since it's clear that Joe Torre will not demote him from the leadoff slot.

Russell Martin Needs A Live Chicken

His line on the season now reads .254/.352/.329/.681, which is quite terrible anyway you cut it. Of course, this doesn't affect his defense, which is back to excellent after a bit of a lull for a few weeks in the summer. However, it does make him a liability in the lineup, and that looks to continue at least until next year.

Beating A Dead Horse

Vicente Padilla had another mediocre outing today, but I wasn't really surprised, because it's what mediocre pitchers do. What's currently happening to Padilla can just as easily happen to Jon Garland as well. Why? Because they are simply pitchers who are variations of average.

At their best, they are slightly above average. At their worst, they are below average. It's fine to desire nothing but the best from players on your favorite team, just don't cross that line between hope and delusion.

Around the Web: Minor League Life

kensai — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 08:45:00 -0400

Minor League Life: Giants minor leaguer Garrett Broshuis gives his take on the Angel Villalona case.

Minor League Life: Another great post about pitching to score and using wins as a performance measurement. I wonder how a guy who hates "stat nerds" would argue to him that he's wrong?

"I know you play the game, and this is a well-reasoned post, but...you just didn't know how to win before!"

True Blue L.A.: Phil with a recap of the AZL squad. I'm going to do something similar, but it's taking me a while because I'm busy/lazy.

True Blue L.A.: Phil recaps the Ogden squad.

MLB.com: Cameras follow Matt Kemp around as he takes a tour of the various Dodger offices. When he helps answer phones, one caller asks him if he's still a virgin. Who the hell does that?

Mike Scioscia's Tragic Illness: One of the best bullpens in baseball history? I'm not sure about that, but it's the best in the league.

Beyond The Box Score: A cutter is such a beautiful pitch. I actually don't believe it's for everybody, but it's certainly effective when used correctly.

Sports Illustrated: This isn't baseball related, but I love reading about people who think outside of the box. It's a story about a high school football coach who goes for it on every fourth down.

While that's extreme to apply to higher levels of competition, it boggles my statistics-loving mind when a high-powered NFL offense punts from the opposing team's 40-yard line on 4th-and-4 or something. Ugh. Your balls: please find them.

Beyond The Box Score: There's some excellent ideas involving contracts here.

But, what if Adam is a second-half player, and a team wants him to play more like second-half Adam in the first half? How might a team structure a contract to give LaRoche the incentive to do the things he needs to do (e.g., get in shape, practice, take his medication regularly, etc.) to generate higher production? I have a simple solution: Offer a big All-Star bonus.

Players with strong first halves have an advantage at making the All-Star team over second-half players. Many players have All-Star bonuses in their contracts in small amounts, a few thousands dollars or so. If a full-year of second-half LaRoche is worth an additional $2 million, offer him a $2 million bonus for making the team. If he can fix the problem, it will likely be fixed. If not, you get the same LaRoche as always without having to pay the bonus.

Never thought of stuff like that before, but it works perfectly, no?

The Onion: An article dedicated to Derek Jeter's great accomplishment.

Positives and Negatives

kensai — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:30:00 -0400

Chad Billingsley's start certainly didn't end the way anybody wanted, but unlike some who want to use this performance as further evidence that he's unreliable, I find it extremely hard to take away anything negative from this showing.

The Nationals are a solid offensive team, and the fact remains that Billingsley absolutely dominated them. Was it perfect? Of course not. I was as frustrated as anybody that he couldn't locate some of his pitches, and it was totally his fault that the homer he surrendered was of the 3-run variety. However, any criticism leveled at him for allowing five baserunners and striking out nine batters over six innings borders on delusion.

It's probably true that I show more confidence in our young stars than most would at this point, but then again, they've never given me much reason to doubt them either. I'm defending his ability for the same reason I defended Jonathan Broxton's, Matt Kemp's, Andre Ethier's and many others.

Going forward, it's imperative for his playoff rotation chances to build on this performance, especially with Joe Torre doing the decision making. Nobody expects him to allow less hits than today, but it's reasonable to expect better location and consistency.

*****************************************************************************************

One clear negative of the day was the earned run that George Sherrill gave up, but not for anything Sherrill did. He pitched excellent as usual, but the defense looked like something out of Little League, as Matt Kemp and Manny Ramirez miscommunicated on a routine flyball, and Orlando Hudson blew a double play ball with a poor throw. Terrible.

*****************************************************************************************

Speaking of Hudson, if he's seriously hurt, that pretty much eliminates the competition for the second baseman's job. If that turns out to be the case, I feel extremely bad for him, because he was likely on his way to a solid payday in the off-season, and the fact remains that he has been a solid contributor to the Dodgers in 2009.

Chad Billingsley: Make Or Break

kensai — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:30:00 -0400

Chad Billingsley looks to prove his doubters wrong and get back on track.

Since the All-Star Game, in which he allowed one run in one inning, Billingsley has posted a 3-6 record and 5.49 ERA. While his overall numbers on the season still look fine on paper (12-10, 4.05 ERA in 31 games, with 165 strikeouts in 184 1/3 innings), they haven't looked quite as rosy in real time of late.

While many fans seem to think this start will make or break Billingsley's postseason rotation chances, I'm a bit more optimistic about him.

Like anybody else, I'd love to see him get back on track with a nine inning shutout or something of the sort, but I'll settle for a solid outing of any kind just to get him back on track before the playoffs.

GT

Can't Dodge the Truth: L.A.'s Most Valuable Players Don't Have Big Contracts

kensai — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 06:30:00 -0400

Found this interesting graph and analysis by Walter Fulbright over at Beyond The Box Score.

The top 3 contributors on this team in terms of WAR are Matt Kemp, Casey Blake(!), and Clayton Kershaw. If Blake weren't having the second best year of his career and were closer to his career norms, the third would be Chad Billingsley. This is the most prominent example we've shown (so far) where the top payroll breakdown tells a much more interesting story than the VOC graph does: The Dodgers young talent isn't complementing their success, it's creating it.

Of the top 5 paid players, 2 are worth their money: Kuroda and Furcal. In terms of WAR, Kuroda is the 10th best player on this team. Furcal 12th. Schmidt is a completely lost cause, Pierre (despite having a season actually above what he projected, and what he had shown in prior years), was a lost cause the minute they signed the contract, and it wasn't bad luck: any due diligence would have revealed that he would be exactly what he is. And of course, Manny. I'm surprised some blind old scout with shingles doesn't get credit for identifying one of the best right handed hitters in baseball history, and after careful deliberation and listening to the plane of the bat swing, deciding that yes, he's a pretty good player.

After 2 straight years of Ned Colletti doing anything he could to prevent his young talent from contributing on offense, they eventually broke through on their own and made it impossible to send them back to the bench or platoon duty. The next couple of years should be a blast to watch, just remember to give credit where the credit is due.

Touting the youth movement as the reason for recent success is not exactly a new thing on this site, but I thought it would be nice for somebody else to beat the dead horse a bit.

Los Angeles Dodgers: Ronnie Belliard vs. Orlando Hudson

kensai — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:15:00 -0400

Due to the Dodgers not playing today, I guess a lot of people are making a big deal about this article by Jim Peltz about Joe Torre starting Ronnie Belliard over Orlando Hudson.

It appears Orlando Hudson might no longer be the Dodgers' starting second baseman.

Manager Joe Torre sounded non-committal Sunday as recent acquisition Ronnie Belliard played in place of Hudson for the second consecutive game.

I believe a large portion of the fans are clamoring for Belliard to start because of his hot hitting since he was acquired. However, there are those like Dave Cameron from FanGraphs who believe that starting Belliard would be the wrong move to make.

Belliard simply is an inferior player to Hudson. His entire production bump since the trade to LA is a function of a 25% HR/FB rate that has allowed him to slug .589 in 18 games. If you think that's sustainable, I've got a bridge to sell you.

Belliard is a swing-at-anything hack without the contact or power to make that kind of approach work. In 204 plate appearances before the Nationals shipped him to LA, he posted a .297 wOBA.

He's not a defensive wizard. He doesn't run well. He's not as good of a hitter. The only thing Belliard can outdo Hudson in would be some kind of eating competition.

When October rolls around, Torre better have Hudson installed back at second base and Belliard on the bench where he belongs. Any other alignment will be a blow to the Dodgers' chance of winning a World Series.

So what about me? Well, I'm not in any particular camp.

While I don't disagree with anything Cameron said about Belliard, I'm not so sure Hudson is that good of a player either.

I mentioned that Hudson was a rather mediocre hitter at the beginning of the season, and while he made me look like an idiot for a while, his offensive production has come down to about his neutral park norms for recent times.

My current stance is that if Torre wants to play Belliard during the regular season until his luck runs out, then so be it.

I'm not sure Hudson's true talent level is so significantly better that it would be foolish not to start him (like would be the case with say, Manny Ramirez and Juan Pierre).

However, when it comes to the playoffs, I'm not quite as sold on the idea of Belliard starting. After all, the Dodgers won't be playing the Diamondbacks, Pirates, Padres, and Nationals in October, they'll be facing elite staffs, and you generally want to go at them with your best players.

Everybody is reeling off these comparisons to Marlon Anderson in 2006, but while he may have had a 1.243 OPS for the Dodgers that year, his OPS in the postseason was .692. I don't blame him though, he was never as good as he showed during the regular season after that trade. And neither is Belliard.

Remember, hot and cold streaks start and end quite randomly. That's not a stat nerd thing either. Everybody who has played any sport knows that there's no switch you turn on and off. Sometimes you just feel like God and you're drilling everything.

A week later, you go 1-for-4 in a game, then 0-for-4 the next day, and before you know it, you're one for your last 21, and everybody's asking you why you suck.

Point being, if you want to chance it that Belliard's hot streak will continue, I don't have any real issue with it. Personally though? I'd rather not risk it.

Matt Kemp Isn't Just Lucky

kensai — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:20:00 -0400

This article by Matt Swartz proves it.

First, there's Matt Kemp. Despite Kemp’s power tendencies and relatively high strikeout rate, Kemp is also a BABIP Superstar, but he's unlike other players similar to him in those regards because of his speed; a reflection of that is that Kemp has a 12.8 percent rate of infield hits per ground ball this season. He also rarely pops out when he doesn’t miss, doing so only 4.6 percent of the time this season, and only 2.0 percent of the time in 2008. He also hits the ball very hard, allowing many line drives and outfield flies to fall in as well. This year, he has a BABIP of .359, even higher than my .346 projection.

I only mention this now because there has been past speculation about Kemp's high BABIP tendencies and what it meant for his future.

A lot of people thought his batting average would eventually come back down to Earth, but I defended him because I believed his speed helped him beat out a good portion of the high amount of ground balls he hit, and he also drilled a lot of line drives.

While I suppose the study itself is still partially inconclusive, it's quite clear that any expectation for Kemp's batting average to fall based on his high BABIP is rooted in false assumptions. Barring a change in skill or ball distribution, Kemp's batting average should remain in the .290-.310 range.

Talk About a Bad Day...

kensai — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 19:50:00 -0400

This actually isn't funny, but I admit I sort of chuckled. Then again, I'm probably a bad person. :o

A baseball prospect for the San Francisco Giants is the main suspect in the killing of a 25-year-old man in the Dominican Republic, police said Sunday.

Angel Villalona turned himself in 12 hours after the man was shot at a bar in the southern coastal city of La Romana, Col. Adrian Urbaez told The Associated Press.

The 19-year-old was considered the Giants’ most prized prospect when he signed and was chosen the top prospect in the Arizona Rookie League two years ago.

Villalona will appear in court Monday and could face up to 20 years in prison if found guilty in the Saturday night killing of Mario Felix de Jesus Velete, police said.

Wow. I was actually following his career, too.

All I'm Going To Say Is...

kensai — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 13:15:00 -0400

...Whatever you felt about Vicente Padilla before yesterday better be the same as today.

He's the same pitcher.

Since coming over, Padilla has faced the Rockies, the Giants twice, and the Diamondbacks twice. Just saying.

So it doesn't matter whether you saw him as an ace, a third starter, or a fifth starter. The bottom line is that he's still the same guy he used to be, and he'll continue to be the same guy the next time he runs out there.

Same with Jon Garland. Since coming over, he has faced the Diamondbacks twice, the Pirates once, and he faces the Giants today. Same guy, crappy teams.

Same with Chad Billingsley as well. He's struggling against everybody, and we all know it, but if he goes out and pitches a quality game in his next start, does that really make you believe he's magically better? It'd be nice to see, for sure, but opinions that fickle are likely to have been misguided to begin with.

Los Angeles Dodgers: The Best on the Bases

kensai — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 10:15:00 -0400

When you hear fans discuss which players are the best baserunners, the argument usually boils down to who has the most steals.

However, we know that baserunning involves so many different aspects besides base stealing.

Stuff like taking the extra base on a hit and advancing on a wild pitch do factor into a player's value as a baserunner. Dare I say they are...little things?

I mock that term all the time because it usually involves hyperbole about something unprovable, but I have a little evidence to back this position up.

With a little help from Baseball Prospectus and Bill James Online, I thought I would take a crack at examining the best baserunners on the Dodgers.

Equivalent Baserunning Runs

Baseball Prospectus measures overall baserunning value with a metric they call EqBRR. EqBRR has five different measurements: EqGAR, EqSBR, EqAAR, EqHAR, and EqOAR.

Don't be scared off by the acronyms, it's really not that hard to digest if you just click on the links and read exactly what each metric measures.

It all makes good sense, and you'll probably see how it's an effective way of measuring those little things that make a difference in close games.

EqGAR

Matt Kemp is likely on top of this metric simply because he's the fastest player on the team. Ground balls are a relatively easy read for the baserunner, so there's less skill involved. Rather, it's more about pure acceleration and top-end speed.

Given that, it's nice to see Rafael Furcal at the top of the list. His speed still seems to be there, but he's just not using it to steal.

EqAAR

Air reads are more complicated because you can't just take off at the crack of the bat. Judging line drives, fly balls, and pop flies quickly is more skill related than seeing a grounder and running fast.

Casey Blake and Manny Ramirez probably play above their raw speed here because they are adept at reading the ball off the bat. Conversely, it's possible that Matt Kemp and Russell Martin haven't quite figured it out yet.

EqHAR

The Dodgers as a group seem to excel at scoring on hits. Grounders, flies, and line drives are all combined into one, so it's hard to tell why certain players are better than others. However, it's possible that Larry Bowa is just doing a good job here.

EqOAR

As a team, the Dodgers are atrocious at taking the extra base on wild pitches and passed balls. Maybe somebody should help them with making reads? Geez.

EqSBR

This reflects the efficiency of the base stealer, not just raw steal totals that mean nothing without context.

More than anything on an individual level, though, their poor base stealing figures reflect on their manager's poor strategy as well.

Joe Torre's constant hit-and-runs and double steals usually end up having negative outcomes. Sorry, but constantly running into inning-ending outs doesn't work so well.

Who would have thought that double stealing on a 3-2 count with James Loney and Casey Blake while Matt Kemp is at the plate would be a bad idea?!

EqBRR

EqBRR is supposed to determine the player with the most value on the bases (and it does), but since it includes value from stolen bases, it doesn't fully determine which players are the most effective at the less prominent aspects of base-running.

In order to get that information, I'll need to measure it without the EqSBR component.

EqBRR-EqSBR

After factoring out base stealing, most of the Dodgers are pretty solid baserunners, which shows you how bad Joe Torre's strategy really is.

Judging by the chart, i'd say Andre Ethier and Casey Blake are two players that have below average speed but above average value (good baserunners). On the other hand, Orlando Hudson has above average speed but just below average value.

Despite ranking second on the list, I believe that Matt Kemp can do better as well. He's already a huge contributor on the basepaths, but if he fine-tunes his reads, he could provide the type of baserunning value that guys like Chone Figgins and Ichiro Suzuki have.

Net Gain

Bill James Online measures first to third, second to home, first to home, taking extra bases, and avoiding double plays.

The metric he uses is called Net Gain, and it consists of two measurements: BR Gain and SB Gain. I don't think it's too hard to figure out what those stand for.

SB Gain

These results are a little different from EqSBR because they measure value based purely on SB/CS numbers. Still no real surprises, but the value of this exercise comes from being able to confirm what we observed in the EqSBR numbers.

BR Gain

A little different from the EqBRR-EqSBR rating, but this measurement doesn't have nearly the amount of components. It still provides value to us by affirming our previous thoughts on certain players, though.

Net Gain

Nothing new here, just a summation of the two previous metrics.

Concluding Observations

It's likely that Matt Kemp is both an elite base stealer and elite overall baserunner. He ranks 20th in the majors in EqBRR, he ranks 19th in the majors in EqSBR, he's tied for fourth in the bigs in Net Gain, and he's tied for sixth in the bigs in SB Gain. Scary thing? He has room to improve.

Juan Pierre is an overrated overall baserunner. He's not incredibly efficient stealing bases, and he's nowhere close to an elite base stealer. In fact, he has essentially league average value on the basepaths, which is pathetic for somebody who has a reputation for speed.

James Loney and Manny Ramirez are slow human beings. Painfully so. Your eyes do not lie.

Rafael Furcal's wheels are likely fine. His back and confidence might not be, but his speed appears to be there.

Casey Blake could be the most underrated baserunner on the team. He's probably never going to have that much overall baserunning value because he's so slow, but it's amazing that a plodder like him could possibly provide above average value.

Russell Martin's poor rating is primarily powered by a Joe Torre-fueled woeful base stealing year. Still, I expect better than average out of him, not below average.

All-Star Team of the Decade

kensai — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 08:00:00 -0400

Tom Verducci did an article on who he believed were the best players of this decade and I thought it was an interesting concept, but he didn't give any justification for his selections, so I figured I would do my own version.Based on a player's WAR(wins above replacement) numbers, which is an indicator of how valuable a player is to his team, I have put together the best team of players of the decade.

All-Star Team of the Decade

If you want to get a little understanding of the Latin American influence upon the game in the aughts, check out this All-Decade Team:

C: Jorge Posada

I'll be honest, the first name that shot into my head was Joe Mauer (~32.9 WAR). However, the reality is that his career started in 2004 and he has only had three seasons of monster WAR totals thus far. He's probably a solid candidate for catcher of the next decade though.

Pudge Rodriguez (~31.7 WAR) was another option, but he peaked early in the decade and is now an absolute shell of his former self.

That basically leaves Jorge Posada (~41.7 WAR) as the only real choice here. Yeah, his defense is below average, but he has had eight seasons this decade with a WAR over four. Nobody comes close to that.

My Pick: Jorge Posada

1B: Albert Pujols

I would like to pretend there is a competition of some sort, but nobody is even close to Albert Pujols (~76.4 WAR). I hate you, Albert.

Just kidding, I want to have your children. Please sign with the Dodgers.

My Pick: Albert Pujols

2B: Jeff Kent

Gah! Is Jeff Kent (~36.2 WAR) really the best second baseman of the decade? Well, he has a compelling case, as he leads all second basemen in WAR over that time period. However, while he was an elite player with five-plus WAR seasons from 2000-2002, he tailed off considerably after that. Besides, Kent was a jerk of the highest nature and I honestly can't think of a player in recent memory that I hate more.

All biases aside though, I would have probably given the honor to Chase Utley (~33.9 WAR) anyway. His career started in 2003 and he didn't get full playing time until 2005, but from the time he got the starting nod, he has done nothing but put up five-plus WAR seasons.

Personally, I'll take the guy who was elite for longer despite having only half the decade to establish himself. The fact that Utley is even close to Kent in pure statistics speaks volumes of how good he is.

My Pick: Chase Utley

SS: Derek Jeter

Overrated. A funny word, isn't it? So much debate over something that is inherently subjective. People love to take it out of context because it comes with negative connotations, but it doesn't always have to get ugly that way.

Sorry, but no matter how good Derek Jeter currently is, and he's plenty good, he'll never be underrated or anything close to it. Why? Because of media outlets like ESPN pumping out fluff pieces that compare him to Ruth/Mantle/Gehrig/DiMaggio. Hell, I even saw one article compare Jeter to Honus Wagner. Ugh.

Anyway, after I got done throwing up in my mouth, I realized that no matter how much sabermetricians bash him, he'll still always be overrated because of the plethora of delusional media types just waiting for an excuse to glorify him on national television.

Still, Jeter's WAR this decade is ~45.9, which far outpaces Miguel Tejada's ~38.9, so Jeter's the runaway choice for me...and he's still overrated.

My Pick: Derek Jeter

3B: Alex Rodriguez

Yeah, A-Rod used steroids. Whatever. He's ridiculously good. Ridiculously.

Alex Rodriguez's ~73.2 WAR beats Chipper Jones (~49.8 WAR), the second-place finisher, by almost 25 wins. That is probably the most impressive thing I've seen since I watched this little dude park.

Sure, A-Rod's a douche, but for him to cost his team 25 wins in "moral support" or whatever you want to call it, he'd have to pretty much go around trying to rape his teammates in the shower after every practice and game. In immediate retrospect though, if you're sitting there thinking "well, that doesn't sound so far fetched", you might have a point.

My Pick: Alex Rodriguez

LF: Manny Ramirez

I think Verducci had a brain fart here or something. Is it just me or did he completely miss on Barry Bonds (~64.4 WAR)? He must have, because there's no legit reason not to put him here. After all, if steroids was what kept Bonds off the list, then why put Manny Ramirez (~42.2 WAR) there instead?

My Pick: Barry Bonds

CF: Carlos Beltran

As far as I can see, there are three choices here: Andruw Jones, Carlos Beltran, and Jim Edmonds.

Maybe people forget about him nowadays because of his precipitous decline, but Jones was a premier center fielder in the majors for quite a while. He had four seasons this decade at six WAR or above, and he totaled ~41.4 over that span, placing third among center fielders.

Beltran leads center fielders in WAR for the decade (~48.6), but he has only had three seasons over that time period at six WAR or above. That's not meant to belittle his accomplishments, but you could argue that Jones was better.

In the end, I think it's Edmonds who remains the forgotten man. He is second in WAR (~46.3) among center fielders, and he had an amazing six seasons this decade at six WAR or above. He tailed off harshly toward the end of that time period, but he was the elite of the elite for six years, much more than either of his competition could muster.

My Pick: Jim Edmonds

RF: Vladimir Guerrero

Right field provides another trio of choices in Bobby Abreu, Vladimir Guerrero, and Ichiro Suzuki.

Abreu (~44.7 WAR) is probably the surprise mention to a lot of people, particularly because he's not that flashy. The bottom line, however, is that he has consistently got on base for a decade, and it all adds up. He has had three years this decade over five WAR, so he has been elite at times as well.

That said, he doesn't really stack up against Vlad (~45.9 WAR). The WAR figures are close, but Vlad had five seasons this decade over five WAR, showing that he has been an elite player for a longer period of time.

Both of those guys don't really compare well with Ichiro (~50.3 WAR) though. He has a solid lead over both of them in overall WAR, and he has posted six seasons this decade over five WAR. Furthermore, he has had one less year than both Abreu and Guerrero, showing how much better he has been than any other right fielder this decade, much like Utley did with the second basemen.

Ichiro is interesting to me because he presents a divide between four factions instead of the normal three. Usually there is a divide between the mainstream media, sabermetricians, and regular fans. With Ichiro though, there seems to be a divide between mainstream media, regular fans, sabermetricians, and people who think they have a clue about statistics but don't.

Yes, the mainstream media are wrong for touting Ichiro as one of the greatest hitters of all time. No, his merely solid hitting statistics don't mean he's not a great player.

It's true that Ichiro is a completely overrated hitter. Simply put, he doesn't deserve to be considered one of the best hitters of this generation. However, his real value stems from his status as an elite defender and an elite baserunner. I don't get what people don't understand about that.

My Pick: Ichiro Suzuki

DH: David Ortiz

I guess the definition of a DH is sort of subjective, but my analysis came down to two hitters: Jason Giambi and Jim Thome.

David Ortiz (~26.6 WAR) was a great player, but the fact remains that he sort of sucked for a good portion of the decade. He had three seasons above five WAR, and by contrast, he had four seasons 1.2 WAR or below, which is lower than league average. He gets minus points for looking like a Dominican Shrek as well.

Giambi (~40.8 WAR) only had three seasons above five WAR as well, but they were way above five WAR, and he only had three seasons where he was below league average. Hence the ~14 win difference over Ortiz in Giambi's overall WAR total. Minus points for wearing a gold thong and trying to play it off as cool.

Thome (~39.7 WAR), like the other two, only had three seasons above five WAR. However, he only had one season where he was below average, and thus he was a more consistent force to be reckoned with. Thome gets bonus points for not being linked to steroids, not wearing a thong, and not looking like Shrek.

My Pick: Jim Thome

LHP: Randy Johnson

I thought this one wouldn't even be close, but I was gladly wrong.

Johan Santana (~41.4 WAR) has a good case, as he didn't become a full-time starter until 2004, but still ran off four seasons of five-plus WAR.

Still though, Randy Johnson (~43.2) was the elite of the elite. The only thing that stopped him from starting the decade with five straight seasons of seven-plus WAR was an injury in 2003. Besides, he's a World Series hero. That counts for something.

My Pick: Randy Johnson

RHP: Pedro Martinez

Pedro Martinez (~39.6 WAR) seemed like a solid pick to me, but a lot of his best seasons were before the decade started. He had one of the best seasons ever in 2000, but had only three more seasons of five-plus WAR. What really hurts him is the fact that he's been essentially useless for four years running now.

Javier Vazquez (~39.9 WAR)? No, I'm not joking. He has had four seasons of five-plus WAR, just like Pedro, and has a higher overall WAR total. Why? Mainly because he's a good pitcher that throws 200 innings year in and year out. It's worth mentioning that he has a reputation for underperforming, so I probably wouldn't put him above Pedro, but I think he deserves a mention.

Curt Schilling (~37.7 WAR) shouldn't be a shocker, but he has only had three seasons with a WAR of five or above. Missing the last two years of the decade really didn't help him, though his World Series heroics vault him over Vazquez for me. He gets minus points for not being able to shut up and for actually playing World of Warcraft seriously.

Roy Oswalt (~39.8 WAR)? Yes, Roy Oswalt. Like Schilling, he has had only three seasons with above five WAR totals, but he has been solid in all the other years.

Roy Halladay (~44.4 WAR) is a surprising runaway winner for me. He leads all pitchers in WAR, and he posted six seasons of five WAR or better, which bests everybody else in the field. He's good and stuff.

My Pick: Roy Halladay

RP: Mariano Rivera

Nobody compares to Mariano Rivera (~32.6). He has thrown more innings than everybody in the field, and he's the best pitcher in the field. Debate over.

My Pick: Mariano Rivera

Player of the Decade: Albert Pujols

Yup. Probably one of the greatest players we'll ever see. He is the type of player that we are going to be telling our kids about.

My Pick: Albert Pujols

Billingsley Gets Pushed

kensai — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:45:00 -0400

Fine with me.

Instead of pitching on his normal schedule, which would have meant a Saturday outing against the same Giants team that knocked him around last Sunday, slumping starter Chad Billingsley will not pitch until Wednesday, when the Dodgers face the Nationals in Washington.

Vicente Padilla pitches Friday against San Francisco, Jon Garland goes on Saturday and Randy Wolf starts the series finale on Sunday.

Wolf gets to pitch on his customary five days' rest after he showed no ill effects from his hyperextended left elbow in pitching seven innings against the Pirates on Tuesday.

Torre said that matchups played into his decision to swap Billingsley with Garland.

Was He Really Not Worth The Money?

kensai — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 12:00:00 -0400

Like most fans out there, I was completely fine with the Vicente Padilla deal. He cost the prorated league minimum and has pitched well thus far. However, I do have a problem with the high wire act he seems to do every game, and it's reflective of his general skill.

In Jon Garland's case, while I would like to be content with his performance, I believe Tony Abreu was a stiff price to pay, especially with the guys like Charlie Haeger already doing well.

That said, why in the hell didn't the Dodgers make right on one of the most lopsided trades in history and bring Pedro Martinez back for far less than he is worth? Not only does Martinez actually have the cachet to put butts in seats and sell jerseys, he has also been a damn good pitcher this year. Martinez is averaging 89 mph and is regularly hitting 92 mph on his fastball. That kind of stuff is more than enough given his always dynamic change and slider.

Seriously though, the dude has just 6 walks to 34 strikeouts in 37 2/3 innings pitched this year, and it's good for an otherworldly 5.67 K/BB ratio. Of course, that isn't even close to Pedro's heyday, when he was putting up better than an 8 to 1 ratio, but it's still good enough to rank him among the best in the game if he had been pitching all year.

Now why didn't we sign him again?