Man Tracy Ringolsby is a downer. The MLB.com writer that wears a huge Garth Brooks style cowboy hat recently penned an article about the Dodger’s regular season dominance guaranteeing them nothing in the postseason. Boy do we already know that, but thanks for raining on our parade Tracy.
The Dodgers are an amazing 40 games above .500 with a 71-31 record and continue to dominate. After another incredible come from behind win over the Twins on Wednesday night the Dodgers have won 36 of their last 42 games. They have a 12.5 game lead in the NL West and seem to be on pace to finish with the best regular season record in franchise history. In case you were wondering that was a 105-47 record from the 1953 club. That team finished with a .682 winning percentage. The 2017 Dodgers currently boast a .696 winning percentage in case you needed some kind of reference.
The Dodgers are really good this year. There’s always a but though. But, and I do mean but Clayton Kershaw is out with a lower back strain and might not return until September. Personally I don’t think the injury is very serious, but the Dodgers don’t want to take any chances. That’s a smart move in my opinion.
There are still plenty of question marks in regards to health and durability on the Dodger’s pitching staff. Brandon McCarthy is also on the disabled list with a blister and is constantly hurt. The Dodgers just can’t count on him in a big game even though he’s pitched pretty well this season. Alex Wood has been phenomenal this season, but the rest of the fifth inning strugglers have been inconsistent and frustrating at times. Hyun-jin Ryu and Kenta Maeda haven’t been bad, but they can’t pitch past the fifth inning, or rarely do. Rich Hill has been pitching a lot better of late, but he has trouble pitching past the fifth inning most of the time as well. As evidence by last night’s “start” Brock Stewart is not a starting pitcher in any way whatsoever.
You only need three starting pitchers in the postseason. If Kershaw’s health is in doubt, then the Dodgers need to go out and get a starting pitcher. If Kershaw wasn’t hurt I would say the Dodgers would be fine, but that isn’t what we’re dealing with here.
So the Dodgers need to stack the deck this year. Why not? If the front office can acquire Yu Darvish, or someone like a Sonny Gray it would seriously increase their odds of winning the World Series. We’ve seen plenty of clubs finish with 100 or more wins and not win the World Series or even lose in the playoffs and not even get there. As Tracy points out it’s happened a lot. Getting through the postseason is hard.
The Dodgers know that better than anybody. They’ve had four consecutive soul-crushing losses in the playoffs. With the club mired in a nearly 29-year World Series drought, it would be prudent for the front office to make this a go year and do everything in their power to get the club through the playoffs and into the World Series.
That might mean parting ways with a good prospect, perhaps two of them. Let me tell you, I don’t want to see any good prospects dealt. However I would trade a hundred Alex Verdugos’ or a thousand Willie Calhouns’ to win a World Series. Believe that.
Well, we don’t have a hundred Alex Verdugo’s or a thousand Willie Calhouns’ to trade, only one each. I would trade them both if it guaranteed a Championship, but it doesn’t.
So if we “stack the deck” by acquiring Darvish or Gray, how much do you think it increases our odds of winning the W.S.? Maybe 1 – 2% ? Serious question!!
I agree with you Box. Doesn’t guarantee anything, especially if Darvish gives up 4hr in game 2 of the playoffs like he did last year (or 2015) for Texas
But I’d say it’s more likely that he does well in a playoff start then Brandon McCarthy. So in that sense, we do increase the likelihood that we get a good playoff start, thus keeping us in the game, and thus giving us a better chance to win.
1%? 2%? Not sure what our odds are now, but i”d say more than 2% for sure
It would definitely increase their chances tremendously
Tremendously?!???!
They are 71-31 without a trade, and they are the odd on favorite to win the World Series right now at 11/4.
How much greater can their win percentage or chances to win grow?
Is that amount, truly tremendous?
I want it up to 99.9% then and only then would I feel better
Doesn’t and won’t ever happen.
Verlander’s trending down and has cost implications. I can’t imagine Detroit putting in much money.
Darvish is coming off a recent ACL, and has no reason to resign at all. But because he’s a rental, maybe he costs less?
Sonny Gray would be the cheapest option being team controlled for three more years. Verlander has 28 million remaining on his contract I think, but it depends on how much Detroit wants to throw in to get rid of him. If the Dodgers can take on a good portion of the money then they may not have to send back as big of a haul in prospects.
So you guys aren’t buying my 4 WAR by a 5 inning Verlander strategy. Hey, it works for a 37 year old Hill, why not a 34 year old Verlander?
Ok then, let the Cubs or Nationals have him.
I think it is an interesting theory, that his efficiency could increase if his workload decreases.
I don’t have any empirical evidence that it works or has worked.
Hill had no term remaining on his deal. Verlander has awful term remaining. Hill’s stats were also not waning, as Verlander’s are (I realize your theory is that he wouldn’t wane further with a new usage strategy.)
I don’t see why, to Scott’s point, LA would throw in cash as it would increase the chance of triggering the repeater luxury tax. Detroit must be looking for prospects, if they are not going to get prospects, wouldn’t the Tigers hold onto Verlander, who the Detroit fans adore?
Arg.
I’m tired and most probably wrong.
Let’s see….
Darvish has had 15 quality starts out 22 starts, 68%. McCarthy has had 8 quality starts out of 16 starts, 50%. So you have a 18% better chance of getting a quality start in one out of each four playoff games with Darvish. That’s worth something but not sure how much.
I seem to remember Cubs acquiring Chapman increased their odds of winning W.S. last year about 2 – 3 % (Per 538). Chapman might help every game so seems like he would be more valuable.
A little diversion into today’s politics:
There once was a prince, and this prince dreamed for years of the perfect girl, but he never had a chance. Then suddenly, a witch -the Reconcilliation Witch- said she would cast a spell to make sure than any woman would marry him. There was just one catch: he had to marry before midnight, otherwise no woman would ever, ever agree to marry him.
And so the Prince ran off. Off to find a perfect girl, but none were quite right. So, as the clock approached midnight: he mulled a new and brilliant plan. He would marry a truly terrible girl before midnight, but only if she would divorce him the next day. This way, the prince reasoned, he would still have a chance to marry the girl of his dreams. But he soon found out that this truly, terrible girl was so bad, so terrible that he couldn’t risk the chance that she would not divorce him.
That don’t make NO sense.
Exactly.
Oh……
So you’re not even trying to make sense. That might help explain a lot.
To the point of the thread….. I think……
I would like to try to match the starting pitching strength of those teams we are likely to play. I don’t know if I would use the word tremendous, but I will say I would like more better starters when facing Chicago or Washington. Of those being mentioned I thought I preferred Darvish. Not sure now. Verlander is interesting to me, using him as a 30 start 150 inning guy. If he doesn’t feel like he has to go 7 32 times, he might could blow ’em away for 5. Same with Darvish, but I think I’d want to know he was intending to stay here.
Badger
We can definitely out bullpen the Nats, and that might be a cheaper way, to do that.
I also wonder if they are thinking about Buehler coming up to help in the pen, in September.
He has had two starts now, and he should be able to get seven starts in, before September.
I got that number from something I read in some blog.
Because once he was promoted, they said he would be able to get in nine starts.
But nine starts sounds like a lot to me, so don’t hold me to this.
But Buehler has the pitches, and velocity,that would make him good in the pen, in the post season, if he continues to pitch like he did last night.
I didn’t think it was a good thing that the Dodgers drafted him at the time, needing a TJ surgery.
But now I think that was a very smart move, since the Dodgers win to much, and can’t draft the top players in the draft!
http://www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?player_id=621111#/gamelogs/R/pitching/2017/MINORS
Buehler, as far as I know, is on on an unspecified inning and pitch count. He’s at 70 now, looked like crap in his first AAA outing, went 5 strong in his second. They are not letting him throw 80 pitches yet, mid 70’s mostly. Yeah, I anticipate he might get some low pressure relief innings in September, maybe even a start against a crap team, or he may be done before that. Who knows. I would hope they are very careful with that guy.
The stats that Tracy mentions are very telling. The number of games in early series were increased on the theory that in a longer series usually the best teams win. However as compared with other sports with grueling postseasons (hockey and the NBA which has the most grueling playoffs of all), the best teams don’t win (as much).
I haven’t done the research and don’t think any blogger has, publicly, but I think it might be related to bullpen innings. It should not be as much of a crapshoot as it is, maybe it will take some better research to figure it out.
Ken Rosenthal?
Verified account
@Ken_Rosenthal 58s
59 seconds ago
Source: #Dodgers promoting C Kyle Farmer. Accompanying move not known. Team currently carrying 14 pitchers, 11 hitters – a short bench.
Here’s what the Dodgers would be guaranteed by NOT trading any prospects: Potentially zero roster turnover between 2017 and 2018 (Bullpens are fickle) and 6 years club control of Verdugo, Buehler, Calhoun etc. The best upgrades available are from within the system. Look at what the Giants did and the Cubs and Red Sox are doing. They are trying to force their window to stay open or opened wider at the expense of sustainable competitiveness. Friedman and Zaidi aren’t trying to win a singular World Series. They are building a dynasty to be a championship caliber club into perpetuity. Wouldn’t the Phillies look good with Seager, Pederson and Urias? Where would LA be without them and crusty old Cole Hamels instead. Be a little freaking patient. How did the Yankees get Rivera, Jeter, Posada, Pettite, Williams?
Drew, I think the response to that is, “If not now, when?” Because the Dodgers have spent money to field the equivalent of two MLB teams, there are lots of prospects being blocked and keeping them all in AAA will in fact breed resentment, and cutting the vets will also have a negative impact.
That said, I am not sure a big move is needed even with Kershaw out 6 weeks or 8 weeks. I think the unclogging of injured and AAAA vets is easier done in November (hopefully after the parade, knock on wood).
I’ve been using the D word…dynasty…to describe Friedman’s strategy for a while.
Using Dynasty at this stage, even thinking it, is like, how do I put it … a Clippers mentality. Not even an Angels mentality. This is Los Angeles. Beneath the lights there is blood and guts, and a never ending stream of broken promises and failed dreams. And a million excuses of how just being on stage, at any role, is “victory enough”.
With all due respect to every struggling actor in LA busing tables, I was alluding more to a general set of principles and a strategy that I think Freidman and Kasten are aiming for. Rather than sacrifice long term sustainable winning for short term playoff chances, they aim to keep fielding competitive if not exceptional teams year in and year out. Think the Braves of the 90s with hopefully less WS futility.
It doesn’t mean a dynasty will happen, but they’re creating a model other teams will begin to try to emulate.
Now we are including Pederson with Seager and Urias?
This place is nuts.
You give Friedman WAY too much credit patch. The Dodgers been playoff good for several years. The foundation of this team is Kershaw, Jansen, Seager, Turner, Bellinger, etc, all players handed to them. The model of which you speak has already been molded by several GM’s that came before FAZ. They are following Beane, Epstein, Ricciardi, Alderson, Cashman – even the other sports are using analytics now. Friedman and Zaidi aren’t trend setters, the Dodgers are following in the footsteps of teams like the Kansas City Royals, Philadelphia 76ers and the Houston Astros. The difference is the Dodgers gave FAZ $300 million in payroll to start with.
NO, Dodgers gave FAZ a $300M MESS. They are still burdened with an over $50M rotting “foundation”. Crawford, $22M, Gonzalez, $22M, Guerrero, $7.5M and Ryu $8M.
Those other guys, Jansen and Turner are shrewd free-agent acquisitions by FAZ. Seager and Bellinger were developed by FAZ. Bellinger had 428 minor league ABs with FOUR home runs, pre FAZ. The FAZ development department changed his swing, just like Taylor’s. You know the rest of the Bellinger/Taylor story.
Boxout, that is a gigantic load of crock. And the first person who would agree with me would be Justin Turner who has gone out in print and credited Coletti for changing his life. If it wasn’t for Coletti I doubt Turner would have signed a FA at a discount.
Even the FAZ has not claimed any (and I mean not a single iota) credit for the players they inherited. The only ones giving all the credit to the FAZ are their followers. I don’t worship any GM, and it’s a strange world where I give more credit to the FAZ than their fans. Just plain nuts.
FAZ doesn’t need to claim any credit, they have been letting their actions do the talking.
Regarding Turner, I think he signed at a discount with FAZ just last winter, so did Jansen. They liked what they saw happening in LA. Just ask them!
They signed because Coletti discovered them and changed their lives, not because of the FAZ. Not one one them has said anything other than being thankful to Colleti and wanting to be with the guys that they came up the minors with. They’re here for each other, not LA. This is in print.
Make that an over $60M rotting foundation. I forgot about Arruebarrena, $5.5M.
Sure blame the prior GMs but not Guggenheim and Kasten. Even though most of the production comes from the prior regime and the payroll increased after FAZ took over and signed a bunch of deadweight AAAA players. You cannot cherry pick any more aggregiously than this, and why? Just plain nuts.
The FAZ strategy would have been a complete train wreck without Roberts. And Roberts was Magic’s pick, not FAZ’s pick. Magic saved the FAZ.
Turner is from Lakewood. Maybe he just wanted to play for the team he grew up with. Both he and Jansen got paid handsomely to stay at home.
There is a worse signing than Arruebarrena. Olivera. We flushed about $30 million down the crapper with that one. There are other expensive examples of WTF?! that are always conveniently ignored. This organization has been good a long time. Are they better now? Looks like they might be. We won’t know until October.
Those who worship at the alter of FAZ are going to keep making these outrageous claims. Getting harder to ignore the arrogant blatherskite. It’s everywhere you look these days.
I said early and often the team looks good but will likely need more better starting pitching to finish it off. And what are they looking for now? Starting pitching of course. And a lefty reliever. Just like ’15. Wonder if it will be another Latos/Anderson or will they actually get a pitcher worthy of the Dodger uniform. Stand by.
Excuse me. Olivera became Wood! I said it before and will say it again. Wood for $30M is a pretty good deal. I should have said VERY GOOD JOB FAZ!!!!! Disagree??????
“Excuse me.”
I find that difficult catbox.
Once again, selective memory. We needed a starter. Thus the offer of a package headlined by the #24 rated prospect for Hamels. (No Drew, nobody here suggested the ridonkulous package you mentioned). Wood? Yeah, he looks good so far this year but the two previous years, years with statistics you conveniently did not mention, he had a losing record, a 0.6 total WAR and a collective ERA of 9.00 in post season, including an ERA of 18.00 in the game Hamels would have pitched. Oh, you no doubt forgot the other guy who pitched in that same game, Brett “Jelly Donut” Anderson, also had an ERA of 18.00. Those hairballs are not forgotten by those who do not have their heads bowed at the Altar of The Great and Powerful FAZ. And Wood for $30 million is just not accurate. I won’t bother to tell you why. I’ll let you look up the numbers for yourself.
That said, as far as I’m concerned, all will be forgiven when we win a Championship.
BAAAAger: “Excuse me.” I find that difficult catbox.
Jeez, here we are, having a spirited MLB debate, enjoyed by everyone, and you start the juvenile attacks.
What is it? Rough Night? jonah strong-arm ewe?? I normally wouldn’t condone that type of behavior just because of how someone is dressed, butt in your case?? You knew how jonah would react or should have.
If it isn’t jonah’s fault, is it just because you lost the debate and need to resort to name calling. Perhaps, it’s very common these days.
Back to the DeLeon and Peraza for Hamels argument? I tried to help you with your “delusional” problem a couple threads ago. You should have read the article I posted, it might have helped.
Make that an over $80M rotting foundation. I forgot about Ethier’s $18M.
I guess I was doing a pretty good job compartmentalizing. Damn if Colletti can’t cause PTSD.
Most of that money is on the ownership group, not Colletti. Ethier maybe, but they approved that trade with the Red Sox that brought all that dead wood to LA>
Yes, Guggs did approve it. Guggs wanted to make a splash when they got to LA. Don’t you think the GM, who was scouting out “opportunities” brought that to them and said it was the best he could do? It’s the GM’s job to build the team.
Hindsight is 20/20, I would have preferred a more patience instead of taking Crawford to get Gonzalez. But, there wasn’t a reason in the world that Gonzalez was worth $100M more (Crawford’s salary) than he just signed as a free-agent for the previous year. Can’t even say the Dodgers wanted Crawford, they already had Either and Kemp and none could play center.
Bottom Line: The trade has handcuffed FAZ for a few years now.
More inaccuracies.
The trade followed the nightmare McFuknutz disaster. It put butts in seats and brought us Division Titles. “We did this for the fans. We want to win now. Our players are extremely happy.” Magic Johnson.
The idea that FAZ has been handcuffed is ridiculous. They’ve done anything and everything they wanted, including RAISING payroll and spending freely on the international market. The team has been successful, the money is flowing, the franchise is worth more now than ever and it started with The Trade.
This was a great blog! Wonderful posts!
Wood has become a great pick up. At first not so much. But look at all the crap that came LA’s way when that trade was made, and luckily most of it left fast. Latos, a total failure in Dodger blue, Johnson, who would make any manager putting him in a high risk situation shake with fear, Michael Morse, deadwood from the get go. Louis Avilan who also finally is pitching like he belongs. Are they genius’s? Hell no. They just realized what a HUGE mistake they made with Olivera and found some dumb ass to take him off their hands. That trade was supposed to get them over the top. It did not. As for the developmental part of guys like Seager and Bellinger, FAZ has nothing to do with that. It is the instructors and coaches being able to communicate with those players and have them buy in to what the coach proposes. Taylor made those adjustments with help from Turner Ward, not FAZ. Most of the starters on this team are from Colletti and White regime. FAZ has added some pieces, but giving him credit for Turner and Jansen resigning is bullshit. They wanted to be here and it sure is not because of the GM, Zaidi, nor the director of baseball operations, Friedman. The seeds were planted before either of those guys were hired. Turner got his chance under the prior regime and the same with Jansen. Their prime FA was over the HILL.
This is bad arguing:
—>They just realized what a HUGE mistake they made with Olivera and found some dumb ass to take him off their hands.
That’s the definition of good management and good trading. Finding someone to take an asset of no value and getting an all-star from it.
—>That trade was supposed to get them over the top.
Says who? Other than Michael and maybe Badger…
—>As for the developmental part of guys like Seager and Bellinger, FAZ has nothing to do with that. It is the instructors and coaches being able to communicate with those players and have them buy in to what the coach proposes.
Who hired those coaches? Who installed the development program? Who is aggressive in promoting talent?
Hint: It’s the people who cleaned house with minor league managers and overseers when Guggenheim bought the team.
—>They wanted to be here and it sure is not because of the GM, Zaidi, nor the director of baseball operations, Friedman.
At best opinion and speculation, at worst blatant lies.
Your opinion is your own you overblown moron. You think everything you say is the truth, but the truth is that the coaches were picked by the manager. The development plan was there before Fried Brains and Zorro took over. Yeah I know Friedman hired Roberts, but most of the minor league coaches have been there since Logan White and before. The pitching coach, who arguably has the biggest impact was hired long before Fried Brains got there. Sure, they retained Kenley and Turner. That was a no brainer decision. They also resigned their own blunder over the HILL. You really think he is going to pitch that well in year 3??? He just lately started to resemble the pitcher they traded for. You have a lot more faith in a 38-39 year old arm than I do. And Turner and Jansen wanted to come back because of their team mates, not some moron in the front office. If you so damn smart, how come those two have never been part of a world championship team? The ownership group thought that trade with Boston was going to mean a championship, and it sure boosted attendance. The seats were empty during McIdiot’s reign. You problem is you think all of us should be drinking the FAZ cool aide. Sorry, we have brains and think for ourselves and are not brainwashed by a bunch of totally useless stats. When Farhan and Andrew win more than just a division title and bring home a World Series, maybe I will think they know what the hell they are doing. So far over their two year reign I have seen the status quo. Not improvement with all their moves. Badger and I are not the only ones here who question what they are doing, A lot of people do. We just question it more often. Considering what Colletti had to work with, he did a damn good job. Also, it is very funny to me that of the top deadline deals as listed by MLB.com, Friedman and Zaidi are nowhere on that list. But Colletti is. For getting Manny. So you go ahead and spew your blue kool aid rhetoric and believe what you want, but until those two losers in the FO win something you are the biggest blow hard on here.
Lol.
Well-written, well researched and well reasoned.
As I was saying:
https://www.truebluela.com/2015/12/21/10636294/dodgers-minor-league-managers-2016-bill-haselman-ryan-garko
And:
The Dodgers have a Spanish speaker on the coaching staffs of each of their six minor league affiliates, which makes sense considering how many of their players are from Latin America.
But what seems like a common-sense practice is, in fact, a groundbreaking measure implemented by the organization’s new farm director, Gabe Kapler.
Each Dodgers minor league team will have three coaches this year, up from two last year. The reason for that, Kapler explained Monday on a conference call, is to ensure that each staff would have a Spanish-speaking coach.
“It’s tremendously important, particularly at the lower levels, but even at the upper levels because cultural assimilation for us organizationally is as important as probably any other element of player development,” Kapler said.
Kapler said he was influenced by his experience playing for the Tokyo Yomiuri Giants of Japan in 2005.
“The baseball was nearly the same, but I was really out of my element because I was very used to communicating in the clubhouse,” Kapler said. “When that element was removed for me, I felt very out of my skin and being out of my skin translated to poor performance on the field.”
Dodgers announce minor league coaching staffs
Kapler said he wants his players to be comfortable.
“Only when they are comfortable and stress-free will they perform to the best of their abilities,” he said.
Kapler touched on a number of other topics during the call.
On changes to the winter development program: “I think in the past it’s been driven by the camp on the field, and guys have had an opportunity to display their athletic prowess. We leaned heavily against that this year in favor of creating a more mentally inviting environment. We wanted our players to stay on their off-season programs, their throwing programs, their strength and conditioning programs and not ramp up in the middle of winter to impress physically. Rather, we wanted them to be open-minded and flexible and nimble of thought and be excited about coming in to share sort of a unique experience, where there was going to be a ton of information passed back and forth, group discussions and just sort of talk shop, to a degree.”
Bluto, Turner and Kenley re-signed because of their teammates and both have spoken very fondly of Colletti. This is published; I think in the LA Times. Maybe it was that reporter’s opinion but it may be a fact based on quotes from Turner and Jansen.
I suggest you realize most of what you say are also opinions, and sometimes you do pass off your own opinion as fact but yet put down others for doing the same. And feel free to show me up when I do so. Sports talk is about 99% debating opinions and using selective facts to justify opinions.
YF,
Where did I say anything contrary to what you said regarding being complemantary of Colletti?
Further, where did you read they resigned for less specifically because of their teammates?
Your last response to Michael about Turner and Jansen resigning, implying Michael’s position is at best an opinion and at worst a blatant lie. That was what set Michael off. Re-read it and Michael’s position on that specific point is mich more established that your response or Boxout’s prior response (which Michael was responding to in the first place, not yours, and I’m not sure why you would want to support Boxouts positions as you are much more precise and objective than he is).
It is total speculation!
I’m sure they are both very grateful for Colletti for signing them, but to say that Friedman and Zaidi had no bearing on their decision to resign for under-market deals is obviously speculation.
I defy you or Michael to cite evidence to the contrary.
I don’t know how you can leap from “speaking fondly” of someone to the conclusions that you both seem to be drawing out of thin air.
But show me something non-speculative that goes in that direction and I’ll admit I’m wrong.
Won’t be the first time, nor the last.
I never used the term over the top.
Magic Johnson said it best. I’ve already posted that quote. Collett said this:
“In this position, you have to be aggressive,” Dodgers general manager Ned Colletti said. “You can’t be reckless, but you have to be aggressive and creative and think outside the box. For a while there, we weren’t really able to do that. From a baseball standpoint, it’s far more conducive to be as good as you can be now.”
The position he’s talking about apparently has slipped some minds around here.
The trade accomplished what it meant to. You remember the empty seats? I do. You remember the embarrassment of McImpecunious? I do. I called that one. (just another topic Timmons and I went round and round about). And even though there were those that said payroll will HAVE to go down immediately (that campaign led by you know who) it did not go down – quite the opposite in fact – IT WENT UP! And it’s still up! The Dodgers have been spending like a Trump wife for years now. Money is not the object. The object is the object!
What they did in 2012 has zero bearing on what they intend to do now. That trade was about re-establishing this franchise. No championship yet, but we are back from the McDumbfuk disaster.
This argument has gone on for years. I don’t bring it up, but those who have it wrong believe just by repeating it would will somehow make it right. And it won’t.
Magic has proven to be a gentleman. You don’t hear him saying that Jim Buss and Mitch Kupchak really swallowed a hairball by signing Mozgov and Deng do you? And everybody knew that immediately.
Colletti probably knew the writing was on the wall with him being in charge. Like Buss and Kupchak, who had a timetable to win, Colletti thought he would also employ a Kamikaze move to try and save his job. Didn’t work for Buss/Kupchak and it didn’t work for Colletti. Simple as that.
That statement by Colletti, reminds me of the Kamikaze having their last drink right before departing on their suicide mission. Big talk and ceremony with a bad ending.
Your last paragraph sums you up.
You do not have a freakin clue.
Are there any businesses where it is easier to replace talent, then develop and retaining yourself? If the playoffs are a small sample size crapshoot, the best way to win a championship is to get to the playoffs every year. Now, being the best regular season team also yields home field advatage through the WS. Friedman et all did have some players handed to them, but they didn’t necessarily have to retain them. Spending the money they did was a patchwork until the minors started producing like the Dodgers of old. We are now seeing the benefits of that. I love the methodology of the Front Office. Trading minor league pitchers is preferable to hitters because of attrition rates. Look at the deal last year with Oakland. There will be a time when Kershaw isn’t the Ace of Aces. By then, he could be part of a rotation of hone grown aces. I imagine he is smart enough to see what is happening around. I would think, “do I want to compete WITH this, or AGAINST this.” Should be an easy question to answer given the direction of the franchise. Its funny how much fans of the same team, who has the best record in the league, can argue amongst themselves…. What would I know… My Dad has been a Dodger fan since 1959. And we’re just up in the middle of nowhere Montana….
Excellent Analysis Drew, very astute! But hate to tell you, those are fighting words around here!
Middle of Nowhere Montana? I spent many summers as a kid half way between White Sulphur Springs and Great Falls. About 50 miles to either one, but I never felt I was in the middle of nowhere Montana. Loved every second of it! Driving tractors, trout fishing, grouse hunting, those were the times.
Well said, BUT, sometimes you have to be a little bold, winning is great, but division titles just mean you were good in the regular season. You can be smart and not mortgage the future. But sometimes that impact player is just what you need. Players in the conga line to the majors are just prospects until they prove otherwise.
I’m not so sure that the best way to win a championship is to be in the playoffs every year. The teams that have won recently did not have long runs in the playoffs. KC? Hardly. Cubs? Nope. Giants? Negative. Red Sox? No way. It’s a theory, but I don’t buy it. Build a great team, and at the deadline pick up that missing piece, or pieces, and peak at the end of the year. The missing pieces, and peaking early, have been our boon for a few years.
I’m all for building our own great starting rotation. That’s a very difficult thing to do. We have many advantages the lesser teams do not. We can sign more better free agents than can those teams that will never approach luxury tax levels. Do it right and the Dodgers will be in the hunt nearly every year. But honestly, even the Yankees go through down years. Winning it all should be difficult. And obviously it has been for the Dodgers. Let’s win it once and leave the word dynasty out of the conversation. There are no dynasties in baseball. Nor should there be.
Yep,FAZ is at it again, they trade for reliever Luke Farrell of the Royals, a cash transaction. Luke’s big league stats. 1 game, 2 K’s and a ERA of almost 19. Better at AAA, ERA a little over 4. Is this the big arm we have been looking for??????? (SNICKER)
Actually Drew, being in the playoffs approach does not work in modern professional sports and worked even less in baseball. Look it up. The only baseball team it’s ever worked for is the Jeter-Rivera Yankees.
Reason why? My opinion/theory is salary caps combined with the fact that if you plateau out in the second round of playoffs you end up drafting lower for an extended period of time.
And also, it is not well researched why baseball playoffs are not like other sports with 7 games series. Teams that repeatedly get into playoffs should go deeper and deeper each year, but in baseball doesn’t happen that way.
Heyman on the Dodgers:
The Dodgers’ preferred pitching target remains Yu Darvish, according to sources — though word is they aren’t likely to surrender their very top prospects in any deal.
Sonny Gray appears to be more of a fallback candidate for L.A., according to people with ties to the Dodgers.
Dodgers GM Farhan Zaidi was recently quoted saying he couldn’t see parting with their top hitting prospect Alex Verdugo. Though nothing was said about top pitching prospect Walker Buehler, the same could hold true for him.
https://www.fanragsports.com/news/heyman-dodgers-prefer-darvish-price-prohibitive/
I wonder out Texas would take Seager and Urias for Darvish? Maybe if we threw in Pederson?
Would anyone trade Buehler for Gray?
Yeah, Texas would do that deal! Just like we’ve been saying for two years, the Phils would’ve taken Seager and Urias for Hamels. Nothing less. We could get Darvish for Seager only now, since he is no longer just a prospect. Happily, FAZ didn’t trade him then and won’t now. Got it??
No, I wouldn’t trade Buehler for Gray. I would rather take my chances with 6 years of Buehler control for two of injury risk Gray, but it’s close.
Phillies took MUCH LESS.
It is close regarding Gray. He’s already what Beuhler might, or might not, become. And Gray could help this year.
Bluto, I cannot respond directly to your last post about speculation, due to the settings on the response functions for this blog. But your reaction is precisely the issue. Your position is no less an opinion, and in fact Michael’s view is more supported and your reasoning (or more accurately, Boxout’s original position that Jansen and Turner signed as FA was due largely to FAZ) is not supported and requires an even larger leap. By trying to turn the conversation to shift the burden of proof does not change that.
That’s total BULLSHIT.
I’m not giving an opinion at all.
I’m saying that there’s no way you or Michael know why Turner and Jansen resigned.
And I’m asking you to explain why you are stating that “knowledge” as a fact.
I’m not saying they resigned because of Friedman. I’m not saying they resigned for less because they like Dodger Stadium. I’m not saying they resigned because I use a fake name and post silly parables about John McCain as a Prince. I’m not saying anything except, and read this closely:
Michael doesn’t know why they resigned for less and, BEST CASE, when he claims he does, he is speculating.
Who, frankly, cares if you think Michael’s position is “more likely” than Boxtop’s. That is speculation!
Bluto, why they re-signed is based on statements they made to reporters. I remember multiple news outlets. Google Dodgers, Jansen, Turner and Wedding. They all had offers on the table and were courted by other teams. They talked to each other over a wedding and those talks made them want to come back and take the Dodgers offers over other teams. FAZ not involved in those discussions. This is well reported by news outlets months ago. Recently, on a piece on Colletti, I think in the LA times, Turner and Jansen credited Colletti with their careers. Boxout tried to insert FAZ as the main factor for Turner and Jansen coming back. This is an opinion just like mine and Michael’s, but based on reports our views are much more supported. You can try to say everything is speculation and only Jansen and Turner knows why they signed, but then you would have to explain why the statements these same players made about their conversations at that wedding is not relevant. And why you are supporting Boxout’s position of elevating FAZ’s role in the whole matter is beyond me as Boxout’s position has less relevant reporting to support it.
By “less relevant reporting”, again on Boxout’s position which is what Michael and I were responding to, I mean zero relevant reporting.
Your opinion was that Michael’s position is at best an opinion and at worse a blatant lie. Those are your words and that was your opinion. I do not agree that position is tenable because Michael was basing his opinion on published reporting, unlike Boxout. And because of the reporting, Michael has grounds for holding that opinion other than his own personal view. It is probably at worse a well-supported opinion and at best fact. Not a blatant lie under any circumstances, and not just speculation.
YF,
If you don’t like the way an argument is going, change the argument.
1. You continue to insert Turner and Jansen crediting Colletti with their careers into my response to Michael’s posting speculation as fact. It’s not relevant because it doesn’t have anything to do with it. I credit my mentor with my career, but it doesn’t impact the next contract I sign.
2. I am not supporting Boxout’s position. I don’t even know what his position is, nor what he’s talking about. Is he still trying to make Badger’s name into an insult? Is he chatting with that Tried Blue ninny??!!??!
3. Look at what Badger just posted, not wanting to take the uniform off. I could read that as loving the way the uniform fits, I could read it as the Dodgers were his/her hometown or original team, I could read it as the player loves the entire organization, I could read it as the player loves the way the team treated him. Some of those include the front office, some don’t. I would be SPECULATING to say one interpretation was the truth.
4. I did the same search Badger did, here are two quotes from a USA Today article:
“We’ve talked about this for the past year, doing everything we can to change the culture,’’ Friedman said, pointing to the need to create a selfless, winning mentality. “Where you see that really play out is, your own free agents want to stay, and word gets around the league and guys want to come here and play.’’
“I probably would have beaten (the record) with Washington, but the best thing for me is to be here,’’ said Jansen, a career-long Dodger. “It’s the best thing for my family. I’m happy to be here, I’m excited to be here. We’re playing for one thing here. We’re playing for winning a championship. It would mean a lot to me to win a championship at home.’’
Now, can you make the case that the actions the Front Office has taken since taking over is relevant to both quotes? Obviously YES.
5. Here’s another result from the same search Badger did:
Unlike Miami, the Dodgers offered stability in addition to financial security. Washington could also provide both components. The Nationals made an offer that was “exceptional and generous and for more money,” according to Jansen’s agent, Adam Katz.
“At the end of the day, Kenley loves Los Angeles, his Dodgers family, the fans here, and although money was a factor, it wasn’t the most important thing,” Katz said.
Did you see him mention the Dodgers family?!?!?!?! That could include the Front Office obviously.
6. Here is a quote that directly cites the wedding:
Jansen’s Agent said:
“At his wedding on Saturday, I think something pivoted for him. I think it was being with his teammates and his family. He got a jolt of how important family and continuity was. He called me over the weekend and said he was having difficulty processing leaving the Dodgers and instructed me to work hard to get it done.”
OK. So make the point that Jansen only mentions the teammates and not the front office. Fine. Oh wow. Guess who put the TEAM and teammates together.
It’s speculation pure and simple to say the Front Office had no impact. That’s what I’m saying not Boxtop.
Please stop.
Here, again thanks to Badger, is another direct quote. This time from Turner.
“As much as you want to go out and test the waters — I had this conversation with Kenley – it’s not always greener on the other side when you go to another organization,” Turner said. “As good as they may make it seem it’s going to be for you, you don’t necessarily know what you’re getting yourself into. With the Dodgers, obviously being here the last three years, I knew exactly who was here.
“I love the staff, (manager) Dave Roberts and what he’s done, the guys he’s put into place, what they mean and what they stand for. I love being a Dodger. I love being in the community. I’ve got a lot of stuff going on right here in this city where I grew up not too far from and really wanted to continue those relationships, keep building on it. We have some unfinished business too.”
Again you said Michael’s position is at best opinion and at worst a lie. My first response to you was on that issue, and every response to you was on that issue. I understand you say FAZ was involved. Michael and I were responding to Boxout originally and you chose to criticize our positions, relative to Boxout’s. That is fine and if you want to add more points that’s fine. But relative to Boxout’s position our views are much better supported.
OK.
We will move on.
I really don’t know what the heck Boxout was saying. I’m sorry for that. I was only trying to respond to these “facts” that I saw Michael make and I’ll quote directly. I’m not sure why the situation in which these were posted matters, but if it does I guess I should have read it or cared about it.
—>They just realized what a HUGE mistake they made with Olivera and found some dumb ass to take him off their hands.
—>That trade was supposed to get them over the top.
—>As for the developmental part of guys like Seager and Bellinger, FAZ has nothing to do with that. It is the instructors and coaches being able to communicate with those players and have them buy in to what the coach proposes.
—>They wanted to be here and it sure is not because of the GM, Zaidi, nor the director of baseball operations, Friedman.
Well I read their quotes as to why they said they decided to stay in LA, but they were just their own opinions so how can we believe them?
I just did a simple google search on “Jansen gives reasons he stayed in LA”. It came right up. It was a family decision and an easy one. They wanted to stay home. LA is home. Turner said the same thing. “I knew from day 1 I didn’t want to take this uniform off”. Other than making the offers, sounds like FAZ had nothing to do with it.
Wood getting hit hard, but, as it has been, it continues to be.
Definitely was in the first couple of innings. Seems to have settled a bit.
Some days I hate how the Dodgers swing at the first pitch and make quick, easy outs.
Other days I love how the jump all over the first pitch and line base-hits everywhere.
Ah, baseball.
Good pitching matchup. 4 earned in 7 vs 3 earned in 6.1. Moore wins by a .88 margin.
It could have been much worse fir Wood. (see what I did there) A lot of early line drives found gloves. The Dodgers have had some good karma going for them for several weeks. I expect it to continue through November. And you?
I just hope they make smart decisions for the short/medium and long term.
Too much randomness in this game.
That other thread referencing 2013 and Ramirez (ex-BoSox) and his ribs resonated.