Randy Wolf might start opening day for the Dodgers!
In less important news, the Dodgers have signed Manny Ramirez. This is less important because pitching is 90% of the game, and Manny isn't a pitcher. I can't believe the Dodgers would give a non-pitcher 25 million dollars. That's just --- irresponsible.
I will admit that it's been awhile since I heard someone say that "pitching was 90% of the game", but I used to hear something like that a lot. But it's clear that no one ever really believed it because the players have never been payed that way. The one I still sometimes hear is that you win with pitching and defense and clutch hitting. I guess Manny fills in nicely in the clutch hitting department. Not so much the defense.
Here's the lineup I'm imagining right now:
Furcal
Hudson
Manny
Ethier
Martin
Kemp
Loney
Blake
Kershaw
I put Kershaw in there because I'm most excited to see him pitch this season. I guess that's a pretty good lineup. Who is the most likely to hit poorly for his position in that lineup? Loney? Maybe Blake or Kemp? If the Dodgers stay healthy and none of the young or very old players takes a huge step back there aren't any holes in this lineup. You will score a lot of runs with a lineup without holes and one superstar.
Apparently Manny agreed to the same deal that was rejected a few days ago. Can we say that both sides end up looking like fools here? McCourt and his starting from scratch remarks, and Boras and his taking the offer that was once rejected. But it doesn't matter, does it? I don't think either of these guys should care that they looked foolish at one point. The deal got done. Neither side had any other options, not really. They were wise enough to see that and deal with the devil across the table.
It's a good day. I'll remember that, even if I look back on this day a year from now with mixed emotions. We really don't know what Manny will bring this year, and by saying this I am not so much questioning his effort to win but his aging body. But right now I'm assuming the best. Today, and tomorrow, and all spring. He'll hit 0.350, with lots of home runs, and lots of great quotes. He'll get the MVP this time. The stands will be filled with wigs, and fans will chant his name.
Manny is back.
04 March 2009
27 February 2009
Close to closing
My wife and I just closed on the house we were purchasing. Sometimes it seemed like it would never get done, but it was. Can't the Dodgers close with Manny too?
The Dodgers and Manny are okay with the 45 million over two years with the opt-out after one year --- it's only the deferrals of money that keep them apart. I never like deferrals in contracts. A deferral is an interest free loan made by the player to the ball club. Why should a player do that? The true value of a contract with deferrals is less than the quoted value, but people just see the total amount and judge based on that. I wonder if large companies struggling in the bad economy will start trying to defer some of their workers' salaries. California was deferring tax refunds before the budget was finally passed.
If the Dodgers can't afford to pay Manny 25 million now then what makes them think they can afford the deferred payments a few years from now when Manny isn't even on the team anymore and they have to pay all these good young players entering late arbitration and free-agency? It doesn't seem like sound financial planning. I'd rather see Manny leave than see the Dodgers go into extreme cost-cutting mode a few years from now.
But whatever. I can't see into the future, and I don't know what the Dodger finances are really like, or even what the team will be like in a few years. I can only really see the Dodger season ahead, and I know I want Manny in it. Can't these sides come to a compromise? Defer less of the money, or treat the deferrals like a real loan with interest. Don't insult Manny and his evil but brilliant agent by trying to pass off your deferrals as full value. And Boras probably has nowhere else to go at these prices. If he can get the Giants or some mystery team to bite at these prices I guess we'll know soon, but I doubt it. Both sides need this. Make it happen. Close the deal.
The Dodgers and Manny are okay with the 45 million over two years with the opt-out after one year --- it's only the deferrals of money that keep them apart. I never like deferrals in contracts. A deferral is an interest free loan made by the player to the ball club. Why should a player do that? The true value of a contract with deferrals is less than the quoted value, but people just see the total amount and judge based on that. I wonder if large companies struggling in the bad economy will start trying to defer some of their workers' salaries. California was deferring tax refunds before the budget was finally passed.
If the Dodgers can't afford to pay Manny 25 million now then what makes them think they can afford the deferred payments a few years from now when Manny isn't even on the team anymore and they have to pay all these good young players entering late arbitration and free-agency? It doesn't seem like sound financial planning. I'd rather see Manny leave than see the Dodgers go into extreme cost-cutting mode a few years from now.
But whatever. I can't see into the future, and I don't know what the Dodger finances are really like, or even what the team will be like in a few years. I can only really see the Dodger season ahead, and I know I want Manny in it. Can't these sides come to a compromise? Defer less of the money, or treat the deferrals like a real loan with interest. Don't insult Manny and his evil but brilliant agent by trying to pass off your deferrals as full value. And Boras probably has nowhere else to go at these prices. If he can get the Giants or some mystery team to bite at these prices I guess we'll know soon, but I doubt it. Both sides need this. Make it happen. Close the deal.
20 February 2009
DeWitt loses his job
I've had a really stressful week --- trying to buy a house --- which combined with a lack of real Dodger news meant no posts. But now the Dodgers have signed Orlando Hudson, the O-dog, apple of Vinny's eye, and that's news big enough to break through even when I can't think of a single damn thing to write.
Blake DeWitt is forced into competition with Casey Blake, which will be no competition at all. Then he would go be forced into a competition with Mark Loretta, which is just kind of sad. I think Loretta might win, too. Or maybe Casey Blake moves to right field if Manny isn't signed, which would send DeWitt to third with no competition, unless Loretta was again competition. So with the signing of Hudson it looks like we now have a choice between Manny and DeWitt in the lineup, which is also no competition at all. But then no one can compete with Manny. Not for stats and not for money demanded either.
Mind you I don't know if Casey Blake would be better than Blake DeWitt, but I'm sure Torre and the temper boys ( Bowa and Duncan ) probably think so. And they're probably right, even. DeWitt is no sure thing, and Casey makes more than him. That always counts for something, right up until the strikeouts pile up and we all realize the player we once thought we knew was eaten by a lazy, powerless, smiling alien, and then even Pierre looks like a better option. You know who I'm talking about. But Casey Blake probably won't get eaten by an alien, and he's probably good for at least an OPS of 0.750, and that seems like enough to hold off DeWitt. That's kind of depressing.
It seems like signing Hudson might cost the Dodgers two young players: DeWitt and whoever they would have drafted in the first round this year. Not starting will cost DeWitt valuable development time, and likely Colletti will trade him at midseason for a bag of bean-eating middle relievers. Bean-eating because they stink up the joint.
I guess now the Dodgers can go to Boras and say "Hey look, now we have a plan B that doesn't involve Juan Pierre!" I don't know if Boras buys that or not, but I do. This signing does seem to give the Dodgers an escape hatch from everyday-Pierre-land even if Manny isn't signed. That's something.
Blake DeWitt is forced into competition with Casey Blake, which will be no competition at all. Then he would go be forced into a competition with Mark Loretta, which is just kind of sad. I think Loretta might win, too. Or maybe Casey Blake moves to right field if Manny isn't signed, which would send DeWitt to third with no competition, unless Loretta was again competition. So with the signing of Hudson it looks like we now have a choice between Manny and DeWitt in the lineup, which is also no competition at all. But then no one can compete with Manny. Not for stats and not for money demanded either.
Mind you I don't know if Casey Blake would be better than Blake DeWitt, but I'm sure Torre and the temper boys ( Bowa and Duncan ) probably think so. And they're probably right, even. DeWitt is no sure thing, and Casey makes more than him. That always counts for something, right up until the strikeouts pile up and we all realize the player we once thought we knew was eaten by a lazy, powerless, smiling alien, and then even Pierre looks like a better option. You know who I'm talking about. But Casey Blake probably won't get eaten by an alien, and he's probably good for at least an OPS of 0.750, and that seems like enough to hold off DeWitt. That's kind of depressing.
It seems like signing Hudson might cost the Dodgers two young players: DeWitt and whoever they would have drafted in the first round this year. Not starting will cost DeWitt valuable development time, and likely Colletti will trade him at midseason for a bag of bean-eating middle relievers. Bean-eating because they stink up the joint.
I guess now the Dodgers can go to Boras and say "Hey look, now we have a plan B that doesn't involve Juan Pierre!" I don't know if Boras buys that or not, but I do. This signing does seem to give the Dodgers an escape hatch from everyday-Pierre-land even if Manny isn't signed. That's something.
13 February 2009
Broxton Blows Them Away
Yesterday there was plenty of discussion of Big Bad Jonathan Broxton in the comments at Dodger Thoughts. I tend to fall on the side that considers Broxton a fine pitcher whose failures are unfairly magnified, though I do understand the emotional reaction and will confess to nearly losing patience with him at one point last season. It's really a strange thing and I can't justify it. Broxton is clearly an elite reliever by strikeouts and walks and runs allowed.
Since I have nothing else to write about today I thought I would break down all eight of Broxton's blown saves last season into three categories: horrific, regular, and unfair.
May 11
Broxton was pounded. He gave up 6 runs and got only one out. He gave away the lead and the tie and any realistic shot at the game. This loss was 100% on him. A horrific blown save.
May 25
Kershaw's debut. Broxton comes in with a 3-2 lead, a man on third, and one out. Ideally he would get a strikeout here but instead he gives up a fly out and the run scores. In the eighth inning he gets Pujols, Ludwick and Glaus in order. Broxton gives up no hits in his outing. The Dodgers win the game in the tenth, due in part to Broxton's excellent work in this game. Unfair blown save with very good pitching.
May 27
Broxton comes in with a 1-0 lead, with runners are first and third and one out. DeWitt boots a slow roller that probably would have scored the tying run anyway. Broxton gets the second out of the inning but then goes on to give up two hits to score two more runs. If the fielding had backed him up Broxton would have given up the lead but not the tie through little fault of his own. As it was he wasn't able to stop the bleeding after the error and the game was lost, so in that respect it was poorly pitched. Unfair blown save with poor pitching.
May 31
Broxton give up 3 runs and 4 hits in the eighth inning, turning a 2-0 lead into a 3-2 loss. A horrific blown save.
July 1
Broxton gives up a double to turn a 6-4 lead into a 6-6 tie in the seventh inning. He will pitch a perfect eighth in which he retires current Dodgers Ausmus and Loretta. The Dodgers will go on to win in extra innings. This is a legitimate blown save but not a meltdown. Regular blown save.
August 9
Broxton is now the closer. The Dodgers take the lead in the top of the tenth against the Giants on a Jeff Kent home run. Broxton makes a throwing error and gives up two singles and a double to allow the Giants to win 3-2. A devastating loss. A horrific blown save.
August 24
Broxton comes in to close out a 2-1 victory over the Phillies. Instead he allows a few baserunners and gives up a game-tying single to Pedro Feliz. Broxton then gets Rollins to preserve the tie. The Dodgers will go on to lose in extra innings. This is loss number three in the Dodgers near-season-breaking eight game losing streak. But Broxton did not lose the game on his own. Regular blown save.
September 26
The Dodger rally off Giant reliever Brian Wilson ( a genuinely bad closer ) to turn a 2-4 deficit into a 5-4 lead in the top of the ninth. Broxton comes in to close the game. He allows a baserunner who steals second and goes to third on Martin's throwing error. The tying run comes home on a sac fly, and Broxton then gets the last out. The Giants will go on to win off of another pitcher when Dave Roberts singles home a run. Broxton could have pitched better but this blown save is not his fault, since without the throwing error no runs scores on the fly ball. Unfair blown save.
Of Broxton's 8 blown saves last year, 3 were unfair and not really his fault, 2 were legitimate blown saves but did not by themselves cost the team the game, and 3 were horrific blown saves that lost the game. Broxton had 14 holds and 13 saves last year. That's 27 successes versus 5 genuine failures with the lead on the line. That's not a fabulous ratio but it is a good one. The idea that Broxton can't be a closer is based on emotion and not reality.
Since I have nothing else to write about today I thought I would break down all eight of Broxton's blown saves last season into three categories: horrific, regular, and unfair.
May 11
Broxton was pounded. He gave up 6 runs and got only one out. He gave away the lead and the tie and any realistic shot at the game. This loss was 100% on him. A horrific blown save.
May 25
Kershaw's debut. Broxton comes in with a 3-2 lead, a man on third, and one out. Ideally he would get a strikeout here but instead he gives up a fly out and the run scores. In the eighth inning he gets Pujols, Ludwick and Glaus in order. Broxton gives up no hits in his outing. The Dodgers win the game in the tenth, due in part to Broxton's excellent work in this game. Unfair blown save with very good pitching.
May 27
Broxton comes in with a 1-0 lead, with runners are first and third and one out. DeWitt boots a slow roller that probably would have scored the tying run anyway. Broxton gets the second out of the inning but then goes on to give up two hits to score two more runs. If the fielding had backed him up Broxton would have given up the lead but not the tie through little fault of his own. As it was he wasn't able to stop the bleeding after the error and the game was lost, so in that respect it was poorly pitched. Unfair blown save with poor pitching.
May 31
Broxton give up 3 runs and 4 hits in the eighth inning, turning a 2-0 lead into a 3-2 loss. A horrific blown save.
July 1
Broxton gives up a double to turn a 6-4 lead into a 6-6 tie in the seventh inning. He will pitch a perfect eighth in which he retires current Dodgers Ausmus and Loretta. The Dodgers will go on to win in extra innings. This is a legitimate blown save but not a meltdown. Regular blown save.
August 9
Broxton is now the closer. The Dodgers take the lead in the top of the tenth against the Giants on a Jeff Kent home run. Broxton makes a throwing error and gives up two singles and a double to allow the Giants to win 3-2. A devastating loss. A horrific blown save.
August 24
Broxton comes in to close out a 2-1 victory over the Phillies. Instead he allows a few baserunners and gives up a game-tying single to Pedro Feliz. Broxton then gets Rollins to preserve the tie. The Dodgers will go on to lose in extra innings. This is loss number three in the Dodgers near-season-breaking eight game losing streak. But Broxton did not lose the game on his own. Regular blown save.
September 26
The Dodger rally off Giant reliever Brian Wilson ( a genuinely bad closer ) to turn a 2-4 deficit into a 5-4 lead in the top of the ninth. Broxton comes in to close the game. He allows a baserunner who steals second and goes to third on Martin's throwing error. The tying run comes home on a sac fly, and Broxton then gets the last out. The Giants will go on to win off of another pitcher when Dave Roberts singles home a run. Broxton could have pitched better but this blown save is not his fault, since without the throwing error no runs scores on the fly ball. Unfair blown save.
Of Broxton's 8 blown saves last year, 3 were unfair and not really his fault, 2 were legitimate blown saves but did not by themselves cost the team the game, and 3 were horrific blown saves that lost the game. Broxton had 14 holds and 13 saves last year. That's 27 successes versus 5 genuine failures with the lead on the line. That's not a fabulous ratio but it is a good one. The idea that Broxton can't be a closer is based on emotion and not reality.
11 February 2009
March Madness
Dodgers sign Milton
Milton will initially compete for the fifth spot with Jason Schmidt, Eric Stults, Claudio Vargas, Ramon Troncoso and Shawn Estes.
That's six contenders. How are the Dodgers going to choose just one? I'm so confused, and I bet you are too. Forget about projections and upside and arm health and all that. We need something simple and final. Therefore Dodgerama is going to sponsor an old fashioned single elimination mini-tournament to sort it all out. I'll have to throw in McDonald and Weaver to fill out the bracket with eight.
Seeding
1. Schmidt
He gets the top seed because of his huge contract.
2. Stults
He's filled the fifth starter spot before with decent results. He's made 14 starts for the Dodgers over the last 3 years, with 5 quality starts. That may not seem like a lot but in this group I think it is.
3. Troncoso
He probably has the best combination of raw talent and health among the official six candidates. But he's never started at the big league level before.
4. Milton
He gives up lots of home runs.
5. Estes
A long time ago he won 19 games in a season. These days he barely keeps his strikeout rate above his walk rate.
6. Vargas
He's never been good.
7. McDonald
In my opinion he's the best pitcher on the list, but it seems he will start the season in the 'pen to limit his innings.
8. Weaver
Someone had to fill out last slot of the bracket. But I have a feeling there will be no Cinderella story.
Round one
Ideally each round would be decided by some relevant statistic. For example, the first round could be based on likely strikeout rate, then the next round on walk rates, then the last round on home run rates. But that's kind of boring, so instead the first round matchups will be won by the pitcher who has pitched for the fewest evil teams in his career. If needed the tiebreaker will go to the pitcher whose name least resembles the name of a crappy fast food chain.
Schmidt (1) v. Weaver (8)
Schmidt was the Giants ace for years. Weaver pitched for the Yankees, but that's not enough to overcome Schmidt's tour of evil, especially since Weaver was actually a double agent working against the Yankees while in New York. Weaver wins in an upset!
Milton (4) v. Estes (5)
Estes had that 19-win season with the Giants, and to top it off he was with the Padres last year. Milton was comparatively an Angel. ( Uh, not literally. )
Troncoso (3) v. Vargas (6)
Vargas lost this matchup the moment he first wore the hideous Snakes cap back in 2005. If only he had known back then what that decision would cost him today on some blog.
Stults (2) v. McDonald (7)
Both of these fine young men have spent their entire careers in the Dodger organization. This is one of those matchups where you can only say it's a pity one of them has to lose. Stults wins on the tiebreaker.
Round Two
Round two will be decided by which pitcher has the best movie quote somehow associated with him.
Milton (4) v. Weaver (8)
Milton was the name of a character in Office Space who said "I'm going to burn down the building." In Ghostbusters Sigourney Weaver's character says, "I am the keymaster," when she is demonically possessed by Gozer the Gozerian. Milton wins in a tight battle, because while Gozer failed, Milton actually did succeed in burning down the building.
Stults (2) v. Troncoso (3)
Eric Stults sounds like Eric Stoltz who plays Lance in Pulp Fiction who says "You gotta stab her once, but it's gotta be hard enough to break through her breastplate into her heart, and then once you do that, you press down on the plunger." I'm pretty sure that can beat any quote from the movie Tron. Stults wins!
Final round
The final round will be decided by coolest anagram that can be made from the pitchers' first and last names.
Stults (2) v. Milton (4)
I have a feeling it might come down to these two in real life as well. In real life it's the guy who's already done well in spot duty as the fifth starter for the Dodgers against a veteran who knows how to be a veteran. Since Stults always seems to be an afterthought for the Dodgers until they really need him I think Milton wins in real life.
But in this competition it is the ferocious Metric Lion v. the wily Cult Sister. Cult Sister tries to brainwash the Metric Lion, but the beast's precision with logical metric units makes him immune to mind tricks! He calculates the perfect leap down to the last nanometer and devours the Cult Sister!
So Eric Milton wins! It may be an arbitrary victory, but it's no less arbitrary than giving each guy 20 spring training innings and deciding who gets the spot based on that. I like my way better.
Milton will initially compete for the fifth spot with Jason Schmidt, Eric Stults, Claudio Vargas, Ramon Troncoso and Shawn Estes.
That's six contenders. How are the Dodgers going to choose just one? I'm so confused, and I bet you are too. Forget about projections and upside and arm health and all that. We need something simple and final. Therefore Dodgerama is going to sponsor an old fashioned single elimination mini-tournament to sort it all out. I'll have to throw in McDonald and Weaver to fill out the bracket with eight.
Seeding
1. Schmidt
He gets the top seed because of his huge contract.
2. Stults
He's filled the fifth starter spot before with decent results. He's made 14 starts for the Dodgers over the last 3 years, with 5 quality starts. That may not seem like a lot but in this group I think it is.
3. Troncoso
He probably has the best combination of raw talent and health among the official six candidates. But he's never started at the big league level before.
4. Milton
He gives up lots of home runs.
5. Estes
A long time ago he won 19 games in a season. These days he barely keeps his strikeout rate above his walk rate.
6. Vargas
He's never been good.
7. McDonald
In my opinion he's the best pitcher on the list, but it seems he will start the season in the 'pen to limit his innings.
8. Weaver
Someone had to fill out last slot of the bracket. But I have a feeling there will be no Cinderella story.
Round one
Ideally each round would be decided by some relevant statistic. For example, the first round could be based on likely strikeout rate, then the next round on walk rates, then the last round on home run rates. But that's kind of boring, so instead the first round matchups will be won by the pitcher who has pitched for the fewest evil teams in his career. If needed the tiebreaker will go to the pitcher whose name least resembles the name of a crappy fast food chain.
Schmidt (1) v. Weaver (8)
Schmidt was the Giants ace for years. Weaver pitched for the Yankees, but that's not enough to overcome Schmidt's tour of evil, especially since Weaver was actually a double agent working against the Yankees while in New York. Weaver wins in an upset!
Milton (4) v. Estes (5)
Estes had that 19-win season with the Giants, and to top it off he was with the Padres last year. Milton was comparatively an Angel. ( Uh, not literally. )
Troncoso (3) v. Vargas (6)
Vargas lost this matchup the moment he first wore the hideous Snakes cap back in 2005. If only he had known back then what that decision would cost him today on some blog.
Stults (2) v. McDonald (7)
Both of these fine young men have spent their entire careers in the Dodger organization. This is one of those matchups where you can only say it's a pity one of them has to lose. Stults wins on the tiebreaker.
Round Two
Round two will be decided by which pitcher has the best movie quote somehow associated with him.
Milton (4) v. Weaver (8)
Milton was the name of a character in Office Space who said "I'm going to burn down the building." In Ghostbusters Sigourney Weaver's character says, "I am the keymaster," when she is demonically possessed by Gozer the Gozerian. Milton wins in a tight battle, because while Gozer failed, Milton actually did succeed in burning down the building.
Stults (2) v. Troncoso (3)
Eric Stults sounds like Eric Stoltz who plays Lance in Pulp Fiction who says "You gotta stab her once, but it's gotta be hard enough to break through her breastplate into her heart, and then once you do that, you press down on the plunger." I'm pretty sure that can beat any quote from the movie Tron. Stults wins!
Final round
The final round will be decided by coolest anagram that can be made from the pitchers' first and last names.
Stults (2) v. Milton (4)
I have a feeling it might come down to these two in real life as well. In real life it's the guy who's already done well in spot duty as the fifth starter for the Dodgers against a veteran who knows how to be a veteran. Since Stults always seems to be an afterthought for the Dodgers until they really need him I think Milton wins in real life.
But in this competition it is the ferocious Metric Lion v. the wily Cult Sister. Cult Sister tries to brainwash the Metric Lion, but the beast's precision with logical metric units makes him immune to mind tricks! He calculates the perfect leap down to the last nanometer and devours the Cult Sister!
So Eric Milton wins! It may be an arbitrary victory, but it's no less arbitrary than giving each guy 20 spring training innings and deciding who gets the spot based on that. I like my way better.
10 February 2009
Weaving a Tall Tale
Last night while I was reading my wife came from the computer and told me that the Dodgers had signed Jeff Weaver to a one year contract worth 5 million dollars.
I didn't believe it, not even for a second.
We discussed after what number would have worked better. She wanted to tell me of a contract that would outrage me, but 5 million dollars was just too high, especially considering a previous conversation we had where we wondered if Weaver had even pitched last year. ( He did, but only in the minor leagues. ) The details of the real contract suggested indifference more than outrage. Half a million if he makes the team as a reliever; no incentives.
She had rejected the idea of making his fake contract a multi-year one; that would just be unbelievable when a guy like Randy Wolf gets only a one year deal. We decided that a guaranteed one year deal for two million where he would compete for a starting spot would have been the best play, which would have been not much of a play at all. I might be gullible ( or pessimistic ) enough to believe that Ned Colletti would sign Weaver for two million, but I'm not yet crazy enough to get too upset about a two million deal for anyone. I think the lesson in all this is that it's hard to build a good contract prank around Jeff Weaver.
After the failed prank we agreed that Weaver is this year's Chan Ho Park. Then we tried to remember who is this year's Sele/Erikson. We couldn't remember. ( Turns out it's Shawn Estes, ex-Giant. ) We also reasoned that Randy Wolf is this year's Randy Wolf. Wolf doesn't have a hard act to follow.
The last time I believed a prank story about a free agent contract was when my mother told me in the 1988 off-season that Orel Hershiser had signed a contract. I was thirteen years old then, and he had been my favorite player since 1985, so I was overjoyed to hear this, and I just as I started to express my verbal relief, she says, as it was the most natural truth in the world, "the contract is with the Milwaukee Brewers."
I didn't believe it, not even for a second.
We discussed after what number would have worked better. She wanted to tell me of a contract that would outrage me, but 5 million dollars was just too high, especially considering a previous conversation we had where we wondered if Weaver had even pitched last year. ( He did, but only in the minor leagues. ) The details of the real contract suggested indifference more than outrage. Half a million if he makes the team as a reliever; no incentives.
She had rejected the idea of making his fake contract a multi-year one; that would just be unbelievable when a guy like Randy Wolf gets only a one year deal. We decided that a guaranteed one year deal for two million where he would compete for a starting spot would have been the best play, which would have been not much of a play at all. I might be gullible ( or pessimistic ) enough to believe that Ned Colletti would sign Weaver for two million, but I'm not yet crazy enough to get too upset about a two million deal for anyone. I think the lesson in all this is that it's hard to build a good contract prank around Jeff Weaver.
After the failed prank we agreed that Weaver is this year's Chan Ho Park. Then we tried to remember who is this year's Sele/Erikson. We couldn't remember. ( Turns out it's Shawn Estes, ex-Giant. ) We also reasoned that Randy Wolf is this year's Randy Wolf. Wolf doesn't have a hard act to follow.
The last time I believed a prank story about a free agent contract was when my mother told me in the 1988 off-season that Orel Hershiser had signed a contract. I was thirteen years old then, and he had been my favorite player since 1985, so I was overjoyed to hear this, and I just as I started to express my verbal relief, she says, as it was the most natural truth in the world, "the contract is with the Milwaukee Brewers."
09 February 2009
Werewolves of Los Angeles
Last night I heard Werewolves of London on the radio. I like this song and enjoy hearing it. But as the song began, I tensed up, on my guard, because I wasn't sure what would follow --- if I would hear the real thing, or if I would hear the rip off song All Summer Long, which begins the exact same way as Werewolves of London does and ends up being some kind of wretched chimera assembled from parts of the Warren Zevon classic as well as Sweet Home Alabama. And it's sung by Kid Rock. Noooooooo!!! I guess some people like it but I can't stand it.
I'm not sure --- maybe the two songs don't start out exactly the same, but it's close enough to fool me. It sure was the first time. I well remember my feeling of disorientation and confusion, and then anger. Where were the "aaahooo's!" Where were the lyrics about chinese menus and Trader Vic's? Who the heck was this punk singing --- it sure wasn't Warren Zevon! After setting me up to think I was hearing one thing it had horribly become some unoriginal song about days gone by and lost love and something about Sweet Home Alabama? --- what the hell?
The Dodgers are just beginning. Their core is young and still new and promising. I feel like we've just heard the opening of their song. And I'm excited. I think it's going to be a good one. But my guard is up, a little bit. I'm hoping for Werewolves of Los Angeles, but I might instead get Frustration All Summer Long. In the Kid Rock song he's mooning over stuff that happened back in 1989; if things go sour this season it will be tempting to yearn for the glory days of 1988. Again.
I think the Dodgers still have a transformation to make. They are good, a contender, but not great. They are not an undoubted elite team that the opposition fears to play. We know what they did last year, so it would be foolish to count out this team, even if Manny leaves. But we should also know how fortunate they were to get as far as they did last year. Better teams, teams with more wins, didn't get the chances the Dodgers had. You can't count on luck and fortunate circumstance every year ( though the NL West may be just as bad this year ). You won't always get an infusion of Manny at the end of the year.
I don't think resigning Manny is the key to the transformation of the Dodgers. Obviously the Dodgers are better if he is around, but they did lose eight straight games with him last year. It's the young core of the team that matters. It's Kemp and Loney and Martin and Billingsley and Kershaw and Ethier and Broxton and DeWitt and McDonald. They have arrived, most of them, as solid major leaguers at least. And some of them are already stars. But the fierceness of talent is not yet on full display. Kemp hasn't yet wielded his full and ferocious power. Kershaw isn't yet a killer with the strikeout. There is another level of performance that the young Dodger stars need to reach. Not all of them, necessarily, but most of them. Unlike a werewolf transformation the Dodgers' transformation won't happen all at once. In fact it's already been happening. Billingsley is already an ace, or near to it. Ethier hit like a slugger the last few months of last year. They are on their way. I think it's going to happen this year. They are going to become a 95-win team. That's the optimism in me. The part of me that howls, irrationally, exuberantly, without reservation. Aaaaahooooo!
I'm not sure --- maybe the two songs don't start out exactly the same, but it's close enough to fool me. It sure was the first time. I well remember my feeling of disorientation and confusion, and then anger. Where were the "aaahooo's!" Where were the lyrics about chinese menus and Trader Vic's? Who the heck was this punk singing --- it sure wasn't Warren Zevon! After setting me up to think I was hearing one thing it had horribly become some unoriginal song about days gone by and lost love and something about Sweet Home Alabama? --- what the hell?
The Dodgers are just beginning. Their core is young and still new and promising. I feel like we've just heard the opening of their song. And I'm excited. I think it's going to be a good one. But my guard is up, a little bit. I'm hoping for Werewolves of Los Angeles, but I might instead get Frustration All Summer Long. In the Kid Rock song he's mooning over stuff that happened back in 1989; if things go sour this season it will be tempting to yearn for the glory days of 1988. Again.
I think the Dodgers still have a transformation to make. They are good, a contender, but not great. They are not an undoubted elite team that the opposition fears to play. We know what they did last year, so it would be foolish to count out this team, even if Manny leaves. But we should also know how fortunate they were to get as far as they did last year. Better teams, teams with more wins, didn't get the chances the Dodgers had. You can't count on luck and fortunate circumstance every year ( though the NL West may be just as bad this year ). You won't always get an infusion of Manny at the end of the year.
I don't think resigning Manny is the key to the transformation of the Dodgers. Obviously the Dodgers are better if he is around, but they did lose eight straight games with him last year. It's the young core of the team that matters. It's Kemp and Loney and Martin and Billingsley and Kershaw and Ethier and Broxton and DeWitt and McDonald. They have arrived, most of them, as solid major leaguers at least. And some of them are already stars. But the fierceness of talent is not yet on full display. Kemp hasn't yet wielded his full and ferocious power. Kershaw isn't yet a killer with the strikeout. There is another level of performance that the young Dodger stars need to reach. Not all of them, necessarily, but most of them. Unlike a werewolf transformation the Dodgers' transformation won't happen all at once. In fact it's already been happening. Billingsley is already an ace, or near to it. Ethier hit like a slugger the last few months of last year. They are on their way. I think it's going to happen this year. They are going to become a 95-win team. That's the optimism in me. The part of me that howls, irrationally, exuberantly, without reservation. Aaaaahooooo!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)