Dodger Bats (Led by Joc Pederson) Outscore Dreadful Pitching, Dodgers Beat Bucs

Who has two thumbs and never stopped believing in Joc Pederson’s talent….(holds up thumbs) This guy! It was Joc’s power that helped spearhead an 8–run Dodger attack at PNC Park in the rubber game of their three game series against the Pirates. The Dodgers needed every one of those runs which included three home runs and seven extra-base hits. Pederson slugged two home runs while driving in three runs and Cody Bellinger also had three hits and two runs driven in as the Dodgers beat the Bucs 8-7.

It wasn’t easy because the Dodger’s pitching and game strategies are a disaster. The entire starting rotation is on the disabled list so rookie Dennis Santana was the scheduled starter. But just minutes before the game he was scratched while warming up in the bullpen. We later learned that he had soreness in his LAT muscle. So you would think that the Dodgers, a team with World Series expectations would have a viable backup plan in place, right?

Dodgers  8 13 1

Pirates     7 9 0

WP-Baez-3-3

LP-Taillon-3-5

SV-Jansen-15

HR-Pederson-5-6-Bellinger-11-Diaz-4-Cervelli-9

http://gty.im/969194878

Wrong. Their brilliant plan was to just use the bullpen the entire day. With the pen already logging a ton of innings on this road trip, that seemed like a costly mistake. For the record they did win, so many people will claim that the flawed strategy works. But let’s see how this affects the staff when the team returns home against the Braves this weekend. In the meantime today we were greeted with failed relievers pitching in the early innings. Daniel Hudson, Scott Alexander, and Pedro Baez all pitched in the first three frames. Hudson and Alexander each pitched a single scoreless inning and Baez (recalled because Tony Cingrani was placed back on the disabled list) tossed two innings and gave up one earned run.

The Dodger bats had to come through this afternoon to make up for the awful pitching, and boy did they. Joc Pederson got things going during the opening frame with a solo home run to lead off the game. The Pirates tied the game in the bottom of the third when Jordy Mercer reached on a single, was sacrificed to second, and then advanced to third on a well placed bunt single from Josh Harrison. Gregory Polanco’s sacrifice fly brought in Mercer to tie the game at 1-1.

The Dodgers scored single runs in the first, fourth, fifth, and sixth innings. They also scored two runs in the seventh and eighth innings as well. The Dodgers reclaimed the lead in the top of the fourth. Cody Bellinger doubled and was advanced to third on Chris Taylor’s single. The little engine that could, Breyvic Valera scored Bellinger with a bunt single to first that he beat out.

http://gty.im/969192998

In the top of the fifth, Joc doubles and eventually scores on a Matt Kemp ground ball force out to put the Dodgers up by a 3-1 score. Pittsburgh starter Jameson Taillon was fairly effective, tossing five innings and allowing three earned runs on eight hits. Taillon struck out seven and walked one. The Dodger bats took advantage of the Pirate’s bullpen. In the top of the sixth, Valera walked and a Yasiel Puig pinch-hit double scored him to give the Dodgers a 4-1 lead.

The Pirates would rally in the bottom of the sixth. With Josh Fields on the mound, Starling Marte walked and Josh Bell would double him home. That made it a 4-2 Dodger lead. An Elias Diaz sacrifice fly later in the inning would bring the Pirates to within a run.

A Cody Bellinger home run (with Kemp aboard) would give the Dodgers a 6-3 lead in the top of the seventh. The Dodgers added an additional two runs in the top of the eighth. Logan Forsythe walked and scored on a Pederson two-run blast. That’s Joc’s second home run of the game. The Dodgers lead 8-3.

Move to the bottom of the eighth. With Brock Stewart pitching, the Pirates plated three unanswered runs to cut the Dodger lead to 8-6. There was a Corey Dickerson single, a Max Muncy error and a three-run home run from Diaz to get the Bucs close.

Kenley Jansen had to be brought in with one out in the bottom of the eighth because the Dodgers had expended their entire pitching staff. They were lucky the game didn’t go extra innings. Kenley ended the eighth inning by striking out Mercer, and getting Adam Frazier to line out to short.

With one out in the bottom of the ninth, Francisco Cervelli homered to get the Pirates within a run. The Dodgers now led 8-7. Thankfully there was nobody on base when the Buc’s backstop launched that ninth inning home run. Kenley recovered to get Marte to ground out, and then strike out Josh Bell to end the game.

The Dodgers return home to open a three-game series against the Atlanta Braves on Friday night. The boys in blue have now won 15 of their last 20 games and have reached the .500 mark once again. However the club can’t continue with these types of pitching strategies. The bullpen can’t pitch 6+ innings three or more times per week. The Dodgers are going to have to get out there and find some starting pitching somehow. Friday night’s pitching match-up will see rookie sensation walker Buehler countering old friend Brandon McCarthy.

Scott Andes

Scott Andes

Scott Andes: Former Co-editor of Lasorda's Lair. Longtime writer and Dodger fanatic Cheap MLB Tickets

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
Twitter

86 thoughts on “Dodger Bats (Led by Joc Pederson) Outscore Dreadful Pitching, Dodgers Beat Bucs

    1. Why? His walk rate is down and his K rate is up. Do we really need more of that?

      He was just designated so he’s there.

  1. Put muncy at 2nd then. Utley and forsythe dont hit. 1b bellinger 2b muncy ss taylor 3b turner c grandal lf kemp cf Pederson rf puig

  2. They can get a second baseman, what they need right now is starting pitching and they need it really bad. There are only 3 starters on the roster right now. If they could get the Brad Miller of last year, maybe. But Muncy is playing better than Miller right now.

  3. 1b bellinger 2b muncy ss taylor 3b turner c grandal lf kemp cf Pederson rf puig starting lineup. Which pitcher should they get now.

  4. Doesn’t anyone out there ever want good solid players. You talk about Brad Miller or Colon or some other washed up or hurt player. The Dodgers are a storied, big market, quality franchise with great fans but we have been covered with nothing ballplayers when we really need good help. I am tired of hearing about the money, these jackasses need to service their team and give us good help in areas where we are weak. We should be blowing people away but instead we have to fight way to hard.

    1. Pack, there is very little room on the payroll to add a truly great player. Colon has a AL respectable 4.0 ERA and if acquired would immediately lead the team in IP. We have used 23 pitchers and NONE of them has pitched as many innings as Colon has. And he makes $1.75 million.

      We need an innings eater and we have very little money to spend. Maybe there is someone else that starts 28 games, goes 5+ innings, has a 1.065 WHIP and fits our skinny budget. If you know of any, let’s talk about them.

      1. Badger
        Maybe the Dodgers need to give in order to get. Run off Forsythe or trade some prospects and get some decent pitchers. DO SOMETHING, even if its wrong. I am so tired of Tampa baseball it makes me puke. Badger, you keep wanting to operate in their world so they could tell you anything and you would go to trying to fit something in. They are the ones who are wrong and everybody knows it. If the Dodgers really wanted to get a good pitcher, they could. It might cost more than THEY want to spend but they could get one. Do you follow ?

      2. There’s plenty of room in the deep coffers of the richest team in baseball with the deepest resources. They choose not to use these resources. The ownership has earnings in the billions. The franchise is the richest and deepest in baseball. Believe me if the Dodgers want to acquire a player they have the means to get them. They’re not the Tampa Bay Ray’s,they just operate like them.

        1. Scott
          Finally the voice of reason. Glad you are not just taking the FO word for everything like they would like us to do. Just because they say it does not make it right for sure. Yes, they do have the money buy they are all about making more of it and just sit on their butts and do the very least and spend the very least they have to. It really hurts to see them do the good folks of LA that way.

          1. I’m not reading tea leaves here. They have been very clear about the intent this year. It is what it is and though you may not believe it, it isn’t my idea.

            I’m not supportive of this group pack. Maybe you remember the intense debates I had with the resident FAZophants regarding this issue. I know the money is there. We all know the money is there. After this year they will spend again. But, I think it’s clear this is a reset year. I accept it.

    2. Well Package welcome to the world of Guggenheim and FAZ. They care not about what you, I, or any other fan thinks. They had a plan to get under the luxury tax and they did it. If they could have moved him over the winter, Matt Kemp would not even be here. But him coming into camp in great shape, with a new attitude and energy forced himself onto the roster. Where would they be without Kemp? They could not have seen all the injury’s that have devastated the pitching staff, and put some of the best players out for more than just 10 days. They could also not foresee Seager going down for the year. I would love to see someone like Degrom become a Dodger, or a really solid 2nd baseman. FAZ does not work that way. They prefer to keep their prospects and dumpster dive. The peruse the waiver wire and pick up guys with low cost and what they consider a huge upside. That’s how they got Hudson, Chargois. They only signed 1 major free agent and he has been on the disabled list since late spring. That’s the huge difference between Colletti and the FAZ. Colletti was not afraid to take risks, and he worked for a cheapskate. They might have a lot of money, but I can tell you with conviction that all I have read is that they are not going to trade for someone that puts them over the tax. We have to live with that.

      1. Mr. Norris
        I agree with all you have said but this brand of baseball sucks. Give me Colletti back every time. It makes you really hate them.

        1. I dislike their modus operandi as much as anyone. It makes it really hard to be a fan. They inherited a really good farm system and some very good players, and have done nothing to really upgrade the team. If you look down the list of the players that have obtained, there is not one single impact player in the bunch. They have not made one single trade that brought an A-list player to this team. That includes Darvish, who even as a rental was not all that great. It will be probably 2 more years before the draft picks they have made make an impact at the big league level. Buehler is the first. But the core of the team are holdovers from the previous regime. The free agents they have signed have been less than stellar. I myself have lived long enough to understand that as a fan, I am stuck because I love the team. I no longer have a favorite player, main reason is because they usually will be gone after you gain an attachment to them. So now, I just try to enjoy the players that are here. But some get really hard to like, such as Forsythe, when you know that could have done better. I also try to understand where each player is in the pecking order. I know who the favorites are, and I also know who they depend on in clutch situations. I just hope that at least once more before I shuffle off this world that the team wins another championship. Time is slipping by.

          1. Mr. Norris
            I too live in the world where I would like to see them win the big one, one more time. The sad part to me is there are many, many fans that seem to be OK about how they run the team. It is really disheartening to say the least. They would rather quote sabermetics and all the reasons why the FO CAN’T get players than demand that they do better. Guess I am too old for this sport or just let it go..

  5. The FBZ will dumpster dive and whichever starter they get is just as likely to last 1 .1 innings or be a last minute scratch.

    Time to bring up more arms at AAA and send Stewart down. It’s survival time for the next week.

    1. Artieboy
      Maybe they could but they would have to pay a huge part of Kemp’s contract. I for one am enjoying Kemp more than about anything else the team is doing right now. He is getting it done for the sorry FO who really doesn’t want him. He is a true Dodger. He may have not been when he left but he sure is since his return. Without him, would the team have enough offense? Who knows?

  6. Why would they want to sell the Dodgers?

    They are making plenty of money just from the day to day operations.

    The Giants value tripled, after they won those three World Series.

    I think anyone would be crazy to sell the Dodgers, in fact, I am sure the O’Malley family are sorry they ever sold the Dodgers.

    Kemp is about the only proven hitter on this team, besides Turner, and of course, Corey.

    But since we don’t have Corey this year, we need Kemp’s bat.

    Like Badger already said, non of these guys are going to hit like this all season, although I wish they would.

    But that is not going to happen, because the adjustments will be coming, from the other team’s pitchers.

    This has not even been a week, because this didn’t really start, until the Rockies series.

    And Badger has been right more often then anyone about this team, and the players.

    1. I forgot to mention Puig.

      The only reason I wasn’t sure about him at the beginning of last year, was because he had not played throughout the season, for two years.

      And he didn’t get his act together the first year Roberts managed this team, so I wasn’t sure about his commitment.

      Because I consider Roberts a much better communicator, then Mattingly.

        1. Package

          I love you, but I think Mattingly was a terrible manager.

          He handled both Kemp and Puig badly, especially Kemp who was just coming back from being injured.

          I know one of Kemp’s injuries was because he didn’t run all out to home, but he really hurt himself on that wall in Colorado, trying to make a catch.

          I didn’t like how he treated Ethier at times, either.

  7. Truth be told, I really like ‘ALL RELIEVERS, ALL THE TIME’. Philosophically, I’m on board with this concept. It works in a myriad of ways. We are so ingrained to regard a game with a ‘starting pitcher’ and a bullpen to take over in troubled times. We make stars out of these starters and pay them insane amounts of money. A corps of relief pitchers does away with this whole concept of Cy Young winners, strikeout artists, big payrolls, bonuses, and many other tangents that get built up into our thinking about pitchers. It also takes a lot of pressure off them, keeps them healthier, wholelier, and happier. The closer still retains his status and will get paid more but nothing like a bloated starter. I even submit that this concept creates a better team spirit and could bring world peace into the realm of possibility. lol.

    Has any other team used this concept in the history of baseball? This is not a joke, it’s a revelation! This doesn’t mean that Roberts should stay the manager. You don’t need a manager when you have the computer telling you when and who to insert into the game. This is another benefit, not dealing with the human foibles of a manager, their ego, and their high salary. Craft beers at Trader Joe prices and .50cent Dodger dogs are possible in this model. I guess it’s a form of Socialism but don’t use that word to describe it!!

    1. Wholelier. I like it.

      It’s certainly a different way to go about it. I can see the value in the plan, IF you’ve got 13 great arms on the staff. That said, I think the plan will remain 6-7 guys rotating off and on DL that can go 5, and another 12-15 guys rotating through the system in the bullpen. Like I mentioned, we have already used 23 pitchers, and we are 24th in starters IP. Can that be a blueprint for a championship? I really doubt it, but I can see the game is changing. If this unhealthy team of broken wings and squirrels can win it all I’ll be duly impressed.

      In the mean time, there are a lot of teams that look a wholelier lot better than we do, but none of them are in the NL West.

      Thanks for the compliment MJ.

    2. Jeff and Badger, I applaud the idea but it’s not going to work. The key to pitching is getting as many guys out as possible with as little effort as possible. (Someone like Mad Dog Maddux or even Bart Colon should clue in Kershaw on this …. I believe Stripling’s got the point actually …)

      The relief corps are built upon maximum effort in short stints. That works In football and maybe the World Cup or the Olympics, but not in the marathon that is the MLB season.

      1. YF, sorry to disagree. We are totally conditioned to see the game a certain way because of how we were brought up to think about it. The reality is, the way the pitching is setup today’, it is bound to fail in various ways. We see it here through injuries, the difficulty in picking talent to be starters, their enormous salaries which puts a stress on the rest of the team, and the hyping of ‘stars’. This is all the way baseball is spun and it has created real problems for teams. Combine that with the rise of football and basketball in popularity. Baseball is sinking, slowly, in popularity.

        1. Don’t think so Jeff.

          Not at all.

          Tampa is obviously experimenting somewhat with this with Romo, but the that’s very small sample and there’s no way of projecting how it would work over a full month, much less a full year.

          The other problem is obvious. The more changes you make, the less opportunity you have to take advantage of matchups. Assets cannot be reused.

          On a macro level, I think you’ve forgotten to think about sports business before talking. Football is arguably descending, and baseball and basketball don’t overlap much. Money for local TV is ridiculous and team values are sky high. The Marlins just went for 1.2 Billion. With a Bee.

          1. Bluto, of all the guys left in here – after most of the FAZophants followed felonious – you are the one I expected to be behind the trendy thinking. It’s Petriello-think at its finest. This from 2015:

            https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.mlb.com/157383440-starting-pitchers-should-throw-fewer-innings.amp.html

            The trend is unmistakable. The question is not will starters throw fewer innings, the question is how few fewer. 3 or 4 starters who go 15 batters? That sure sounds like us, does it not?

          2. Fazophants followed felonious. WHAT?!??!?!

            I think there’s a massive delta between optimizing the length of a starter’s outing from expecting complete games or near complete games to two or three times through the order

            AND

            everyone be a reliever.

          3. “WHAT?!?!?!”

            Seriously?

            Never mind.

            Who said anything about everyone being a reliever? Wasn’t me. Wasn’t Jeff. It was only you.

            30-40 starts 120-130 innings. Our staff has maybe 3 starters capable of that. 2 for sure, Kershaw and Buehler. Every other starter already has reliever written on them. Let Wood, Maeda, Stripling, Santana, Hill, Stewart, Ferguson, Urias and anyone else start and go 50 pitches and they will be ready again on 2 days rest.

            It’s just food for the thought. And innovation is the ‘delta’ between the old and the new, right? It’s a short step between 5 inning starts, which is a thing, and 2 trips through the order.

          4. Here’s what I responded to in Jeff’s own words:

            Truth be told, I really like ‘ALL RELIEVERS, ALL THE TIME’. Philosophically, I’m on board with this concept.

            But what you brought up, is really far beyond my scope of knowledge. Specifically the rate of recovery in pitchers from say 50 innings done repeatedly.

          5. You responded in Jeff’s own words?

            Huh?

            Communication breakdown.

            The Dodgers, looking like crap for a lot of this year, minus many its stars, is drawing over 45k at home, leading MLB. Nobody’s gonna care who starts and who relieves. LA fans don’t seem to mind who wins, they show up. It’s true overall attendance was down last year, but the big city teams are doing well and money is still flowing.

          6. I did respond in Jeff’s words, just to show you what I was responding to.

            Sorry, if it was bad protocol or inappropriate.

            I’m not sure about LA Fans and what they would mind.

            For the life of me, I can’t believe there’s such a strong (but admittedly tiny) contingency that doesn’t appreciate and/or understand the metrics/processes the front office employs. Even after the joy of last year.

      2. YF

        Very good points!

        I didn’t even think of the different efforts a starter and a reliever, will put in.

        When Maeda first went out that day, I was afraid he had some type of shoulder or elbow issue, because he is pitching more all out now, because that is what the Dodgers want him to do.

        And I know that type of effort is putting more stress on his shoulder and elbow, and we already know he had some structural issues in on his arm.

    3. You would burn out every pitcher on your staff by August. These guys are not trained that way. How many relievers in MLB history have ever thrown in 100 games or more? The answer, one. Mike Marshall when he was with the Dodgers in 1974. He pitched in 106 games and threw 208 innings. Relief pitchers are trained to go max effort for a short burst. You think there are a lot of arm problems now, if they went the all reliever route, they would probably triple.

      1. Michael,

        The pitching selections would have to change. The whole approach is what I’m talking about. You have the same problems now with the starters being injured, all of them! Some are conditioned for throwing longer than others. Some should only come in for short time. The training staff and the mentality would need to be freshened. It doesn’t mean the same pitchers would be used everyday.

        Obviously, the FAZ choices are not suitable for this type of strategy. Maybe some would survive, but you have to start with healthy stock. It can work. The biggest obstacle is our minds.

      2. Michael, I point again to the number of pitchers we’ve already used. It’s still early June and we’ve now used 24 different pitchers. You say we would burn out every pitcher by August. Hell, we are doing that now.

        I don’t see this plan as a 9 pitchers a night thing. Starters go through the lineup once. If they’re good maybe that will give them 3 innings. Or perhaps they go through it once, then the top again. They’re starters, they are supposed to be stronger. If they only go 3-4 innings that would mean the team could go back to a 4 man rotation, giving each starter 40 starts. 40 starts at 3 innings is 120 innings a year, for which guys like Hill, and frankly all the Dodger starters, are better suited. Obviously if you’re good, you can still put up 3+ WAR and earn your money. Who knows, it might extend careers.

        This thinking like a moneyballer is kinda fun.

    4. Jeff

      Our relievers are so wore out when we go to the post season, we can’t count on them to pitch as well, as they would, if they had more in their tank.

      I think the way Verlander pitched throughout the post season, is an example of a team with an ace that pitched so well, they didn’t have to depend on their bullpen that much, when he pitched.

      And since Verlander pitched pretty deep into games, he gave the bullpen almost a day off, so they would be fresh for the next game.

      The Astros probably had one of the worse bullpens in last year’s post season, yet they won it all.

      Blanton literally blew up, in the series we played against the Cubs the year before, from over use.

      1. MJ, the pitchers will get stronger as they adapt. It will be an adjustment. It doesn’t seem the Dodgers can plan on having the traditional starter this season. This is the perfect opportunity to implement this plan and see what it will do. We are already 2-0 with it and there were several games where the starters went a few innings and the relievers and bats saved this win. I don’t worry about burning out a dozen to 14 pitchers on a staff throughout a season. I do worry about starters getting hurt, though. I’m even in with the starters coming in in relief for a few innings during a game. Imagine Kershaw appearing the 4th inning for 3 more. The possibilities are endless. Athletes can adapt. They have to change their routines and mindset. They need to train in a different way for different results.

        1. Jeff

          I am more concerned about what would happen in the post season.

          Remember when Morrow came into that one game, in the post season, when he really needed a day off, and the Astros were hitting HRs right and left, off him?

          And YF made a good point about the different efforts that relievers pitch with, as compared to a starter, because they are not going to pitch much more then one inning.

          But the way starters are going down, you might get your wish.

          1. There is a variation on this, what Tampa is doing by starting a reliever for an inning then letting the starter go.

            I find that interesting.

            I just don’t think you can do away with the 5-6 innings a starter is generally tasked with and employ a healthy staff of solely relief pitchers.

            Again, this is well beyond my knowledge base of arm health and recovery.

          2. MJ,

            We are already playing a modified version of what I am talking about. In order for this to be a ‘model’ that is put in place intentionally, it needs to be prepared for during the off-season. You can see the possibility of success with it in how the Dodgers have dealt with the pitching injuries. With Buehler injured, they have only Stripling left to act as a starter, but Stripling is already a long reliever and no reason that Buehler cannot be a long reliever in the ‘new system’. No one gets to pitch more than 4 innings. Socialist Baseball.

            How about the change in Joc and Bellinger! The HR’s are flying off their bats. What strange mojo this team has. It is a team of contradictions and surprises.

      2. MJ, I have a post in moderation, again, that speaks to the decline in starters innings. It was written by Petriello over 2 years ago. This trend has been in the making for some time now. The way to pull it off is explained in detail in that article and one need to look no further than the Tampangeles Dodger Rays. The key is to have a plethora of young strong arms in the system with options, and you keep moving them up and down as needed. FAZ anticipated this, just like they anticipated Kemp looking and playing 6 years younger. Ok, maybe not like that, but they are preparing for bullpen help for September and Octopus. Autocorrect put that in there and it kinda fits with the theme, multiple arms, so I’ll leave it. Ladies and gentlemen – your Tampangeles Octopussies!

  8. MJ, I do not think Peter O’Malley is sad he sold the team for a couple of reasons. 1. It was widely known that although Peter wanted to keep the team in the family, none of his children wanted to run the team. 2. The estate taxes on the Dodgers when Peter passed away and ownership was transferred would have been astronomical. Especially in California. Most baseball teams today are run by conglomerates. They can more easily afford the losses than an individual owner could. The big difference in the Dodgers I grew up with and the team now is that when the O’Malley’s ran the team, it was like a family. There was a camaraderie among the players who were treated by their owner like they were part of something very special. They more than any organization save the Yankees, would bring back former players and hire them for all sorts of positions with the team. Look at Lou Johnson, Don Newcombe, Tommy Davis, Ron Cey, all members of the community service and public relations side of the team. Lasorda was brought back as a special consultant to the president right after he was forced to retire because of his heart. Most of those guys have been retained by Guggenheim because they needed that connection and continuity to woo the fans. In most organizations, do you think Ned Colletti would still be drawing a paycheck after being replaced? Usually not, and the Dodgers probably have more vice presidents who have also been GM’s than any other team in the majors. That being said, O’Malley was a great owner, but his only business was the Dodgers. They had no other income besides what they made from the team. Very hard to be competitive with those kinds of resources.

    1. I don’t know much about the O’Malley’s but from what I’ve read I don’t much care for any of them. Walter was kind of a dick, and he named his son Peter, so…. like father like son. Baseball owners of that time were not all that likable. And things are worse now. Baseball is a multi billion dollar business and when there is that much money involved you don’t have brothers of benevolence running things. Where it goes? Who knows, but one thing you can count on, fans will pay for all of it.

      1. I liked Peter a lot more than I did Walter. I read all about how he handled things when the team was in Brooklyn. He basically bamboozled his way out of Brooklyn. And LA was more than happy to have him, plus he got Horace Stoneham to pack up the Giants and move the same year. But who do you think made way more money that first season. The Dodgers played in the 90,000 seat coliseum. The Giants at Seals Stadium in SF which seated maybe 30,000. Dodgers led the league in attendance most of the next decade. But you are definitely right, those owners were not very likeable. Neither were their GM’s. The stories about Bavasi are almost as bad as those about O’Malley.

    2. Michael

      Part of the O’Malley family was trying to buy into the Padres, and I believe they may have some shares too.

      I bet they wish their grandfather never sold the Dodgers.

      I started watching the Dodgers when Walter Alston was the manager, so I know how the Dodgers handled their organization.

      I understand they had new challenges with free agency, but like I said, why is someone from the family buying into the Padres?

      1. The grandkids had more of an interest maybe, but his children did not. I read all the stories leading up to the sale, and from what I read O’Malley was really concerned about what it was going to cost in estate taxes if and when the team were transferred to the kids ownership. They got more money selling the team to FOX. Now as far as buying into the Padres, well, that’s a whole different ball of wax. They are worth maybe a quarter of what the Dodgers are. Their operating costs are cheaper, they pay rent on the stadium, they do not own it. O’Malley tried to get into NFL football in LA. And he himself might regret selling the team. But it was purely a financial decision to do so.

        1. Figures that someone who stands to make $350 million on a sale balks because of an estate tax issue. Thank goodness I never had to be concerned about only inheriting a quarter billion.

          1. Never made sense to me either, but it seems that if he left the team to them when he died, the estate taxes were going to be enormous, and since his kids were not really interested in owning or running the team, he sold out. There was another family, the Mulvey’s who were part owners, they really wanted to keep their part of the team, or buy the team, but they did not have the financial backing to do so.

        2. Michael

          The Padres don’t have the TV contract that the Dodgers have, or the fan base the Dodgers have either.

          And the Dodgers are making a lot more money then the Padres ever will.

          But I would love to know why baseball allowed the Dodger’s previous owner, to keep the Dodgers parking lot, after all he did?

          The DBacks are playing Colorado this weekend.

          It would be a good time to pick up some games.

  9. Michael

    Two of Peter O’Malleys sons, and two of his nephews, are part owners of the Padres, along with Phil Michelson.

    But a corporation is the head, and controlling owner, of the Padres.

    1. That’s cool. There are a bunch of part owners with the Dodgers too, but Guggenheim is the big cheese. Everything you said about the Padres was totally true. Baseball had no control over the parking lots. They just wanted McCourt gone. That was part of the negotiated deal. McCourt had the team deep in debt and close to bankruptcy. He was in a dirty divorce fight that was pretty public in nature, so they just wanted him out of the picture asap. But it was unlike when baseball took over ownership of the Expos. McCourt was kind of like Bruce McNall, who once owned the Kings. He made a lot of money elsewhere and almost ran his franchise into the ground. But like I said, a single owner or family ownership in todays game is usually not feasible. Unless there is a very large conglomerate behind them, the financial burden of keeping up with the rest of the league would break their bank.

      1. Not for Fernandez.

        Get the TJ, very common these days, and he’s back with the team as a hitter this time next year. The Angels will be ok. And if one guy makes the difference for that team then they need more better players.

  10. Santana has a torn lat muscle. So down goes another pitcher. Pickens are slim down on the farm, may be time for Ole FAZAROONI to make a deal. Should be a sore arm or two on the market by now and we all know how much he likes those.

    1. We got arms o’plenty at both AA and AAA. Use them in trade or bring them up. It’s only for a few innings. Banuelos, Broussard, Corcino, DeFratus, Lee, Sborz, Ferguson, Spitzbarth…… the revolving door policy. It’s explained in the Petriello column. Makes sense. Let’s do it like the Rays do.

      1. Yeah and how’s it working for the Rays? Because man they’re only like 10 games back in the Al east. They’re setting the world on fire with these revolutionary pitching strategies. They may just win 80 games this year.

        1. I dunno Scott, I think what the Rays are doing makes a ton of sense. It’s a very small sample, and they may not have the talent/roster composition to pull it off, but the thinking is almost infallible.

          1. Yeah Scott. It’s about talent level in Tampa. I agree with Bluto on this one. If it works, why not?

          2. Honestly I don’t believe it’s a sustainable strategy for long term success. If you think about it, what happens when you use 8 pitchers per night? You do one of both of two things.

            1. run the risk of running out of pitchers before the ninth inning. So if the game goes into extras, and they do at times, you have nobody to pitch.

            2. You’ll easily and quickly blow the entire pitching staff’s arms out by May or June. The Dodgers have gotten little to no innings from their starters and look at where they are at. They don’t know who’s starting from day to day. The bullpen is exhausted already. Every day is a struggle and they have to constantly dip into the Oklahoma City and Tulsa rosters on a daily now. It’s bad.

            There’s just an easier way of doing things. Starting pitching is not going anywhere. Unless you are fine with blowing the arms out of most of your most valuable pitchers.
            On a side note, it’s incredibly boring to watch a hundred pitching changes and a parade of relievers every night. It’s actually cringe worthy.

          3. Scott,

            That’s not what we’re talking about. It’s not what the Rays are doing.

            What is going on here.

            What we’re talking about, what the Rays did, is “start” a reliever. Because team, on average, score the most runs in the first inning than any other inning. You start off with a favorable matchup, and then you bring in the starter.

          4. If you’re talking about that strategy, I’m not a huge fan either. I don’t think it gives teams any sort of big advantage. Maybe you can find a favorable match-up but it’s minimal in my view.

          5. Big advantage?

            Most definitely not.

            But what provides big advantages?

            We’re talking about framing, shifting, this “relievering”, not bunting, not trying to steal.

            Little advantages are what baseball is now.

            There are only nine innings (regulation) if you can minimize the most important one, that’s significant.

          6. So, you don’t agree with Petriello’s take on it, hey Scott? I don’t always agree with that guy either. But I do see the logic in what he presents. That was written nearly three years ago and the league is arriving at what he observed in Tampa.

            I also see the logic in what you say Scott. But it would appear that, at least for this year, we will be a bullpen dominant team. The question is how to do it and get to another World Series. It’s about getting 27 outs. Our starters don’t appear to be capable of getting near that total.

            We won’t see 8 in a game often, but we will see 5-6. Few of our starters will be allowed to see a lineup a third time and if they do I’ll bet they get clobbered. Yeah, I’d rather see 5 starters that give quality starts every time out. But, that ain’t us.

      2. Badger,

        Please link the article so I can read it.
        For sure, they will be stockpiling the arms. At first, I thought about this as more of a joke. But I realize it is my old-timer’s mentality that doesn’t allow me to think about the game differently. We always draw upon the past for our answers to life’s problems. Occasionally, a creative idea surfaces if I allow myself to cruise on ‘what if’ frequency.

        1. Well put Jeff. Old dogs can learn new tricks if they keep an open mind.

          It’s on this thread at 7:30 am. It was in moderation for a few hours so it got left behind.

  11. Turner will be out of the lineup until Sunday, sore wrist. Santana to the 10 day DL, Stewart optioned to OKC, Pat Venditte and Adam Liberatore recalled. Maeda threw an aggressive bullpen today and Kershaw threw again. Maeda most likely will start on Tuesday. Exe Dodger, FedEx DFA’d by the Astros.

    1. I hope Turner talks to Freddy Freeman in this series, since he went through the same thing, and he got back pretty quickly, and seems just fine now.

      And I think he did put up pretty good numbers once he was able to play last year.

  12. Squirrel hits 2 homers so far, Pederson and Muncy go back to back, Buehler pulled with a possible injury, Venditte in. Oh yeah, Warriors sweep the Cavs! Outstanding!

    1. If Walker Buehler is injured enough, it will make six Dodger starting pitchers on the DL. I don’t even think the Mets have pulled that off.

  13. Buehler has rib soreness and was in pain and having trouble breathing. Puig was pulled and it looks like it was disciplinary, not physical. I think Ole Doc was not too happy Yasiel got picked off and then laughed about it. 5 homers. Pretty impressive, but I saw them hit 7 against the Reds in a 18-1 blowout years ago. Bellinger just absolutely crushed his. Yasiel will be back in there tomorrow according to Doc. Most impressive thing of the whole evening was Liberatore’s mad dash home on Muncy’s double. Awesome.

    1. I had Puig safe on that pick off.

      McCarthy lasted about as long as I figured he would. But we hit 2 more long balls against him than I predicted. Squirrels look good when they are busy. It’s nut season.

      Tied for second. 1.5 out. Arizona playing well again. It should be them we have to beat.

      Wood will rebound. Last time out it was 5 earned in 2. This time out it will be 2 earned in 5. Ok, maybe 3 earned.

      It’s going according to plan. Except for pitching. Pitching still makes me nervous.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)