Remove this ad

#41 [url]

Oct 17 15 9:17 AM

bigblaster wrote:
We got one wish: Stan Conte has resigned.

FANTASTIC.  The Giants' Manchurian Candidate plant on the Dodgers has finally been disposed of.

Remove this ad

#42 [url]

Oct 17 15 9:21 AM

beefchopper wrote:
bigblaster wrote:
We got one wish: Stan Conte has resigned.

FANTASTIC.  The Giants' Manchurian Candidate plant on the Dodgers has finally been disposed of.
Now if they fire Mattingly too I will consider it a successful offseason alfready.

#43 [url]

Oct 17 15 9:22 AM

grabarkewitz wrote:
bigblaster wrote:
We got one wish: Stan Conte has resigned.
First of many to be shown the door.   I am betting Conte was given the choice of resigning or getting fired and chose the less of a blemish on his resume.    Like Shaikin said, changes are a-comin'. 

I'd bet heavily he was canned.

#44 [url]

Oct 17 15 9:39 AM

NewportDodger wrote:
Puig and prospects for Stanton would fix one problem immediately. Miami would market the Hell out of Puig.

I'd love to see it but Miami marketing the hell out of Puig wouldn't mean much.  Their attendance is horrible and I'd bet would be with Puig anyway. It has been as high as 23,000 only four times in 23 years and two of those four were the year they started and the year they opened their new ballpark.

If that trade happens it is because Loria is the cheapest owner in baseball and would love to have a plausible excuse other than pure salary dump for the salary reduction that would come from replacing the extremely popular Stanton with Puig.

Last Edited By: beefchopper Oct 17 15 10:07 AM. Edited 1 time.

#45 [url]

Oct 17 15 9:46 AM

ocmike24 wrote:
EvilEuro wrote:
On a more grand scale for the Dodgers, I'd like to see any roster changes be made with the idea of improving the baseball intelligence of the team.

One of the things that stood out the most about the Dodgers in the five games against the Mets was just how absolutely brain-dead they are as a collective whole. Soooo many at-bats just given away without a thought of what needs to be done considering the game situation. The litany of men left on base as guys came up and took weak swings at pitches that they never had a chance of hitting for even a sacrifice fly on the first or second pitch. They failed to make starters nor he Mets bullpen work hard.

He might not have had a hit during the series, but Joc Pederson had some of the best at-bats for the team in drawing 7 and 8 pitch walks during game 5. After that, I can't recall many quality at-bats. One of the best ones was by Clayton Kershaw in game 4. It's pretty sad when one of your pitchers is having better quality at bats than the other players in the lineup.

This also goes back to Utley's slide in game 2. He is the only member of the Dodgers who I think recognized the situation and played it accordingly. I don't think anyone else would have went in that hard because they'd have just been going through the motions.

This Dodgers team might be worst I've seen in ages in terms of collective baseball IQ. It just doesn't exist. Part of that is on the players. But another part of that is on the organization. Situational awareness is something that should have been drilled into them as they progressed through the minors. At the Major League level it is something that should have been addressed before the start of the series from Mattingly on a grand overview basis, to McGwire for specific situational hitting talks before games, to Davey Lopes reminding guys about the need to be more aware than normal with regard to all baserunning situations.

I would like to think that those discussions happened. But I find that hard to believe considering the way the Dodgers played the entire series. More than anything that'd be my reason for Mattingly to be let go. Based on their collective levels of intensity and preparedness I couldn't tell if they were in the playoffs, in a throwaway series during the dog days of summer, or just trying to play out the last few games of Spring Training.

How sad is that?
Undoubtedly some of the dumbest MoFos to ever take the field, but really, how many of the position players actually came up through the Dodger minor league system?  Van Slyke, Pederson, Seager, Puig for a year and a half.  The rest came from somewhere else.

Just one more damnation of the worthless Logan White/DeJon Watson and the worst minor league system in baseball.

The funny thing is I thought the dumbest mofo on the Dodgers last year had been Dee. I guess being so dumb didn't prevent him from being the batting champion.

#46 [url]

Oct 17 15 10:48 AM

Shmolnick wrote:
Conte gone is big news for sure. Now maybe they can hire somebody with an actual conditioning program and a clue.

YES! Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. Agree w/Grabs that Conte was given the choice to resign or be let go. Have you guys read his statement? Conte has been involved in some big research project on the science of sports injuries and how to avoid and prevent them. HA, dude you're failing. He gave this as a reason to quit and persue the research. Here's a tidbit:

He is trying to build a formula that will give teams a competitive advantage and help them avoid players who spend their days in the training room and not on the field.

#47 [url]

Oct 17 15 10:52 AM

beefchopper wrote:

ocmike24 wrote:
EvilEuro wrote:On a more grand scale for the Dodgers, I'd like to see any roster changes be made with the idea of improving the baseball intelligence of the team.


One of the things that stood out the most about the Dodgers in the five games against the Mets was just how absolutely brain-dead they are as a collective whole. Soooo many at-bats just given away without a thought of what needs to be done considering the game situation. The litany of men left on base as guys came up and took weak swings at pitches that they never had a chance of hitting for even a sacrifice fly on the first or second pitch. They failed to make starters nor he Mets bullpen work hard.


He might not have had a hit during the series, but Joc Pederson had some of the best at-bats for the team in drawing 7 and 8 pitch walks during game 5. After that, I can't recall many quality at-bats. One of the best ones was by Clayton Kershaw in game 4. It's pretty sad when one of your pitchers is having better quality at bats than the other players in the lineup.


This also goes back to Utley's slide in game 2. He is the only member of the Dodgers who I think recognized the situation and played it accordingly. I don't think anyone else would have went in that hard because they'd have just been going through the motions.


This Dodgers team might be worst I've seen in ages in terms of collective baseball IQ. It just doesn't exist. Part of that is on the players. But another part of that is on the organization. Situational awareness is something that should have been drilled into them as they progressed through the minors. At the Major League level it is something that should have been addressed before the start of the series from Mattingly on a grand overview basis, to McGwire for specific situational hitting talks before games, to Davey Lopes reminding guys about the need to be more aware than normal with regard to all baserunning situations.


I would like to think that those discussions happened. But I find that hard to believe considering the way the Dodgers played the entire series. More than anything that'd be my reason for Mattingly to be let go. Based on their collective levels of intensity and preparedness I couldn't tell if they were in the playoffs, in a throwaway series during the dog days of summer, or just trying to play out the last few games of Spring Training.


How sad is that?

Undoubtedly some of the dumbest MoFos to ever take the field, but really, how many of the position players actually came up through the Dodger minor league system?  Van Slyke, Pederson, Seager, Puig for a year and a half.  The rest came from somewhere else.

Just one more damnation of the worthless Logan White/DeJon Watson and the worst minor league system in baseball.


 

The funny thing is I thought the dumbest mofo on the Dodgers last year had been Dee. I guess being so dumb didn't prevent him from being the batting champion.

I miss Dee. Hated to lose him at the time and still hate it. 

#48 [url]

Oct 17 15 12:23 PM

bcmaiden wrote:
I miss Dee. Hated to lose him at the time and still hate it. 

He still looks like Juan Pierre to me.   He'll occasionally hit over .300 and be relatively valuable, but he'll usually hit in the .280-.300 range with no power, no walks, while leading the league in CS which nearly negates the value of his speed.

#49 [url]

Oct 17 15 2:14 PM

It is interesting to think about this after the year is over. Dee was always a favorite of mine. Ultimately, it sucked removing his speed from the lineup.

#50 [url]

Oct 17 15 3:19 PM

DSinSoCal wrote:

bcmaiden wrote:
I miss Dee. Hated to lose him at the time and still hate it. 


He still looks like Juan Pierre to me.   He'll occasionally hit over .300 and be relatively valuable, but he'll usually hit in the .280-.300 range with no power, no walks, while leading the league in CS which nearly negates the value of his speed.

Offensively Dee was the #2 2B in baseball. Howie was #15. Howie had 2 more walks than Dee in 158 less PA's. Not everyone on the diamond hits HR's and for the small difference in HR production between them, Dee made up for it w/more doubles & triples. I think having zero speed like the Dodgers this year is more negligible. I love Howie but Dee had the better season.

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=2b&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=450&type=8&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0

Remove this ad

#51 [url]

Oct 17 15 3:47 PM

So, I was perusing all things Dodgers and came upon Dilbeck's diatribe. Geez, if Plaschke ever chokes on his own saliva, the Times has a ready replacement. This guy has such a chubby for Ned that it borders on stalking. GIven that Friedman and Zaidi walked into the job where the payroll was bloated beyond compare and they did what they could to cut as much dead weight as they could and that involved paying guys to go away. How much of the belabored $300 million was because of Ned and his need to spend like a drunken sailor and how much did it curtail what moves we could make? If Ned could read the tea leaves, it was a safe bet the Sox would've given away AGon (he was a bad fit) for RDLR and Webster if Ned had any idea how to do his job, but Ned had to take on more money because every GM in the game knew that Ned would overpay for marginal talent. Simply put, I have zero problem with our front office. Did they make some bad decisions? Sure, but name any GM who hasn't made a bad decision. They took risks and some of them were bad (Latos, McCarthy, Rollins) but on the whole, their moves paid off. We are stronger behind the plate (even with Grandal's shoulder, he was better than anything we had behind the plate in years), in the pen (Hatcher came around nicely and Liberatore, Avilan and Thomas are strong lefties in a world where decent lefties are hard to find) and the cost was only an overpaid malcontent, a one-dimensional second baseman and an injury-prone rookie. Sure, Kemp's numbers look good, but what good did it do the Padres? Their team was a bigger mess than ours and that is something to say.

I don't miss Gordon because I don't believe he can sustain his performance over the longterm and it wasn't like he changed the culture in Miami, they are still a mediocre team with a cheap owner. Did we miss his speed? Damn right, but there were expectations that Pederson, Rollins and Puig would replace that speed but it didn't work out that way - I blame Lopes and Mattingdork for that. No one can accuse the FO of not addressing that - they went out and stole Peraza from the Braves and I fully expect him to be our leadoff hitter in '16. For Dilbeck to make comments like he did only shows me that he doesn't get it. I can remember him fawning over Ned for years and what did Ned get us other than a bloated payroll and about three years of eating some pretty awful contracts. Hell, I would love to hear Dilbeck justify Schmidt, League, Pierre, Mueller and others that Ned dropped the bank on.

#52 [url]

Oct 17 15 5:12 PM

grabarkewitz wrote:
So, I was perusing all things Dodgers and came upon Dilbeck's diatribe. Geez, if Plaschke ever chokes on his own saliva, the Times has a ready replacement. This guy has such a chubby for Ned that it borders on stalking. GIven that Friedman and Zaidi walked into the job where the payroll was bloated beyond compare and they did what they could to cut as much dead weight as they could and that involved paying guys to go away. How much of the belabored $300 million was because of Ned and his need to spend like a drunken sailor and how much did it curtail what moves we could make? If Ned could read the tea leaves, it was a safe bet the Sox would've given away AGon (he was a bad fit) for RDLR and Webster if Ned had any idea how to do his job, but Ned had to take on more money because every GM in the game knew that Ned would overpay for marginal talent. Simply put, I have zero problem with our front office. Did they make some bad decisions? Sure, but name any GM who hasn't made a bad decision. They took risks and some of them were bad (Latos, McCarthy, Rollins) but on the whole, their moves paid off. We are stronger behind the plate (even with Grandal's shoulder, he was better than anything we had behind the plate in years), in the pen (Hatcher came around nicely and Liberatore, Avilan and Thomas are strong lefties in a world where decent lefties are hard to find) and the cost was only an overpaid malcontent, a one-dimensional second baseman and an injury-prone rookie. Sure, Kemp's numbers look good, but what good did it do the Padres? Their team was a bigger mess than ours and that is something to say.

I don't miss Gordon because I don't believe he can sustain his performance over the longterm and it wasn't like he changed the culture in Miami, they are still a mediocre team with a cheap owner. Did we miss his speed? Damn right, but there were expectations that Pederson, Rollins and Puig would replace that speed but it didn't work out that way - I blame Lopes and Mattingdork for that. No one can accuse the FO of not addressing that - they went out and stole Peraza from the Braves and I fully expect him to be our leadoff hitter in '16. For Dilbeck to make comments like he did only shows me that he doesn't get it. I can remember him fawning over Ned for years and what did Ned get us other than a bloated payroll and about three years of eating some pretty awful contracts. Hell, I would love to hear Dilbeck justify Schmidt, League, Pierre, Mueller and others that Ned dropped the bank on.
In defending the FO it might be prudent to save the negative rhetoric on Dee Gordon.   Dee would have led the Dodgers position players in:
Runs, Hits, Triples, Batting Average (led league), stolen bases, and, importantly, WAR,  He would have been in the top 3 in several other categories.  For this we got Chris Hatcher and his 0.0 WAR, one year of Howie Kendrick and his 1.1 WAR, a minor league catcher, and Kike' (who might be the best of the lot.)  We also threw in $10M and slightly above replacement level starter Dan Haren, who couldn't have been much worse than our 3-4-5 starters late in the year.  So, I don't think Dee is one of the feathers in Friedman's cap.

#53 [url]

Oct 17 15 5:19 PM

I didn't want to re-hash the trade. I just missed his speed he brought to our lineup. On a separate note, how long has Lester had this issue with throwing to bases? To me that is asinine. Obviously he can still perform, but holy shit. That is ridiculous.

#55 [url]

Oct 17 15 5:34 PM

I suppose, in my heart of hearts, and like everyone else, I'd like the FO to go out spend another $300 million, resign Greinke, sign Price, and perhaps pick up another big bat like Yoenis Cespedes and off we go to the World Series. 


But realistically, I don't see that happening. At some point, the CBA kicks in and having a payroll of $300 million becomes a payroll of $400 million through the various penalties that accrue to high-spending owners. I don't know when that happens, but I'm sure the FO does.

Besides which, my take on Friedman & Co. is that they want to make the Dodgers younger and less expensive rather than older and more expensive. You could see that last year with the Matt Kemp for Yasmani Grandal trade and we saw it again when we traded for Jose Peraza, Alex Wood and Luis Avilan. These, moreover, have been great moves. Grandal has already shown how productive he can be at the plate when he isn't injured. Peraza fills a hole at second base that we had no replacement for in our system. Alex Wood has flashed signs of brilliance (and he's only 23) and Avilan has proven he's a great LOOGY and may be much more than that if given the chance. So I give Friedman & Co. an "A" for the young talent they've picked up this season.

Looking to next year, I see Don Mattingly gone. After 5 years as manager, and the last three taking the team to the playoffs, but not advancing past the first round, I think we've seen what Mattingly can do. If Jeffrey Loria wants him and Miami, by all means, let him go. I also think Wallach, Maguire, Valentin, and Bundy will be let go. I hope they keep Honeycutt, Lopes (still a good 1st base coach and I'd like to see him work with Peraza) and Roenike (because I thought he did a great job as the 3rd base coach).  I have no idea who the FO will choose to replace Mattingly, but I will throw one name out there--Dave Martinez, Joe Maddon's long-time bench coach. I read an article last year when Friedman was hired that he and Martinez were really close. 

As far as the pitching goes, I don't see us resigning Greinke or signing David Price. I can imagine us signing someone like Jordan Zimmerman for four years at around $80 million to slot between Kershaw and Ryu. And they'll probably either have to sign or trade for another arm to fill out the rotation, because I don't see McCarthy being able to pitch again until August or September. The Dodgers have so many arms in the bullpen, I'm sure they'll figure all that out in Spring Training. Even with the injuries to Ryu and McCarthy and the occasional meltdown of the bullpen, pitching wasn't problem with this year's Dodgers.

The biggest problem the new Dodger manager and his staff will have to face is the lack of situational hitting. We simply left too many people in scoring position without bringing them home to score. And this wasn't just a problem in 2015, it was a problem in 2014 and 2013 and probably in 2012, but I can't remember that far back. We're never going to be a championship team if we keep leaving people at second base with no outs and then not bringing them in to score. That has to be the main priority of the new manager.

Next year is going to be tough on us long-time Dodger fans, because for the first time since about 2006, we're going to have a lot of young players in the line-up. And they're going to strike out, a lot. Not only will Joc Pederson return to centerfield, but we'll have Seager at SS and Peraza at 2nd base. I'm kind of on the fence about Puig - part of me says bring him back and see if a new manager can figure him out; the other part of me says the guy is a head case and we're better off without him. Joc Pederson looked like Mickey Mantle the first half of the season and Mickey Mouse the second half. Still, I figure he'll be back. I wonder if the FO will see if Scott Schebler can handle left field. If not, there's a whole bunch of platoon possibilities with Kike, SVS, and Justin Ruggiano. Turner will be back at 3rd base. Seager looked great in September and then got schooled by the Mets. But he'll be back. And the second base job is Peraza's to loose. I'm not as hard on Agon as Torgy is. I looked at Agon's numbers over the last three years and they're remarkably consistent, with the exception that he ground into more double-plays this year. Agon can no longer carry an offense anymore and he's probably overpaid, but I don't see anyone we could trade for that could replace him. And we would not get back Agon's value if we traded him. Grandal will be back behind the plate with Austin Barnes backing him up.

I don't see A.J. Ellis making the cut, though I'm sorry to see him go. As Dopple pointed out, Andre Ethier has about two years and $35 million left on his contract. I can imagine he can be traded if we eat a little bit of his contract. Ethier at least reestablished some of his value. Crawford has two years and $42 million left on his contract. I suspect we'll have to give him away. 

I don't think this team I've described is a world beater by any means. I doubt if this team wins more than about 85 games. On the other hand, the NL West is so bad, that might be enough to win the division. There are a lot of young players in key positions and they're going to struggle offensively as they learn how to become major league players. But even the best players struggle their first couple seasons in the majors. Still, I'd rather suffer through their teething pains and see if they develop into a great team rather than watch this year's team choke and hand a victory to the Mets. 

Last Edited By: Westside Dodger Oct 17 15 6:03 PM. Edited 1 time.

#56 [url]

Oct 17 15 6:02 PM

Westside Dodger wrote:
I suppose, in my heart of hearts, and like everyone else, I'd like the FO to go out spend another $300 million, resign Greinke, sign Price, and perhaps pick up another big bat like Yoenis Cespedes and off we go to the World Series. 

But realistically, I don't see that happening. At some point, the CBA kicks in and having a payroll of $300 million becomes a payroll of $400 million through the various penalties that accrue to high-spending owners. I don't know when that happens, but I'm sure the FO does.

Besides which, my take on Friedman & Co. is that they want to make the Dodgers younger and less expensive rather than older and more expensive. You could see that last year with the Matt Kemp for Yasmani Grandal trade and we saw it again when we traded for Jose Peraza, Alex Wood and Luis Avilan. These, moreover, have been great moves. Grandal has already shown how productive he can be at the plate when he isn't injured. Peraza fills a hole at second base that we had no replacement for in our system. Alex Wood has flashed signs of brilliance (and he's only 23) and Avilan has proven he's a great LOOGY and may be much more than that if given the chance. So I give Friedman & Co. an "A" for the young talent they've picked up this season.

Looking to next year, I see Don Mattingly gone. After 5 years as manager, and the last three taking the team to the playoffs, but not advancing past the first round, I think we've seen what Mattingly can do. If Jeffrey Loria wants him and Miami, by all means, let him go. I also think Wallach, Maguire, Valentin, and Bundy will be let go. I hope they keep Honeycutt, Lopes (still a good 1st base coach and I'd like to see him work with Peraza) and Roenike (because I thought he did a great job as the 3rd base coach).  I have no idea who the FO will choose to replace Mattingly, but I will throw one name out there--Dave Martinez, Joe Maddon's long-time bench coach. I read an article last year when Friedman was hired that he and Martinez were really close. 

As far as the pitching goes, I don't see us resigning Greinke or signing David Price. I can imagine us signing someone like Jordan Zimmerman for four years at around $80 million to slot between Kershaw and Ryu. And they'll probably either have to sign or trade for another arm to fill out the rotation, because I don't see McCarthy being able to pitch again until August or September. The Dodgers have so many arms in the bullpen, I'm sure they'll figure all that out in Spring Training. Even with the injuries to Ryu and McCarthy and the occasional meltdown of the bullpen, pitching wasn't problem with this year's Dodgers.

The biggest problem the new Dodger manager and his staff will have to face is the lack of situational hitting. We simply left too many people in scoring position without bringing them home to score. And this wasn't just a problem in 2015, it was a problem in 2014 and 2013 and probably in 2012, but I can't remember that far back. We're never going to be a championship team if we keep leaving people at second base with no outs and then not bringing them in to score. That has to be the main priority of the new manager.

Next year is going to be tough on us long-time Dodger fans, because for the first time since about 2006, we're going to have a lot of young players in the line-up. And they're going to strike out, a lot. Not only will Joc Pederson return to centerfield, but we'll have Seager at SS and Peraza at 2nd base. I'm kind of on the fence about Puig - part of me says bring him back and see if a new manager can figure him out; the other part of me says the guy is a head case and we're better off without him. Joc Pederson looked like Mickey Mantle the first half of the season and Mickey Mouse the second half. Still, I figure he'll be back. I wonder if the FO will see if Scott Schebler can handle left field. If not, there's a whole bunch of platoon possibilities with Kike, SVS, and Justin Ruggiano. Turner will be back at 3rd base. Seager looked great in September and then got schooled by the Mets. But he'll be back. And the second base job is Peraza's to loose. I'm not as hard on Agon as Torgy is. I looked at Agon's numbers over the last three years and they're remarkably consistent, with the exception that he ground into more double-plays this year. Agon can no longer carry an offense anymore and he's probably overpaid, but I don't see anyone we could trade for that could replace him. And we would not get back Agon's value if we traded him. Grandal will be back behind the plate with Austin Barnes backing him up.

I don't see A.J. Ellis making the cut, though I'm sorry to see him go. As Dopple pointed out, Andre Ethier has about two years and $35 million left on his contract. I can imagine he can be traded if we eat a little bit of his contract. Ethier at least reestablished some of his value. Crawford has two years and $42 million left on his contract. I suspect we'll have to give him away. 

I don't think this team I've described is a world beater by any means. I doubt if this team wins more than about 85 games. On the other hand, the NL West is so bad, that might be enough to win the division. There are a lot of young players in key positions and they're going to struggle offensively as they learn how to become major league players. But even the best players struggle their first couple seasons in the majors. Still, I'd rather suffer through their teething pains and see if they develop into a great team rather than watch this year's team choke and hand a victory to the Mets. 
I think your reasoning makes sense but I'm betting against it for one reason, the Guggies.  These guys did not buy the team for the economics.  They are a group of super rich with strong desires to win a trophy to show off.  I very much doubt they will take a step back and wait for a winning team to develop.  My guess is they will be all in.

#57 [url]

Oct 17 15 6:07 PM

WildHare wrote:
grabarkewitz wrote:
So, I was perusing all things Dodgers and came upon Dilbeck's diatribe. Geez, if Plaschke ever chokes on his own saliva, the Times has a ready replacement. This guy has such a chubby for Ned that it borders on stalking. GIven that Friedman and Zaidi walked into the job where the payroll was bloated beyond compare and they did what they could to cut as much dead weight as they could and that involved paying guys to go away. How much of the belabored $300 million was because of Ned and his need to spend like a drunken sailor and how much did it curtail what moves we could make? If Ned could read the tea leaves, it was a safe bet the Sox would've given away AGon (he was a bad fit) for RDLR and Webster if Ned had any idea how to do his job, but Ned had to take on more money because every GM in the game knew that Ned would overpay for marginal talent. Simply put, I have zero problem with our front office. Did they make some bad decisions? Sure, but name any GM who hasn't made a bad decision. They took risks and some of them were bad (Latos, McCarthy, Rollins) but on the whole, their moves paid off. We are stronger behind the plate (even with Grandal's shoulder, he was better than anything we had behind the plate in years), in the pen (Hatcher came around nicely and Liberatore, Avilan and Thomas are strong lefties in a world where decent lefties are hard to find) and the cost was only an overpaid malcontent, a one-dimensional second baseman and an injury-prone rookie. Sure, Kemp's numbers look good, but what good did it do the Padres? Their team was a bigger mess than ours and that is something to say.

I don't miss Gordon because I don't believe he can sustain his performance over the longterm and it wasn't like he changed the culture in Miami, they are still a mediocre team with a cheap owner. Did we miss his speed? Damn right, but there were expectations that Pederson, Rollins and Puig would replace that speed but it didn't work out that way - I blame Lopes and Mattingdork for that. No one can accuse the FO of not addressing that - they went out and stole Peraza from the Braves and I fully expect him to be our leadoff hitter in '16. For Dilbeck to make comments like he did only shows me that he doesn't get it. I can remember him fawning over Ned for years and what did Ned get us other than a bloated payroll and about three years of eating some pretty awful contracts. Hell, I would love to hear Dilbeck justify Schmidt, League, Pierre, Mueller and others that Ned dropped the bank on.
In defending the FO it might be prudent to save the negative rhetoric on Dee Gordon.   Dee would have led the Dodgers position players in:
Runs, Hits, Triples, Batting Average (led league), stolen bases, and, importantly, WAR,  He would have been in the top 3 in several other categories.  For this we got Chris Hatcher and his 0.0 WAR, one year of Howie Kendrick and his 1.1 WAR, a minor league catcher, and Kike' (who might be the best of the lot.)  We also threw in $10M and slightly above replacement level starter Dan Haren, who couldn't have been much worse than our 3-4-5 starters late in the year.  So, I don't think Dee is one of the feathers in Friedman's cap.


See, I look at those numbers and for some reason I am not impressed.   I mean, they are great and all that, but what good did it do the Fish.   Something just doesn't add up.  You have a team with quality players like Gordon, Stanton, Yelich, Fernandez, Alvarez, etc.... and they were out of it by August.   My thinking is that it is like garbage time in basketball, you are losing by three dozen with twelve minutes to play so it is time to fill the scorebook.   Seeing as how the Fish didn't play a meaningful game for the last couple months, a guy can pad his stats.   Sure, it isn't that easy, but those are empty numbers if you don't even sniff the playoffs.  But, it is easier to play when there is zero pressure or expectations.    

#58 [url]

Oct 17 15 7:40 PM

WildHare wrote:

grabarkewitz wrote:So, I was perusing all things Dodgers and came upon Dilbeck's diatribe. Geez, if Plaschke ever chokes on his own saliva, the Times has a ready replacement. This guy has such a chubby for Ned that it borders on stalking. GIven that Friedman and Zaidi walked into the job where the payroll was bloated beyond compare and they did what they could to cut as much dead weight as they could and that involved paying guys to go away. How much of the belabored $300 million was because of Ned and his need to spend like a drunken sailor and how much did it curtail what moves we could make? If Ned could read the tea leaves, it was a safe bet the Sox would've given away AGon (he was a bad fit) for RDLR and Webster if Ned had any idea how to do his job, but Ned had to take on more money because every GM in the game knew that Ned would overpay for marginal talent. Simply put, I have zero problem with our front office. Did they make some bad decisions? Sure, but name any GM who hasn't made a bad decision. They took risks and some of them were bad (Latos, McCarthy, Rollins) but on the whole, their moves paid off. We are stronger behind the plate (even with Grandal's shoulder, he was better than anything we had behind the plate in years), in the pen (Hatcher came around nicely and Liberatore, Avilan and Thomas are strong lefties in a world where decent lefties are hard to find) and the cost was only an overpaid malcontent, a one-dimensional second baseman and an injury-prone rookie. Sure, Kemp's numbers look good, but what good did it do the Padres? Their team was a bigger mess than ours and that is something to say.


I don't miss Gordon because I don't believe he can sustain his performance over the longterm and it wasn't like he changed the culture in Miami, they are still a mediocre team with a cheap owner. Did we miss his speed? Damn right, but there were expectations that Pederson, Rollins and Puig would replace that speed but it didn't work out that way - I blame Lopes and Mattingdork for that. No one can accuse the FO of not addressing that - they went out and stole Peraza from the Braves and I fully expect him to be our leadoff hitter in '16. For Dilbeck to make comments like he did only shows me that he doesn't get it. I can remember him fawning over Ned for years and what did Ned get us other than a bloated payroll and about three years of eating some pretty awful contracts. Hell, I would love to hear Dilbeck justify Schmidt, League, Pierre, Mueller and others that Ned dropped the bank on.

In defending the FO it might be prudent to save the negative rhetoric on Dee Gordon.   Dee would have led the Dodgers position players in: Runs, Hits, Triples, Batting Average (led league), stolen bases, and, importantly, WAR,  He would have been in the top 3 in several other categories.  For this we got Chris Hatcher and his 0.0 WAR, one year of Howie Kendrick and his 1.1 WAR, a minor league catcher, and Kike' (who might be the best of the lot.)  We also threw in $10M and slightly above replacement level starter Dan Haren, who couldn't have been much worse than our 3-4-5 starters late in the year.  So, I don't think Dee is one of the feathers in Friedman's cap.

Not to take anything away from Dee's standout season, but I think we did fairly well in that trade. In Hatcher, we ended up with someone who filled that important 8th inning role that we'd been sorely missing. Barnes should be Grandal's backup next season & Enrique is a very important member of our bench. We got more than just one season of Kendrick.  He'll almost certainly bring us a supplementary round pick in the '16 draft. 

#59 [url]

Oct 17 15 7:43 PM

Bunt

I'm surprised no one has mentioned teaching the players how to bunt! (Even Agon could bunt for a hit with the shift used against him).  Do away with the extreme shifts.  It causes pitchers to not use the outside of the plate.  Perhaps by next year Beachy will be fully recovered from TJ surgery.

#60 [url]

Oct 17 15 9:01 PM

SCDodgerFan wrote:
I'm surprised no one has mentioned teaching the players how to bunt! (Even Agon could bunt for a hit with the shift used against him).  Do away with the extreme shifts.  It causes pitchers to not use the outside of the plate.  Perhaps by next year Beachy will be fully recovered from TJ surgery.

Beachy is no longer a Dodger. He declared Free Agency. 

Remove this ad

Quick Reply

bbcode help