Milton Bradley

by Joshua Worley

What dooms him, finally, are not his emotional ailments, but his physical ailments. Milton Bradley is like an exciting board game with a tragic flaw. It's complete with exquisitely carved wooden tokens, an embossed game-board, and a rule-book that is almost frustratingly detailed. Given patience and persistence, the rules can be sorted out, but finally the game that seems like it will be so much fun is unplayable for a much more mundane and irrefutable reason. There are no dice.

It may be Bradley's emotional meltdowns that get the bigger headlines, that are more memorable, that make him seem like a bad risk, but it's really his persistent and unshakable injuries that have told the story of his career. If he could just stay healthy, he would be a star, one of the most exciting players in the game. Good and exciting are not synonymous. Adam Dunn is good, very good, but not exciting. Milton Bradley is good and exciting, a real joy to watch play baseball. He plays with such purpose. He is a good defender, a patient hitter with power, a fast, determined runner. He's more like Matt Kemp than Juan Pierre on the bases. Fast and scary.

Fast and scary. These words so well describe Bradley. His temper comes fast and scary. It was with the Dodgers that his worst meltdowns came. Bradley's most physically healthy year may have been his most mentally unhealthy year, at least publicly. Bradley's incidents from 2004 don't need but a few words to describe for anyone who watched that Dodger season. The bag of baseballs. The bottle and the fan. The "Uncle Tom" reporter. The "Arrest Me" incident on an Ohio highway.


Milton Obelle Bradley -- CF/DL

age: 29
bats: switch

Year -- games -- OPS

2002 -- 98 -- 0.723
2003 -- 101 -- 0.922
2004 -- 141 -- 0.786
2005 -- 75 -- 0.834
2006 -- 96 -- 0.817
2007 -- 19 -- 0.819

Bradley just seems to wear down so easily. It's as if he plays too hard, with such fire, that he just burns himself up. I wonder if it's not a coincidence that his healthiest year on 2004 was also his second worst year with the bat; his worst year leaving out his rookie year. Bradley is never fully healthy for long.

After Bradley called Jeff Kent a racist made pointed remarks about what he perceived ( perhaps correctly ) as Jeff Kent's insensitivity toward African-Americans in 2005 and then allegedly choked his wife that off-season, the Dodgers had seen enough of him and decided to ship him out. But given that he had only played 75 games in 2005, there were also plenty of on-field reasons to trade the troubled outfielder. New GM Ned Colletti eventually traded Milton Bradley to Oakland for Andre Ethier. Antonio Perez was also sent to Oakland in the deal.

By talent alone, the deal was a clear win for Oakland. But talent alone has never defined Bradley, unfortunately. Given Bradley's injury troubles, and that Oakland just designated him for assignment, did the Dodgers in fact win this deal?

Andre Ethier had a great 2006 and helped the Dodgers make the playoffs. By no means a cinch to play on the big club in 2006, Ethier was promoted to the Dodgers in May of 2006 when Ricky Ledee was injured. He played occasionally for a month or so, and then really started to hit for a sky high batting average in the middle months of the season, before falling into a September slump and losing most of his playing time to Marlon Anderson. Nevertheless, Ethier was a blue bolt through the Dodgers season, and unexpected charge that helped power the Dodgers into the playoffs. Surely just based on 2006 the Dodgers won the Bradley trade?

But Milton Bradley also had a good 2006, when he played. He also helped his team make the playoffs. Of course it's important to remember that Ethier didn't log a full 2006 either, though for different reasons than Bradley. Here are the three principles of the trade and their win shares in 2006, according to hardballtimes.com.

player -- WS -- WSAB

Ethier -- 12 -- (+4)
Bradley -- 13 -- (+6)
Perez -- 0 -- (-3)

WSAB is win shares above bench, and roughly says how better or worse a player would be than a typical bench player. When he played in 2006, Bradley was actually a bit better than Ethier, though Perez's apocalyptically awful year drags down the Oakland half of the ledger and probably gives the Dodgers a slight edge on the trade in 2006.

Given the the A's have now designated Bradley for assignment, there may be some reactionary writers who take the angle that these Moneyball GM's have learned the hard way the value of team chemistry. Both DePodesta and Beane traded for Bradley, and their teams were later forced to part with him. It's not all on base percentage and VORP; chemistry and character matter! But more to the point, durability matters. I don't necessarily think it's a mistake to acquire a player like Bradley, who is so injury-prone, but he may not end up being worth as much as you'd think, or hope. Ned Colletti has gone to the other extreme, of course, and acquired the anti-Bradley in Juan Pierre. Pierre is fast and not scary at all. He's durable and mediocre. I think overpaying for Bradley is less objectionable to over-paying for Pierre, though this may be a gambler's philosophy. edit: on second thought, I'm not sure it's fair to say either DePodesta or Beane overpaid for Bradley.

I don't think one can rationally say that given what the principles knew at the time of the trade that the A's or the Dodgers made a bad trade. Bradley had worn out his welcome in LA off the field, and the incident with his wife was truly awful and disturbing. There was no reason to think it was a sure thing that Bradley would play a entire injury-free season. There was also no reason to think Ethier would ever become a good big leaguer, much less in 2006. In fact, it's not certain even now that Ethier will ever be much more than a fourth outfielder. He's not yet recaptured any of his July 2006 magic in 2007.

The A's were set to get a small bit of remaining value out of Bradley in their trade with the Royals, but they were burned by a Bradley injury one last time. The trade has been scuttled because Bradley injured his oblique muscle in his very last at bat with the A's! It's so absurd and fitting, and sad, too. The Dodgers will get some value out of Ethier in the future, maybe a lot if he ever rebounds to his 2006 level. So based only on results, I do think the trade has turned into a small win for the Dodgers. This doesn't mean Oakland did the wrong thing in trading for Bradley, just as I don't think it was wrong for the Dodgers to obtain Bradley in 2004. Bradley is a high-stakes player. You've got to know that when you roll the dice on him. He may pay off spectacularly for awhile and help you go on to greater things. Just know that eventually he'll come up snake-eyes.

The 400 Club

by Joshua Worley

Both Loney and Kemp are batting over 0.400 on the season. They are putting a fierce purpose behind their talent and spraying the ball hard everywhere, and right now the singles are falling in, the doubles are scorching over, and even a few home runs are booming. Just two home runs, so far, but they will hit more.

I was hoping one of them might hit a home run tonight, especially off this young fly ball pitcher Sonnanstine. The Dodgers took full advantage of his fly ball tendencies in the second inning, as I hoped they would, scoring two off of a home run, a pair of doubles, and a fly out flown amok on a shaky throw. It's funny --- while Ethier's double didn't result in a run, it did make the second run Sonnanstine allowed in the inning become earned instead of unearned.

Lowe faltered again toward the end of his outing, as he sometimes does. It's easy to see when it's happening, though always impossible to predict the damage that might occur. He'll start to allow more balls hit in the air, and the grounders will start to be harder, but that doesn't mean a home run is coming. But tonight one did. Grady did the right thing in pulling him right after the bomb by Delmon Young, clearly, and I would say that even if Seanez had gone on to cough up the lead there. Delmon Young played like a future version of himself in this game, going 3 for 4 with the home run.

The young guys on the Dodgers are just so fun to watch, though the very best highlight of the game for me was seeing two slow wily veterans hit consecutive stand up triples. But the youth is just so much more consistently fun to watch. I don't want to wane pessimistic about Loney and Kemp's chances of playing tomorrow even with their combined 5 for 9 this past game, so I won't. I just hope to see them batting one after the other many more times this season. The thing is, they shouldn't be batting 0.400. If they were playing as much as they should, they wouldn't be batting so high. Such a thing can't last for any hitter. So please, Grady, boot them out of the 400 club as soon as possible!

Tampa Bay Preview: Gack, What's in This Juice?

by Joshua Worley

Tampa Bay just can't pitch. Well, they can pitch, but when they do their opponents score lots of runs. They've allowed the most runs in baseball. The starting staff is bad; the relievers are bad. This is the team that gave the Dodgers Dannys Baez, Lance Carter and Mark Hendrickson, after all. From the waters of the bay of Tampa flow many bad pitchers.

Their lineup is pretty good, better than the Dodgers, by my reckoning. But it's just not enough to overcome that bad pitching. How depressing it must be to be a fan of Tampa Bay! There aren't even any salad days to remember. It's been all gruel for fans of the Rays since they came into the American League, and is there any realistic hope that they can ever compete with New York or Boston? Back when Major League Baseball was talking about contracting teams, how come they never talked about contracting this one? At least let that abortion of a stadium be sucked into a black hole. I am not looking forward to seeing baseball played in what might as well be an Ikea warehouse with some turf slapped down. Does Tropicana actually pay to have their name associated with this horrible stadium? I guess it's truth in advertising, since their juices taste like unfiltered swill.

The Rays record is 31-39, with 345 runs scored and 429 allowed. The pitching match-ups will be Lowe v Sonnanstine, Wolf v Kazmir, and Kuo v Jackson, unless Jackson is skipped.


Elijah David Dukes -- future DFA

age: 22
bats: right

AVG -- OBP -- SLG
0.190 -- 0.318 -- 0.391

I don't think he's going to play in this series. He hasn't started since June 12. In the eight games since then he's had 3 pinch hitting appearances. In June he's 2-36, with both hits singles. He threatened to kill his wife and has been subjected to a restraining order. He called into a sports talk radio show Tuesday morning and ranted about his lack of playing time.

Dukes clearly has talent. He has plate discipline ( 33 walks ) and power ( 10 home runs ). But he strikes out too much to be a consistently dangerous hitter, and while he might yet develop into a very good hitter, he'll likely destroy his career with his off field problems first. I don't believe any team will give Tampa Bay anything in trade for Dukes, though some team will surely take a chance on him if he's released.


Akinori Iwamura -- 3B

age: 28
bats: left

0.323 -- 0.426 -- 0.476

His nickname is "Japanese Lightning". These stats, while very good, come in only about a month of play. He's missed time due to an oblique strain and an eye injury.

This is his first year in the Major Leagues, after 9 years in the Japanese Central League. He won 6 gold gloves at third base in Japan, so he's apparently a good defensive third baseman. He showed power in Japan, hitting 44 home runs three years ago and 32 last year, but this year he only has 2 so far. He's batting leadoff for the Devil Rays, and he gets on base plenty. He's a modest 5 for 8 in stolen bases.

Given the dissatisfaction the Dodgers seem to have with their third base candidates, I wonder why they didn't make more of an effort to grab Iwamura when he was posted. The winning bid was a mere 4.5 million. I'd rather see what Betemit and LaRoche can do at third, of course, but I don't think Ned feels the same way.


Brendan Michael Harris -- SS

age: 26
bats: right

0.311 -- 0.365 -- 0.484

Born in Albany, NY, his nickname is "Albanese Lightning". Okay, it's not, but that would be cool.

The Rays got him by trading either a player to be named or cash considerations to the Reds. He's been quite good, with some power and a line drive rate of 26% fueling his high average. The top of the Rays lineup is not to be taken lightly.


Carl Demonte Crawford -- LF

age: 25
bats: left

0.297 -- 0.354 -- 0.473

Often the subject of trade rumors involving the Dodgers, Crawford has been the Rays highest profile player for a few years now. One can see why Crawford would be highly sought after, and be expensive to obtain in trade. He's a 0.800 OPS players who regularly steals 50 bases, and he's only 25. It's easy to imagine him making a leap in performance over the next few years and turning into version 2 of pre-steroids Barry Bonds. That's a very optimistic projection, of course, and he's never showed the patience of Barry, which is perhaps his greatest weakness right now. His career OBP is only 0.329.


Gregory Blakemoor Norton -- DH/1B

age: 34
bats: switch

0.212 -- 0.369 -- 0.288

He's been pressed into service as a regular starter because of the injuries to Rocco Baldelli and BJ Upton. He's mostly played as the DH lately and batted fourth, which seems odd to me when you have Carlos Pena available to bat fourth.

This is the kind of player Dodger pitchers will love to see after struggling against the top of the Rays lineup. I can see it now: in the first inning Randy Wolf has allowed two on with one out after the fearsome top three of the batting order, and up to the plate steps Greg Norton, cleanup hitter. Wolf would have to have visions of a double play to end the inning, right? Of course, Wolf is more of a fly ball pitcher, and Norton hasn't grounded into any double plays this year, so maybe he can strike out instead. He does that a lot. He also walks a lot, and that leads me to my minor goal for the Dodger pitchers this series: don't walk Greg Norton.


Carlos Felipe Pena -- 1B

age: 29
bats: left

0.307 -- 0.401 -- 0.665

Where did this come from? He showed some promise with the Tigers back in 2003 and 2004, but he just couldn't hit for a high enough average to keep his job as starting first baseman. After bouncing around the minor leagues of Detroit and New York ( AL ) the last few years, and playing in only 18 games last year with the Red Sox, he's put it all together this year. He has a good batting average, he's getting on base, and he's hit more home runs than ever, with 17 so far this year. Wolf, you better be out of the first inning before Pena comes up.

Or should he? Well, yes, he should, but Pena isn't the same hitter against lefties as he is against righties. He only has one home run in 29 at bats against left-handed pitchers. So maybe it's a good thing that Kuo has been moved up to Sunday. Pena might even sit out one of the two final games.


Ty Allen Wigginton -- 2B

age: 29
bats: right

0.279 -- 0.325 -- 0.474

Like a lot of other Devil Ray hitters, he strikes out a lot. That seems like a good sign for both Wolf and Kuo. The bad news is that Wigginton is mashing lefties so far this year, with an OPS above 1.000. So against Kuo and Wolf the Rays lose Pena as a force but gain Wigginton. Great.


Delmon Demarcus Young -- RF

age: 21
bats: right

0.270 -- 0.303 -- 0.410

He's not ready for the big leagues yet. Dodger pitchers, get him out while he's still a relatively easy out early in his career. It's only going to get harder in the future. He does do a bit better against lefty pitchers.


Dioner Fabian Navarro -- C

age: 23
bats: switch

0.170 -- 0.241 -- 0.240

Any day Navarro catches instead of backup Raul Casanova will be an advantage for the Dodgers. Even though the Rays will be playing with the DH they'll still have a hitter who hits like a pitcher in the lineup.

This line for Navarro makes me sad. I really liked him when he was with the Dodgers. I don't know, exactly, but something seemed to happen to him between 2005 and 2006. He just didn't seem to be the same player. He just wasn't playing well for the Dodgers offensively or defensively, at least not to my observation, and then Martin burst on to the scene after Dioner was hurt and there was no looking back for the Dodgers at that point.

But there was a time when I really thought Navarro was the catcher of the future for the Dodgers. I hope he starts playing better, though only after the Dodgers leave Tampa.


Jonny Johnson Gomes -- RF/DH

age: 26
bats: right

0.273 -- 0.364 -- 0.532

There are some good names on the Rays, but Gomes wins the title for best name. I can only wonder what could have been, though. If he had been named Jonny Jones Gomes that would be the best baseball name of all time. I'm not sure, though, is Gomes pronounced with two syllables or just one?

The reason that the Rays are trying to sell for Dukes' benching is that they're making room in the lineup for the resurgent Gomes. And truly Gomes is playing better than Dukes, though that's not all there is to it, of course. The Rays have played 6 straight games without the DH coming into this series, but previously they had Gomes batting ninth. I'm not sure why they wouldn't put the catcher there.


Andrew Michael Sonnanstine -- P

age: 24
throws: right

ERA -- IP -- SO -- BB -- HR
7.11 -- 19.0 -- 20 -- 2 -- 6

That 7.11 ERA looks mighty inviting, but can the Dodgers take advantage of him if they don't hit home runs against him? I sure hope tonight's game isn't the one where Sonnanstine figures it out and stops giving up home runs and pitches a gem.

He's pitched well in one of his three starts since being called up, actually. Against Florida he gave up just two runs in 7 innings, both on solo home runs, and struck out 10. But home runs figure to continue to plague him, because he's given up 28 fly balls to 16 ground balls so far.

Matt Kemp and Wilson Betemit better start tonight, not only because they should anyway, but to take advantage of this pitcher's home run habits. And Loney ought to start as well.


Scott Edward Kazmir -- P

age: 23
throws: left

ERA -- IP -- SO -- BB -- HR
4.10 -- 90.0 -- 91 -- 44 -- 10

Since the Dodgers miss seeing Shields, this is the only good pitcher they'll face this series. But he's not been as good as he was last year, because his walks and home runs allowed are slightly up. He seems a lot like a Wolf-type pitcher to me, so it's appropriate that they face each other Saturday. If it really is the battle of two similar pitchers, then doesn't the advantage go to the Rays because they have the better lineup?


Edwin Jackson Jr. -- P

age: 23
throws: right

ERA -- IP -- SO -- BB -- HR
7.85 -- 57.1 -- 52 -- 37 -- 9

Jackson was one out away from qualifying for his first win of the season against the Snakes, but he had to come out of the game with finger cramps. The Devil Rays might skip his start, but for now he appears to be the scheduled starter for Sunday.

Jackson is still only 23, so I guess it's too soon to just give up on him. The strikeouts are there; he just allows way too many walks in the process of getting those strikeouts. I'm looking back at this 2003 season, when he dazzled in 3 starts with an ERA of 2.46, and even then he was walking a batter every two innings. Of course, Billingsley was rather wild last year, and he seems to have settled down this year. I think it would be rash for a team like the Devil Rays who aren't going anywhere this year to give up on Jackson. The Dodgers clearly had no place for him, though. They couldn't carry him on the big club, and he wasn't progressing at all in AAA.

If Jackson doesn't pitch, then it's likely Jason Hammel to get the start. Hammel has only pitched 9 innings with the Rays this year. I'd really rather see Jackson, in spite of the Lima-potential for him to suddenly pitch well against his old team.


Prediction:

My television shatters trying to render the monstrous stadium of the Rays. Lowe give up one run in eight innings but gets a no-decision after the Dodgers disappear against Sonnanstine. Wolf gives up 4 early but settles down and the Dodgers win late against the awful Rays pen. Just for the heck of it Grady puts Kuo in as the pitcher and DH against Jackson and the Dodgers become the first team ever to hit 9 home runs in a row.

Injury Makes the Choices Around Here

by Joshua Worley

Kemp and Loney get zero starts combined in the series in Toronto. To quote from the global warming commercial the state of California just paid to be aired, that's not just a fact, it's a choice. And that makes it almost worse than any sweep. When the Dodgers get swept, it's not just that they played poorly: the opponent also played well. There was a contest on the field and though the Dodgers tried to win, they failed. That's not necessarily disheartening, though it's usually disappointing. But when Loney and Kemp are shut out of a series, never allowed to start, that is something the Dodgers did all by themselves, and that is disheartening and depressing.

I don't know, maybe Grady could forsee that the evil Toronto turf would injure either of those young players if they played. Loney did have that collision with the wall on Suday, but you know, I have a feeling he wouldn't have started in this series even if that didn't happen. It's hard to imagine that either of these players are going to get the playing time at the big league level they need when neither starts once during an entire series. That doesn't mean it won't ever happen. The better part of me still hopes for it. But I have to wonder what conditions will have to prevail for it to happen. I suspect that only an injury will get Loney or Kemp the playing time they need. Does that mean I should hope for an injury?

No! And yet ... I think about the rubber game of the Toronto series going on as I type this, in which Billingsley got the start, and I realize that I'm very happy to finally see Billingsley start, after two and a half months of bullpen exile, and then I remember that to get my wish for him to start another pitcher had to be injured. I certainly didn't want to see Schmidt injured, and yet that's what it took. Injury made the choice to start Billingsley. ( That, and some very basic sense that Tomko and Hendrickson weren't good choices. )

I think it was a good idea to start the year with Billingsley in the bullpen, to limit the number of pitches he would make this season, though I don't think I would have done it. I want to see the promising young players right away. Yes, they need to first show they belong by excelling in the minor leagues. But once they've climbed the ladder, it's time to play them. Unless there is someone obviously better blocking them, it's time to play them. That doesn't seem to be the Dodger philosophy, though.

Matt Kemp is batting now. To give Grady the credit he deserves, at least Kemp has had at bats in every game even if he hasn't started. Kemp is just so talented, such raw power and speed ... and here he grounds out to second, except the second baseman can't field it cleanly as he goes to his left, and once a fielder bobbles a Kemp grounder he can forget about throwing, so fast is Kemp. Kemp safe at first.

I want to see more of that. I just don't want to have to hope for an injury to see it happen.

update: And then Kemp displayed his incredible power in his second at bat, hitting a ball I was sure would just be a fly out to center field that carried, and carried until it was a booming double. What a player! So fun to watch! Please, Grady. Play him. Free the Bison.

One and Twenty, Unrelenty

by Joshua Worley

As everyone who follows the team likely knows, the Dodgers are 1-20 in their last 21 games in AL parks. To this unrelenting fact, I say: So what?

Record by year in AL parks:

2005: 0-9
2006: 1-8
2007: 0-3

About half of this awful 1-20 mark comes from the 2005 Dodgers. That's two years ago, which in the case of the Dodgers is a very very long time ago, almost an entire roster ago. That 2005 team has almost nothing to do with this year's team. Here's some rather scary proof in the form of a list of Dodger starters with games started in the nine 2005 losses:

Kent - 8
Saenz - 8
Werth - 8
Phillips - 8
Perez - 8
Choi - 8
Edwards - 7
Drew - 6
Grabowski - 6
Izturis - 5
Repko - 3
Ross - 3
Rose - 2
Robles - 1

Half the names in this list fill me with a sort of horrified despair, a protest that surely there wasn't a time when I honestly hoped that a team playing Jason Grabowski and Mike Edwards regularly would ever win anything. Only Kent and Saenz remain on the 2007 Dodgers from this despressing list of starters.

The starting pitchers from the 2005 losses show slightly more overlap:

Weaver - 3
Penny - 2
Lowe - 2
Houlton - 1
Dessens - 1

The whipping boy of this group, Weaver, is gone. Penny and Lowe weren't having the kind of years in 2005 they're having in 2007. I'm thinking their success this year is a much better indicator of how they'll do in Toronto and Tampa than a few starts in different AL parks back in 2005.

The 2006 Dodger lineup that went 1-8 was about 2/3 consistent with this year's, with a few players such as Lofton, Cruz and Izturis moving on. The starting pitchers of the 2006 team were a varied lot:

Billingsley - 2
Tomko - 1
Hendrickson - 1
Seo - 1
Sele - 1
Lowe - 1
Perez - 1
Penny - 1

Five of the 9 starts are by pitchers who are gone or no longer in the starting rotation. Penny picked up the lone win of the 9 last year. Billingsley seems likely to pitch sometime in the upcoming 6 games, and he did have two losses in AL parks last year. But Billingsley has come a long way in a year, judging by his much improved K/BB ratio from this year to last.

I'm not going to do another Blue Jays preview since I just did one a few weeks ago, and I won't have anything new to say about them. The Dodgers get to see the same three pitchers as last series. McGowan, Halladay, and Marcum. They're all good, but none of them are unhittable, and all are capable of mixing in a bad game as well. The Dodgers will counter with Penny, Kuo, and a third starter to be announced. I'm not sure why Lowe isn't starting in Toronto; maybe it has something to do with the turf in Toronto vs the turf in Tampa. Whenever Lowe does start, the Dodgers will also need to slide someone new into the rotation and I have to believe that will be Billingsley, since Tomko and Hendrickson have already earned their demotions.

I guess the one argument that the Dodgers are doomed in the next six games that makes a small amount of sense concerns the artificial turf they will have to play on. It's not something you ever see anymore in the National League, which is a reversal from the 80's when I started watching baseball. Back then 5 of 12 NL teams had it, so the Dodgers would play about a fifth of their games on turf and they could get used to it. Now the only time the Dodgers ever see it is in the occasional AL park visit, so it's alien to them. I suppose the turf could give Tampa Bay and Toronto some small fielding advantages in the series. We'll see.

The Battle for the LA Fan

by Joshua Worley

Having just endured the end of a 5-1 season series victory by the Angels over the Dodgers, I decided to tackle another battle of these LA rivals. This time, it's a question of which of these teams a baseball fan living in the LA metropolitan area should choose as his or her favorite team. Twenty years ago, ten years ago, even five years ago, the answer to this question would have been obviously the Dodgers. But the Angels have clearly closed the gap, to the point that the outcome of this battle is in doubt. I believe that overall both franchises are top-rate, so really the prospective fan can't lose, whichever choice is made. Still, which is the better choice? Is the unthinkable possible, another Angel victory over the Dodgers?

I've broken the battle between the teams down into several categories, not all of equal importance. I've tried to give out fair grades to each team in each category, though of course I am a Dodger fan.


Stadium

Dodgers -- A-
Angels -- B

I haven't been to Angel stadium, which makes it hard for me to give it a grade. By most accounts it's a nice place to watch a ballgame, and how can I really know until I've been there? Nevertheless, it's a no-brainer to give the Dodgers the advantage here. There are three important factors to keep in mind. 1) Since it was built Dodger Stadium has been the gold standard of ballparks, especially of non-retro ballparks. 2) Angel stadium has those stupid rocks in the outfield. 3) Angel Stadium is in the middle of Anaheim, while Dodger Stadium is in Chavez Ravine, with mountains visible beyond the outfield walls.

Dodger stadium gets dinged slightly because of all the extra advertising now, as well as difficulties in parking and navigating the food lines.


Announcers

Dodgers -- A
Angels -- C-

I have to wonder why anyone would watch the Angel version of the telecast when the Angels and Dodgers play, when they could be listening to Vin Scully instead. It's not as if Vinny is a homer, either. He calls the action simply and directly, and never makes anything about himself. He tells wonderful stories, and also knows when to be quiet and let the game and the crowd noise tell the story itself.

I can deal with Physioc and Hudler, I guess. I'll occasionally watch the end of a close Angel game and not feel an irresistible urge to mute them. They're like most announcing teams these days: the loud annoying homer and the stupid, goofy analyst.

Announcing is easily the Dodgers biggest advantage. But ... how long will this advantage last? This is a tough thing to even write, but realistically, will Vinny be calling Dodger games 10 years from now? I wouldn't put it past him, but still, it would be misleading to not mention that at some point we may be talking about Charlie Steiner and Steve Lyons as the primary Dodger announcers, and then this category becomes more or less a toss-up, more about personal taste than anything else.


Tradition

Dodgers -- A
Angels -- C

Maybe I've underestimated Angel tradition, but it would be pretty goofy to claim they have the Dodgers beat in this category. It's only starting in mid to late 70's that the Angels could begin to lay claim to any sort of tradition that would resonate for any but the most hardcore fans, and the Dodgers of the 70's and 80's clearly beat the Angels in the same timeframe. Prior to the 70's it's all Dodgers.

Another factor in tradition is that the Dodgers have a great, long-term rivalry with the Giants of San Francisco that doesn't depend on both teams being successful. The Angels are building a good rivalry with Oakland, based mostly on their parallel runs near the top of the AL west. But if one of these teams isn't playing well, will Angels vs A's still have much juice? I doubt it.


Recent Success

Dodgers -- B-
Angels -- A-

The Angels clearly have the Dodgers beat here, with the 2002 World Series Title being exhibit A, though I will say that it's pushing it a bit to call that recent history. The Dodgers have usually been a winning team in their last six years, including playoff appearances two of the last three years. Unlike the Angels, they haven't done anything in the playoffs. Both teams are doing well so far this season.


Future Success

Dodgers -- B+
Angels -- B+

Both clubs have a lot of good young players in the pipeline. Which team has the better prospects depends on who you ask in my experience, so I'm calling this a draw. I think the Angels have more hitting and the Dodgers more pitching on the way, but one really never knows how prospects will work out before-hand. Both teams have fairly large payrolls as well, and are willing to go after free-agents. Both LA teams should be competitive in the near future.


League

I'm not going to give grades here, but merely point out the obvious: some people like the DH, and some people can't stand it. I hate it, so there you go. I've found in talking to people that fans of National League teams nearly always prefer not to have the DH, while fans of American League teams more often than not support the DH but are more likely to disapprove of it than NL fans are to approve of it.


Ownership

Dodgers -- C
Angels -- A

Right here is the heart and soul of the argument in favor of the Angels. By acclamation Arte Moreno is the best owner in baseball, or tied for the best, anyway. The fans love him, and he seems to understand that serving the fans is the best way to build and maintain a great franchise. Ownership is really the only area in which I'm jealous of Angel fans. The only mark against Moreno is his ridiculous name change to the Angels, though I will admit there are solid economic reasons to re-emphasize the Angels presence in the greater LA area market.

I think McCourt is improving, and to damn him with faint praise he could have been a lot worse. The Dodgers still play at Dodger Stadium, Vinny is still announcing, payroll has not been slashed, and the on-field team seems to have a bright future. On the other hand, two General Managers have been unfairly fired, Ross Porter was fired, ticket prices and parking prices have been raised by obscene amounts and the transition to the new parking system was handled atrociously.

The thing is so many of the other categories can be influenced by what kind of owner you have. If you can't trust the owner, then as a fan you're in deep trouble. Angel fans never have to worry. Dodger fans do, though. Nevertheless, I didn't give McCourt an F. He hasn't committed an unforgivable sin like leaving Dodger Stadium. He'll keep getting his chances. What other choice do Dodger fans have?


Uniforms

Dodgers -- A
Angels -- B-

I think the lettering the Angels use is ugly, but I know some people like it so I won't hold it against them. But there's no competing with the classic, elegant look of the Dodgers with the script blue lettering and the small red number on the front of the uniform. I like both teams' cap logos: both are simple, yet immediately recognizable.

One problem with the Angels is that they've changed their uniforms a lot over the years, which hurts the tradition of a team, the connection to the past. Look at old pictures of Dodgers, even from Brooklyn, and it's basically the same uniform. Not so with the Angels. The worst Angels uniforms ever were likely the pre-Moreno versions that had the Angel wing on the A in Angels, and the powder blue home plate in the logo. Just awful. If they were still in these unis they'd get an F in this category.

I know some might scoff at this category being important, but the uniform is sometimes the only constant of a team from year to year with player movement. The uniform is how the team presents itself to the world, and the fan will likely be wearing small bits of the team uniform. It matters.


General Manager

Dodgers -- C
Angels -- C+

Both GMs gave out inadvisable long term deals to centerfielders, but right now Colletti's seems much worse. Stoneman has often been criticized for being unable to make the big trade, while Colletti has usually been praised for not trading away the promising kids. Both seem to adhere to the high batting average philosophy of offense, though this doesn't mean that they don't want power hitters or high OBP hitters either. Neither is as bad as Bowden or as good as Beane. I give Stoneman the slight edge here just based on Pierre vs Matthews, and because of Colletti's pattern of buying high and selling low.


Summary

By my grades, the Dodgers win 4 categories, while the Angels win 3, with one draw and one undecided. But this raw tally is meaningless. It really comes down to what is important to the fan making the decision. Neither team has any real deal-breakers in any category: for instance, neither team plays its games in a dump like Tropicana, or has Jim Bowden as its GM. The Dodgers are more likely to appeal to a fan with a real appreciation for the history of the game, while the Angels are more likely to appeal to the fan who doesn't think beyond the current decade. The trump card for the Dodgers is that they offer the better experience over the airwaves and probably* at the stadium. The trump card for the Angels is their owner, and the trickle-down effect from the owner. I know that some would now say that the fan experience has become better at Angel Stadium, and this is because of Moreno and McCourt. *( the owner effect is why I said probably )

I'm not willing to say that McCourt has failed yet, that he can't turn things around and on balance become a good owner. He's so far avoided the worst pitfalls. So based on a future about as bright as the Angels future, and their clearly superior history, the Dodgers still come out ahead.

But not by much, and not at all for some people, and that's okay. LA is big enough and diverse enough for two great franchises to co-exist.

Outfield Disaster, Again

I'm about as angry as I've ever been, and it has nothing to do with the score. I'm not sure who to blame, and frankly that's not the point. But for the love of God Dodger management, do two things. Put padding in the entire outfield wall before another young Dodger player gets hurt, and stop playing young players out of position because you don't have the courage to bench an over-rated under-producing vet.

There were so many ways to avoid this injury to James Loney. Maybe the best thing for Loney would be for the Dodgers to just trade him to save him from their own incompetence.