Game 103, 2015

Angels at Dodgers, 7:10PM PT, TV: SPNLA, FSW

Clayton Kershaw brings his hopefully-comfortable hip and his 29-inning scoreless streak to bear against the Angels’ Hector Santiago, who’s 7-4 with a 2.43 ERA. Santiago had a rough outing in his last game but had a 1.13 ERA over his previous five starts.

Believe it or not, the Angels have always given Kershaw trouble (relatively speaking). He’s 2-2 with a 3.76 ERA against them; that’s the highest ERA he has against any team he’s faced more than three times.

There will probably be moves later in the day to get to 25 players on the active roster, and there might even be another transaction or two. Who knows?

New news:

Lineup when available.


Kiké in centerfield? Huh.

108 thoughts on “Game 103, 2015

        • Why would anyone want Morse over Tabata, unless he were cheaper, but that asks the question, ‘why would the Dodgers want Tabata?’ I’m like Package, these guys don’t make sense to me sometimes.

          • I think taking Morse was a condition of getting Latos from the Marlins, so it makes sense the Dodgers would flip him for someone younger and cheaper and perhaps more useful in another transaction down the road.

          • But, of course, all the moves make sense to Package: The GM is on an ego trip wants to replace anyone on the roster he didn’t acquire,replace them with less than stellar talent and turn LA into Tampa Bay West, results be dammed.

  1. In Texas, BadGums has surrendered six runs on six hits in two innings. Llaneros lead the Gnats, 6-2.

  2. Just as Jim Duquette said on MLB radio today. The Dodgers want that 85% performance for the 25% cost, they just don’t want impact players.

    • Earlier you said you just wanted Lake Wobegon players (where everyone is above average).

      • I am counting impact players as above average. Plus I never said anything about Lake Wobegon players, I said Proven above average players. Guess I will have to give some sort of my barometer?

        • Wood is well above average, with comparable numbers to Hamels, and he’s much younger. Latos should be a big improvement over Frías and others who have struggled in the No. 5 spot, and the two relievers should be too (though I’m somewhat skeptical about Johnson). The rotation is much stronger than it was a few days ago.

          • Wood is not an impact player. Hamels is a proven impact player, no doubt about it.

          • I will not stop complaining and you would do yourself wise to keep your opinions of what I think to yourself. If you don’t like what I think, TOO BAD!!!

          • I suppose that’s one way to answer a question. (I actually don’t expect you to stop complaining in any event).

          • Obviously, the Dodgers FO failed completely. If they had done due diligence, they should have been able to acquire Hamels, Price, Cueto, Chapman, Kimbrel, Tulowitzki, Carlos Gómez, and Céspedes. If they’d tried hard enough, they probably could have gotten Stanton, too, for Brandon Beachy.

    • Not sure I understand this. What is the analysis behind it? I imagine they would have gladly taken on Hamels salary just didn’t want to give up their top prospects. Same with Price, whose rental cost was the Jay’s number 1 prospect.

      • They must have called you and told you so you could tell us. That is just an opinion. You don’t know who they would have asked for.

        • It actually has a nice ring to it and might not be a bad strategy given the onerous contracts they have to deal with. Just wondering what evidence was provided.

        • From the reports I read, last year the fillies wanted Joc, Seager and Urias, but brought that down to Seager and Urias this year. What we do know is that the Rangers gave up three of their top five prospects.

  3. Rollins SS
    Kendrick 2B
    Gonzalez 1B
    Van Slyke LF
    Puig RF
    Grandal C
    Guerrero 3B
    Hernandez CF
    Greinke P

  4. I’m glad Mike Trout isn’t in the National League West! Unless he was a Dodger, of course… And add Goldschmitt to the roster, too…

    • We can thank Snake management, which passed on him twice in the draft. Padres, Rox and giants (sic) all passed on him once as well.

      • We should also note that, among their other shortcomings, Goldschmidt and Price failed to sign after being drafted by the Dodgers. Of course, that had to be at least partly the previous FO’s fault.

    • The Gnats got a mediocrity who, however, is better than the decrepit Tim Hudson, but they still don’t have a No. 2 or 3 starter. The Dodgers got one premium starter who’ll be around for a while, another who’s making a strong comeback, and two usable relievers.

        • The Gnats only got Leake, nothing more. The Reds got a so-called pitching from a weak farm system, and a career AAA utility guy.

    • Apart from money (why limit a analysis to just that?), it cost the giants (sic) their number 1 prospect for a rental. We lost a redundant Oliviera and three low end minor leaguers. (to be fair, his actual video discussion on this is much more balanced).

  5. The Dodgers don’t like to sign “older” pitchers to big, longterm contracts. I am concerned that that will mean they won’t re-sign Greinke, who becomes a free agent at the end of this season.

      • It seems to be conventional wisdom that Zack will opt out, but I don’t know where it came from. As far as I know, he himself hasn’t said a word about it. For all we know he and his wife (and newborn child!) love LA and want to stay.

  6. My message immediately below is confusing. What I meant to ask: Do you think Greinke remains with the Dodgers after this year?

  7. Maybe I am wrong but I don’t think the Dodgers obtained Olivero to trade later. I just can’t figure out why they would get rid of him before he plays even an inning? They had to lose 28 million bucks or at least the bulk of that in trading him. I also don’t believe the part where they said they didn’t know where to play him. Why did they get him if they didn’t know where to play him. It is not because of Turner as he has played well last year and this year. Why didn’t they just get a very, very good impact player? Doesn’t sound like the FO is very smart.

    • Here’s what I think came down: They didn’t get Olivero as a chip. I’m pretty sure they thought he’d be a contributor this season and for several years down the road. But as Turner remained the hitter he was last year and the decent defensive player as well, Olivero became less valuable to them. They knew the Braves had tried hard to get the guy, so when it turned out they’d give up Wood and two other big league relievers for him (a guy who’s been hurt and hasn’t played even an inning of MLB), it was too hard to pass up.