Never forget.

—–

Baseball Prospectus: Matt Kemp has struggled to start the year, but his poor Spring Training probably has little to do with it.

His career line in 561 plate appearances? .252/.291/.448/.739.

True Blue LA: The Opening Day payroll for the Dodgers is over $240 million.

Baseball America: Draft bonus pools for the 2013 MLB Draft will rise 8.2 percent from last year. The Dodgers have $5,211,700 to spend on their 10 picks within the bonus pool range.

True Blue LA: Here’s all the changes to Dodger Stadium that you’ve been hearing about.

—–

Albuquerque Isotopes: Albuquerque Isotopes Opening Day roster.

True Blue LA: Chattanooga Lookouts Opening Day roster.

True Blue LA: Rancho Cucamonga Quakes Opening Day roster.

Great Lakes Loons: Great Lakes Loons Opening Day roster.

—–

Baseball America: Tomohiro Anraku, potentially the next big thing in Japan, threw 772 pitches in nine days at Koshien.

I guess it’s sad that I’m not even shocked by this. The practice has been going on forever now and there have probably been countless arms ruined far before they even get to Koshien.

Yahoo! Sports: Story on Tomohiro Anraku, Koshien, and the Japanese mentality towards pitch counts.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Arguing for patience and perspective regarding Yasiel Puig.

I know he looks awfully impressive (dude looks like he could be on your fantasy football team), and I’ve liked what I’ve seen as well, but I really do believe people are getting way ahead of themselves.

Baseball Prospectus: The Dodgers might have a platoon partner for Andre Ethier internally in Jerry Hairston Jr.

—–

Eye On Baseball: Fox Sports mistook Hyun Jin Ryu for Jae Kuk Ryu. Swell.

But hey, at least they got it to within the same ethnicity! Progress!

Los Angeles Times: Guggenheim Partners is being investigated by the SEC due to their relationship with Michael Milken.

Doesn’t appear to be anything to get spooked about just yet, but geez, that’s the last thing this franchise would need.

—–

FanGraphs: Umpires are actually getting a lot better.

Granted, it won’t stop me from complaining, but it’s better than regression.

MLB Trade Rumors: Want to be an MLB GM? Here are general managers giving you advice.

MLB.com: The Dodgers are making extensive upgrades to Dodger Stadium, and I have to say that it all sounds awesome.

The most obvious upgrade — and the one senior vice president of planning and development Janet Marie Smith mentioned first — is the replacement of the scoreboards located above the right- and left-field pavilions with larger, 1080 high-definition LED boards, as well as replacement of message boards, including ribbon boards at the Loge level and outfield wall.

The rectangular one that has been in left field since the last All-Star Game is being returned to the hexagon shape of the original. The boards will be 22 percent larger with an active viewing area 66 percent larger, allowing for more video and statistical information to be displayed.

A new, sharper sound system comes with it, designed to direct sound to each seating section and minimize echoes.

Worried that it’ll look too modernized and lose its charm? Don’t. The changes are actually quite subtle and they aren’t gaudy or ridiculous.

Responding to complaints from fans, a state-of-the-art Wi-Fi and cellular antenna system will go live to support cellphone and Internet connectivity.

There also is major work being done to widen concourses, expand and renovate restrooms, enhance food service, build new entry plazas and create bullpen overlooks for standing-room views of the game. Restrooms will be installed under the outfield pavilions and more wheelchair locations will be created.

The Wi-Fi has long been a complaint among people covering/attending Dodger games, so I’m guessing this will be a welcome fix.

For the players, a new clubhouse is being installed, along with an expanded weight room and underground batting cages.

“That was a hot-button issue for Mark [Walter, chairman],” said Kasten. “He wants the finest training center in all of sports.”

For the on-the-field product, this is the one improvement that could actually have an impact, so at least it isn’t all superficial.

Playground areas will be created for children in the pavilion and Reserve Level that will include life-size bobbleheads.

Smith said the franchise’s history will be celebrated by displaying retired uniform numbers at the Top of the Park, giant World Series rings representing the six World Series championships and a display of Gold Glove, MVP and Cy Young Awards at the Dugout Club as “an inspiration to fans and players.”

Like most things the new owners have done so far, it all sounds great, so hopefully the honeymoon ends up lasting.

Los Angeles Times: Bill Shaikin has an update on the ongoing Dodgers television contract negotiations.

Whether the Dodgers keep their television broadcasts on Fox Sports or move them to Time Warner Cable appears to be a “50-50″ proposition, according to a person familiar with the team’s TV negotiations but not authorized to discuss them.

The Dodgers’ discussions with MLB center on whether all of their guaranteed television revenue should be subject to baseball’s revenue-sharing program. At issue in a $6-billion deal: whether the team’s contribution to the program would be about $1 billion or about $2 billion.

The league believes — and there are indications the court might agree — that the Dodgers must take some element of risk with any money not subject to revenue sharing.

The Dodgers must contribute 34% of the annual rights fee to baseball’s revenue-sharing program. The team plans to launch its own regional sports network, in part to avoid the prospect of Fox or TWC paying a much higher rights fee.

However, in order to get dividends from a regional sports network, the league believes the team should be required to take the accompanying risk of ownership. The Dodgers are looking at other ways to structure a deal that would shield that money from revenue sharing and satisfy MLB as well.

I feel more uncomfortable now than before, when it was basically reported as a done deal with FOX, but it does appear that the team will be getting their due windfall at some point, regardless.

Of course, none of this will likely affect 2013 anyway, but if the team is asked to take on extensive risk or if there’s a $1 billion difference in revenue from what the owners thought they would get out of the deal, I would have to think it would affect payroll somewhat.

—–

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Somebody has to hit leadoff … right?

—–

FanGraphs: HGH testing in baseball? Public relations.

So what we see here appears — to my admittedly skeptical self, at least — less MLB and MLBPA joining hands to do what is right and rid the game of a great evil and more an appeal to doping fears and the court of public opinion. Personally, I just hope its intrusion into the game is minimal.

The public thinks HGH is a big deal, so why wouldn’t the MLB do testing and appear concerned as well? That way the MLB can beat their chest about being serious on PEDs, even though it makes basically no impact at all.

It’s an idiot test to me anyway, as I’m not sure why an athlete would waste their time with it. Placebo effect, I guess.

FanGraphs: David Laurila with the quotes of the year that he’s gathered. An interesting read.

Grantland: Jonah Keri on the riches of the Dodgers and the curse that comes along with it.

That, in a nutshell, is The Curse of Plenty. The Dodgers have more money to spend than anyone, without enough top players to go after. They’ve clogged their roster with merely decent talent at multiple positions because their general manager is impulsive and overeager to spend that money without properly gauging the market for the few elite talents out there. One great way to find those top players is to develop them yourself, but the Dodgers have shipped away several strong prospects to make reactionary trades, such as the Gonzalez deal.

This is still likely to be a good team, one that’s in the hunt for a playoff spot. But because of a few shortsighted moves and a market that can’t provide the great players they crave, the Dodgers may well find themselves back in familiar territory next fall: looking up at the Giants, and wondering where it all went wrong.

Been saying for a while now that all the hype and excitement is nice, but when it comes down to game time, the 2013 Dodgers are no lock, just like the 2012 Dodgers weren’t a lock after all the trades.

Did they get better? Yes, absolutely. However, even on paper, it’s nowhere near the best team in baseball, and it’s certainly no certainty to even win the division. That’s just the reality of the current team.

Now this situation is absolutely preferable to the previous situation, but optimism shouldn’t breed delusion.

—–

Feelin’ Kinda Blue: Dustin Nosler points out that for all the improvements in the off-season, the Dodgers bench is still mediocre.

—–

True Blue LA: Looking at A.J. Ellis and arbitration. He seems to be looking at around $3 million. A deserved raise.

True Blue LA: Analyzing Ronald Belisario and arbitration. He seems to be looking at a range between $1 million and $1.5 million. That is, of course, assuming the Dodgers think he can make it back into America. Who knows what his status is since he recently got kicked off his Winter League team in Venezuela.

—–

Baseball Prospectus: Do you scoff at all those horrid FOX “scouting reports” for pitchers? Of course you do. Well, Sam Miller has got you covered.

“If you are what you say you are…”

—–

Dodgers Now: Bill Shaikin reveals that the Dodgers are no longer exclusively talking with Fox, as they’ve met with Time Warner now.

The Dodgers and Time Warner Cable have met to discuss a potential deal for the team’s television rights, according to two people familiar with the talks but not authorized to comment on them.

The Dodgers are considering at least three options for their next television home: the Prime Ticket cable channel owned by Fox Sports, the SportsNet cable channel owned by TWC or a new channel owned by the team.

Not sure whether this is a positive or a negative in terms of potential television money, but I figure competition rarely generates a lower return.

Baseball Prospectus: Maury Brown had an interview with Stan Kasten at the Winter Meetings.

—–

Los Angeles Times: Bill Shaikin warns about the perils of long-term big-money contracts.

But…

They do take players to 2017, and beyond. If the Dodgers win in 2013, well, who cares?

…that’s always the rub. If they win, even if the players start to implode in the context of their contracts, it’s justifiable. Flags fly forever, after all.

But they have to win.

FanGraphs: Jeff Sullivan reminds us that even if the Dodgers literally had an unlimited payroll and bought every top player they could on the free agent market, it still wouldn’t have resulted in a division winner in 2012.

Smarts still matter. The limit though becomes roster spots.

—–

FanGraphs: Dave Cameron questions why people assume prospects are always unknown quantities but are fine assuming that veterans always provide consistent results.

Wil Myers is a risk, but so is James Shields. So is Albert Pujols. So is Justin Verlander. So is everyone.

When we start using labels like “prospect” or “proven veteran” to describe players, we lose that reality. Myers and Shields both have the chance to be good, bad, or anything in between. Let’s not let the terms we use to describe player types obscure that fact. The Royals didn’t trade a lottery ticket for a paycheck; they traded a few lottery tickets for a scratch-off card. They probably did reduce their overall performance risk for 2013, but it didn’t go to zero. Let’s not pretend that we know so much about projecting the future of Major League players that we create an artificial divide where one does not exist.

Prospects come with uncertainty, but so do Major League players. Everyone is a risk. You weigh that risk against the potential rewards, and you figure out which trade-offs are worth making. Once you cross over into treating some players as non-risks, though, you’ve stopped evaluating players properly. And then you make trades like the one the Royals just made.

This is precisely how I’ve thought since I started blogging. Everybody has a percentage of relative success, and things can always go against that, but what you want to try and do is play the odds as best you can and hopefully the cards go your way.

Grantland: Part 1 of Jonah Keri ranking the 50 best players in terms of trade value. No Dodgers here yet, but Carlos Santana finds a spot at #43.

The other two catcher rankings are the ones likely to elicit the most hate mail. In the first draft of this list, I had Santana considerably higher. Twenty-six-year-old switch-hitting catcher, career .806 OPS, signed for peanuts at four years, $18 million with an affordable $12 million option that would keep him in-house through 2017. By any objective standard, that would seem to make him a monumental bargain. Except the Lords of the Realm might not agree. There are the obvious concerns, such as Santana’s subpar defense, which (along with a semi-platoon designed to get him more at-bats) contributed to his playing 66 games at first base in 2011, with 21 at first and 27 at DH in 2012. Then there’s baseball’s continuing bias against low-average, high-walk hitters, even when we thought that was all behind us. The early buzz around Nick Swisher suggests he’ll be disappointed in his free-agent haul, while the cash-stuffed Rangers thought so little of Mike Napoli’s three-true-outcomes offense that they didn’t even make him a qualifying offer this offseason, meaning they think a one-year deal for a shade over $13 million is an overpay. If the Jered Weaver ranking constitutes ignoring the herd, consider the Santana ranking a case of acknowledging it.

Given how he’s perceived publicly, quite frankly I was surprised he made it onto the list at all.

Grantland: Part 2 of Jonah Keri ranking the 50 best players in terms of trade value. Matt Kemp checks in at #22.

Tulo and Kemp are franchise players…

OK, there are theoretically some scenarios that could see one of these guys traded:

C. The Dodgers decide they don’t feel like running $250 million payrolls anymore and stage an everything-must-go sale.

That’s about it, really.

Clayton Kershaw comes in at #13.

Practically speaking, there’s no way that Kershaw or Verlander will get traded, not even with both two years away from free agency. The Dodgers have shown they’ll throw ungodly amounts of money at slightly above-average players, let alone all-world pitchers, so Kershaw’s staying.

Yeah, at this point, it’s just a matter of whether or not he’ll get the richest contract for a pitcher in MLB history.

—–

FanGraphs: Speaking of money … Wendy Thurm takes a look at every television rights contract in the MLB.

I … uh … can see why some teams might be a bit upset.

—–

FanGraphs: As the power game has decreased, the running game has become more important. Seems to make complete sense, not be counter-intuitive.

The relationship is clear: the league took a year to catch up, but as run production goes down, stolen bases go up (For the record, the coefficient of determination between OPS and SBA/SBO is 0.78.).

It might seem counter-intuitive — the more run scoring drops, the more we hear about the sanctity of the out. Each of the 27 is hugely valuable, yes, but as run scoring drops each plate appearance is also more likely to produce an out.

The league on-base percentage has fallen from .336 in 2007 to .319 in 2012, and therefore the marginal out — the out risked by the stolen base — is less valuable. That’s why the “runCS” value in the Guts section — the cost in runs of a caught stealing — has lessened from minus-.433 in 2007 to minus-.398 in 2012.

Put another way, the stolen base becomes a less risky proposition because there is less to lose. The hitter at the plate is now less likely to get on base or hit a run-scoring extra base hit, and the chances of two hitters singling in an inning to knock a runner home drops in a compound fashion. Conversely, making the hitter’s job easier becomes more valuable now that the “wait for a three-run homer” strategy isn’t as viable.

The break-even rate on steals has fallen from 68 percent to 66 percent, down from 70 percent at the height of the steroids era in 2000. A player that stole 75 bases and was caught 25 times would have gained 4.2 runs of value in 2007. In 2012, that number rises to 5.1, and the player likely would have been running 10-20 percent more often; a routinely successful basestealer’s value in the running game therefore increases by some 30-40 percent.

It’s a great article, primarily because it shows that the break-even point for stealing success has fallen all the way down to 66%. Best to remember that during the season.

Wouldn’t it be nice if Dee Gordon could get on base enough to use his speed in this new environment?

—–

Yahoo! Sports: Jeff Passan has the story about how the MLB wants to ditch the posting system.

Major League Baseball and Nippon Professional Baseball are discussing significant changes to the posting system that brings players from Japan to the major leagues, sources told Yahoo! Sports.

While the talks haven’t moved beyond cursory stages, MLB is pushing NPB for a system in which teams no longer would bid blindly for the right to negotiate with a player but rather would participate in a traditional, open auction, the sources said.

Such a format likely would lessen the amount of money funneled toward the Japanese team that posts the player. In the cases of Yu Darvish and Daisuke Matsuzaka, their NPB teams received more than a $50 million windfall, a huge boon for a league with manifold financial struggles.

MLB and the players’ union agree they’d prefer to see a larger percentage of the money spent on high-end imports go to the player, the sources said.

Here … we … go.

Why the dramatics? Because this could be the start of a conflict between the leagues, as the NPB were the ones who wanted to change their rules in regards to their high school players going to the MLB in the aftermath of Shohei Otani‘s announcement. But now the MLB is requesting that they concede to them on posting fees. They are different issues, but they’re going to butt heads at some point in the near future it seems.

The posting fees are the far more significant deal though, IMO. Last I checked, and I admittedly don’t check regularly, I think only the Yomiuri Giants and a couple other teams in the NPB operate in the black. Everybody else is in the red for one reason or another, so these gigantic fees they get by selling off their elite players to the MLB helps the team — and the company that owns them — immensely. As such, I can’t see them going down without a fight.

Maybe there’s a happy medium here though, where a reasonable auction-type situation gets implemented with the NPB team getting to set a reserve price, and where the MLB concedes a bit of ground to the NPB on the signing of Japan’s amateur players so that Japanese fans get to watch their best young talent for at least half a decade or so.

Either way, it seems that something is going to change in regards to the relationship between the two leagues, and it’ll probably happen sooner rather than later.

Los Angeles Times: Steven Cohen has been implicated in an insider trading scheme.

Tuesday the Wall Street Journal reported that Cohen had been implicated in a massive $276-million insider trading scheme.

Remember him? The guy who was once the front-runner for the Dodgers?

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnd that’s why some of us didn’t want him as owner.

—–

The Book: Tom Tango argues that since teams are now allocated draft money, why not use an auction system?

Players would declare themselves for the draft, and set their own reserve price. If no one bids for them at that price, then they go back into the pool the next year. So, if Mark Appel sets his reserve price at 7MM$, and no one bids on him, then too bad for him.

You can even have teams sell their slot money at whatever price they want. If the Astros have 11MM$ in slot money, maybe they figure that they could sell that for say 19MM$ to the Yankees. They can then take that money and get themselves a free agent on the open market if they wanted to. Or they can buy future slot money. The Yanks may give the Astros 14MM$ of future slot money for 11MM$ of current slot money.

And how about this: a player can also declare which teams he won’t sign with. 20% of the final bidding amount on each player goes to the teams he didn’t want to play for. If for example Mark Appel declared he didn’t want to sign with the Astros and Pirates, and the Yankees bid 8MM$ for him, then Appel only get 6.4MM$, and the Astros/Pirates each get 0.8MM$ that they can use in next year’s draft. So, a player can direct where he wants to go by taking less money.

Love this. Love this so much.

Plus, the draft is currently boring as hell. But this? This would make it exciting.

—–

Buster Olney: Buster Olney goes hard in the paint at Hall Of Fame voters.

We can all debate about who should’ve done what to stop this, whether it was the union leaders or the owners or the clean players or the dirty players or the writers.

What cannot be debated is that over a period of more than 50 years, dating from the first use of amphetamines around the end of World War II into the early part of the 21st century, the institution of baseball generally did not respond to a rampant growth in the use of drugs. The union leadership didn’t respond. Major League Baseball didn’t respond. The players — current Hall of Famers among them — didn’t respond. Loose rules that were in place were not enforced.

In that vacuum, many, many players chose to use drugs, from the so-called red juice to good ol’ fashioned steroids. Many, many did not. We’ll never know exactly who did what, when they did it and what the precise impact was on their respective careers — and those of other players.

What we do know is that thousands and thousands of games were played, with thousands and thousands of players aided in one way or another by drugs, legal and illegal. We already have a Hall of Fame that includes former PED users, given the decades-long influx of amphetamines.

To stop a few of the participants at the door of a museum of history seems absurd, because the history occurred, whether we like all of it or not.

So the baseball writers ought to get out of the way rather than acting like overzealous crossing guards empowered by their ballots. The writers’ work should always reflect history, not determine legacies; that’s the work of the players, the good and the bad.

Yes. All of this.

—–

The Chronicle Of Higher Education: David Pargman makes the case for allowing college athletes to major in … well … being a college athlete.

Why do we impose upon young, talented, and serious-minded high-school seniors the imperative of selecting an academic major that is, more often than not, completely irrelevant to, or at least inconsistent with, their heartfelt desires and true career objectives: to be professional athletes?

Acquisition of athletic skills is what significant numbers of NCAA Division I student athletes want to pursue. And this is undeniably why they’ve gone to their campus of choice. Their confessions about their primary interest are readily proclaimed and by no means denied or repressed. These athletes are as honest in recognizing and divulging their aspiration as is the student who declares a goal of performing some day at the Metropolitan Opera or on the Broadway stage. Student athletes wish to be professional entertainers. This is their heart’s desire.

Their family members, friends, and high-school coaches acknowledge and support that goal, so why not let them step out of the closet and declare their true aspiration­—to study football, basketball, or baseball? Why not legitimize such an academic specialty in the same manner that other professional performance careers, such as dance, voice, theater, and music, are recognized and supported? Why treat preparation for professional sports careers differently? Why not establish a well-planned, defensible, educationally sound curriculum that correlates with a career at the elite level of sports?

He has a point.

Besides, maybe they would actually learn something this way, instead of sleepwalking through history or sociology classes or whatever else. Or cheating.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello has a list of the players up for the Rule 5 Draft along with who he thinks will be protected on the 40-man roster.

True Blue LA: Brandon Lennox has basically the same thing but from his perspective.

Both are interesting reads, and I was considering doing one myself, but this off-season has been/will be a mess, so I’m not entirely sure how this will go down or how many spots are even available in reality. I mean, at this rate, some guys who get put on the 40-man might need to be designated or traded later anyway.

I’m not sure how many eligible minor-leaguers are actual threats to stick the whole season with an MLB club. Steven Ames and Tony Gwynn Jr. and … that’s about it?

—–

Plaschke Thy Sweater Is Argyle: Greg Zakwin‘s IBWAA ballot.

Feelin’ Kinda Blue: Dustin Nosler‘s IBWAA ballot.

In case you missed it, I posted mine here, along with the 2012 results.

—–

Plaschke Thy Sweater Is Argyle: Greg Zakwin questions whether or not the Dodgers moves to this point have been primarily public relations based.

True Blue LA: Eric Stephen looks at the available free agent starting pitchers and concludes that it’s Zack Greinke or bust.

When it comes down to it, if the Dodgers are hellbent on adding a starting pitcher they should only add a difference-maker. Dempster is a fall back, while Sanchez (money) and Kuroda (draft pick, age) seem overly expensive and not without significant risk. That leaves Greinke, the pitcher with the best track record and highest ceiling among available options.

Greinke or bust.

I think he’s right, but only assuming that Anibal Sanchez actually gets anywhere close to what he’s asking, and I don’t necessarily buy that. I mean just the other day Jeremy Guthrie was allegedly asking for around $12 million annually.

Feelin’ Kinda Blue: Dustin Nosler says that after pairing age risk and the cost of losing a draft pick, bringing Hiroki Kuroda back is too much to give up.

I get it. Kuroda is a quality pitcher, something the Dodgers could use in the rotation. But he’s not a young guy and having to give up the draft pick is the only reason I don’t want to see the Dodgers bring him back,

This rings especially true if the Dodgers plan to trade away even more players from their dwindling farm system, because then constantly hitting on and having first-round picks is crucial.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello has a nice summary of everything regarding Hyun Jin Ryu.

The reason I’m skeptical about throwing money at him is because reports seem to have him sitting in the 88-91 range with only his change-up grading as a plus pitch.

Baseball America: Dodgers have hired Patrick Guerrero as their Latin American Coordinator.

Guerrero, who lives in the Dominican Republic, will run the organization’s scouting throughout Latin America. The Mariners had fired Guerrero as their Latin American coordinator earlier this month at the same time they announced that Bob Engle, their vice president of international scouting, had decided to leave the organization. Seattle’s decision to fire Guerrero, according to Baseball America’s sources, was made above Engle, an unusual move for a Latin American scout. Both Guerrero and Engle had been with the Mariners since 2000.

Baseball America: Bob Engle has been added to the Dodgers staff as the Vice President Of International Scouting.

The Dodgers have made more changes to their international scouting department, most notably with today’s hiring of Bob Engle as their vice president of international scouting.

Bob Elliot reported last night on Twitter that the Dodgers were going to hire Engle, whose contract with the Mariners as their vice president of international scouting ended yesterday.

Word in the industry is that there could be more major changes coming to the team’s front office, but the team has already confirmed that Engle will bring aboard several of his former lieutenants with the Mariners to work for the Dodgers.

He’ll bring on scouts that have worked with him with the Mariners.

Three other scouts who had worked for Engle in Seattle will join his staff with the Dodgers. Pat Kelly is coming in as the team’s Pacific Rim coordinator after holding the same title in Seattle. Jamie Storvick, who resides in Taiwan, will also be heavily involved in the team’s Pacific Rim work. Gene Grimaldi will help lead the team’s efforts in Europe. The Dodgers are also bringing in Mike Tosar, who had been out of baseball but also previously worked with Engle in Seattle, as a special assignment scout.

Dodgers continue to add quality staff, which can only be seen as a positive.

—–

MLB.com: Todd Coffey, Juan Rivera, and Matt Treanor had their options declined by the team.

The Dodgers declined the 2013 contract options for pitcher Todd Coffey, outfielder Juan Rivera and catcher Matt Treanor on Monday.

Coffey, who missed the second half of the season after undergoing his second Tommy John elbow reconstruction surgery, was bought out of a $2.5 million salary for $300,000.

Rivera, who shuttled between left field and first base until the trades for Shane Victorino and Adrian Gonzalez, was bought out of a $4 million salary for $500,000.

Treanor, who saw only sporadic action backing up A.J. Ellis, was bought out of a $950,000 salary for $150,000.

No shockers here. We’re all just glad they’re gone, I figure.

Los Angeles Times: Chad Billingsley seems to be on track to pitch in 2013.

“It looks like he’s going to be ready for the 2013 season,” said Dave Stewart, Billingsley’s agent.

Billingsley touched 94 mph with his fastball and threw an assortment of pitches, including his four-seamer, two-seamer, curveball and changeup. Billingsley threw 35 to 40 pitches.

One still has to wonder how long this will last though. I haven’t heard of too many success stories in regards to rehabbing torn elbow ligaments.

MLB.com: Kenley Jansen is on the road to recovery after heart surgery.

“I feel so much better now than I did at the end of the season,” said Jansen, who has recovered enough from last week’s heart surgery to take part in a Halloween candy giveaway on Monday at the Home Depot Center soccer stadium.

“I was dragging all day long at the end,” he said. “I can tell I’ve got so much more energy. Now I look at this soccer field and just want to get out there and start playing. I’m feeling so good.”

Jansen underwent a successful three-hour ablation surgery performed by Dr. Koonwalee Nademanee at White Memorial Hospital on Oct. 23. During the procedure, the abnormal tissue in his heart was identified and then cauterized to stop the erratic electrical signals sent from the area.

Jansen said his heart went into an irregular beat when the surgery started, helping doctors quickly pinpoint the areas needing attention. He said he still has some stiffness in his groin area, where two small incisions were made, but otherwise feels better than he had.

“It wasn’t scary at all,” said the 25-year-old. “I just wanted to get it over with. I feel it’s a relief and it will be good for me for the rest of my life. I just wanted to get it done, and I know this doctor is one of the great experts and I have a lot of confidence in him.”

Baseball aside, I just hope this ends his heart issues once and for all.

—–

FanGraphs: Jeff Sullivan thinks that Brandon League‘s contract is an example of inefficiency by the team.

Yet I might just be skipping around the major point. Brandon League has closer-type stuff, and the Dodgers want League to close, but the Dodgers already had an effective closer in Kenley Jansen. Granted, Jansen just underwent heart surgery, but his outlook is very good and he intends to be at full strength come spring training. Last year Jansen had 99 strikeouts in 65 appearances. He’s dominant when he’s pitching, and on top of that, he’s cheap. So the Dodgers aren’t paying League to fill a gaping void. That makes this move seem more unnecessary.

And League has supposedly figured it out before, only to lose it again within weeks or months. The fact that he had to re-discover the feel for his splitter says that, previously, he has lost the feel for his splitter after having had it. League, at his absolute best, is a very good reliever worth millions of dollars, but he’s seldom at his absolute best and he’s hardly been the model of consistency. The Dodgers didn’t just make a godawful move. They made a move that’s easier to criticize than defend. Individual inefficiencies aren’t a big deal, but individual inefficiencies do add up, and the Dodgers seem to be adding them up.

Baseball Prospectus: R.J. Anderson doesn’t think history will view the deal favorably.

Handing out a three-year deal to any non-elite reliever is asking for a lousy return on investment—ditto the $7.5 million average annual value. Why then are the Dodgers marching into the land of poor ROI? It might be that Colletti suspects the rest of the league, flush with cash, will hit the market with similar ferocity; causing an apparent overpay to blend in with the norm in the coming weeks. The chicken-or-the-egg scenario here is whether Colletti’s attempt to beat the market inadvertently set the market, but that’s a topic for another day. In a market with so many right-handed relief options available, it seems fair to ask if the endowment effect fooled the Dodgers into liking League more than they should.

In all likelihood, no one, save League and his agency, will stamp this move with a gold star in three years. You can make sense of it from the Dodgers’ point of view if you want to, however.

Sounds familiar, so I guess I’m not the only one thinking along those lines.

—–

FanGraphs: Does throwing a lot of strikes indicate a pitcher who is at less risk for injury? A case study by Jeff Zimmerman seems to suggest that.

LAist: In what I had not seen reported anywhere else, oddly enough, Dodger Stadium is scheduled for renovations.

ESPN Los Angeles: Jamie McCourt is suing Frank McCourt for fraud. I’m sure we could fill the Grand Canyon with the amount of shits you all give.

—–

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello says that the people already declaring the Adrian Gonzalez trade a failure are off-base. He’s right, of course, since this was always a long-term deal.

MLB.com: John Ely and Joc Pederson were named the Dodgers minor league players of the year.

—–

The Wall Street Journal: Now we have scientific proof that Vin Scully is awesome.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Even though he’s away from home right now, I think Mike Petriello comes away from the trade with the right approach.

So how am I feeling about it today? I think Gonzalez is going to be an incredible fit in LA, especially considering that reports of his demise in Boston seem overblown (he was outstanding last year and has been very good for much of this year after a slow start) and that he never seemed to want to leave Southern California in the first place. It’s a high price to pay, but if he is what we think he is – and don’t forget, there was little available in the first base market next year, so if you’re spending money, this is how you do it – and the team becomes a consistent contender, I think it’ll be a price we can live with.

And if not? The next decade could get ugly, fast. For now, I’m cautiously optimistic, but mainly excited for the rest of the season.

I’m the same. Hopeful, but wary for reasons that I believe are legitimate. Far too many Dodgers fans pretending this is highway robbery in our favor, in my opinion.

Dodger Thoughts: Jon Weisman invokes Pedro Martinez for Delino DeShields.

The chances of De La Rosa becoming one of the greatest pitchers of all time might be slim, but De La Rosa doesn’t have to become the second Pedro to represent a major loss for the Dodgers. He could just be really good, while Gonzalez apes DeShields’ decline.

Like I said, I’m hungry for a World Series title, and I’m not saying the risk of trading De La Rosa won’t be worth it. Don’t misunderstand me: The Dodgers need a player like Gonzalez, who boosts them at their weakest position. I even believe that a move back to his Southern California roots and away from the Red Sox maelstrom could revitalize him.

All I’m saying is, short of Clayton Kershaw, the trade of any other pitcher besides De La Rosa would have left me more comfortable.

Not sure I agree with the people flipping out on him, especially if the Dodgers can’t upgrade their rotation significantly in the coming years. However, I think Adrian Gonzalez is a far better player and Rubby De La Rosa, while one of my favorites, won’t get to ace level.

Sports Illustrated: Jay Jaffe acknowledges the risk and the reward, saying that if nothing else it makes the season compelling.

All in all, it’s a dizzying deal that could affect not only the outcome of this year’s NL playoff races, but also could turn the Dodgers into the NL West’s powerhouse for years to come, with an enviable middle of the order starring Kemp, Gonzalez, Ramirez and Ethier. Or it could blow up in the team’s collective face, saddling the Dodgers with unproductive players signed to long-term deals, and hampering their roster flexibility much as it did these Red Sox.

Given their surrender of two top young arms, and the massive savings — and saving face — that the deal offered Boston, the Dodgers should have come away with far more than $12 million in salary discounts. That they didn’t puts virtually all of the risk on them, but it makes for a compellingly aggressive play in a playoff race that remains wide open.

True Blue LA: Eric Stephen notes that the team is headed for the luxury tax.

Dodgers Now: Stan Kasten says they aren’t maxed out yet though.

If the Dodgers can add $260 million to their payroll in one trade — and close to a half-billion dollars in four months — is there a limit to their spending?

“Somewhere, I suppose,” Chairman Mark Walter said Saturday.

And where might that limit be?

“I haven’t found it yet,” President Stan Kasten said. “I’ll let you know when we get there.”

Not sure how much of that is rhetoric, but I think we’ll see in the 2013 off-season.

FanGraphs: Dave Cameron thinks it doesn’t make sense from a baseball perspective but that it might make sense if the Dodgers make a deep run into the playoffs due to financials.

From a purely baseball standpoint, this investment doesn’t make sense. Gonzalez isn’t valuable enough to make him worth taking on the albatross contracts of Crawford and Beckett, and the Dodgers almost certainly could have gotten a better bang for their buck in free agency this winter. However, making moves this winter won’t get people interested in the Dodgers in the same way that a deep playoff run this year will.

I’m getting a lot of similar comments on Twitter, so I know this isn’t a rare opinion, but I have to wonder how legitimate the train of thought is. Dodgers fans show up regardless of how the team is doing, and the only reason attendance plummeted last year was because of a fan boycott of Frank McCourt. Even with all the turmoil, they were sixth in attendance last year, and this year they’re already back up to third. As such, I don’t buy the argument that they needed to do this during the season to make the playoffs otherwise fans wouldn’t come back and they wouldn’t make money. If the tens of millions from potential playoff revenue is going to make or break a team with billions of dollars looming, then there are bigger problems here.

Also, I don’t buy that this is to create buzz for a media deal. We’re all speculating, but logically I don’t see why cable companies, who negotiate deals like this all the time, would be swayed off their valuation due to a small sample size and not take into account the big 15-to-25 year picture. It’s already rumored to be in the $8 billion range, so how much higher could it go? Maybe they are that dumb, I dunno, but it seems iffy to assume so.

There’s no getting around the fact that the Dodgers likely just paid $20 for a gallon of milk. Given the prices everyone else is paying for milk, that seems pretty silly. If you happen to have lots of $20 bills and no milk, however, and there’s only one guy selling milk in your immediate vicinity, maybe you just complain about price gouging and hand over the $20. Depending on just how many $20s the Dodgers ownership has, this might not end up being quite as nuts as it looks on the surface.

Or, maybe I’m just over-thinking all of this, and the Dodgers just made a horrible, horrible trade. I’m honestly not sure.

Maybe, but I can’t see this trade destroying the team down the road. It might make for an inferior roster, but as long as they continue to spend, the team will be competitive. I’d just rather have to go through as little big money decline phases as possible.

ESPN: Buster Olney names his winners and losers … with the Dodgers on both.

Winners: The Dodgers of 2012

They are markedly better today than they were before this deal. Adrian Gonzalez is perfect for their lineup, their lineup balance, their defense and their ballpark, and he knows the division from his many years with the Padres. Beckett might be energized, and he gets to shift out of one of the best-hitting divisions to one of the worst.

Winners: Magic Johnson, Stan Kasten and the rest of the Dodgers’ ownership group

In less than four months, these owners have managed to completely rebrand the franchise, and, even if the Dodgers don’t make the playoffs this year, they’ve set themselves up for a major bounce forward in attendance and interest and team success in 2013. The city might throw them a parade even if they don’t win the World Series because, ding-dong, the Frank McCourt era is over.

Losers: The Dodgers of 2017

The team’s stunning spending spree feels good today, but Los Angeles has set itself up to have a roster loaded with aging stars in about five years — Matt Kemp, Gonzalez, Crawford and Andre Ethier all have contracts that run through that season. By then, the Dodgers’ farm system should be replenished, and the club’s ownership should have the resources to pave over that type of problem in the way the Yankees have — and, in any event, Dodgers fans won’t have to worry about that for a while.

ESPN: Keith Law takes a good now and bad later approach as well.

This deal could end up looking good for both sides, better for the Dodgers in the very short term but much better for the Red Sox in the long term. Boston enters this winter with a new financial lease on life, freeing the Sox up to spend in a weak free-agent market or perhaps to take on a large contract someone else would like to move (Cliff Lee? Justin Upton?).

They’re also looking at a pretty interesting group of position-player prospects racing up the system, led by Xander Bogaerts, who has improved his defense at shortstop this year and might defy earlier expectations and stay at the position. That potential for an inexpensive core should help Boston avoid a similar tangle of large contracts in the near future, just at a point when the Dodgers are facing a financial quagmire and roster crunch of their own.

Baseball executives are chiming in on the trade, basically questioning what the Dodgers are doing.

Rival exec on #Dodgers: “If you had $250M to spend, is this how you’d do it?”

— Ken Rosenthal (@Ken_Rosenthal) August 25, 2012

Rival execs are wondering why LADs didn’t simply say to BOS: We’ll take your bad contracts, but we’re not giving you any prospects of note.

— Buster Olney (@Buster_ESPN) August 25, 2012

NL exec view:”The Dodgers so wanted Gonzalez they took Crawford and Beckett’s money and traded two great arms to get him.”

— Peter Gammons (@pgammo) August 25, 2012

While I don’t necessarily disagree with their assessment, one has to wonder how much of this is legit and how much of this is just being jealous.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello asks whether we should start worrying about Andre Ethier. Go over and read the whole thing, but he brings up points I wanted to address:

The obvious answer is that it’s yet another injury, but I’m not sure it’s that simple. Yes, he strained his oblique in San Francisco at the end of June and landed on the disabled list, and as his return coincided with the start of the second half it is technically accurate to say that “he’s been awful since he was injured.” The thing is, that oblique strain hardly interrupted a hot streak; over his previous 30 games before that, he’d been only at .241/.317/.352 (.669).

Nice. I had brought up on Twitter that maybe he just needed time off after the season to rest his oblique (notoriously naggy injury that can sap power), but he’s been struggling longer than that. Also, I looked at his swing to see if anything has changed, it hasn’t.

Here’s what I mean by that. Check out the percentage of lefty pitching that Ethier has faced over the last six years, shown in the table at right. For years, Ethier routinely faced lefties 25-30% of the time. This year it’s well over 40%, and as I hardly need to tell you, Ethier is absolutely awful against lefty pitching.

In my brain, I called bullshit on this. Either managers are figuring it out or he’s just run into an abnormal amount of lefty starters this season. My gut said it was the latter.

While I don’t have the exact amount of plate appearances against lefty starters for the team, I do have this:

So the dip that MSTI’s chart shows from 2010 to 2011 is expected, and so is a spike in 2012, but Ethier’s spike is around double that of the rest of the team. This suggests that while he has run into a bit of bad matchup luck this year, Ethier is indeed facing a greater diet of lefty relievers.

The league is learning, so when will the Dodgers?

—–

Beyond The Box Score: A frightening look at young stars who went on to disappoint during their primes, centered around Hanley Ramirez. It had me worried for a while, but his line is now at .311/.368/.544/.912 with the Dodgers, so that makes me feel better.

—–

ESPN: A.J. Ellis wrote a guest article at Buster Olney‘s blog and gave insight into what players are feeling around the trade deadline. Good read.

Hanley Ramirez‘s agent Adam Katz told Tim Brown of Yahoo! Sports that his client is thrilled:

Hanley agent Adam Katz:”If he was going to be moved then this was his first choice. He can’t wait to get here, compete, do what’s asked.”

— Tim Brown (@TBrownYahoo) July 25, 2012

Well, at least the most important guy likes the trade.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello likes the deal for the Dodgers.

So for the price of a decent pitching prospect, a low-level minor leaguer, and giving Miami salary relief, the Dodgers have filled two huge holes. If Ramirez doesn’t get his mojo back, then this is probably a win/win for both sides, since even a lessened Ramirez is superior to Uribe and Miami gets Eovaldi and out from Ramirez’ salary. If Hanley rebounds to be something like what he was before – and at 28, there’s still time for him to do so – then this becomes a massive steal for the Dodgers.

It’ll be a while before we know how this turns out, because it could be years until we see what Eovaldi really turns into. Today, on the morning of the deal, I can at least say something I don’t really get to say too often around here: good job, Ned. This isn’t a slam dunk deal, but with everything considered, it is one that is absolutely worth making.

Feelin’ Kinda Blue: Chad Moriyama‘s own Dustin Nosler loves the trade.

So, the Dodgers gave up a couple talented arms for a former and potential superstar (seems weird to write that). The Dodgers were able to use their best asset — deep pockets — to make this deal happen. It seemed the Dodgers weren’t going to be able to swing a deal or acquire a decent player without giving up Zach Lee. However, they found middle ground with the Marlins and were able to absorb all the money, allowing them to acquire Ramirez.

And by moving Eovaldi, the Dodgers are almost a lock to trade for a starting pitcher (*cough* Ryan Dempster *cough*) before Tuesday’s trade deadline.

I absolutely love this deal and I still can’t believe it happened. I wish Eovaldi and McGough all the luck in the world, but the Dodgers got the better end of this deal.

Marlins Daily: Dave Gershman doesn’t think the Dodgers package was worth Hanley Ramirez.

A weird start to the day here on the East Coast, and who knows, it could get weirder if the Marlins continue unloaded pieces whom they don’t see as part of their future plans. For now this one deserves to soak in. Eovaldi is a guy with hard stuff which includes an explosive fastball, something of a potential #2 or #3, I’d say, but I don’t think he’s worth Hanley Ramirez.

FanGraphs: Jack Moore points out that the Dodgers needed to improve and they did.

This Hanley Ramirez is no longer a superstar, but he fills the holes of the Los Angeles Dodgers nearly perfectly. If the Dodgers are going to make a run at the playoffs, they need contributions from the left side of their infield, and Ramirez makes that a possibility again.

Baseball Prospectus: Colin Wyers, Kevin Goldstein, and R.J. Anderson analyze the pieces in the trade.

If Hanley’s upside is a return to something approaching his All-Star years and his downside is puttering along at around league average, the Dodgers have made a gamble they simply can’t lose. Don Mattingly is going to have his own version of Sophie’s choice to make when Gordon returns: “You can lose Juan Uribe or Dee Gordon from your lineup. Pick one and only one.” But either way, the Dodgers have improved their lineup over what it was yesterday.

Sports Illustrated: Cliff Corcoran offered a rare negative take on the Dodgers side of things.

Ramirez has now hit .245/.328/.405 (.249 GPA) in 776 plate appearances over the last two seasons combined. That is not a $15-million-per-year player. That, plus his poor fielding (by the advanced stats, which are generally in agreement, he grades out as every bit as much of a liability in the field at third base as he was at shortstop), means he is not a player who is going to single-handedly put the Dodgers into the playoffs.

Even the diminished Ramirez will be an upgrade over the production Los Angeles has been getting from the left side of the infield (it’s not yet known where he’ll play for the Dodgers). There’s also the “change of scenery” fantasy. The last imagines that getting away from manager Ozzie Guillen, with whom he butted heads, and from a team on which he was literally pushed aside by a new $106 million bauble named Jose Reyes, who has been no more valuable than Ramirez this season, could give Ramirez a fresh start that would rejuvenate his bat. That, however, is wishful thinking, not sound decision-making.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello gave his mid-season grades for the offense.

Thought he was a bit friendly to Bobby Abreu given that most of his production wasn’t so much skill-based as luck-based.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello gave his mid-season grades for the pitchers.

I don’t quite understand why Chris Capuano gets an A basically for his ERA (actual performance) when he recognizes that he’s been fortunate. Yet the grade for Ted Lilly is primarily based on the fact that he was lucky. Same for Jamey Wright, who currently has a negative WAR on the basis of his actual results but gets a solid grade because of his peripherals.

I feel like it was harsh on Chad Billingsley on the basis of results versus peripherals and the fact that I don’t think expectations should have been so high. Same goes for Nate Eovaldi, because he posted a 4.35 FIP/4.80 xFIP/5.11 SIERA last year, so I’m not sure where the expectations were supposed to be at.

—–

FanGraphs: Twins GM Terry Ryan gave an interesting view on how their front office evaluates their scouts.

DL: How do go about evaluating your scouts?

TR: Well, they pretty much make that assessment pretty easy. When they send us their guys over the course of a couple years, you start to get a pretty good cross-section of what they’ve sent you. Now you can’t — a 31st-round draft choice that a scout signed, that’s pretty deep. How is he fitting in? Has he got a chance? Has he helped the organization get better? If a scout sends us guys that don’t want to get with the program too often, those are the types of guys that — each one of our scouts has a direct supervisor that’s in communication with him constantly. They’re the guys that funnel the information to that supervisor. Has he got his stuff in? Is he thorough? Does he got the medical? Does he got the signability? Is he taking me to see guys that don’t have a chance? Those are how you evaluate scouts. Usually the supervisor has the best grasp of what kind of scout we’ve got.

They also graduate into professional coverage. That’s when I start to get involved, because I read the reports daily. If their numbers and their verbal and their role don’t add up, they get calls. It doesn’t take too long to figure out “Listen, this guy doesn’t know what he’s doing. We better get him pointed in the right direction.” That’s how we evaluate scouts.

DL: Some fans are guilty of judging scouts only by who they signed, with no knowledge of who they recommended.

TR: We have their list, obviously. But there’s nothing more frustrating to have an area scout say, “I had him right there, but we didn’t get him.” Well, you didn’t have him in high enough, then. We don’t ever want to hear that. That’s an excuse. “Oh, I had all those guys in. We didn’t get any of them, but I had them in.” That’s protecting your hind side. That doesn’t work.

Not going to agree or disagree, but the interview provided insight into an aspect of things that I had not seen elsewhere.

Deadspin: Deadspin made GIFs of the strike three call of every umpire. Seriously.

This is part one.

Deadspin: Part two.

Yahoo! Sports: Jeff Passan writes about MLB‘s ridiculous blackout policy.

I wrote about my issues with it here.

—–

FanGraphs: Dave Cameron‘s “Stat Nerd NL All-Star Roster” includes A.J. Ellis and Clayton Kershaw, but Andre Ethier just misses.

—–

Baseball Prospectus: Doug Thorburn dissects the slide step and doesn’t think it’s worth implementing.

It is my contention that most pitchers would do better if they both A) went faster from the windup, and B) kept their natural leg lift from the stretch. Pitch execution is the single-most important facet of every play on the diamond and the epitome of the phrase, “baseball is a game of inches.” It is therefore insane to continue throwing a wrench into 40 percent of a pitcher’s deliveries in an attempt to stop a once-per-game occurrence for which the pitcher is only fractionally responsible.

Great article.

R.J. Anderson looked at Ned Colletti‘s trade history over at Baseball Prospectus and wondered why Dodgers fans are so worried about him.

Colletti’s evaluation mistakes cost the Dodgers two middle-of-the-rotation starters, an All-Star catcher, and a good fourth outfielder at most. But what about the flip side? What about when Colletti correctly evaluated his own prospects? Silver wrote, “One of [Colletti's] strengths seems to be knowing when to bail on his own players.” In the time since, Colletti has reaffirmed that notion. Some of Colletti’s better trades have come when correctly identifying the lemons in his own bunch. He traded Bryan Morris and LaRoche to acquire Manny Ramirez (easily the best deal of his career), used the intrigue of Joel Guzman to land Julio Lugo (whom, for whatever reason, fell to pieces, mitigating an otherwise clever deal), grabbed Jon Garland for Tony Abreu, got Jim Thome for nothing, and added Ted Lilly and Ryan Theriot for Blake DeWitt and two prospects who were unable to make the Cubs’ top-20 list this preseason.

Tagging Colletti as a good or bad general manager adds no value. What can add value is breaking general managers down to tools and skills. Colletti seems to understand that future value is worth less than present value, particularly when his team has the ability to compete now and the resources to compete later. Proper evaluation is the engine in Colletti’s machine. That means the Dodgers have to continue to land potentially useful players and continue to evaluate and harvest the potentially overvalued prospects. Every once and a while, Colletti is going to miss on a player. It happens; even John Schuerholz, the master of farm system self-evaluation, lost a few times.

This isn’t to say that Dodgers fans should have blind faith in Colletti, just that cowering in fear seems to be equally as unreasonable.

Andrew Grant addressed the notion that Ned Colletti’s not that bad of a General Manager over at Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness.

Ned Colletti isn’t without his merits. He’s good at assembling a bullpen on the cheap and the Dodgers get more mileage out of their veteran utility guys than most teams, but these are minor things in the big picture. Colletti inherited a dream situation, the best farm system in baseball with a payroll in the upper echelons of the league and the more it has become his team, the worse it has gotten. If you compare Ned’s moves to Bobo the General Managing Chimp he looks great, but if you assume a base level of competence from your GM Ned falls massively. James Loney’s monthly home run doesn’t make him a good player, so all of Ned’s moves not failing miserably shouldn’t make him a good GM.

I was actually going to write something similar, including using the exact same links he used, but instead, I’ll just address the question of whether Dodgers fans are justified in worrying at the trading deadline.

—–

Despite my derision of him as a General Manager, Ned Colletti has, in my estimation, specific strengths and weaknesses. He is terrible at major free agent signings, but fringe/average on the minor free agent deals. He’s good at trading away major league talent (usually guys that he signed, unfortunately) for useful minor leaguers. And as Andrew showed, he’s basically average at trading away minor league players, but it’s rare that he gets value in return for all that he trades away.

Coincidentally or not, his strengths all seem to derive from scouting and evaluation of minor league players (trading for minor leaguers/drafting minor leaguers/trading away minor leaguers). Such opinions were earlier justified in quantifiable form by The Hardball Times. Now I’m not saying that all the minor league strengths are due to Kim Ng/Logan White/De Jon Watson, but that is their job description, and two of those three were with the team before any of us were aware Colletti existed.

—–

So with that established, I don’t understand how or why R.J. gives Colletti credit for getting present talent in return on trades as if that’s what happens all the time when Colletti deals away minor league players.

Looking at the trades he has made over the years, it’s a bit odd to use that angle. Manny Ramirez was a once-in-a-lifetime scenario in which the Red Sox had to dump a Hall Of Fame talent, even the most ardent fan of Ned Colletti would have to admit that, and that’s ignoring entirely the report that Frank McCourt was the one who made it happen because he wanted to sell tickets. Andre Ethier was Colletti’s shining moment, and despite what Nate Silver said, I loved the trade at the time. Again though, that’s clearly not a deadline deal where he acquires current talent in exchange for future talent. Quite the opposite actually, and it’s certainly not what Dodgers fans are worrying about here.

So why are they worried? Because essentially, he has lost an All-Star catcher (a good one, at worst), two middle-of-the-rotation guys, and an outfielder who would have definitely started for the Dodgers over the years in return for what? Greg Maddux and Casey Blake for two months? Neither of which vaulted the Dodgers to the next level in the present or future.

As such, I would say Dodgers fans are justified to be worried about Colletti at the deadline. That is, unless David Wright decides to push over a Mets employee, bad mouth the Mets in the press, and quit on the team or Bobby Abreu blows his top and becomes a clubhouse cancer, forcing a deal for a minor league prospect. Because while the odds are good that he’ll both get nothing that helps the team and give away nothing that matters, more often than not, when the players involved have mattered, he’s come out on the losing end.

ESPN The Magazine: Molly Knight with a must-read profile on Matt Kemp.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello points out that the Dodgers bullpen is excelling … and on the cheap.

ESPN Boston: Theo Epstein provides a cautionary tale for the Dodgers.

“If I have a regret about the way we handled that offseason (after the 2009 season), it was that instead of being more patient and saying, ‘We’ll strike when the time is right,’ there was a lot of pressure in the environment at the time to do something,” Epstein said. “If I learned a lesson from the offseason, it’s never feel the need to do something. If you’re trying to avoid one move that you don’t think is going to work out, don’t then settle for a different move that maybe doesn’t check all the boxes. Be true to the philosophy and understand the bigger picture. There’s always another day to fight. You don’t have to get everything done in one offseason just because of what’s going on in the environment around you.”

Should be obvious to anybody with a brain that spending a $100 million budget wisely will make a far better team than a $200 million budget and randomly signing the biggest name on the market every now and then.

The Kansas City Star: Zack Greinke is weird … and awesome.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello once feared the exact deal that Andre Ethier signed, and while he holds some concerns, he finds it hard to argue against the deal.

What interests me more right now is trying to figure out just how much a big 2012 could enhance Ethier’s value on the market, because there’s a big difference between a deal for, say, 3/$36m (which I’d certainly love to do) and something more like 5/$85m (which I’d run away screaming from).

So the end result, in my view, is that the Dodgers paid a fair price to lock up one of the two best and most popular hitters on their team, a player with his share of flaws, but one who provides a service which couldn’t easily be replaced on the open market or via trade. I’m slightly apprehensive about the idea of Ethier being a $100m type player, yet I suppose I can’t really argue with the logic behind the move.

So he thinks they got market value, that it helps public relations, and that it was the best fit.

—–

Baseball Prospectus: R.J. Anderson thinks the deal is fair.

No extension is complete without hemming and hawing over the financial figures. Ethier is being rewarded handsomely for being a consistently good player (his Wins Above Replacement Player totals seem locked in around three wins per season). Is Ethier worth this kind of investment? It isn’t an easy question to answer. Consider the Dodgers’ perspective. These are new owners taking over a club whose previous owner soured the fan base. Fan morale should be improved thanks to the club’s first-place standing, but locking up a large part of the team’s recent good times gains public relations points, too.

Here’s something else to consider: the Dodgers know their own budget the best, and also know that the league might be flush with cash this offseason. It’s possible, not likely but possible, that Ethier’s deal looks prudent should teams splurge this offseason.

Even if the deal doesn’t win awards for being the most efficient usage of resources, the Dodgers should be happy to retain Ethier’s bat for an additional five or six seasons.

He believes the team may have gotten market value, that it will help public relations, and that it may prove to be a solid fit.

—–

FanGraphs: Dave Cameron thinks it’s an overpay but that the team should have the finances to overcome it, rendering the overpay meaningless.

From an abstract point of view, Ethier’s not worth this contract, but when you consider the Dodgers specific financial position, the team’s attempts to rebuild credibility with an alienated fan base, and the fairly minor scope of the overpay, this just isn’t something that anyone should get all that worked up over. The Dodgers paid a nice player a little bit more than he’s worth in order to keep him, and the difference probably won’t have much of an impact on their ability to do anything else. It’s an overpay, but an irrelevant one that shouldn’t garner all that much criticism.

He thinks the Dodgers paid over market value for Ethier, that it will help public relations, and that the future budget will take care of the overpay.

—–

True Blue LA: Eric Stephen takes a different approach to looking at the contract and compares Ethier to similar players.

Sammy Sosa, Jim Edmonds, and Carlos Beltran were the only three of the bunch to improve in their age 31-35 seasons. This group collectively averaged 2,844 plate appearances from age 26-30, and averaged 2,216 PA from ages 31-35, a 22.1% drop, with only three of the 13 players accumulating more PA as they aged. Four of the 13 players didn’t even make it to their age-35 season.

There is a fair amount of risk that Ethier could fall off a cliff from a production standpoint, with fellow Dodgers right fielder Shawn Green providing a prime example. But if Ethier does decline, the Dodgers are hoping for more Magglio Ordonez and less Trot Nixon.

You should go look at the chart, it’s interesting and much better than the similarity scores from Baseball Reference.

—–

Baseball Nation: Grant Brisbee makes the case that the message behind the deal was more important than the deal itself.

Maybe the Dodgers overpaid, and maybe they assumed a lot of risk with the Ethier deal. It’s not a bad deal, especially when you think of Jayson Werth and Carl Crawford as possible corner-outfield comps. But the Dodgers were sending a message just as much as they were trying to build a 2014 roster. If Magic Johnson is to be believed, the message will have several parts, and they’ll all be expensive. That’s the brand of the new Dodgers. It just happened to kick off with some old Dodgers.

This is yet another analysis of the contract that mentions the public relations angle, which is an interesting way to look at the deal. I actually didn’t think much of it before, but laid out like this, yeah, I can see how this might influence their decision to give him what he wanted, even if it is a little over market value.

Whether I agree with that logic is a different story though.

—–

Dodger Thoughts: Jon Weisman is upbeat about the outcome of the contract.

It’s hard to get a true bargain with established stars — which is why it was so wonderful for the Dodgers that Ethier (acquired as a minor leaguer from Oakland in 2005) and Matt Kemp emerged from their farm system in the first place. On some level, if the Dodgers can avoid with Ethier what happened with the Toronto Blue Jays and Vernon Wells, they should be happy. A major hope of the new ownership is that it won’t have to penny-pinch. As long as Ethier remains a reasonably productive player and not an albatross, the Dodgers and their fans should be happy to have him, even if he ends up pocketing something more than he’s worth.

He thinks that it’s probably an overpay, but it’ll be fine if he doesn’t become terrible.

Well yeah, but I think the risk that he does become terrible is built into the analysis of the deal, no? I mean, if I could rule out the possibility of attrition, then yeah, I love the deal.

—–

ESPN: Uh, I guess Keith Law couldn’t even be bothered to write an article on it, but it’s probably safe to say he doesn’t like it.

Someone needs to hand Ned Colletti a pen and a blank piece of paper and ask him to draw a typical hitter’s aging curve.

— keithlaw (@keithlaw) June 12, 2012

More like ROFLMAO “@Crev10: @keithlaw Did you ever publish a write-up on Either’s contract or would it have just read: “LOL”?”

— keithlaw (@keithlaw) June 13, 2012

I don’t think many are quite at this end of the spectrum.

=====

All in all, most seem to agree that’s he’s getting a deal that’s over market value and that there are concerns about regression as he ages. However, their concerns are mitigated primarily due to public relations reasons or because of the assumed budget.

The public relations angle is wonderful, and the expanding budget is part of the reason I’m somewhat neutral on the deal. However, all I care about is the Dodgers being a quality team again, so call me heartless or whatever, but I couldn’t care less about public relations or the loyalty of the fans or how many people would cry if Ethier wasn’t re-signed.

All I want to know is whether or not the deal was worth it from a baseball perspective, and judging by most of the analysis purely from that angle, the consensus seems to be that the jury is still out and they will be that way for a while.

Beyond The Box Score: Glenn DuPaul takes a look at the most valuable players of April and May. A.J. Ellis tops the hitter’s list, while former Dodger James McDonald tops the pitcher’s list.

The New Yorker: Scientifically, what makes players choke?

So far, so obvious: the extra money led people to get more excited about the potential rewards, which led them to work harder. This is why businesses give people bonuses.

However, when the subjects actually began playing the video game, the striatum did something very peculiar. All of a sudden, the activity of the brain area became inversely related to the magnitude of the reward; bigger incentives led to less excitement. Furthermore, activity in the insula was closely correlated with success, with decreased activity leading to decreased performance.

What explains this result? The researchers argue that the subjects were victims of loss aversion, the well-documented psychological phenomenon that losses make us feel bad more than gains make us feel good.

There is something poignant about this deconstruction of choking. It suggests that the reason some performers fall apart on the back nine or at the free-throw line is because they care too much. They really want to win, and so they get unravelled by the pressure of the moment. The simple pleasures of the game have vanished; the fear of losing is what remains.

Basically? Because they care about winning.

Personally, I answered: $1, $5, $10, $500.

—–

Baseball Prospectus: Dash Treyhorn analyzes how the perception of Charlie Manuel has evolved, primarily due to winning.

Sometimes I wonder if the same would be possible with Ned Colletti. We’ve already seen how people think he’s solid because he won with all the homegrown talent he was provided and another GM’s players, so I can’t help but think that if Stan Kasten helps turn the ship around with Colletti still on board, it would completely change the way most people look at him.

—–

Deadspin: A youth baseball coach was arrested for threatening a parent with a gun. Thought it was an appropriately timed story given my article on coaches.

Gawker: Is Jose Canseco even writing his own crazy tweets? Probably not, which is even more reason we shouldn’t give a shit about him.

NotGraphs: Jeremy Blachman has a humorous take on my complaints regarding the MLB‘s blackout rules. The sad thing? His list of rules isn’t that much more amusing than the real ones.

The Hardball Times: Chris Jaffe on the 50th anniversary of Dodger Stadium.

A.J. Ellis Facts: A.J. Ellis, cult hero and internet meme.

Los Angeles Times: Bill Plaschke (barf) talks to the key figures in the new Los Angeles Dodgers ownership.

For now, as the initial celebration fades and the close examination begins, Dodger fans need to see proof that this dream team won’t just turn into another nightmare.

“You know I’m going to do this right,” promised Johnson. “I would not be putting millions of my dollars into this if we weren’t going to do it right.”

The questioning started here with Johnson. Will he be more than just a new Dodger face and voice? Will he have the freedom to help run the Dodgers with his considerable business acumen and competitive spirit?

“You want to know Magic’s title? It’s owner,” Kasten said.

Johnson confirmed that he has already picked out a Dodger Stadium office and that, while he still has other business interests, this will be his main job and focus.

“I take, very seriously, the honor of being a minority owner in an organization where Jackie Robinson played,” Johnson said. “I’ll be there every day, fans will see me every day, I’ll be working hard to spread the word about how we’re going to make this a great franchise again.”

I think we’ve known all along that he was a figurehead, but he’s an awesome figurehead, so whatever.

Walter said he will remain in the background of the club’s daily operations, allowing Kasten to oversee baseball and business matters while Johnson is the caretaker of the image.

“I’m a baseball fan, but I’m not qualified to make baseball decisions, and I don’t want to pretend to be,” said Walter. “I’m here to support and help my people as much as I can. I’m here to cheer as loud as I can.”

But since he still controls the purse strings, the bucks still stop with him, no? Will he give Kasten the freedom to spend them? How does he view the idea of paying the sort of big money for the sort of big free agents that the Dodgers have avoided signing during most of their 14-year championship drought?

“Stan has a very proven formula for building a team that doesn’t win one year, but wins 12 years in a row [Atlanta Braves], so for me to tell him how you build that is completely inappropriate,” said Walter. “But having said that, we really want to win, and it’s OK if, while we’re producing the best players in the world, we also have the best players in the world on our field.”

In other words, said Johnson, “We are going to have all the resources available to us to put a championship team on the field.”

Oh dear, I think I’m in love.

“We understand what we just bought, we understand what it needs to be,” said Kasten. “We make more money when we win. We are real cognizant of that. While we want to build a long-term plan, we want to have a winner now.”

To understand Kasten’s baseball philosophy, check out his Atlanta Braves team that won the 1995 World Series. His front office was led by powerful General Manager John Schuerholz. His starting rotation was led by a high-priced free agent, Greg Maddux. His everyday lineup was filled with homegrown stars like Chipper Jones, Ryan Klesko and David Justice.

“I believe in scouting and player development, and a starting rotation,” Kasten said. “With both, anything is possible. Without both, nothing is possible.”

It’s just words, and I prefer actions, but they are saying literally everything right so far.

Haven’t been this excited about the team since they swept the Chicago Cubs in the 2008 NLDS.

Los Angeles Times: Walter Hamilton takes a look at the Guggenheim Partners.

Guggenheim Partners is connected to the family of Meyer Guggenheim, who came to the U.S. in the 1840s and made a fortune in mining. The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum is named after the family.

Peter Lawson Johnston II, a great-grandson of the Guggenheim’s patriarch, launched the financial services company in 2000. The company is run day to day by chief executive Mark Walter and executive chairman Alan Schwartz, the former CEO of Bear Stearns & Co.

The firm is a full-fledged investment bank in the mold of Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. Guggenheim has become a big player in commercial real estate debt, managing the type of investments that tripped up so many big Wall Street firms during the global financial crisis.

Guggenheim has varied holdings, including being a co-owner of the company that operates the Hollywood Reporter.

It has a large investment operation in Santa Monica, with more than 200 of its 1,700 employees based there. The firm manages about $125 billion in assets.

Mining, huh? It’s like they’re trolling Josh Macciello.

MLB.com: Richard Justice with a nice profile on Kasten.

He has some unshakeable core beliefs about running a baseball team. He believes the fan experience should be pleasant, that teams must be accountable to their customers. And he believes teams should be built from the inside through scouting and player development.

If he’s approved, he’ll surely use the work done by Cox and Schuerholz with the Braves as a blueprint for how to run the Dodgers.

He’s also a student of the game’s history and will almost certainly both understand and tap into the things that have made the Dodgers special, from the former players who created the team’s aura to the ballpark that is one of the signature destinations in Major League Baseball.

In both Atlanta and Washington, he told his employees that there really was no magic formula to succeeding. It was a matter of doing things right and getting better every single day.

Awesome.

Fox Sports: Ken Rosenthal believes Kasten will be the difference maker for the product on the field as well.

Wall Street Journal: Scott Austin has short blurbs on all those involved in the new ownership of the Dodgers.

—–

ESPN Los Angeles: Jon Weisman has a to-do list for the new owners.

The bottom line is, you can’t expect perfection, but you can demand excellence. Every effort must be made at making the best possible decision a thousand times over.

The new owners might fail. But, finally, Dodgers fans can at least say there’s hope.

Word.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello gives 19 random thoughts on the new ownership of the team.

—–

Dodgers Now: Dodgers players give their thoughts on the new owners, including Juan Rivera and Juan Uribe, who hadn’t heard of the deal until Dylan Hernandez told them.

Dodgers Now: What do Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol think about Magic Johnson‘s involvement with the Dodgers?

The question reminded me of this:

LA Weekly: I called Josh Macciello out a while ago, but this article was a thorough takedown. It’s long, but well worth a read.

—–

Baseball Prospectus: The rotation for the Los Angeles Dodgers might not be as good as we think in 2012.

That’s ninth in the National League, and I think it’s clear as to where the value starts tailing off.

If the rotation is going to be good this year, contributions from Nate Eovaldi and others will probably be a part of it.

Baseball Prospectus: Kevin Goldstein ranks the Dodgers farm system 19th in the MLB.

19. Los Angeles Dodgers
Top 11 Prospects List
System At a Glance: There’s certainly pitching here, but it’s more quantity than quality, and the organization is wafer-thin when it comes to positional prospects at the upper level.

Sounds about right to me.

Los Angeles Times: CBS and MSG are interesting in joining an ownership group in an effort to secure the television rights for the Los Angeles Dodgers.

CBS and MSG have each considered whether to invest in a Dodgers ownership group to secure the team’s television rights, two people familiar with the Dodgers sale process said Thursday.

The objective for both parties would be to launch a regional sports network centered on the Dodgers, the people said. It is uncertain whether CBS or MSG has committed to provide financing to one or more bidding groups.

Not a bad thing, is it?

Regional sports networks bring in a ton of money.

—–

Sports Illustrated: Dodgers team health report has Matt Kemp and Chad Billingsley in the green, but Clayton Kershaw in the yellow.

FanGraphs: Surprise, surprise, Vin Scully was voted the best broadcaster in baseball. Another surprise, San Francisco Giants fans complaining about Scully.

—–

Fox Sports: The MLB playoffs are expanding from 8 to 10 teams, which is wonderful news for the Dodgers in 2012, because it means more average teams will get in.

For baseball though? It’s just another step in reducing the importance of the regular season and putting an emphasis on luck in the playoffs.

Wonderful.

I know this much, Ned Colletti is fucking ecstatic, because if he runs into a bit of fortune this year, the Dodgers might be able to sneak into the playoffs and save his job.