Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Dodgers - Final Wish
There is but one last wish that I have for the Dodgers. And it sounds crazy, but it's a great idea. And if the price is right, it just might work.
Mike Piazza.
Yes, Tommy Lasorda's Godson, Mike Piazza, is still a free agent, which probably means that his asking price is going to be lower than the $16 million he made last year. Which is good, because the Dodgers are racking up a payroll already, but haven't quite hit $100 million. If they can convince him to take, an $11 million paycut like Bernie Williams did, the Dodgers just might have the answer. They would use him occasionally as a catcher (probably about 30-40 games at most), an additional coach for Navarro (on catching and power hitting), a first baseman (in case something is wrong with Kent, or to let them try Nomar in left field before he's there regularly), and a pinch hitter. You don't have to make a start to be a Dodger great. Manny Mota is still a "coach," and I don't know what he coaches, but I bet he sits on the bench just to make everyone hope that he'll come out and pinch hit. And Kirk Gibson's shot was, of course, a pinch hit home run.
Then, all they have to do is trade Hee Seop Choi for a relief pitcher, or a prospect, or even a draft pick.
But just think of the batting situations you could get out of this. Without Piazza, it's
Furcal
Lofton
Drew
Kent
Nomar
Mueller
Cruz
Navarro
(pitcher)
and with Izturis,
Furcal
Lofton
Drew
Kent
Nomar
Mueller
Izturis
Navarro
(pitcher)
Consider the possibilities for the Dodgers with Piazza.
Furcal
Lofton
Drew
Kent
Piazza
Nomar
Mueller
Cruz
(pitcher)
Now, obviously he can't play catcher every game. Before Izturis returns, he can get some time at first. But here's the effective lineup if they use him as a pinch hitter with Izturis in there
Furcal
Lofton
Drew
Kent
Nomar
Mueller
Izturis
Navarro
Piazza
Start that lineup with Izturis or Navarro, and you have some offensive potency.
Not only would Piazza then not have to go to the Angels, but the Dodgers would once again have my favorite player, and they could let the bobbleheads roll out.
Mike Piazza.
Yes, Tommy Lasorda's Godson, Mike Piazza, is still a free agent, which probably means that his asking price is going to be lower than the $16 million he made last year. Which is good, because the Dodgers are racking up a payroll already, but haven't quite hit $100 million. If they can convince him to take, an $11 million paycut like Bernie Williams did, the Dodgers just might have the answer. They would use him occasionally as a catcher (probably about 30-40 games at most), an additional coach for Navarro (on catching and power hitting), a first baseman (in case something is wrong with Kent, or to let them try Nomar in left field before he's there regularly), and a pinch hitter. You don't have to make a start to be a Dodger great. Manny Mota is still a "coach," and I don't know what he coaches, but I bet he sits on the bench just to make everyone hope that he'll come out and pinch hit. And Kirk Gibson's shot was, of course, a pinch hit home run.
Then, all they have to do is trade Hee Seop Choi for a relief pitcher, or a prospect, or even a draft pick.
But just think of the batting situations you could get out of this. Without Piazza, it's
Furcal
Lofton
Drew
Kent
Nomar
Mueller
Cruz
Navarro
(pitcher)
and with Izturis,
Furcal
Lofton
Drew
Kent
Nomar
Mueller
Izturis
Navarro
(pitcher)
Consider the possibilities for the Dodgers with Piazza.
Furcal
Lofton
Drew
Kent
Piazza
Nomar
Mueller
Cruz
(pitcher)
Now, obviously he can't play catcher every game. Before Izturis returns, he can get some time at first. But here's the effective lineup if they use him as a pinch hitter with Izturis in there
Furcal
Lofton
Drew
Kent
Nomar
Mueller
Izturis
Navarro
Piazza
Start that lineup with Izturis or Navarro, and you have some offensive potency.
Not only would Piazza then not have to go to the Angels, but the Dodgers would once again have my favorite player, and they could let the bobbleheads roll out.
Labels: Dodgers
Monday, January 16, 2006
Dodgers - The Canadian Will Always Be There
Over the weekend, the Dodgers made a trade for someone else to fill a position they already have an all-star for. No, not another shortstop, but a closer. The Dodgers traded prospect Chuck Tiffany and post-prospect Edwin Jackson for Danys Baez and Lance Carter of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays.
In doing this, the Dodgers department bureau of redundancy and repetition department has yielded a team that now has 2 leadoff men (Furcal and Lofton), 2 closers (Baez and Gagne), and a bajillion shortstops (Furcal, Izturis, Garciaparra, Robles, Lowe). On the upside, the Dodgers also have a 5 man rotation for the first time since, well, I don't know. And they don't have to depend on Hee Seop Choi to play first.
Some reports have suggested that LA might be without franchise-maker Eric Gagne by the start of the 2007 season. These reports were believed to be filed by British intelligence sources because first of all, the British have cricket, not baseball, and if Frank McCourt does that you will be able to hear crickets chirp at Dodger stadium. Secondly, the Los Angeles Times reveals that it is Baez who will be more likely to leave.
Isn't that nice. They're going to work together. But only for one year. Baez has been in Tampa Bay for two years after being with the Indians for three. If the Dodgers pull of a title (and offer him a little more money) he just might change his mind to continue as the setup man and "other closer." In considering Baez compared to Gagne, you don't have to be a Paul DePodesta sabermetric dork to figure out that 160 for 166 is better than 102 for 126, or how that means that Baez has four times as many blown saves in his career than Gagne despite 40 fewer oppurtunities. Which doesn't mean Baez is bad; rather, it just means that he's Gagne's setup man.
Personally, I'm of the theory that a team should basically have 6 or 7 starters and 3 closers, with maybe a left handed specialist just to screw someone up sometime. You can use a starter as a long reliever without screwing up your rotation, and still give everyone plenty of rest. Or by having a couple extra days rest the pitchers can actually make it to the 8th inning. Even having two teams of setup man-closer would be good in letting them get rest, especially for very streaky teams.
Given his pattern of moves this offseason, though, this trade and creation of a 2-inning sequence of lights-out suggest that Colletti was being quite earnest when he said, "I can't sit around and wait; I want the Dodgers to win now." But I think this move is made for Grady Little more than anyone. Although Scott Williamson had proven effective in the 2003 postseason, the Red Sox did not really have a legitimate setup man - closer sequence. Through 2001 they had Derek Lowe, and in 2002 they had Urbina, but nobody in 2003. The point being that Grady Little had good reason to leave Pedro Martinez in - he was more confident in Pedro than his bullpen. By getting an extra closer and not keeping the guy who's the most durable starting pitcher, the Dodgers are insuring against Grady's weakness.
The Dodgers are determined to make this year "next year" since last year sucked.
In doing this, the Dodgers department bureau of redundancy and repetition department has yielded a team that now has 2 leadoff men (Furcal and Lofton), 2 closers (Baez and Gagne), and a bajillion shortstops (Furcal, Izturis, Garciaparra, Robles, Lowe). On the upside, the Dodgers also have a 5 man rotation for the first time since, well, I don't know. And they don't have to depend on Hee Seop Choi to play first.
Some reports have suggested that LA might be without franchise-maker Eric Gagne by the start of the 2007 season. These reports were believed to be filed by British intelligence sources because first of all, the British have cricket, not baseball, and if Frank McCourt does that you will be able to hear crickets chirp at Dodger stadium. Secondly, the Los Angeles Times reveals that it is Baez who will be more likely to leave.
"If you ask me what I want to do, I want to be a closer," Baez said Sunday.
"Now I've got to see what kind of situation we have. I'm not too happy about
that situation, to be a setup man again when I've been a closer the last couple
years."He made it clear it's nothing personal. He admires Gagne's work. And he
won't make waves."I know [Gagne] has been hurt, but he's very, very good," Baez
said. "We're going to work together and we'll see what happens. They know I can
close games. But I'm fine, and whatever the situation is, I'll be ready to go
into games. . . ."
Baez, too, is looking ahead. He made it clear he wouldn't sign an extension
with the Dodgers unless he would be the closer in 2007."I'll pitch one more
year, then I'll be a free agent and everyone in both leagues will know I can be
a closer," he said.
Isn't that nice. They're going to work together. But only for one year. Baez has been in Tampa Bay for two years after being with the Indians for three. If the Dodgers pull of a title (and offer him a little more money) he just might change his mind to continue as the setup man and "other closer." In considering Baez compared to Gagne, you don't have to be a Paul DePodesta sabermetric dork to figure out that 160 for 166 is better than 102 for 126, or how that means that Baez has four times as many blown saves in his career than Gagne despite 40 fewer oppurtunities. Which doesn't mean Baez is bad; rather, it just means that he's Gagne's setup man.
Personally, I'm of the theory that a team should basically have 6 or 7 starters and 3 closers, with maybe a left handed specialist just to screw someone up sometime. You can use a starter as a long reliever without screwing up your rotation, and still give everyone plenty of rest. Or by having a couple extra days rest the pitchers can actually make it to the 8th inning. Even having two teams of setup man-closer would be good in letting them get rest, especially for very streaky teams.
Given his pattern of moves this offseason, though, this trade and creation of a 2-inning sequence of lights-out suggest that Colletti was being quite earnest when he said, "I can't sit around and wait; I want the Dodgers to win now." But I think this move is made for Grady Little more than anyone. Although Scott Williamson had proven effective in the 2003 postseason, the Red Sox did not really have a legitimate setup man - closer sequence. Through 2001 they had Derek Lowe, and in 2002 they had Urbina, but nobody in 2003. The point being that Grady Little had good reason to leave Pedro Martinez in - he was more confident in Pedro than his bullpen. By getting an extra closer and not keeping the guy who's the most durable starting pitcher, the Dodgers are insuring against Grady's weakness.
The Dodgers are determined to make this year "next year" since last year sucked.
Labels: Dodgers
Monday, January 09, 2006
Fiction, At Least for Now
January 9, 2006. 6:54PM PT.
LOS ANGELES - Eric Gagne announced today that he will have laser eye surgery, stating "those goggles were just getting too foggy, especially in other cities, where they have moisture in the air." Gagne continued, "Hey, everyone else is getting surgery, and I don't like being left out."
Indeed just a few days ago, Jeff Kent announced he was getting surgery to remove himself from spring training, and get a bit of scar tissue off his wrist. Ned Colletti called this "precautionary." Rafael Furcal announced earlier today that he would be getting surgery on his knee, which had been bothering him last year. Colletti called this "a cleanup." At the news of Gagne's eye surgery, Colletti said Gagne was being a punk for trying to get him to call his surgery "visionary," describing it rather as "elective."
Rumors are circling now of more potential surgery. Kenny Lofton and Sandy Alomar Jr, are both shopping around for Botox treatments. Owner Frank McCourt announced he would have a brain transplant, because doctors gave him a discount as there is nothing to remove. JD Drew announced that he would do whatever it takes to have his entire skeletal structure replaced with adamantium, because he told his family that he would be Wolverine for Halloween. Finally, Odalis Perez announced he would get a haircut. Ned Colletti announced that he and Gagne have a good working relationship due to his experience as a sportswriter who covered hockey. When asked about the surgeries, Colletti said "well, why not."
LOS ANGELES - Eric Gagne announced today that he will have laser eye surgery, stating "those goggles were just getting too foggy, especially in other cities, where they have moisture in the air." Gagne continued, "Hey, everyone else is getting surgery, and I don't like being left out."
Indeed just a few days ago, Jeff Kent announced he was getting surgery to remove himself from spring training, and get a bit of scar tissue off his wrist. Ned Colletti called this "precautionary." Rafael Furcal announced earlier today that he would be getting surgery on his knee, which had been bothering him last year. Colletti called this "a cleanup." At the news of Gagne's eye surgery, Colletti said Gagne was being a punk for trying to get him to call his surgery "visionary," describing it rather as "elective."
Rumors are circling now of more potential surgery. Kenny Lofton and Sandy Alomar Jr, are both shopping around for Botox treatments. Owner Frank McCourt announced he would have a brain transplant, because doctors gave him a discount as there is nothing to remove. JD Drew announced that he would do whatever it takes to have his entire skeletal structure replaced with adamantium, because he told his family that he would be Wolverine for Halloween. Finally, Odalis Perez announced he would get a haircut. Ned Colletti announced that he and Gagne have a good working relationship due to his experience as a sportswriter who covered hockey. When asked about the surgeries, Colletti said "well, why not."
Labels: Dodgers
Sunday, January 08, 2006
Major League Baseball - Fish in the Desert?
From the looks of things, the Florida Marlins are likely moving to either Las Vegas, Nevada or Portland, Oregon. They want a baseball-only stadium, and frankly they do not have the following in Florida for the city of Miami to build them one.
If they want an exciting stadium, they should put it in Vegas. They could do all kinds of crazy things, like have the monorail take you right to it (a la Disneyworld), have a high-capacity dome, sell reasonably-priced concessions, etc. And they could play in Trump stadium. Given its tourist attraction status, the Vegas location would benefit greatly from a more gimmicky stadium, and would thus be even more fun to watch.
In Portland, though, they could not only develop a greater following (with a larger overall population). And the city has proven they can support a professional sports franchise with the Blazers, whereas Vegas currently holds the Dodgers' AAA affiliate. Also, Portland's location could give a view of the Willamette - or moving away from central Portland, Columbia - river, where such an option is not so easy in Vegas, if a waterside view is prefered.
Regardless, the team will no longer remain in the National League's "East" division, save for a farce similar to that which put the Atlanta Braves in the West division until the advent of the Central division, but would move to the National League West. The obvious initial solution then to merely put the Pittsburgh Pirates in the East, since they are east of Atlanta. This still leaves 5 teams in the East, 5 in the Central, and 6 in the West. But that would be odd with the American League having 5 teams in the East, 5 in the Central, and only 4 in the West.
The revolutionary, and yet blatantly obvious solution is to put the Colorado Rockies in the American League, West division. What is blatantly obvious about this is that the Rockies, with their mountain air, have a great hitters' park, and the American League caters more to offense with the Designated Hitter position. What is revolutionary about this, though, is that it will force the league to schedule interleague play thoughout the season, since there would then be an odd number of teams in each league.
To put this in perspective, the Dodgers are scheduled for 5 3-game interleague series in 2006, most of which are in the months right before the all-star break, which would be 15 games. This new schedule would create the need for either 4 or 6 interleague series, and for the purposes of this idea, it will be 6. This will create 2 3-day stretches where each team plays in interleague. In each occurance, the pairing will be the same, with all NL teams getting home field advantage the first time and all AL teams getting it the second time. Then there will be one weekend in which 9 teams will play interleague series while 6 series between major intra-division rivals take place, which can be known as "super rivalry weekend." These rivalries will vary year to year, but will always include Yankees-Red Sox and Dodgers-Giants.
Summarizing, the current layout looks like this:
National League
East
Braves
Mets
Marlins
Nationals
Phillies
Central
Astros
Brewers
Cardinals
Cubs
Pirates
Reds
West _ _
Diamondbacks
Dodgers
Giants
Padres
Rockies
American League
East
Blue Jays
Devil Rays
Orioles
Red Sox
Yankees
If they want an exciting stadium, they should put it in Vegas. They could do all kinds of crazy things, like have the monorail take you right to it (a la Disneyworld), have a high-capacity dome, sell reasonably-priced concessions, etc. And they could play in Trump stadium. Given its tourist attraction status, the Vegas location would benefit greatly from a more gimmicky stadium, and would thus be even more fun to watch.
In Portland, though, they could not only develop a greater following (with a larger overall population). And the city has proven they can support a professional sports franchise with the Blazers, whereas Vegas currently holds the Dodgers' AAA affiliate. Also, Portland's location could give a view of the Willamette - or moving away from central Portland, Columbia - river, where such an option is not so easy in Vegas, if a waterside view is prefered.
Regardless, the team will no longer remain in the National League's "East" division, save for a farce similar to that which put the Atlanta Braves in the West division until the advent of the Central division, but would move to the National League West. The obvious initial solution then to merely put the Pittsburgh Pirates in the East, since they are east of Atlanta. This still leaves 5 teams in the East, 5 in the Central, and 6 in the West. But that would be odd with the American League having 5 teams in the East, 5 in the Central, and only 4 in the West.
The revolutionary, and yet blatantly obvious solution is to put the Colorado Rockies in the American League, West division. What is blatantly obvious about this is that the Rockies, with their mountain air, have a great hitters' park, and the American League caters more to offense with the Designated Hitter position. What is revolutionary about this, though, is that it will force the league to schedule interleague play thoughout the season, since there would then be an odd number of teams in each league.
To put this in perspective, the Dodgers are scheduled for 5 3-game interleague series in 2006, most of which are in the months right before the all-star break, which would be 15 games. This new schedule would create the need for either 4 or 6 interleague series, and for the purposes of this idea, it will be 6. This will create 2 3-day stretches where each team plays in interleague. In each occurance, the pairing will be the same, with all NL teams getting home field advantage the first time and all AL teams getting it the second time. Then there will be one weekend in which 9 teams will play interleague series while 6 series between major intra-division rivals take place, which can be known as "super rivalry weekend." These rivalries will vary year to year, but will always include Yankees-Red Sox and Dodgers-Giants.
Summarizing, the current layout looks like this:
National League
East
Braves
Mets
Marlins
Nationals
Phillies
Central
Astros
Brewers
Cardinals
Cubs
Pirates
Reds
West _ _
Diamondbacks
Dodgers
Giants
Padres
Rockies
American League
East
Blue Jays
Devil Rays
Orioles
Red Sox
Yankees
Central
Indians
Royals
Tigers
Twins
White Sox
West
Angels
Athletics
Mariners
Rangers
Whereas my new proposal would look more like this:
National League
East ____________ Central _____________ West _ _
Braves__________ Astros ____________ Diamondbacks
Mets ___________Brewers ____________Dodgers
Nationals________Cardinals____________Giants
Phillies__________ Cubs ___________Marlins (new name likely)
Pirates __________Reds ______________Padres
American League
East_____ ________ Central _____________ West _ _
Blue Jays _________Indians ____________ _Angels
Devil Rays ________Royals ______________Athletics
Orioles __________Tigers _____________ _Mariners
Red Sox __________Twins ______________Rangers
Yankees _________White Sox ____________Rockies
Each team will play 21 games against each of the other teams in their division, 6 games against each of the other teams in the league, and 18 total interleague games, consisting of at least one series against each team in the corresponding division of the opposite league. For example, the Yankees would play the Braves, Mets, Phillies, Nationals, and Pirates in interleague play. To recap, that is
Division Play 84 games
League Play 60 games
+ Interleague Play 18 games
Total 162 games
Which adds up to a full season.
Granted, there are winners and losers in this deal. The losers would be the four original NL West teams, the four original AL West teams, and arguably the Pirates (although they would no longer have the Cubs, Astros and Cardinals, the Braves, Mets, and Phillies, and maybe even Nationals might give them a hard time). The winners of this, by a greater margin would be the AL East, whichever new city gets the Marlins, and the Colorado Rockies, who would be given a chance to be legitimate competitors. Fans of baseball, though, would also see a more competitive major league system (except possibly the NL East, with the Pirates and Nationals as questionable contenders), an overall improvement in the division setup, and the home to a DH who's close to retirement but just not quite ready to go yet (Frank Thomas? Mike Piazza? Larry Walker's return from retirement?), especially one who wants to work on a home run total.
So when the Marlins decide they want to move West, I will be sending a letter to Bud Selig's office.
Labels: MLB
Friday, January 06, 2006
In The News - Hank Bosnia leaves VA Tech
Marcus Vick, the younger brother of Michael Vick, who has been nothing but trouble for Virginia Tech finally got kicked off the team. What was most revealing, though, was the information about an arrest:
Information about legal problems that did not make the media until now. This is nothing new for the Vick family, as his older brother Michael, had a lawsuit drawn against him. According to the Smoking Gun,
adding to that
So that's the awful truth. But it cannot stay that way, of course. It has to get funny; it's on smokinggun.com, after all.
Ron Mexico. Wikipedia has a great section on this on their Michael Vick page. What's really fascinating, also, is that you too can come up with your own bogus name for just such an emergency as Vick's. All you need to do is to go to the Ron Mexico Name Generator. Marcus Vick's new pseudonym is Hank Bosnia.
Nomar Garciaparra's nickname is Guy California.
And Osama bin Laden is Kurt Zambia!
Vick might have avoided dismissal had news not broken Friday that he has a
hearing on Jan. 17 for traffic violations stemming from a Dec. 17 arrest. He was
charged with going 38 in a 25 mph zone and driving on a suspended
license.
The offenses occurred the day Tech players began pre-Gator Bowl
preparations with a 1 p.m. team run in Blacksburg. In July 2004, Vick was
arrested for reckless driving and possession of marijuana. That arrest followed
an arrest earlier in the year on charges of contributing to the delinquency of a
minor. Those legal troubles led to his suspension from school for the fall, 2004
semester. He was reinstated with the stipulation that further trouble would lead
to his dismissal.
Information about legal problems that did not make the media until now. This is nothing new for the Vick family, as his older brother Michael, had a lawsuit drawn against him. According to the Smoking Gun,
a 26-year-old health care worker, was infected with the sexually
transmitted disease in April 2003 after an unprotected encounter with Vick at
the athlete's Duluth, Georgia home.
adding to that
Elliott's complaint also contends that Vick "apologized profusely" for not
telling her he was infected with the STD.
So that's the awful truth. But it cannot stay that way, of course. It has to get funny; it's on smokinggun.com, after all.
Elliot's lawsuit alleges that Vick has used the name "Ron Mexico" and, in a
related court filing, her lawyers are seeking Vick's admission that he used the
"Mexico" alias--and perhaps other fake names--"for the purpose of herpes testing
and/or treatment."
Ron Mexico. Wikipedia has a great section on this on their Michael Vick page. What's really fascinating, also, is that you too can come up with your own bogus name for just such an emergency as Vick's. All you need to do is to go to the Ron Mexico Name Generator. Marcus Vick's new pseudonym is Hank Bosnia.
Nomar Garciaparra's nickname is Guy California.
And Osama bin Laden is Kurt Zambia!
Labels: Other News Items
Stuff I Read - I apparently think a lot like Thomas Sowell
I just finished Freakonomics, the bestseller written by an economist and New York Times writer. It's interesting, as it explores some fun questions. Though the authors claim no central focus, the subjects of the chapters are cheating, information, crime, and how a child will end up as an adult, and seem to add a bit to each other.
Much attention is also given to Levitt's personal life and how he ended up researching various problems, which I suppose is to be attributed to Dubner. This book was really written for a very mainstream audience, as it is not only apolitical, but also does not require a prerequisite knowledge of economics.
I did find myself agreeing with Thomas Sowell's assessment of Freakonomics in a random thoughts column, where he stated:
The emphasis on the reasoning was not in the use of economics, but the system of testing against data to reveal underlying causes. The way the book analyzes statistical findings (without showing all the data that was processed) reveals perhaps a bit more about how statisticians think. What makes this an economics book is the use of the idea that people act rationally in their own self-interest, which is how to arrive at some of the startling conclusions.
Much attention is also given to Levitt's personal life and how he ended up researching various problems, which I suppose is to be attributed to Dubner. This book was really written for a very mainstream audience, as it is not only apolitical, but also does not require a prerequisite knowledge of economics.
I did find myself agreeing with Thomas Sowell's assessment of Freakonomics in a random thoughts column, where he stated:
Economist Steven Levitt's best-selling book "Freakonomics"
is not really about economics. It is about applying systematic reasoning to all
sorts of social problems. Systematic reasoning is needed even more than
economics.
The emphasis on the reasoning was not in the use of economics, but the system of testing against data to reveal underlying causes. The way the book analyzes statistical findings (without showing all the data that was processed) reveals perhaps a bit more about how statisticians think. What makes this an economics book is the use of the idea that people act rationally in their own self-interest, which is how to arrive at some of the startling conclusions.
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
Dodgers - Finally, another starting pitcher
Ned Colletti made the move today of getting rid of every Dodger named Duaner. Duaner Sanchez is now a Met, as is Steve Schmoll. The Mets must put a lot of stock in Jae Seo, because along with him, they also dumped Tim Hamulack. Hamulack persisted for 10 years trying to make the majors, and finally did this year, giving up 6 runs in 6 appearances in a total of 2.1 innings pitched in the majors. Rightfully so for Seo, though; in his 14 starts, he went 8-2 with a 2.59 ERA, pitching a little over 90 innings. He could easily last over 180 innings for the Dodgers, puttin less strain on the bullpen, and actually win games, giving Eric Gagne something to do.
Sanchez will be missed, as he and Brazoban would easily be great setup men or fill-ins for Gagne, which is important with the way their starting pitchers go. He also will probably improve and be a great setup man for Wagner. Schmoll is young enough that he will likely improve a bit as well, and while he didn't do too bad, he did have an ERA over 5 last season.
Seo gives the Dodgers a complete starting lineup without having to rely on rookies that are not yet prepared, which is important for the organization. Edwin Jackson can master the minors a bit more before he comes up (which will be the next time Brad Penny gets injured), and he and Houlton can drastically improve then. The Dodgers also protected in this move secret weapons in the minors that they have yet to call up to the Major Leagues, which represent their future. Schmoll will be getting plenty of major league experience, though, as the Dodgers will need to use someone in their bullpen.
So let's recap the lineup. The Dodgers starting pitchers currently look like they'll be
Lowe
Penny
Perez
Seo
Tomko
and the bullpen will be
Gagne (Closer)
Brazoban
Broxton
Hamulack
a couple others
Their opening day position players as of today will be, in order of expected batting apperance
Shortstop Raphael Furcal
Center Field Kenny Lofton
Right Field JD Drew
Second Base Jeff Kent
First Base Nomar Garciaparra
Third Base Bill Mueller
Left Field Jose Cruz
Catcher Dioner Navarro
So with a 5 man starting rotation, 6 or 7 in the bullpen, and 8 starting position players, that leaves 5 or 6 bench players for opening day. These are my predictions
Hee Seop Choi
Jayson Werth
Willy Aybar
Ricky Ledee
Sandy Alomar
Olmedo Saenz or Oscar Robles
When Izturis gets back, assuming no infield or outfield injuries, Kent goes to 1st, Nomar goes to left, and Ledee goes to the Minors since Cruz will not be the 4th outfielder.
Kudos, Ned. It almost looked like he went on vacation, then he comes back and boom, an unexpected deal that gives the Dodgers a starting pitcher that's 14 years younger than David Wells. Let the Padres have him. The Dodgers can wait to deal Perez until after Jackson and Houlton, or some of their other young prospects are ready. Sure he's a lefty with a good arm, but he's also 43. I would expect him to last a little while longer, but the fact that he's talked to the Padres about a position with the organization after his playing career seems to exhibit that he's thinking he's near done. Besides, the Dodgers' pitching prospects are getting there, and LA might even be lucky with a non-roster invitee, a la Jose Lima 2004.
Weaver is a "long shot", as the Dodgers have made the smart move of assuming players that have Scott Boras as an agent want to be somewhere else. In fact, that seems to indicate why LA would even make the move to get Seo (who will be making a good bit under a million dollars, actually). But he would be nice to have again, given how dependable he's been for LA. That's not to mention what the Dodgers would be able to do with 6 dependable starting pitchers (like trade one).
Sanchez will be missed, as he and Brazoban would easily be great setup men or fill-ins for Gagne, which is important with the way their starting pitchers go. He also will probably improve and be a great setup man for Wagner. Schmoll is young enough that he will likely improve a bit as well, and while he didn't do too bad, he did have an ERA over 5 last season.
Seo gives the Dodgers a complete starting lineup without having to rely on rookies that are not yet prepared, which is important for the organization. Edwin Jackson can master the minors a bit more before he comes up (which will be the next time Brad Penny gets injured), and he and Houlton can drastically improve then. The Dodgers also protected in this move secret weapons in the minors that they have yet to call up to the Major Leagues, which represent their future. Schmoll will be getting plenty of major league experience, though, as the Dodgers will need to use someone in their bullpen.
So let's recap the lineup. The Dodgers starting pitchers currently look like they'll be
Lowe
Penny
Perez
Seo
Tomko
and the bullpen will be
Gagne (Closer)
Brazoban
Broxton
Hamulack
a couple others
Their opening day position players as of today will be, in order of expected batting apperance
Shortstop Raphael Furcal
Center Field Kenny Lofton
Right Field JD Drew
Second Base Jeff Kent
First Base Nomar Garciaparra
Third Base Bill Mueller
Left Field Jose Cruz
Catcher Dioner Navarro
So with a 5 man starting rotation, 6 or 7 in the bullpen, and 8 starting position players, that leaves 5 or 6 bench players for opening day. These are my predictions
Hee Seop Choi
Jayson Werth
Willy Aybar
Ricky Ledee
Sandy Alomar
Olmedo Saenz or Oscar Robles
When Izturis gets back, assuming no infield or outfield injuries, Kent goes to 1st, Nomar goes to left, and Ledee goes to the Minors since Cruz will not be the 4th outfielder.
Kudos, Ned. It almost looked like he went on vacation, then he comes back and boom, an unexpected deal that gives the Dodgers a starting pitcher that's 14 years younger than David Wells. Let the Padres have him. The Dodgers can wait to deal Perez until after Jackson and Houlton, or some of their other young prospects are ready. Sure he's a lefty with a good arm, but he's also 43. I would expect him to last a little while longer, but the fact that he's talked to the Padres about a position with the organization after his playing career seems to exhibit that he's thinking he's near done. Besides, the Dodgers' pitching prospects are getting there, and LA might even be lucky with a non-roster invitee, a la Jose Lima 2004.
Weaver is a "long shot", as the Dodgers have made the smart move of assuming players that have Scott Boras as an agent want to be somewhere else. In fact, that seems to indicate why LA would even make the move to get Seo (who will be making a good bit under a million dollars, actually). But he would be nice to have again, given how dependable he's been for LA. That's not to mention what the Dodgers would be able to do with 6 dependable starting pitchers (like trade one).
Labels: Dodgers
Monday, January 02, 2006
In The News - Hugo Chavez is a nice guy, right?
Well, Drudge is headlining that all-around jerkface and former KGB agent Vladmir Pootin' (he had the Moscow baked beans special every day for 50 years) is cutting off oil to Ukraine. As the Telegraph Reports,
So that is a loss of 25% of heating oil to Europe, meaning that Europeans will pay a premium to get their remaining sources to give them more, and many will have to do either with less or without. The US supposedly had a bit of saving grace from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who offered cheap oil. We wanted it, because the average consumer cares very little about whether or not a President borders on being dictatorial, and Americans have a specific emotional attachment and economic ignorance when it comes to oil.
So here are a few things to consider. First, I'd like to give a hat tip to Russell Roberts of Cafe Hayek for pointing this out about a month ago. Now of interest, the CIA World Factbook gives information on many aspects of the country, including per captia GDP. In the US, this was $40,100 per person in 2004. In Europe, Austria's was $31,300 in 2004, France's was $28,700 in 2004, Italy $27,700, Belgium $30,600, and Germany at $28,700.
We could then say that Chavez may be more benevolent to send his oil to Europe, since they have a greater supply crisis and that America's poor people are actually reasonably well-off. The difficulty with that is, though, is in transportation; it would take a bit more fuel to get a tanker from Venezuela to Portugal than to Delaware. The quality of mercy lying therein would require calculation and data that I can't get my hands on.
But what makes people so cynical of Chavez? Does he look better than Putin by comparison? Well consider the following, from that original Cafe Hayek post:
Venezuela's per capita income was about $5,800 in 2004. Is it really more compassionate to sell to the US or even Europe at depressed prices? Or rather, it is better to sell at the going market rate and distribute the rest of the money to the people of Venezuela, and invest money in the nation's infrastucture and economy so that they can bring down the nation's unemployment rate (17.1% in 2004).
Here's another twist, though. In some oil-rich countries, the wealth from oil does not offer a cure-all to poverty. Look at the Middle East. Suppose Chavez believes he cannot help but be a dictatorial ruler, and therefore wants to pass on a consumer surplus to the US, who would have the abilities to do good for his country. Well then, should he really be helping the poor, who would be less apt to use their consumer surplus for charitable contribution as opposed to the economy at large?
The evidence points to Chavez being one of two things, a reputational entrepreneur or an self-aware, yet bungling philanthropist. I would give him credit for being smarter than that, so I think the reputational entrepreneur point is the most likely.
Russia took Europe to the brink of a winter energy crisis yesterday when it
carried out a Cold War-style threat and halted gas deliveries to Ukraine, the
main conduit for exports to the West.
With a quarter of its gas supplied by
Russia, Europe is facing serious disruption and price rises for as long as the
dispute rumbles on.
So that is a loss of 25% of heating oil to Europe, meaning that Europeans will pay a premium to get their remaining sources to give them more, and many will have to do either with less or without. The US supposedly had a bit of saving grace from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who offered cheap oil. We wanted it, because the average consumer cares very little about whether or not a President borders on being dictatorial, and Americans have a specific emotional attachment and economic ignorance when it comes to oil.
So here are a few things to consider. First, I'd like to give a hat tip to Russell Roberts of Cafe Hayek for pointing this out about a month ago. Now of interest, the CIA World Factbook gives information on many aspects of the country, including per captia GDP. In the US, this was $40,100 per person in 2004. In Europe, Austria's was $31,300 in 2004, France's was $28,700 in 2004, Italy $27,700, Belgium $30,600, and Germany at $28,700.
We could then say that Chavez may be more benevolent to send his oil to Europe, since they have a greater supply crisis and that America's poor people are actually reasonably well-off. The difficulty with that is, though, is in transportation; it would take a bit more fuel to get a tanker from Venezuela to Portugal than to Delaware. The quality of mercy lying therein would require calculation and data that I can't get my hands on.
But what makes people so cynical of Chavez? Does he look better than Putin by comparison? Well consider the following, from that original Cafe Hayek post:
Yes, the people of Venezuela are lucky to have him. He's selling oil at a
40% discount to people in a country whose per-capita
income is over SIX TIMES that of Venezuela's. That's a man who really
knows how to take care of the little guy.
Venezuela's per capita income was about $5,800 in 2004. Is it really more compassionate to sell to the US or even Europe at depressed prices? Or rather, it is better to sell at the going market rate and distribute the rest of the money to the people of Venezuela, and invest money in the nation's infrastucture and economy so that they can bring down the nation's unemployment rate (17.1% in 2004).
Here's another twist, though. In some oil-rich countries, the wealth from oil does not offer a cure-all to poverty. Look at the Middle East. Suppose Chavez believes he cannot help but be a dictatorial ruler, and therefore wants to pass on a consumer surplus to the US, who would have the abilities to do good for his country. Well then, should he really be helping the poor, who would be less apt to use their consumer surplus for charitable contribution as opposed to the economy at large?
The evidence points to Chavez being one of two things, a reputational entrepreneur or an self-aware, yet bungling philanthropist. I would give him credit for being smarter than that, so I think the reputational entrepreneur point is the most likely.
Labels: Politics
