Post-Christmas stocking-stuffers

Speculation remains the currency of choice among the beat reporters, it seems.

Dodgers meet with Maeda, says MLB.

The Dodgers met with Japanese free-agent pitcher Kenta Maeda on Thursday, according to several Japanese media outlets.

[snip]

The Dodgers are believed to prefer a trade for Miami ace Jose Fernandez or Tampa Bay fourth starter Jake Odorizzi, but don’t want to deal such top prospects as Corey Seager or Julio Urias to do it.

They also reportedly have some interest in Scott Kazmir, one of the few remaining free agents who could crack their rotation.

381 thoughts on “Post-Christmas stocking-stuffers

  1. Where can I buy a book on the Sabremetrics analytical methodology as it pertains to baseball?

    I ask out of curiosity…..
    I also ask out of the desire to be more informed as to the Sabre-based postings I see from other bloggers here…. and, quite frankly….. I feel left-out… 🙁 …….. 🙂

    The only STAT I’ve been going with has been…..
    ” Dodgers WS Championships since 1988 ” = 0 … zero….nada…zippo….zilch….aught…donut…..
    goose egg….nil….. et.al.”

    PS – As I was typing my list of synonyms for zero, I remembered “donut” from Michael Keaton in the movie, “Gung Ho”….. pretty classic. Have a great day you guys…..

    • The place to begin is probably the glossaries of Baseball Reference or Fangraph sites. if you want more on what’s behind them, then “Hidden Baseball” a 25 year old book is said to be good. An interesting book at this point is also “The Sabremetric Revolution: Assessing the growth of Analytics in Baseball”, which provides a perspective on its impact in baseball over the past 25 years, including a critique (both in general and more specifically to “Money Ball” and the notion that sabremetrics accounted for the success of the A’s in those years) and future areas requiring attention. Also very interesting in terms of both assessing players and applying analytics to strategy and tactics is Tom Tango’s “The Book: Playing the Percentages in Baseball”. The new area for numbers in baseball is Big Data. This will only grow with the fitting out of all major league stadiums last year with monitoring equipment. It’s not just for TV graphics showing the trajectory and speed of the ball and players, but provides millions of data points that can be analyzed. This summer I read a very interesting book on the use of Big Data by the Pirates in rebuilding their team called “Big Data Baseball”.

      • Thanks a million, Bob.
        Great resources…. Looks like I’ve got my work cut out for me….
        Good thing it’s only January…and, I’ve got a few months left til Spring Training…
        🙂

  2. I’m making too big a footprint here… I’ll go sit in the corner for a few days…

  3. Package has highlighted the desire to increase run scoring and noted how the Dodgers were in the middle of the pack in this area last year. The Dodgers actually led the NL based on the the OPS+ measure at 105 versus the league average of 94. The question to my mind is why this did not translate into more runs.

    It’s complicated. I think that I would discount somewhat randomness or luck (in this case bad luck) based to two numbers. First, OPS was basically the same overall and with RISP, though on average other teams in the league did a little bit better in this area with the Dodgers at 98 on a scale of 100. Secondly, overall BABIP (batting average balls in play) was league average. Moving on, the Dodger performance shows that a walk is not always as good as a hit, so whereas we had the league’s best OBP at .336 (overall and with RISP) we were 2nd in walks and 13th in hits. While we didn’t K that much (5th best), we were only around average in terms of productive outs. In areas such as bare runners scoring and GIDP we were also league average. So, basically our performance in OPS+ was undermined in terms of scoring runs because we were only average, or worse, in a number of areas that contribute to run scoring.

    • Bob, in looking at your information it looks complicated but the question I have is, using your info it seems would be hard to use it to determine what kind of player to try and obtain? Can you provide us with an example of a player that would be perfect to get using this info? Also keeping in mind as I have been told, you can’t have an All Star at every position. I probably did not explain my question well.

      • Just on the hitting side, and only at the FA market and current “openings” in the Dodger line up, I would say that Howie could contribute. After that, it gets complicated. Unless the market for him plunges, we won’t be able to get him for one year at $16 million. So, a bunch more bucks and/or more than one year would be required.

          • In the last game the Dodgers played last year,in Pederson’s first two ABs, he led off an inning with a walk and both times Greinke followed with a successful sacrifice bunt putting Pederson at second with one out.

            Twice the Dodgers failed to score Pederson from second with one out.

            Two more walks would not have helped without a hit somewhere in the inning. A blooper, a seeing eye ground ball, an error, a bad play might have scored Pederson.

            How many times did that happen during the year might be available but for now we don’t know. But the more times a team gets a runner in scoring position with less than two outs the better the chances of scoring.

            We can think the Dodgers depended on the home run too much and failed to hit with RISP but that is just gut assumption. A curious mind looks for ways to understand what happened and how that compared to what other teams experienced.

            I enjoyed Bob’s input and appreciate someone here that tries to add a deeper look.

        • Actually I just wanted some examples of current MLB players that would fit the using of your info? It doesn’t matter to me what their contract is or team they are on.

          • Sure, the last part was just a thrown in by me thinking it through further as regards this particular player.

          • Don’t think that I have the intellectual curiosity for this and not sure of the practical use of such a long list with somewhat narrow parameters, as I assume that you are curious about the relative elements in OBP. As such the list (there are over 500 players in the MLB, no?) would be ranked based upon the relative contributions of hits and walks, but at some level of OBP it wouldn’t matter (not sure what that level would be). As well, there are more ways to score a run other than a hit with RISP that you would want to take into account slugging as well. Now, if I were playing fantasy baseball and could draft whomever I wanted, that would be another matter.

          • Do you think using certain combinations of sabermetrics that you can decide what kind of player you would like at any given position. Batting as well as fielding? In other words use a different saber related player depending on how you want to build a team? Not sure if this is making any sense? IE. Lets say you think 3b should have an outstanding fielder (Even more than say 2nd base) but not as big a bat as 2nd base. This is just me thinking not necessarily believing.

          • The short answer is yes, using WAR and the subsets of oWAR and dWAR. if you cared about the relative contributions of offense and defense at particular positions. This is historical so for building a team you would want WAR projections which several sites do

      • Don’t take what I posted about your number crunching personal, it’s not an attack on you. You enjoy playing with them and comforting you by giving you explanations. Many of us old time fans have not gotten into them as much, we don’t understand them and, really, we don’t want to. Baseball as we knew it as a child is a comfort to us in our old age, we don’t want to change how we perceive it. Your numbers tell you our team might not be as bad as some of us oldtimers see it, but for us, it’s simple: We lost a lot of low scoring games last year (and won a lot too and even they take a toll as we sweat through them), so the simple solution for us is to get more/better hitters.

        • I certainly don’t take it personally and enjoy your comments because they make me think. I think we are basically from the same generation of fans. For better or worse, my academic and professional career facilitates my appreciation for the numbers approach.

    • Yet you claim we don’t need more/better hitting. You are very fluent with sabir numbers and what they mean, but Package, myself, and probably a lot of other fans only care how they translate into runs on the scoreboard, in short, we care about results, not explanations of why we should have won but didn’t. Sabir was invented by agents for .240 hitters trying to convince GMs that their clients were as valuable as .300 hitters…

      • Guess those clients didn’t want to hear that old saying “If you’re not good, get good”.

      • Never made such a claim. We can always use more hitting. The issue was where that might come from and at what cost. I suggested bounce backs from SVS and Puig and having Seager in the everyday line up. And you wanted Cespedes.

      • Sabremetrics was invented by a fellow with an intellectual curiosity in fitting a production function to the wide array of stats available in baseball and used by GMs to look for the better value for money in improving their teams.

  4. Besides having players on the Farm that can move up to the Show or be included in a trade, there is a need to create a winning and competitive environment for prospects as they move up in the system. Ideally, players will win together and move up together.

  5. I think it might be prudent to look for a big RH bat, maybe later it could be for just 1 year but one thing is for sure, the Dodgers need more runs.

    • The Dodgers were sixth of 14th teams in the NL in runs scored. They finished with a better record than every team above them except for the Cubbies and Bucs.

      • Yeah, we wouldn’t want to win too many games, might delay the start of vacation… Everyone always needs more hitting and more pitching, that’s a given.

      • According to the MLB stats the Dodgers finished 8th in runs in the NL and 19th in all of MLB. The KC Royals and the New York Mets were both ahead of the Dodgers in Runs.Of course both were in the W.S. The Rockies, Dbacks, Nationals,Pirates, Giants, Cubs and Mets were all ahead of the Dodgers in the runs in the NL. Bottom line, they need to score more runs. If the pitching turns out not to be as good then that would be another reason to score more runs.

        • Scoring runs is always good. The run scoring environments in the AL versus the NL are different though, so MLB comparisons don’t tell us much. For example, KC was only about sixth in the AL. As you allude, it’s run differential (RD) that really matters (i.e., taking the pitching into account), but how a team does during the season doesn’t tell us much about the post season, so saying “of course they made it to the WS” is a stretch. The team with the best RD in the NL was the Cards at 0.8 and won 97 games (Dodgers and Mets were at 0.4). heck, in the AL, the Jays had a 1.4 RD! (KC was at 0.5).

          • Sure but the facts about run scoring or even run differential during the season doesn’t seem to tell us much about success in the playoffs such that it can be said “of course both were in the WS”.

        • So? My miscount, but you haven’t proved anything. The 16-run difference with the Mutts amount to one-tenth of a run per game – the offense were essentially the same. The Mutts had the benefit of not losing two starting pitchers for the entire season, or the Dodgers’ record would have been even better than it was.

    • We certainly need Puig and SVS to bounce back, particularly with the loss of Howie. Last year, we actually had the same winning percentage against southpaws as righties. Not sure what to make of this. Maybe we should have done better against righties? Having Seager for the season should help on that score.

      • If what you say is correct then I guess it means that we need to get Howie’s numbers from somewhere. If not improvement from Puig and SVS, then get a bat that is as good or better than Howie. Right? Wrong?

        • I would say that the FO is counting on rebounds from SVS and Puig and them avoiding injury. If Quique in an expanded role can get anywhere near his OPS+ 234 against lefties last year we might not miss Howie so much. AJ did very well against lefties, but in limited time. Grandal also hit lefties better than righties and there is Justin, of course.

          • We have Utley at 2nd, too, remember. If he can get back to anywhere near his career numbers of .281/.365/.479 he’ll help us forget Howie.

          • He still seems to have it in the field, but we probably should not expect too much with the bat

          • I expect Utley will hit well enough to be part of a platoon this season. Nobody expects him to be a longer-term solution.

          • Utley clearly struggled when he was injured last year but with his short quick swing, I think he has another year in him as a hitter if he stays healthy.

  6. Looking at last years stats in a small sample size, Trayce Thompson who the Dodgers got from the White Sox did pretty well. The White Sox were going to give him a good look in CF. Perhaps the Dodgers should give him a look there also.

      • Should the Dodgers want to go with a platoon of Ethier and SVS in RF, there is a chance a Wood and Puig could get Harvey. That would give the Mets the outfielder they need and within their budget. Verdugo might be ready by the time Ethier’s contract ends and could then step into RF withoug being blocked by Puig.

        • I don’t see the Dodgers sacrificing offense for more pitching at this point, particularly in losing a RH bat. What would LF look like under this scenario?

          • I mostly agree. FAZ will be hesitant to lose Puig”s bat and defense. LF would be another platoon with Crawford and maybe Thompson/Herrera. That would give them 3 platoons with Utley and Hernandez at second.

            Harvey should get about $6.3M in his 1st year arbitration.

          • This entire thread is why I come here. I learn so much from everyone’s comments and musings. Thanks, Bumsrap and Co.!

        • That is a tough one Bumsrap. I feel that losing Puig would be a loss, I think it would be easier to replace Puig. Of course injuries could happen to either or both but Harvey is certainly an impact pitcher. I am leaning toward making that trade but I could see it going either way.

          • For me, it’s more about Verdugo. If he can be solid in RF, I will be okay with 2 years of SVS /Ethier in RF.

          • Agreed but for me, I am not sure Puig will ever crack the superstar level again so it would make sense to obtain a really good pitcher.

        • First one of your proposed trades I’ve liked. In reference to some of the comments below, I don’t think FO falls in love with any player, he views them as interchangeable parts. (Not knocking him, just saying that’s how I think he thinks…) We now have a surplus of “low grade pitching” he could trade for any necessary position pieces or even sign Gordon, Cespedes, Upton or whatever is needed. What is our payroll today? Another $20MM won’t kill us…

          • I agree with your take on the FO position but I don’t see them picking up a really good impact position player. They could fool me, however.

          • Second base has been mentioned as a position FAZ wanted to strengthen but lately there seems to be comfort with a platoon of Hernandez and Utley. I can live with that platoon for 2016 but it is still an ongoing concern. Hernandez has to concentrate on second base if he has a chance of being adequate defensively there.

            I can’t see signing an outfielder free agent until Crawford’s and Ethier’s contracts end and not just for the cost but because the team has platoons they can use with players already on the team that are serviceable.

          • As you know I am a fan of Ethier. I think he is very solid and needs to play as much as possible. I do not feel that way about Crawford. I wish there was a way to move him as he is one of the 25 and hurts the flexibility of the team unless there is a plan to use him from the new management.. I think if they can pay a huge portion of Kemp’s salary, maybe they should consider letting Crawford go.

          • Ethier needs to play as much as possible against RHPs. He’s utterly useless v. lefties.

          • They paid around 30% of Matty’s salary commitment and received a player plus salary relief of in the other 70%.. CC is owed $43 million and my guess is that they would have to pay at least 70% of that to unload CC at this point so some though not a lot of salary relief, would likely get little if anything in return, and they don’t seem to have anyone under control now knocking on the door for his slot with Schebler gone. Slot might be used for another infielder or back end of the pen. The other fellow who could be seen as reducing flexibility is Guerrero.

          • Absolutely Bob, Guerrero is just occupying a spot also. Just seems to me that having those guys and not playing them is hurting the ability to win. Perhaps carrying an extra starter might work or long reliever. An extra in the infield and/or another bullpen guy makes more sense. Even though you would be flushing them down the drain it seems those two spots might generate a better team.

          • Any player who can help the club more than Crawford and Guerrero deserves that roster spot more than them. Trade them for bad contracts that would be of more use to us. I once suggested BJ Upton, his being right handed and capable of playing centerfield makes him more beneficial to the club than Crawford. I am sure there are other examples.

          • They got Peraza for second but apparently soured on him and traded him. About the same thing happened with Olivera and Alex Guerrero. Their scouting department must be a real mess. In the short term, bringing Kendrick back might not be such a bad idea…

          • I think Hernandez and Utley will offer similar defense to Kendrick and I hope their offense will be close enough to get the draft pick that Kendrick will get them should any other team decide to sign Kendrick.

          • Ian Desmond seems to be having a difficult time finding a place to land. Any upside in signing him for second base?

          • I see the Angels biting on him especially if they could unload CJ Wilson’s contract. Pujols and Hamilton contracts are killing them. FAZ clearly doesn’t want to get into the same situation.

          • Angels already have an SS. Can’t imagine Desmond signing up to play 2nd base at his age, but who knows how the market will go.

          • I like Utley a lot. I have always liked Utley. I think between him and Roberts, the young players can be taught grit and never say die attitude.

          • Reports are they soured on Peraza because of his on-base skills, or
            perceived lack thereof, during his short look-see. Current management
            inherited Guerrero, whose best position they obviously believe is
            DH…if that.

            Olivera, Guerrero, and good-field no-hit SS Arry probably had a good bit to do with the personnel changes in Dodger international scouting.

          • My guess is what we have is what we will be going with. If Puig and Pederson kick it up a notch…who knows…then maybe someone like CC gets DFA’d during the season. But we should be alright.
            On another note, I have been railing on getting a new manager for a couple years now. Among other things. I guess at least one of my wishes came true this year. I just hope its not a case of the devil you know.

          • I think the manager can be OK but you know the old saying “You can’t be an eagle if you are surrounded by turkeys”, who is on the team is the most important fact I think.

          • So that’s been my problem all these years, I thought by hanging out with eagles, I could become one. Then again, the Turkey almost became our national bird.

          • Actually, most of the turkeys seem to have moved into political office of one kind or another.

          • Your “really good impact position player” usually means someone who has one or two years of high profile performance who fortunately hits free agency at the right time and expects to be paid as if he were going to keep up that output for years and years. Reality is most of them fall back to a more pedestrian performance level quickly and never rise above it again. Will it surprise you to realize both Ethier and Crawford were “impact players” several years ago when they signed the big contracts they are coasting through? They are not unusual. The trick is to acquire a player before he has his career year so he is affordable. That is what FO is trying to do.

          • Actually I was referring to Gordon and Cespedes in this case but I view impact players as proven quality players not one year wonders. As I mentioned below, I like Ethier but am not high on Crawford. I think being affordable relates more to a small market team.

          • Ignoring money and options, it would be very entertaining to watch an outfield of Cespedes, Pederson, and Puig.

          • Cespedas and Puig? Together? In the same lineup? I can see sports psychologists lining up and chomping at the bit.

          • I think Cespedes would have a very good effect on Puig, settle him down and get the highest performance out of him.

          • A bad outfielder is supposed to serve as an example for a younger and more talented player?

          • Yes, ignoring all that, they would be very entertaining, and if Roberts could keep them on the field and focused, that could be a great outfield.

          • Small market teams HAVE to live with affordable, the rich Dodger ownership Chooses to go that route, and that is why they paid Friedman $35MM to come here from Tampa Bay and save them money. If they wanted to spend beau coup dollars on high priced “impact players”, they could have saved $35MM and kept Ned as GM.

          • Yeah, but $35 million for six years. You pay someone six years for their career year you are going to get into trouble.

          • I might have given him four max and hope he was productive for three. FO probably thought the same, but stretched it to 5.

          • I don’t think Zack was being paid for one career year. He has been a Cy Young award winner and should have won this year in many peoples mind. Also, by the Dbacks getting him the Dodgers get double whammied, they lose and the Dbacks win. I do see them overpaying some but I think it would have been worth it. He is very stable.

          • Zach is certainly a great pitcher. His ERA+ in 2015 was 170% better than in 2014. If he had repeated the 2014 performance in 2015, he wouldn’t have been in the top ten in the NL. It was a career year for him and placed him among the elite and he wanted to be paid accordingly. Can’t blame him.

          • “Has been” very stable. There’s no guarantee a pitcher’s arm will hold up. Hershiser had been a Dodger for seven years when his rotator cuff gave way in 1990 and he was out over a year. I think that kind of history is what kept them from offering six years to Greinke; Orel is hardly the only one to whom that happened.

          • So you would pay him betting on the come, huh? At what point do you believe he is worth a 4,5,6 year deal? And for how much per year? Maybe he gets hurt next year so you let him go? You are correct however, there is no guarantee but you have to make a decision. In my opinion that is based on history.

          • Yes, thinking that you were referring to the same. His is not $35 million per year, but for five years.

          • So the Dodgers wouldn’t go a 6th year for Friedman either. At least they are consistent.

          • If the idea was to save money, the Dodgers would have already traded Kershaw for prospects, and their payroll would at Devil Rays levels.

          • The Dodgers draw several times the number of fans that Tampa does, and the same is true of their TV income. In order to do that, they have to provide better players to keep the fans happy. Their payroll will never approach Tampa Bay levels. And I fully expect that when Kershaw opts out (2018?), they will make some kind of attempt to resign him but it will fall short of some crazy offer someone else makes, as it did with Zack.

          • Right, just like they fought for Zack. Funny, WBB, almost every post you make is to disagree with something Package or me says. Is that the best you can do? Can’t you think of something original to post that isn’t a slam or a “you’re stupid” rebuttal to me and Package?

          • I don’t want ceiling (potenial), I want performance. Your findings are based on what?

          • So, you’d continue to prefer an aging powerhouse like the Fillies, with stars like Ryan Howard with contracts stretching into infinity.

          • Signing a impact player does not always mean that you create a Ryan Howard situation.

          • Come on Audit, there has to be one other you’ve liked. Three years I offered Puig for Fernandez. More recently, I suggested various odds and ends for Chapman.

    • Points to FO for this creative deal. If he doesn’t pitch well, he’s not likely to earn any incentives. If he pitches well enough to earn $10MM-$12MM a year incentives every year, (that’s Anderson money), he’s a bargain. Take that, Dave Stewart!

    • Package is going to love this article. Read the comments, a lot of people don’t think much of the writer…

    • The lure of the siren’s song. Tie me to the mast! Don’t think that this “fabulous” was ever really feasible, so a bit of a straw man here. Competing with other teams looking for their ace when you are trying to have three is tough. No telling what sort of sweeteners would have been required to get them to play second and third fiddle.

  7. Package, it’s pretty obvious 2 or 3 people here have built up a serious prejudice to you. Maybe you like it that way but I wonder if you’ve ever considered starting your own blog. I have. I don’t think it’s terribly expensive and the technology is little more complicated than we use in posting here. I’ll be glad to look into for you if you like, help you in any way I can. Might even end up doing it myself…

    • Starting a blog is certainly a thought. I am not sure I would have enough time to devote to it. I will think about it but if you start one I will certainly participate. Thanks for thinking of my welfare as it isn’t fun being disliked.

      • Nobody dislikes you, but many of us have concluded that your opinions are uninformed and evidence-resistant.

        • While the rest of us are well informed, general good citizens, and always right? Some of you haven’t read the Constitution lately. Some people think it says he has a right to his opinion, right or wrong, and the right to so state publicly. Nobody forces you to respond and get even angrier in the process. Quit beating your head against the wall…

          • When we start defending opinions on the basis of the Constitution and everyone’s right to have one this just turns into one of those rant blogs. I think the notion here is that an opinion expressed is subject to disagreement and discussion and one needs to accept that and not play the victim and defend one’s opinion merely on the basis of having the right to have one. I can understand people here finding my own particular back-and-forths as tiresome however, and I can make it a point to curb my enthusiasm in the future for the better of the community.

          • Don’t ever curb your enthusiasm. That is only done when you accept that you are getting old. Keep that boyish charm.

            I liken this (and some others) blog to the old days when a group of us would meet at a bar to watch the lone TV, whatever game was on, and banter back and forth with opinions, ideas, suggestions. And where did that all go? Nowhere, because none of us really knew anything other than what we saw and our opinions as to what it all meant. We saw some players who we could see were “stiffs”, we saw some players who we could see had potential, but it was all just our opinions, nothing more.

            That was fun and meaningless and afterward we all went home. Kind of had to, the bar was closing. But my point is the world never ended, we all had fun, voiced our opinions, argued, all of us know nothings. Ah the good old days.

            The problem is that back then, we could make comments to each other, sarcastic or otherwise, and because it was “live”, these comments retained their intent and meaning. Here, in writing, we do not know what is stated in jest or meant sarcastically. Bottom line, let’s resolve to give each other a break.

          • Package certainly has the right to his opinions, even though they’re invariably wrong and factually challenged. I think most of us would like him to learn to think more critically about his assumptions.

        • In reality, aren’t all of our opinions just that, our opinions? Are any of us informed? I could be wrong, but none of us are privy to inside information. We all state emphatically our positions based on conjecture and theoretical models and hypotheticals. So why not me? or Package? or you? Doesn’t make us wrong. Doesn’t make us mean spirited. Just makes us passionate fans.

          • Opinions are just opinions, yes. But it’s far better if they’re based in fact and not defended as having the same weight as fact when there’s easily available evidence that they don’t.

            It can be my opinion that the sun could rise in the south tomorrow, and I have every right to state it publicly. But if I do so I open myself up to justifiable ridicule and soon will find that my opinions are no longer taken seriously–nor should they be. It’s made worse if I voice the same opinion over and over, however fact-based it is or isn’t.

            Exercising the right to free speech does not protect me from the consequences of doing so.

          • So, if I understand you correctly, some of you have inside information and are privy to FO meetings. Well I, for one, am impressed.

          • You don’t. I made no such claims, nor would I. We all have access to the same information. But we don’t all give it the same weight or incorporate it into our opinions. Some opinions here can ignore facts.

            Please note that this isn’t directed at you.

          • Rest assured, I am not taking any of this personally. I know its not meant at me. Its just conjecture and how each of us views available information which, rest assured, is just part of the whole.
            At the end of the day, just as we used to years ago, we go home and forget about it and start anew tomorrow.

          • Some of us, not including Package, have opinions supported by facts rather than mere assertions.

          • Facts? Oh, you mean taking numbers and manipulating them to support the desired outcome? I get it. Kind of like how the economy and jobs are going so well in the country, and I’ve got the graphs and calculations to prove it. You mean like that?
            Sorry, but IMO, there are no facts in sports. There are indicators and tendencies. But it still comes down to abilities and health of the players. And as much as we would like them to be, these cannot be absolutely quantified. Again, just my opinion.
            And I don’t know any of you here, but cheap shot at Package, if I might say so.

          • Howard, I am in agreement with you. Love your reference to the economy, lot of people here don’t realize how tough it is out there for some people, especially the young people. You have your feet on the ground.

          • So, you’re telling me there are no facts? I was not aware a certain strident cable news network had a first name.

            The economy is in pretty good shape, by the way, especially since it hit bottom in 2008. But your network will never admit that.

          • If you are saying the economy is in pretty good shape, then that means you have a job. Otherwise, you would not say so. Try driving around your neighborhood, or any other for that matter. Take a look at all the small businesses that used to be there, and remember, small business drives the economy.
            On your other note, facts are what you make of them, and how you twist them.
            And I wish I owned that network. It makes money. How else could the Fox network afford billions for sports events.

          • But one might conclude that we need better measures of the economy than just the traditional one’s on GDP and unemployment and not that we just ignore numbers. An analogy in baseball might be that we need to look beyond batting average when evaluating a hitter or wins when evaluating a starting pitcher.

          • We are doing that, yet it still comes down to how we massage numbers to achieve our desired result to prove our point.

          • The notion is that if you don’t agree with the numbers you provide a counter argument, no?

      • As I have said several times, I don’t dislike you. I dislike your habit of insisting that your opinions are correct despite all logic and evidence to the contrary.

        Seriously, do you really think Friedman et.al. are paid what they’re paid to destroy the team by trading your favorite players and not acquiring others you like? That’s what you seem to be claiming. You have to know that’s nonsense, yet you repeat those sentiments daily.

        • Before I answer, this is not a slam on the FO. I think Freidman is paid what he is paid to make money. Yes his goal is to field a winning team, not necessarily a championship team but one good enough to continue to fill the seats and create a buzz among Dodger fans. This causes interest and an atmosphere of winning. I also think he has a budget but we are not given that number and I am not saying we should. I do think the number is a real good number to work with. I like to follow my team and the players it obtains but I don’t think the FO has anywhere near the loyality we fans do. When they trade Matt Kemp it is all about getting rid of his contract even if it means paying more in a trade than he should. I do feel that they have made many mistakes but their philosophy is to build from the minors cheaply. I don’t think that works in total as you cannot predict who will perform to a high level. With FAs you have a history in the Major leagues and a reason to bring them in. Not every position needs a FA but a good mix. Bottom line is they don’t feel like most FAs are worth the money and they can meet their objective of keeping the interest and fans in the seats without doing that. This is currently working. The part where we really disagree is not obtaining good people to put the Dodgers over the top to win a W.S. They know many people will love them no matter what they do. I am not one of them. In my humble opinion, its all about the money. Again, I am not bashing but simply trying to answer your question so go ahead and bash me everyone.

          • When the Dodgers traded Kemp, they were ridding themselves of a declining and easily replaced player for a talented youngster at a premium position.

          • And that’s good. I’m glad we have Grandal, I regret it took Kemp to get him. I still think if FO had thrown more money at them, we could have made it Crawford instead of Kemp. And that would have been so much better for us.

      • But, but, but… I like having you guys here! I don’t always appreciate the bickering, but I appreciate differing viewpoints, for sure.

          • I say yes, we have two new starters which should help. I tell ya, I was super scared we would not get any more starters. If the postion players play well and the younguns blossom, who knows?

  8. HAPPY NEW YEARS’ DAY !!!! – I hope you all enjoy it to the fullest.
    …..
    Just a quick note here as I was thinking about this yesterday ………
    .
    Personally, I enjoy all the interaction with you guys / gal 🙂 all year / season long. Sometimes I contribute more than others…. However, I check in and read frequently…..
    .
    Some people take a more “glass half full” approach to their commentary while others take more of a “glass half empty” type of approach. However, I do my best to not call others out on a personal basis…. as I try to keep it about “Our Dodgers” ……. (rather than picking at how somebody else expresses their fanship) … Bottom line is that we all have something special and unique in common as baseball fans, let alone Dodger fans, who frequent such a nice forum as EF. I may ‘rant’ at times…. I may joke at others (more wine = more joking) …. However, I look forward to sharing some time with you all here in 2016. Have a wonderful day, all. 🙂

    • “On the Rant” – I believe pro sports are a “product of entertainment.” God knows the organizations, players, and networks make a ton of money off of us fans (win or lose) year in and year out. They come out and make well publicized overtures at press conferences about how their ‘stated’ goal is to be successful by ” W..I..N..N..I..N..G….. Championships” – ( 100’s of millions in recent decades = ZERO WS Championships)
      (At my age now, I’ve figured out long ago that winning comes secondary to being a financially successful franchise… It’s a nice by-product when it happens, but it is more some of us fans who hold it so near and dear….. even more than many of the players)
      —So, when they fall short of their STATED goal of ultimate victory, why can’t we be critical? How did they originally get dubbed , “The Bums?” …. After all, we’re critical about our doctors, our hair stylist, our car salesman, our cell phone company, et. al.
      The Dodgers are another ‘product’ (one we love) so, most people only take the time to criticize because they … actually…. care. — Think about that one…. please. 🙂

        • Ignoring the fact that, one way or another, Package is responsible for at least 25% of your volume. I don’t always agree with him either but I have accepted the pointlessness of trying to reason with him. After all, it’s just his opinion versus mine, and the world doesn’t really care who’s right…

          • I’m not in it for the volume. The goal when I set this up was to provide an alternative place for refugees from Jon’s site when he went to work for the Dodgers and closed it down.

            I want it to be a pleasant place for people to comment on the team, the games and whatever else. When one guy so aggravates others that it seems like one-third of the commentary is an ongoing argument to show him he’s either wrong or wasting his time complaining and he’s unwilling to either be persuaded or stop shouting that he’s right and we’re wrong, what would you have me do?

          • You have the right to kick him or anyone else off the blog for whatever reason you choose. If you do, you have one bland blog. It barely has a heartbeat now. You lose Package, you lose all the comments in rebuttal from WBBsAs and Bob Henley. What is left?

          • I don’t want to kick anyone off. I just want everyone to avoid provoking each other whether with opinions it’s known that no one else shares and in fact thinks are flat wrong or with responses to those opinions that are just outright insults.

            I feel like freakin’ Rodney King during the riots after the verdict was announced. “Can’t we all just get along?”

    • 8 seasons 1509 IP, 2.39 ERA, 1.048 WHIP. Outstanding but it is the Japan League. Still, the best available.

    • Looks like I posted this same tweet above. Should have checked first, didn’t mean to do that. My apologies.

  9. Kazmir–Good pickup. Why? Because the brass hasn’t done anything else. Oh, sorry I forgot about resigning Utley. I don’t look for much more of anything to happen so It’s time for Dodger baseball!

  10. Might as well P. O. everyone else here… I advocate trading Agon for a pitcher and signing Chris Davis. Let the applause begin…

      • Welcome back. Never seen fans like these before, everything the Dodgers do is right, and if they don’t do anything at all, that’s right too… Bet the other clubs envy that..

        • Yea and even though many other blogs have debate as to whether the FO does a good job, this one follows their every move with rave reviews. If you disagree, they hate you.

          • I don’t hate you, package, nor as far as I know does anyone else here. But you’re such a fervent anti-management voice that we (or I, anyway) get tired/bored hearing it.

            Maybe, just maybe, we’re all adults who recognize that whatever we say or think will have no effect on the team’s management, so we might as well sit back and see what happens.

          • I think many here would prefer that this does not turn into a rant blog like several of the others. When you start from the position of hating the FO, as you do, it is difficult to have an actual discussion or debate as you call it. You have an extreme position, see things in black and white, and feel that those that might not agree with you on a specific issue are somehow loyal to the FO. Your point of view extends to demeaning players on our team brought in by the FO and wishing them, and by extension, the team ill, just to prove that you are right in your hatred of the FO.

          • So run me down to qualify your position. There are people the FO brought in that I like fine for instance Howie Kendrick. I didn’t like the trade that brought him in but his performance was OK. I did not care for Joc but he was already here when the FO arrived, Jimmy Rollins and Grandal had poor years in my opinion. McCarthy was expected to get injured and Anderson was a solid #5. What I am saying is that if I don’t give praise to the FO you try and find and excuse to run me down as you did here. I will always have opinions on the quality of play from the Dodgers players and I don’t make up stats to justify my position as some of you all do. I do not like the FO but I do like the Dodgers and their success. Just because you disagree with someone does not make it a rant blog. By the way, you know as well as I that there are some here who make comments personal regularly and I find it very rude but you don’t here any complaints do you?

          • My “position”? You are on record here and can be quoted, despite this attempt to clean up retroactively in your evaluations of the players. You were rooting against them from day one.

          • Yet “hate” is the word that you invoked to describe how you think that people feel about you here.

          • When you are talked about and not even commenting, when people strive to jerk your chain, how would you describe it?

          • “Clean up”. Whatever I said had to do with each of the players, not the team. What you are saying is that if I don’t like a player, I don’t like the team. BS.

          • I have no problem with you disliking the FO, but this dislike is your point of reference and you wish them and the players they acquire I’ll.

          • I don’t wish anyone ill. I simply track what their performance is and point out anything that I feel is less than what it should be. If I understand what you are implying it is that I want them to do bad. That is not true, I want all the players to do well so the team can win a championship. If the team does bad it is the fault of the FO pure and simple.

          • If you mean by validating my point of view, that I will tell you when I feel that something is going wrong, the answer is yes but I do not want them to do bad just so I can say “I told you so”, that would be wrong.

          • And yet you take great pains in trying to paint this FO as a failure. Such that you have this ridiculous spin of saying that the 2015 team was worse than the 2014 team because they won 92 games instead of 94.

          • Bob, no sense in going over this again. I see 94 wins as better than 92 wins. If you choose to spin it to numbers of games the team won the west OK. That is your opinion.

          • You make much of a two percent difference because it serves your narrative. It’s laughable. As well, you ignore evaluation measures such as WAR because they don’t serve your purpose in painting the FO as a failure.

      • Not really fair to Jon. This point of view has been consistently his since long before he wrote for Dodger Insider. It’s why I’m such a Weisman fan.

        • Absolutely. Jon is an optimist, but he’s also a “live in the moment” type. The only time gloom is acceptable is in the immediate aftermath of a defeat.

      • Granted, he was a Dodger Fan before going to work for them. But, as an employee now, whatever he says now MUST be taken as club propaganda, not his honest opinion, although he may well agree with it.

        • Neither Stan Kasten, nor any other Dodger executive, had anything to do with that piece, and in my entire time with the Dodgers I have never written an opinion that I don’t believe.

          For the life of me, I’m not even sure what the “propaganda” in this post could be? I’m saying that a) they had a plan, which I back up objectively, b) I take pleasure in small victories even if I want bigger ones, and c) I like the sound of cheering. Yeah, I’m really in someone’s pocket.

          • Hey Jon…. Happy New Year to you and your family.
            🙂
            ….
            PS – I wish the same to all of my other friends here at EF !

        • I understand exactly what you are saying and agree although you would be hard pressed to find anything that Jon disagreed with the Dodgers now and before this regime. I tell ya most of those who post here are totally in the tank with the FO.

          • package, see Rules 3, 4, and 8. You are rapidly approaching a point where you’re adding absolutely nothing to the conversation and you’re just provoking other people.

          • You know what, I disagree that I am breaking any of the rules you outlined. I have said very little to cause you to call me out but let someone hit me and you never heard it. Please try and be fair and consistant and I will also. Who am I provoking?

          • Well, let’s see. When nearly every comment you make runs down players or the front office in general for no particular purpose, that provokes a lot of people, including me.

            We know your opinion. You needn’t repeat it over and over and over again, as you have since the season ended. You seem to believe that the front office is a failure and will continue to be so. That’s fine. Believe what you want. But stop telling the rest of us that. We’ve heard it from you since October and don’t need to hear it again. It’s as though you’re trying to persuade us all that you’re right and we’re wrong, and after three months I’d have thought you’d have learned that your attempts to do so are unlikely to change anyone’s mind. We’re not “in the tank” for the F.O.

            Were you never admonished “if you have nothing good to say, say nothing at all?”

    • Happy New Year, friends! I loved Jon’s post. I also love the relative uncertainty ahead: all those untraded assets waiting in the wings, just waiting for their moment to prove they were worth the wait. I love the fact that Kik’e is coming back, and Corey, and Joc and even Yasiel. I’d rather see what we can do with what we have, now, than throw the up and coming guys into a trade for a superstar. And while I’m sad about Zack, I honestly think he deserves to be another team’s number one, and I get why he moved on. I’m on the other side of sixty, but I am happy to wait and see where the Dodger boat takes us this year. And I am really happy to have Dave Roberts steering.

  11. So…. Let’s take a look so far…
    …. 1B – Gonzalez , 2B – Utley? , SS – Saeger , 3B – Turner , LF – Crawford , CF – Peterson , RF – Puig …. ( also… Ethier , the utility guy they brought back last week , et. al. )
    ….
    Kershaw , Ryu ( not optimistic ) , Kazmir , McCarthy , Anderson …. Pen not improved…Jansen.
    ….
    Hmmmmmm. – Cespedes does not fix this….. I can’t see any available FA’s fixing this….
    -The prospects they picked up in the recent deals ? – Perhaps…..
    -Just because one of them can throw 100mph doesn’t make him a good pitcher.
    -Chapman (questionable character) was had by the Yanks for what I heard was quite a bargain just days after the Dodgers were in the running…..
    -Yes, there’s a hefty portion of the off season yet to go, but.(not really impressed at this point)
    – And, despite how much I like the guy, I don’t think Dave Roberts is going to make a difference
    if the (never play small ball) Friedman / Farhan duo is pulling the strings like they did with Donny, he’ll have no respect from his players….

    • To me, their only hope…. as presently configured…. is to go with the strategy ‘ Circa 2003/2004 ‘ – When Roberts was a player with the Dodgers……..
      ….
      1. Take quality AB’s – make starting P’s throw as many pitches as they can early in the game in an effort to get to the other team’s pen.
      2. Play ‘ small ball ‘ hoping to get 2 or 3 runs up on the board early …
      3. Hope the pitching is solid and most games are low-scoring and close…
      …..
      Problem – No Beltre, No Roberts, No Gagne, No LoDuca (first half of season), No Tom Martin, No Brazoban, No Green, No Lima – Gosh, I loved that guy on the club. Loved seeing him actively involved in the game, cheering, high-5-ing guys on his off-days.
      That was truly a year when other teams had far superior rosters, but our Dodgers played with smarts and heart. Fun times …..
      …..
      Also – Problem – There’s nothing “Smart” about Puig’s game…..
      Enough skepticism from me….. Let’s wait and see how the rest of the off season goes ! 🙂

    • Mattingly played nothing but small ball – bunted all the time, to the detriment of the team.

    • No, Dodgers need to sign Cespedes. Even if your pitcher holds the other team to three runs, your hitters still need to plate four runs to win the game. With the possible exception of Seager, I fully expect regression from every other current player on the team. Dave Roberts has his hands full…

      • My guess is that our two RH outfielders, SVS and Puig, improve and it’s Cespedes that regresses.

          • Even counting last year’s up for Cespedes and the down for SVS and Puig, he holds a career OPS+ of 122 compared to Puig’s 141 and SVS 118. Cespedes is going to break someone’s heart (and for 5-6 years at what $25 million per), I’d rather not it be the Dodgers’.

          • Your scepticism is not unwarranted. I pretty much harbor those thoughts about any over-priced free agent. I am just so desperate, our pitching has deteriorated and I am hoping to prop it up by improving last year’s offense which I apparently rate a lot lower than you do. I don’t have your blind faith in numbers, I remember losing a lot of well-pitched games and let downs by all the position players, even the two you seem to like so well.

          • Don’t get me wrong, I would love to have his bat as well, I just don’t think the gains on the margin would be all that much over what we have in hand and it would be costly.

          • We can only have eight position players on the field. Cespedes hit OPS+ 137 last year. Dre hit 148 against righties and SVS hit 121 against lefties. Where is the big gain that one might want from a 5-6 year commitment in the $20-25 million range?

          • Eight position players, only three outfielders. You want to platoon Dre so him and SVS are only one, plenty of room left for Cespedes.

          • No, he doesn’t. Céspedes is an above-average hitter but poor outfielder, and is aging. Puig is young and talented, with a ceiling far above Céspedes.

    • If they get another SP (righthanded I assume), they could move Wood to the pen, where his motion might fool guys for an inning or two and he might regain his velocity.

  12. Dodger resident pitching sages weigh in on Twitter…

    Brett Anderson
    @BrettAnderson35

    Hey @ClaytonKersh22 the entire rotation is going to use your glove as a sign of solidarity.

    ==========================================
    Brandon McCarthy

    @BMcCarthy32
    .@Dodgers This is blatant handism and I’m filing a hostile workplace grievance

      • More from @BMcC32 in responses:

        Ed Carter
        ‏@BMcCarthy32 @Dodgers @billplunkettocr Bro, why don’t you focus on actually adding value to that big contact of yours.

        Brandon McCarthy
        ‏@BMcCarthy32
        @truebluebyu hey Ed, go bite a wall

        Morgan Osder
        ‏@morgan_osder
        @BMcCarthy32 @VinceSamperio @Dodgers you gonna play this year? Or just sit out and enjoy that 12M and tweet nonsense from the bench

        Brandon McCarthy
        ‏@BMcCarthy32
        morgan_osder @VinceSamperio hi Morgan, sorry to see that you’re an adult who doesn’t understand how injuries and healing work

  13. Dodger Digest wonders if Wood could now be traded to the Yankees for Miller and maybe another trade for a starter…

  14. I’m wildly unenthusiastic about Kazmir, but he’s good enough to serve as a bridge to prospects like Urias and De León, who need more time in the minors.

      • Three years, $16MM per, opt out after one, FO must be extremely desperate. Comes from not signing better pitcher earlier in off-season. He gets an “F” for this offseason for sure.

        • The opt-out could well work to the Dodgers’ advantage, since the young pitchers should be ready by then.

          • Trouble with opt-outs is they only use them to their (players) advantage. If he stinks, he won’t opt-out; If he does well, he opts-out and demands more money to resign. Pretty obvious FO’s present position is over a barrel…

          • Agreed, if he pitches well for us, he’ll probably opt out, which serves the same purpose for us as signing a one year contract. Now all he has to do is….pitch well for us….

          • We were expecting Zack AND another pitcher; we got Utley and now Kazmir. If they had an election now, Ned might beat him. Isn’t that hard to believe???

    • Have you come across any articles wondering if Miller is crushed and questioning the morality of Cashman?

      • No baseball player who has made it to free agency has any time to question any other person’s morality, he should be busy enough worrying about his own. And I know you won’t understand or agree with that and that’s OK, I have to live with myself…

        • Cashman is the Yanks FO. In the wake of the blotched attempt by the Dodgers to get Chapman there was talk about Friedman having a penchant at TB for bringing in morally suspect players because he could get them cheap and that he was besmirching the organization by continuing to do that with the Dodgers.

    • Ok…. Ok… Ok….

      Scott Kasmir is to me…. kind of a ” Kenny Rogers – Redux ”
      The guy’s been on 5 or 6 different clubs….. With nobody really wanting to invest in him
      long term….. I’m giving the notion a big… ” No-way, Jose ” 🙂

      I’d rather see the ‘All Scrub Farmnands” roster in 2016…. than to see management try to ‘polish this turd’ by throwing a Scott Kasmir in our face as ‘Window Dressing’….

      My Raiders – 2015 Charles Woodson Swan Song – Very unsuccessful season….
      My Lakers – 2015-2016 Kobe Swan Song – Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
      My Dodgers – 2016 Vin Scully Swan Song – October prospects not looking good…….

      • 1-yr., low base, highly-incentive-laden deal ………or, no deal.
        ….
        1. I want an inferno lit under this guy’s behind from day one…..
        ….
        2. “Well then, sir…. you won’t be getting Mr. Kazmir at this price !” …
        ( Ok. Best of Luck, Scott ! – See ya. ) 🙂

        • At least one national writer had suggested that a one year contract would put Kazmir in a very good position to clean up next year with a bigger longer term contract (given the expected FA market). Should be incentive enough.

      • Not understanding the Kenny Rogers comparison ( not similar pitchers, even Kazmir redux. At age 31, Kenny still had another 12 years in his 20 year career ahead of him) and, in any event, don’t think that the Dodgers want to invest in him long term.

        • Just that this guy seems to be moving around quite a bit….
          ….
          Sure, that means somebody wants him… But, it also means somebody’s quite fine with giving him up….. The pure volume / frequency of movement by this guy makes me question the merits of having him on a club.

          • The trade market doesn’t revolve around teams trading bad players for other bad players. He played for TB and OAK, who trade players at the drop of a hat, in any event.

      • As Oaklander, I will only say “Take our Raiders…please.” We’ve had enough of the Davis Crime Family.

        • Hey…. Davis was certainly no Saint, but look further than the LA politicians / Coliseum Commission and their broken promises to Al, followed by their Alinsky-like portrayal of him to the locals…. and, it’s easy to see Al and the Raiders as the source of the problem. Me? – I never bought in to that notion. 🙂

  15. Quiet, little action off-seasons will be the norm if FO is successful in installing “his system” on the Dodgers. No free agent signings, no trades bringing name brand players (impact players as Package says) to the Dodgers. Our players will have arrived from our farm system, with a boost from other clubs best prospects traded to us for our best players who have reached Free Agency or perhaps even just Arbitration. We grow them, let them ripen, then sell them for seed, so to speak. Dodger fans may be an Endangered Species…

    • The first part of that approach is one most teams strive for, right? “Grow your own, they’re cheaper.” Our famous infield was all homegrown (okay, pre-FA days, agreed), Koufax was a bonus baby, Drysdale was homegrown, etc. We used to almost routinely have the Rookie of the Year or a top contender for the award.

      I don’t think these guys want to grow them, play them for six years and then trade them, not if they’re really good players.

      • Going with the 6 years you mention, it becomes a question of paying the player maybe 25X salary in Free Agency for too many years versus getting maybe 80% of his production with a younger player making 1X salary on a one year contract. I know which one I’d take. I’m not complaining about FO’s M.O., just commenting on it.

  16. LA Times gossip:

    In November, a jury awarded $7.13 million to former LA Times columnist T. J. Simers, who alleged that the paper unfairly forced him out in 2013 after he suffered a mini-stroke. The Times plans to appeal the decision.

        • FYI, I think Disqus automatically formats tweets when you plug in their URLs. You highlight the date and time of the desired tweet, copy it, then paste it in the comment box here.

        • When MLBTR or some other site mentions a tweet, they usually make the word”tweet” a hyperlink and make it red or blue, a different color than the regular text. If you left click on that word, tweet, it will open up a new page or tab with the tweet displayed. If you want to post the tweet here, you need only right click on the Address Bar, select “copy” on the drop down menu, go to the site where you want to post it. When your cursor is where you want the tweet, right click and then select “paste”. Takes two seconds to do it and twenty minutes to try to explain how. Hope this helps.

        • With this FO, you have to wonder if Chapman was party of another deal that may no longer be there and they really weren’t looking for another closer.

    • From their players, the Yanquis demand character (which they define as the absence of facial hair).

    • Justin Upton was never on my short list for the Dodgers to sign but Vin likes him, that’s something… What if FO talked the Padres into resigning Upton for one year, the QO basically, and then traded him to the Dodgers for, you guessed it, Crawford, $$$, and some low level prospect. (Don’t hit me! Yours is the first post of the day and I have some whacko ideas to get rid of…)

      • CC must sleep with one eye open knowing that you are working overtime to come up with ideas to get him traded (though he should feel happy given that your first instinct is to DFA him). Justin should be able to get at least $20 million somewhere, I would think, so doesn’t have to settle for QO $16 million. Vin likes him, but always chided him for catching the ball with one hand after one flub when he was with the Snakes. Vin is kinda traditional in that way.

        • Yes, I thought they would likely have to pay him more than $16MM but since the Dodgers would actually be paying it, that shouldn’t bother them.

        • I suspect Carl knows very well that he’s overpaid for his performance, so it’s not just Audit whose machinations he’s keeping an eye on. 😉

          • It’s sort of the way of baseball. CC was seriously underpaid ages 21 through 28 and taken as a whole his career can still be considered a bargain (WAR 39.9 for $107 million), it’s just that the Dodgers are left holding the bag. If you take WAR being worth $7 million on the market, he was actually fairly close to earning his keep in 2014 being paid $8.8 million per in only 105 games.

          • If God himself told me Crawford was worth one plugged nickel, I’d lose all faith in humanity and join WBBsAs in… whatever he is in.

          • Crawford is a fine example of the free agent market system. I comment on what I think FO is doing, but I am not in disagreement with it. I would love to be in the position where all 25 players on our roster are home grown, playing well, and making really reasonable salaries. Financially, baseball has become a farce.

          • Sounds ideal if you were the owner. I suppose it could happen, but hard to imagine cost deflation on the fan side.

    • Given the legacy of the McCourt regime and its holdovers, the current regime looks better every day.

    • We cut the cable a couple years ago, now use a digital antenna to watch local programming and AppleTV to watch Netflix, MLBTV and some other streaming stuff.

      • Roku is similar to Apple TV. Time Warner cable and MLB-TV are supposed to be possibilities. I assume you can’t actually watch the Dodgers on it? The only TV I watch is old movies and rerun Western Series like Laramie, Wagon Train, etc. Think I’d be satisfied with it?

        • I can watch the Dodgers, except when they’re playing the Gnats or the Atléticos, or they’re on ESPN. There are ways around that, but I don’t bother during the regular season.

  17. Kinda troubling……. a few things I’ve heard / read in the last few days……

    1. Donny Ballgame: A replay of an interview with Dan Patrick (prior to his signing with Marlins) had him hailing the aspects of ‘teaching the game’ and having to ‘develop’ home grown talent in Miami vs. when he was with the Yanks & Dodgers. “I love the art of teaching this game,” he said.
    2. Walker Bueler – 2015 #1 Draft Pick – to undergo Tommy John Surgery ????
    Yes – It could be said by some that the arm is stronger after TJ surgery, but still……
    3. Kyle Funkhouser – 2015 1st Rnd. Compensatory Pick – Returning to Univ of Louisville…

    So…. perhaps it’s just me reading into this, but….
    Isn’t the basic jist / undercurrent of the Dodgers new Friedman/Farhan Front Office “Said / Unsaid Mission Statement” – Moving Forward………
    1. Improvement in the area of financial responsibility….
    2. Developing the organization at all levels / tiers of development… (especially the minors)

    • My points are these………..

      1. Seems Donny would fit quite well with what the team appears to be looking to do….
      *** While they may be cordial, he must have really thought two things ……..
      1. He pretty much had the Miami gig sewn up and in his back pocket….
      2. Freidman / Farhan – are two young, overly-controlling, baseball-clueless idiots.

      2. Nice Job with your first ‘real’ draft……fellas! You cannot have a 1st rounder go back to college…….. Somebody has to be more ‘in tune’ with the kid than to waste a #35 overall pick.

    • Funkhouser, as of August 12, 2015:

      Funkhouser moved all of his chips onto the Kyle Funkhouser square,
      saying that he can pitch better and earn a more lucrative signing bonus
      in the 2016 MLB Free Agent Draft.

      There you go. In April of this year his Ks went down, his hits per inning rose, and his ERA went up more than a run per game. His value dropped accordingly.

      Buehler, in August of 2015:

      As expected, Dodgers 2015 first-round draft pick Walker Buehler will have Tommy John surgery on Wednesday in Los Angeles, pushing back his professional debut until
      some time in 2017.

      Plus this:

      https://twitter.com/billplunkettocr/status/628692715295760384

  18. From Dodger Digest: ” At this point, it’s no longer what you wanted the offseason to be when it began. It’s what you can do to make the best of what’s left.”

    • Right now our rotation is Kershaw, Anderson, & Wood. We could have two anythings in our rotation. Don’t even think about injuries…

    • The current thinking seems to be that Urias and JDL would remain on the farm, but Zach Lee might have a shot as a fifth starter.

  19. http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/67297/path-to-the-playoffs-nl-west-2 As things now stand, Shoenfield at ESPN, based on Fangraph WAR projections has the NL West race at Dodgers 95-67 (92-70 in 2015), giants 87-75 (84-78) and Snakes 79-83 (79-83). On the batting side projections have Grandal and AGon slightly down, Justin and Dre significantly down, Joc slightly up and Puig and Seager significantly up. On the pitching side they have Clayton going from 8.6 to 7.8, Anderson 1.7 to 2.7, Wood 2.6 (both teams) to 1.9, Ballslinger 1.2 to 1.3 Ryu going from zero to 2.4 and McCarthy from -0.3 to 1.

    • As usual you are optimistic about next year and I am pessimistic, so no point in debating it. Read somewhere that he Dodgers are skeptical about Maeda’s small hands, small size overall, and that he’s used to pitching only every sixth day. So they will look at him to please their fans but not sign him. Odorizzi is probably a better choice but I hope they don’t give up too much for him. Glad I’m not in FO’s shoes…