A 1500-lb. Lasorda bobblehead!

That’s just part of the 40 tons of stuff the Dodgers sent off to Camelback Ranch this week in two trucks.

The trucks will arrive at Camelback Ranch-Glendale on Saturday, to be unloaded in plenty of time for next Saturday’s first workout for pitchers and catchers and the start of another Spring Training.

Bats and balls are shipped directly by their various manufacturers, in case you wondered. Uniforms and even bottled water as well as office supplies are in these trucks.

The first spring training game is scheduled for March 3 at home against the White Sox. The visitors have a long walk around a five-acre lake within the Camelback complex which separates them from the Dodgers. Or maybe they pedal-boat or kayak it.

179 thoughts on “A 1500-lb. Lasorda bobblehead!

  1. Rollins signs minor league contract with White Sox. Guessing he will get playing time in the Bigs, as they have pencilled in a rookie as starter. Looks like Desmond, who might have been a good fit, won’t find a home there.

  2. It would be appreciated if everybody would stop arguing with Package. Besides, until the Dodgers win a WS, he is going to use scoreboard.

    Package, tell us about yourself.

  3. Article on vets needing to prove something includes CC and Hanley. I try to avoid looking at Carl’s paycheck (which makes him an immovable object) and hope that he can rebound a bit and contribute again at least at an average level, which would be good for a fifth outfielder. On Hanley, I don’t begrudge him. Thought he made some great contributions to the Dodgers and wish him well. http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/165089680/mlb-veterans-spring-training-2016?partnerId=ed-10056114-875107163

    • I will always be curious about how the Dodgers would have fared in the playoffs had Hanley not been hit in the ribs.

      For me, when CC slumps it is because he tries to hit the high pitch out of the strike zone. He needs to find a way to walk more. He could be a good DH. Less likely to get hurt and doesn’t have to throw the ball.

  4. Manfred is likely to rule on Chapman case soon. Puig as well, though that seems a bit minor compared to Chapman. An Utley rule may also be in the making, but the Commish just seems to be merely restating the existing guidelines as regards the runner being able to touch the bag. Also, doesn’t seem all that keen in introducing DH to NL. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/20/sports/baseball/mlb-aroldis-chapman-yasiel-puig-jose-reyes.html?ref=sports&_r=1

  5. With Pederson, Grandal, Puig, Turner, Crawford, Ryu, either injured, wounded, nose diving, etc, was that a team that should have tried to get one more great player to give them a better chance to get to the WS in 2015 and maybe a smaller chance to get there in future years?

      • Yes.

        BTW, I left out Kendrick among the wounded.

        I still see a trade coming for a pitcher though if Pedersen, Puig, Grandal bounce back.

          • What “stand”, which you seem to value so much, have you taken? All I see you doing over the past couple of threads is asking people whether the Dodgers will win the WS. The playoff are a crapshoot, package. Your stand last year was that the Dodgers would be a worse team because of the FO’s activities. That didn’t pan out. Indeed, if they had followed your advice and not made those changes, they would have been a worse team in 2015.

          • My opinion has some basis. Hanley and Kemp combined for negative 0.7 WAR in 2015. Joc, Grandal and Rollins combined for 3.6 WAR. What is your opinion based on?

          • All three played like crap and you know it. I don’t give a a damn what their WAR is. Hanley and Matt played for different teams in different stadiums under different circumstances. Your stats are only your opinion.

          • WAR is park adjusted and thank goodness Hanley wasn’t playing SS.. Again you seemed so interested in other people’s “stands” and whether they have taken one, but haven’t given your “stand”?

          • The nice thing about WAR is that it makes it very transparent when people are cherry picking stats to prove their point. If they played like crap and contributed WAR 3.6, how would you characterize the play of Hanley and Matty that produced negative 0.7 WAR? That is less than replacement level for around $40 million.

          • I will answer the question. You have no earthly idea whether the Dodgers would have won last year with Matt and Hanley. That is strickly your opinion. You have the opinion that the Playoffs are a crapshoot but then say your opinion is right. You think you provide evidence but it is only your opinion.

    • And voila! Dodgers sign Sierra, Cuban pitcher who has 97-98 mph velocity with a four-seam fastball and 91-93 mph with a two-seam fastball. Montas goes on the 60-day DL to make room for the 24-year-old, who’s expected to start in the minors.

  6. Having read some of your commenters opinions of some of us being Simpletons I know it really doesn’t matter what I think although I found this part of the Q&A interesting: Dodgers don’t win a World Series in the next, say, three to five years, has the mission not been accomplished?

    Certainly, my goals are to win as many championships as possible. I don’t define a season a failure if you don’t win a world championship. I just don’t subscribe to the notion that there’s one success story and 29 failures in any given season. That being said, every waking moment for us — in terms of what we do for a living — is focused on how to bring a world championship back to our incredibly passionate fans.

    How do you define a successful season?

    I think winning your division is a very successful regular season. I tend to try to look at it as two parts. It is more difficult to accomplish your ultimate goal without accomplishing your regular-season goal. So I think of winning your division as an accomplishment. I think it’s incredibly difficult over 162 games to beat out the other four teams in your division. To do it three years in a row, I think, is a great accomplishment. That being said, our postseason goals have not been met, and we’re doing everything we can to put ourselves in position to meet those goals as well.

    In other words, winning a World Series is not considered the only way to be successful. Just winning the Division is good enough to be successful. Therein lies the problem. This guy does not know the reason all teams play. It is to win the WS not the division only. Also, he takes credit for 3 years of winning the division when 2 of the three did not involve him. As I said, most of you don’t care what I think as implied by your recent comments. Just because I think the FO is going the wrong direction does not mean I am a Simpleton.

    Also, I don’t think I have to agree with Dustin Nosler who is far from a World Class expert to know what I should believe.

    • The evidence suggests that if the FO had not gone in another direction that winning the Division title in 2015 would have be less certain and moreover retaining Hanley and Matty would have hamstrung the team in the future with 4-5 years of paying in the area of $40 million for players that appear to be on the downswing already.

        • Exactly what would you have done if in ’15 the team had kept Kemp and re-signed Hanley, made whatever “additions,” and tried “one more year,” as you have phrased it –but not won a WS?

          More importantly, what would have been your plan after that failure?

          Sign every big name FA in sight? The Dodgers have won so many WS doing that.

          • I still would not have gutted the team because I feel they were closer to winning in 14 than 15. That is just my opinion. The Dodgers are in a rebuilding mode but telling the fans that they will be competitive, whatever that means. By the way, what will you say if the Dodgers do not make the WS in 16? Wait another year? All the while burning up Kershaw’s prime years.

          • Winning 3 straight division titles–not done before in the NL West…advancing to the NLCS once… and having what seems to be regarded as the top farm system to feed the fire in one way or another…building a team for this year both strong and very deep…these things aren’t competitive?

            Of course not.

          • The first two divisional titles were achieved before this FO arrived and I have no beef with them. My beef has always been THIS FO. Two out of the 3 years are not FAZ teams. Those of you people that back this FO are always quick to give this FO credit for stuff they didn’t do. As far as the free agent signings go. When will the FO ever sign a top FA. Never.

          • So the title won with FAZ is tainted somehow? Just how is that?

            As Bob H pointed out, FAZ is implementing what ownership said do. They’re the hands-on point people but don’t have overall say-so.

            Your beef with this FO actually is based primarily on your view that they “blew up” the ’14 team–mostly meaning the trade of Kemp. Whoever deserves credit for the 3 titles, they happened. More may be on the way.

            As you well know, the Dodgers have a long and not very successful history of FA contracts. What’s the cliche about the definition of insanity or stupidity–same thing over and over expecting different results? Pricey FAs and their multi-year contracts guarantee nothing whatsoever except a degree of payroll and roster inflexibility.

            Predictably, this is devolving into feeding the one-trick pony.

            Have anything different or new to say?

          • I get it, you don’t like FAs. You can call it a one trick pony but doing business they way this FO has done does not guarantee success, just disappointment. By the way, you keep mentioning the Kemp trade but much more happened besides that.

          • I believe that the right FAs at the right time can push a solid team over the top. But they’re not a cure-everything answer. All baseball history, not just that of the Dodgers, attests to it.

            So now this FO quarantees disappointment. If you say so. Enjoy.

    • Moreover, I think the bone you have to pick is with the ownership. The FO is operating under the objectives that they have set. The question is how the FO is performing under those parameters.

        • It certainly is their objective, but thankfully they are not willing to jeopardize the long term health of the club on the off chance of increasing the possibilities in any given year. The deadline pitchers (Hamels, Price and Cueto) had a 3-4 record in the playoffs

    • So, the Braves were a failure for winning 14 division championships from 1991-2005. That “simplifies” matters.

      • I feel if you don’t expect the best, you will not get the best. Accepting less than a WS appearance is what doomed the Braves. I know, I live in Braves country.

        • The other day I posted a Glavine quote in which he said most of his Braves would choose 14 straight division titles/chances to win a WS but just one win over a couple WS titles but not being competitive the rest of that time.

          Law of averages definitely didn’t favor the Braves back then. But Glavine is saying you could reasonably expect more than one WS win out of a string like that. And that most of his guys would take their chances if they had it to do over.

          “Accepting less” is specious. Kinda like a team losing because it has no grit or heart. All of which is deep-fried baloney.

    • Your Clemson Tigers made the FBS national title game, played extremely well, and until a Saban gamble on an onside kick which worked out for Bama, stood a great chance of victory.

      But they lost the ultimate prize. Does that mean they failed ?

      Doubt you think so, since that was their first real chance at a title since they won one back in the 80s.

      My question: A) are your Tigers failures for not winning it all? Or B) winners for being national runnesup and the only unbeaten team (until the title game), winning a national semifinal game and the ACC title, and establishing a dominant program in a strong position to make another run?

      Correct answer in my book is B. Suspect so for you too.

      Analogy to Dodgers isn’t exact, of course. But pretty much, especially on the dominant program part.

      Things are complicated. They’re just not either/or and black/white. IMO someone who sees things only in 2 dimensions misses out on a lot of joy.

      • I think that the difference is that if the Clemson Tigers had not even got to the Championship game they would have been considered failures., but they did make the game. The Dodgers have not gotten to the WS.

        • You said something similar the other day when I posted the 8 teams that have never won a WS, that at least some of them got there since LA has.

          So, the goalposts have been moved, from winning it all to getting there.

          And your strong Tiger program is a failure any and every year it doesn’t at least make the title game? Wow. What an impossible standard for any team.

          • I have always said that I expected the Dodgers to at least get to the WS. After all, it has been 27 years. How long do you think would be appropriate before the fans expect a winner in a large market? There were no goalposts moved. Also I have not called the TIgers losers. Maybe the MLB should let all 30 teams play 162 games and not keep score and then give all the 30 teams a trophy for participating.

          • The fans in Chicago hope (and this year would be right to expect, I think) for more, but they seem to enjoy the games nonetheless. I get the feeling you are miserable all year long because they’re not living up to your expectations/demands.

          • Last year was my most miserable as a Dodger fan in over 60 years. Not because of the team results but the cocky, secretive nature of the FO. I also enjoy the games each day during the season but I think this FO is guilty of many, many mistakes and enjoyed doing them.

          • “and enjoyed doing them.”

            What? They woke up at the trade deadline and said “I know how to make package miserable for the rest of the season! We’ll take some chances on some of the lower-priced players available! We know he wants to give up our future in Urias and Seager to get a Hamel or a Price, so we won’t do that. Won’t that be great?”

            Man, package, you really do say some foolish things.

          • You and all the other “27-yearers” I’ve seen bemoan no WS TITLES in that time, not no WS APPEARANCES over those years. Get real; no weasel words.

    • Friedman, from what you quoted: “That being said, our postseason goals have not been met…”

      What part of that is not clear?

      You: “As I said, most of you don’t care what I think as implied by your recent comments. Just because I think the FO is going the wrong direction does not mean I am a Simpleton.”

      –If we didn’t care, why would we bother to respond? Especially to basically the same FO stuff, over and over? And why repeatedly let yourself be baited?

      “Also, he takes credit for 3 years of winning the division when 2 of the three did not involve him.”

      –He referred in this very article to the Dodgers’ plan preceding his arrival.

      “Also, I don’t think I have to agree with Dustin Nosler who is far from a World Class expert to know what I should believe.”

      –Even “experts” get their share wrong all the time. When people post links to things, they think commenters may learn from and enjoy them– agree entirely, in part, or not at all. Personally I read and may post Dodger stuff for more knowledge and greater understanding of the team. I don’t pretend to tell you or anyone what to believe. Nor do I think anyone else here would presume to.

      Presenting views that may differ from yours is not trying to brainwash you. You seem to persist in the logical fallacy that “your viewpoint is not being allowed when it is just being disagreed with,” to quote Jon W.

      • You have provided much information that is interesting and informative. I appreciate that very much. I do not believe my viewpoint is not allowed, it just is ridiculed, made fun of, twisted, skewed and downright spit on but allowed.

          • Bob, just do whatever you feel is right. I don’t think you are asking permission to ask anything. If I write something you will definitely question it.

          • Not asking for permission, just saying that I provide some evidence in response, which is very different from ridicule, twisting, skewed and spiting on.

      • Should be required reading for all Dodger fans, especially the casual ones. And then their comprehension should be tested.

        And Friedman needs to learn to speak to media more directly and simply. I get that he’s doing his best to answer things which aren’t as simple as fans think– within the limits of what he can say–but complicated answers can tend to make unconvinced audiences think “BS.”

        If he told himself to limit answers to X number of words he might be better served.

        Hard to think of any of the standard FAZ criticisms not addressed. Good questions.

          • In theory, yes. But the more simply things can be explained, the more people comprehend.

            Unfortunately not everyone has a high level of verbal and written communication skills.

            Doubly unfortunately, many headlines-only Dodger fans don’t.

    • “But the player with the best chance to be the next Hanley Ramirez is …
      Hanley Ramirez. This year, the Red Sox asked him to lose weight and
      learn to play first base—in that order. You would think that a former
      shortstop could make a decent go of it at first base, but Ramirez is
      quite larger from his middle infield days. Besides, did you see former
      shortstop and longtime third baseman Alex Rodriguez last year try to
      play first base for the Yankees last year at age 39 as if he were
      wearing two oven mitts?”

  7. Link – I receved a notice of a class action suit by MLB.TV subscribers as regards MLB’s deliniation of team “territories”. In the settlement, though, MLB retained its rights to define markets, but lowered the cost of its services. So, no help for you or others it seems.

  8. Both those links to dodgers.com worked fine for me on the first try. All I can suggest is waiting a minute or two and trying again or, as foul tip says, go directly to dodgers.com and find the articles in the news sidebar there.

    • Another issue: Links here supplant Elysian Fields, rather than opening a new tab or window. Can you change the site preferences? Navigating back can be a nuisance.

    • The link on the blog page to Dodgers @ MLB.com now gets me a not valid message every time. When I emailed you about it a while back, this was sporadic. Now it’s constant.

      But all I have to do is begin typing d..o.. in a new window and dodgers.com pops up in browser history. So.

      Of the 5-6 buttons I regularly click on from the blog page, dodgers.com is the only one to give grief. All others work fine every time.

      Wonder what browsers site users employ? Firefox here.

      • This has been a site problem at times for a good while. Both worked when clicked on right after posting but now don’t. Why???

        Both stories @ dodgers.com

    • Even after the FO dismantled an already deeply flawed team and failed to add a single “impact player?”

    • Fairly close to FanGraph projections, but they have Cubs with 94 wins and Dodgers with 92.

      • The Cubbies have talented young position players, but their rotation falls a bit short of the Dodgers’. The two likeliest NLCS opponents, though.

      • Arrieta needs to show he is for real, is the second half of last season him? or how he was in the playoffs? good but not great….if he isn’t great, could be a tough year for the Cubbies. Lester…Lackey at 37…we’ll see. A lot of teams have good hitters.
        On the Mets, Cespeda, the one the final couple months of the season? or the one in the playoffs? Yes they look like they have a great rotation, but it isn’t even spring yet. Our rotation looked pretty good before last season also, and we all know how that turned out, even with our big two.
        Not that we don’t have issues also, just sayin….

        • Arrieta impresses me, but he doesn’t yet have the sustained success of a Kershaw or a Greinke. Lackey is, well, a lackey.

          The Mets have quality starters at every spot in the rotation, but their lineup is less impressive and they’ve lost a top reliever forever – Mejía may never play ball again. Céspedes is a role player capable of bursts of excellence.

  9. WBBsAs, Come on. You are deliberately provoking package because you know
    you can get a rise out of him. It’s stopped being funny, if it ever
    really was. Yes, he’s gloomy about the team’s prospects and he dislikes the front office. He’s not the first fan to feel that way about his chosen team and he won’t be the last. Give it a rest, please.

    • I check in every once in awhile and that is usually all that I want to do because of WBB v Package. I wonder how many people take a look and go elsewhere?

      • Bumsrap…not that I ever posted as much as everyone else here, but this banter (I am trying to be nice here) is a turnoff, leaving me no interest in reading the threads or posting.
        I am pretty down on what is going on with the team as well, but the personal attacks…well…I’ll check in from time to time to see if things change…I hope they do, this blog used to be fun.

        • They are both as bad as each other, they need to either stop attacking each other or go and set up their own blog, just the two of them, where they can go at each other to their hearts content and leave the rest of us to enjoy this site

    • Agree, though package can tone it down himself as well. It’s fine for him to be gloomy but he has also spent the last two threads with unnecessarily provocative comments.

      • Things can happen, but to bad mouth the Dodgers at this point going into ST seems beyond the pale to me.

          • There is no pretending. You keep saying that I said things that you are flat out lying about. Perhaps you do this to try and discredit me? I would hope the Moderator would put a stop to it. STOP IT!!!!!!!

          • One thing I know for sure is that I do not say you said things that you did not say. I do not constantly make every comment that I write to you personal. You constantly attack me as you did to Audit instead of keeping the subject on baseball. I am no longer asking that you quit with the BS. I am telling you! And Linik, if you read this just know that I will not take this kind of attack and BS over and over. It is going to get real ugly so you need to do what you need to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! IT IS WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • I’m still amazed–but probably shouldn’t be–at the over-reactive and totally illogical mindset of those who seem to accept as gospel the idea that losing Greinke and splashy FA signings and trades by SF and AZ automatically mean the Dodgers can’t do better than third.

      But you surely don’t have to look hard to find it.

      Those folks tend to be headlines-only types.

      • Grandal acknowledged his mistake, accepted the prescribed punishment, and has been clean since. Mejía is a repeat offender who denies the facts. Of course, I wouldn’t expect a brain-dead absolutist to understand the difference.