Don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you've got is gone 'til it's gone?
November 8, 2009 | 9:14
am
Joe Torre, indefinite.
« Previous Post | Dodger Thoughts Home | Next Post »
Joe Torre, indefinite.
The comments to this entry are closed.
| Advertisement |
|
|
Sitting on a bench for $4 million a year is good work if you can get it.
Posted by: Bill Haverchuck | November 08, 2009 at 09:26 AM
Congratulations Jon, on Stanfords huge win yesterday. Well done. : )
I think it shakes out a little like this for the Pac 10...
Tostitos Fiesta Bowl
January 4, Phoenix, AZ 8 pm Fox
BCS vs. BCS (Big 12 Champion, if available- Won't be; so Pac 10 2nd place team gets nod)
CraigPicks: STANFORD or OREGON or ARIZONA or USC vs. BOISE ST (BcS Buster!!!)
Rose Bowl presented by Citi
January 1, Pasadena, CA 5 pm ABC
BCS vs. BCS (Big Ten vs. Pac 10 champion, if available)
CraigPicks: OHIO ST vs. OREGON or STANFORD or ARIZONA
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 09:29 AM
I am ambivalent about Torre in some matters, but his experience dealing with dysfunctional ownership could help provide the stability that may be needed in the near future.
Posted by: WBB | November 08, 2009 at 09:32 AM
Stupid realization of the day: The Joni Mitchell song Jon references above was referenced in the Counting Crows "They Paved Paradise" song. That famous line was first in her song "Big Yellow Taxi." I'm sure everyone noticed that except me, until this morning.
As far as Joe Torre, hope he doesn't turn into the Brett Favre of Managers.
Posted by: underdog | November 08, 2009 at 09:34 AM
That TJ Simers Joe Torre news that Joe's thinkin' about stayin'...
is the the most exciting story to me since Zenyatta beat the boys in the $5 million Breeders' Cup Classic on Saturday. : )
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 09:35 AM
He should stay and go out with another ring...
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 09:37 AM
>> It would be nice to keep 'em off the Phillies, Cards, Rocks, Giants, Yanks or RSox.
Don't worry about either of them going to the Cards. They can't afford the salary, and they already have possibly the best rotation in baseball.
I think Wolf may get more than that, but at that price, we ought to give him a shot.
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 08, 2009 at 09:42 AM
Southern California's gauntlet from hell in the LA Coliseum...
11/14 Stanford 12:30 PM
11/28 UCLA 7:00 PM
12/05 No. 18 Arizona 12:30 PM
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 09:47 AM
NSX, that's good to know. I'll cross them off. :)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 09:52 AM
...They paved Pierreville
And put up a parking lot
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 09:56 AM
John Perrotto over at Baseball Prospectus has also said today that the Dodgers are making Billingsley available. In his words: "Billingsley is the most intriguing of the group [of young available pitchers], as he is just 25 and pitched in the All-Star Game this season. However, he struggled so badly down the stretch that he was taken out of the rotation and left the Dodgers wondering if he might need a new start in another organization."
I'd love to know where this sort of information is actually coming from, or if it's just speculation.
Posted by: Alex | November 08, 2009 at 10:26 AM
The Cardinals rotation is Carpenter, Wainwright and who knows. You need five pitchers for a rotation. They are losing Glaus, Wellemeyer, and Ankiel so there's about 20 million right there, but I have to imagine they're saving that for Pujols.
The problem with getting pitching is that every team can always use a new pitcher. If you sign a guy like Teixieria then you can confidently say the Yankees aren't going to be in the first baseman market for a while, but there's almost never a time where the rich teams wouldn't benefit from getting the best pitchers out there, so if you want an actual good pitcher, you're going to have to outbid the Yankees.
Posted by: regfairfield | November 08, 2009 at 10:26 AM
What leap of logic leads to trading Billingsley helps the rotation?
Either Bills is a good pitcher, which means that trading him would make the rotation worse, or Bills is a bad pitcher, so why the heck would you trade a good pitcher for him.
Posted by: regfairfield | November 08, 2009 at 10:30 AM
Excerpt from Verducci SI story, Nov. 9 issue, written before Yankees clinched---
"...For the last nine years, only their payroll had set a high bar. Even this season, while opening a $1.5 billion palace in which the ticket prices drew more attention than the architecture, New York's consumption—coming in the teeth of a crippling economic downturn—was conspicuous.
" In Game 4, for instance, the Yankees started the highest-paid pitcher in baseball (CC Sabathia), ended it with the highest-paid closer (Rivera), jumped in front with a run by the highest-paid shortstop (Jeter) and salted the game away in the ninth when the highest-paid catcher (Posada) drove in the highest-paid first baseman (Mark Teixeira) and baseball's highest-paid player (Rodriguez)."
Also points out what astute observers know--that Yankee (or other teams, parentheses mine) WS wins come when the team has the pitching. When not, they don't.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1162151/index.htm
Posted by: twerp | November 08, 2009 at 10:34 AM
This is only tangential, but a friend of mine who has been a lifetime Yankees fan has renounced them because 1) they tore down historic Yankee stadium; 2) they fired Joe Torre. He is now a Dodger fan.
Posted by: WBB | November 08, 2009 at 10:46 AM
Maybe the link to the Yankees story is an actual contibution. The following, well....
Saw Jon's post on projected pitcher leg injuries way late, so here's a belated contribution (using "contribution" VERY loosely)--
Determined to win and keep Torrre's confidence and actually stick in the rotation, Charlie Haeger (sorry, Maddz) gets so tangled up on one delivery while trying to perfect his new pitch, the knuckleslidecurvepalmsplitter, that his pushoff leg literally comes flying off. It is so mangled by all the gyrations that it can't be saved, and Haeger has to be fitted with a prosthetic.
After this terribly unfortunate and freakish thing ends his career, the Dodgers are so taken with his heart and grit that they allow him to be in the dugout and travel with the team for as long as he wishes.
This goes well. However, at times on the team plane the high altitude somehow begins to affect the artificial leg, causing him great discomfort. He finds that he can get relief only if he literally removes the leg. Afterward he places it in the overhead baggage compartment so as not to alarm the team.
This, of course, becomes the new standard for the meaning of "having a leg up on someone."
Aren't you all SO glad I chimed in? Hmmmm...can the sound of groaning be heard over the tubes?
Posted by: twerp | November 08, 2009 at 10:50 AM
New Coaches Poll Nov. 8, 2009 (Looks pretty good to me!)
1. Florida 9-0
2. Texas 9-0
3. Alabama 9-0 (Bama/Tebow showdown)
4. TCU 9-0
5. Cincinnati 9-0
6. Boise State 9-0
7. Georgia Tech 9-1
8. Ohio State 8-2
9. Pittsburgh 8-1 (Pitt/Cincy showdown)
10. USC 7-2 (Also #11 in the AP)
16. Oregon 7-2 (Also #14 in the AP)
27. STANFORD 6-3 (Also #25 in the AP)
28. Oregon State 6-3 (Also #26 in the AP)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Other then five solid starters, the one thing the Dodgers need besides a stable ownership is a stable manager. I like Torre a lot.
Craig88USC, I will surprised if SC can pull one win out of the next three. They stink slightly less then my Irish.
We do agree on one thing though. Yesterday's performance by Zenyatta, which I was fortunate enough to witness from the owners box of Mind That Bird was incredible. Incredible enough that the owner of Mind That Bird was clapping.
One of the most exciting horse races I've ever seen to date. the freekin' horse was last out of the gate and looked like they needed a stretcher for it by the 1/4 pole! When it made its way back around, the greatness of that mare was in full force. Completely dominate and she wasn't going to be denied. Bill Dwyre's description of it, equaling it to the Gibson home run, was apropos.
Posted by: Tommy Naccarato | November 08, 2009 at 11:03 AM
NFL shocker on FOX :) -
Cardinals 14 17 - - ... 31
Chicago 7 0 - - ... 7
Curt Warner 17 for 20 in the first half!
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 11:27 AM
I mean Kurt ...lol
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 11:28 AM
First half just ended:
Warner 17-22, 189 yds, 4 Touchdowns!
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Didn't Smoltz struggle with concentration problems early in his career?
Didn't he see a psychologist, even had the psychologist sit in the stands behind home plate so that Smoltz could make eye contact when he was pitching?
Maybe Bills needs something like this. His stuff is exceptional and I think it would be wrong to give up on him so early in his career.
Posted by: artieboy | November 08, 2009 at 11:32 AM
Tommy, I wouldn't be surprised if y'all beat Connecticut. ;)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 11:39 AM
The Dodgers aren't trading Billingsley now. No way, folks. :)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Artie, the guy wore a red shirt or sweater so Smoltz could see him if I remember correctly. He turned out OK(borderline HOF'er), so lets not go jumping off the end of the pier just yet.
Posted by: PismoBruce | November 08, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Yeah, sure we had a tough Duel in the Desert . . .
That victory was like pulling hen’s teeth offensively, but the defense stepped up time after time.
Some folks have folded the tent on the Trojans, and called on the Fat Lady. But the season is far from over if you’re watching the rest of the Pac 10 games.
The way the Trojans close out this season is not only extremely important now, but it’s paramount for next year’s foundation as a team, and whether they give up when there is adversity.
Keep hammerin’ away as we fight on. . . ;)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 11:47 AM
Underdog - the CC song you are referring to is actually a remake of Joni's Big Yellow Taxi - so, you've had a stupider realization than you thought.
Posted by: Jodi | November 08, 2009 at 11:52 AM
>>Artie, the guy wore a red shirt or sweater so Smoltz could see him if I remember correctly.<<
I think that was even during the World Series.
Maybe the Dodgers should do the same. I believe you should never trade your starting pitching.
Posted by: artieboy | November 08, 2009 at 11:57 AM
It's a joke that USC is ranked higher than Oregon. The Ducks and the Trojans have the same record, and the Ducks' losses were far less embarrassing than the Trojans'. Not the mention the fact that the Ducks massacred the Trojans a grand total of EIGHT days ago.
Posted by: whodat807 | November 08, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Craig,
Then that should mean that UConn would take USC down to the wire! (if they played)
USC #10 in the coaches poll is somewhat of a joke. The Trojans are not a BCS quality team, but this isn't a crime as much as Ohio State being #8 proving the inaccuracy of these polls as well as them being of pure hubris. About as ridiculous as Rachel Alexandria being anointed Horse of the Year while not even showing up for the most important race of the year against the best horses of the year. (that were in the field yesterday)
Posted by: Tommy Naccarato | November 08, 2009 at 12:04 PM
Yeah, there's so many things wrong about them being behind usc. Ridiculous.
Posted by: Troy | November 08, 2009 at 12:08 PM
USC has had a lot of trouble attempting to contain really good passers so far this season.
Stanford has a really, really good passer this year.
USC's passer may be really good in the future. Not yet.
Posted by: 68elcamino427 | November 08, 2009 at 12:17 PM
Whodat807, it's just a beauty contest, my friend. Note Ohio State ranked higher than us today, also. Remember, I was at that game in Columbus, and I recall SC was easily victorious then! But it all seems rather hazy, especially after last Halloween night in the friendly green colored town of Eugene. ; )
Here's the thing. Oregon dominated us. Stanford dominated the Quacks yesterday. Now, can Southern California beat the Cardinal? We'll all sure know that answer in just SIX short days. And I can't wait. : )
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 12:17 PM
More of Joe Torre is a great thing for the Dodgers.
Posted by: 68elcamino427 | November 08, 2009 at 12:18 PM
I believe you should never trade your starting pitching.
Posted by: artieboy | November 08, 2009 at 11:57 AM
Agree totally. Would be nice to have Edwin Jackson in the mix right about now.
Posted by: PismoBruce | November 08, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Troy, I love UCLA. You beat a top Big 12 team this year, as well as Tennessee in Knoxville!
And Washington with NFL bound QB Locker yesterday.
Do NOT hang your head. You're goin' to be BOWL eligible.
Plus, you have the genius of Norm Chow. You'll be fine.
Pac 10's tougher than ever. :)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Tommy, I wonder how Southern California would do against Navy or at Notre Dame this year. Hmmm...
Hey! Wait a minute. :)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Last thing about SC until the end of next Saturday's war (I promise)...
In today's just updated Sagarin rankings we are 10, and Oregon is 9. A total of 6 PAC-10 teams are ranked in his top-25. (all Elo Chess)
In more accurate Predictor we are 9 and Oregon is 5, and 5 PAC-10 teams are ranked in the top 27.
..
Now, how 'bout dem Dodgers? We need a bench! Ya think? ;)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 12:43 PM
There's an extra couple of words in the thread title. "is gone" doesn't belong.
Posted by: Norm | November 08, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Craig, USC as a powerhouse is not what you think it is. They are no different then the 2005 Michigan Wolverines who despite three losses, still managed to find themselves in a the top 15 of the Nation's elite and finished with 5 losses total. Bottom line is that I think that it will be proven in the next weeks to come that USC is on the down cycle. They are overrated. I really do. But that's my opinion. They aren't the pro team you think they are! :)
(In other words, I don't think your being objective enough to see the negatives of a really bad season)
Posted by: Tommy Naccarato | November 08, 2009 at 12:47 PM
Haha, thanks Craig. Making a bowl sure would be nice, especially after their hot start got my hopes up.
Posted by: Troy | November 08, 2009 at 12:48 PM
I'll throw a bomb here. If MLB can subsidize a farm system, so can the NFL and the NBA. Universities have no business subsidizing the football and basketball industries with infrastructure and games that have nothing to do with their academic mission. It's time to sever that connection,
Posted by: WBB | November 08, 2009 at 12:59 PM
I'll throw a bomb here. If MLB can subsidize a farm system, so can the NFL and the NBA. Universities have no business subsidizing the football and basketball industries with infrastructure and games that have nothing to do with their academic mission. It's time to sever that connection,
Posted by: WBB | November 08, 2009 at 12:59 PM
Universities aren't subsidizing the NFL and the NBA through their sports programs; they're subsidizing themselves. They make millions upon millions of dollars from sports revenue. Moreover, when a university's high-profile sports teams are doing well, that university enjoys considerable boosts in giving rates from alumni, resulting in millions more.
The MLB subsidizes its developmental league because it has to. Why would the NBA and the NFL want to heavily invest in minor leagues when they enjoy such a win-win proposition with colleges?
Posted by: whodat807 | November 08, 2009 at 01:14 PM
The extra words I put in the headline are what make it relevant to the story.
Posted by: Jon Weisman | November 08, 2009 at 01:20 PM
I love the picture Lasorda posted on twitter of him working out in Murrieta. That's where I'm from, and he totally dissed it. Not only that, looks like he is getting ready for a throw down with Bevacqua.
Posted by: Troy | November 08, 2009 at 01:24 PM
Most universities LOSE millions upon millions from their sports programs, which subvert their academic mission. A handful make money from football and basketball, but even those have had to make enormous investments in infrastructure that should be accounted for v. those annual profits. As long as the universities subsidize the NFL and NBA, sports will continue to be a money-losing proposition. At the very least, there should be no "athletic scholarships," a term that is an oxymoron.
Posted by: WBB | November 08, 2009 at 01:34 PM
>> I believe you should never trade your starting pitching.
That depends on the situation. For example, when a team is in a rebuilding year, when it's not going to win a pennant anyway, and has a short period left on the contract of an ace before he can file for free agency and the team can't afford to retain him, it would make sense for that team to trade him for top prospects. Note, I say "top" prospects, not the second-tier kids Cleveland gave Lee away for. It would still make sense for Toronto to trade Halladay this winter (although they could have even gotten more for him last July, if Ricciardi hadn't been so busy proving himself incompetent as a GM).
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 08, 2009 at 01:38 PM
BCS Standings:
1 Florida 9-0
2 Alabama 9-0
3 Texas 9-0
4 TCU 9-0
5 Cincinnati 9-0
6 Boise State 9-0
7 Georgia Tech 9-1
8 LSU 7-2
9 USC 7-2
10 Iowa 9-1
Posted by: Alex41592 | November 08, 2009 at 01:59 PM
That a pitiful 19% of Div 1-A schools make a profit off of their sports program is not an argument against football and basketball; it's an argument against sports like track, swimming, diving, lacrosse, soccer, baseball and other lower profile sports.
According to USA Today, 56% of Football Bowl division programs and 57% of Div 1-A basketball programs make a direct profit (and that's not including money made from TV and playoff appearances), and it's a good bet that it is from that pool that the NFL and NBA draw their a hefty majority of their players from.
If a university is losing money, then I absolutely agree that they should start cutting athletics spending. However, it makes little sense to point the finger directly at football and basketball, without which most sports programs would simply evaporate.
Posted by: whodat807 | November 08, 2009 at 02:11 PM
I find Torre's comments interesting in a number of ways.
1. Part of the thrust of what Simers wrote about him led to a psychoanalysis of the Steinbrenner years. George III, as Red Smith used to call him, replaced the abusive father whom Torre was always trying to please, and thus Torre's hurt when Steinbrenner would attack him or disrespect him. We aren't seeing that here.
2. I wonder if Peter Gammons read it and wants to backtrack his totally unsubstantiated claims that Torre is really unhappy with the Dodgers' dysfunctional ownership, which he probably considers a picnic in comparison with the combination of Steinbrenner and the NYC media.
3. Earlier this year, Plaschke announced Vin Scully's retirement, and Vin has, thankfully, walked that back a bit. Could Simers be suffering a bit from Plaschke's disease of writing what he wants to see in print as opposed to reality? I doubt it in this case, but it's just a thought.
Posted by: Michael Green | November 08, 2009 at 02:11 PM
I doubt Simers is making up the conversation he had with Torre and Zimmer.
Posted by: 68elcamino427 | November 08, 2009 at 02:23 PM
Schools have to make a profit on football and basketball, because that money has to be used to fund other sports, especially those covered by Title IX.
That being said, as a graduate of the farm I think it is outrageous that there is such a high percentage of incoming freshman spots reserved for athletes. I am with WBB on doing away with big time college athletics. Make them all club sports again.
Posted by: Jack Dawkins | November 08, 2009 at 02:53 PM
>> I think it is outrageous that there is such a high percentage of incoming freshman spots reserved for athletes
What is that percentage at your school? At most schools, it's surprisingly small (typically well below 5 percent).
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 08, 2009 at 03:09 PM
Note that the percentage of incoming students who played athletics in high school - any sport, at any level - may be much higher, but the percentage who are actively recruited by the college coaches is usually very small.
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 08, 2009 at 03:11 PM
Just to be clear: I agree there are a lot of things about college athletics that are distasteful, and many schools take them far too seriously, to the detriment of academics. I just took exception to the notion that college football and basketball programs are subsidizing the NBA and the NFL.
Posted by: whodat807 | November 08, 2009 at 03:15 PM
SEC = BCS dominance. See y'all at the Rose Bowl, not in the Rose Bowl...
Posted by: 356man | November 08, 2009 at 05:33 PM
Liga de Beisbol Dominicano update (and thoughts)...
A total of SIX second baseman on Tigres del Licey seems to cut into DeWitt's playin' time.
Only 21 at bats so far for the kid. But he had a nice weekend.--
Today Little Blake drove in a couple playing just third base.
Better news is yesterday he picked up a couple of hits playing third AND second... Btw, they played Hoffmann's team! Jamie played left field for Leones del Escogido and is 11 for 45 with 5 doubles driving in 4 for the winter, so far.
Can't locate Jimmy Mac anywhere. Maybe Bobby H. could check the cantinas down there. Just kidding. :)
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 06:00 PM
356Man, who's gonna win the Sec Championship game? Can Alabama slow down Tebow? Is it
tough to pick one over the other? Quite a dilemma... Too bad you can't send the whole conference. lol
Pick one, my friend.
We're pulling hard for Florida because Tim will probably be a Jacksonville Jaguar. Hence, possibly LA's future NFL QB. So, I think I'll be an honorary Gator against Texas at the RB. You, too??? : )
Posted by: Craig88USC | November 08, 2009 at 06:17 PM
Scholorships?
I love Division 3 sports. All walk ons. Not many (in fact almost none) will wind up in the NBA or the NFL but it's great competition.
Posted by: Old Dodger Fan | November 08, 2009 at 06:42 PM
Craig: We'll send them both. Quite simple, eh?
Posted by: 356man | November 08, 2009 at 06:48 PM
Statement Regarding Billingsley: "...However, he struggled so badly down the stretch that he was taken out of the rotation and left the Dodgers wondering if HE MIGHT NEED A NEW START IN ANOTHER ORGANIZATION!?!?!?"
That's a statement sports pundits make somewhat regularly that makes absolutely no sense to me in the context in which it's usually said, like here. Either he's going to settle down as a pitcher or he isn't. It's not like he's been getting death threats while pitching at DS. He's a young pitcher going through some growing pains for cryin' out loud!
If the Dodgers were a really good but aging team that wanted one last good shot at the ring and they could somehow exchange Bills for Doc or something like that, I might have to say they should go for it. With the Dodgers being a young team on the rise, what that writer said ... It just seems stupid to me. Insane, if the Dodgers are actually thinking that way.
Posted by: herchyzer | November 08, 2009 at 07:19 PM
GMs routinely buy into the "Maybe he just needs a new start in another organization" when they choose to pay the Russ Ortizes, Livan Hernandezes, Brett Tomkos, etc. of the world over and over again.
Posted by: Bill Haverchuck | November 08, 2009 at 07:24 PM
Did Carl's Jr. buy the Laker Girls? Or do they now have competing sets of dancing women at basketball games.
Posted by: Andrew Shimmin | November 08, 2009 at 08:10 PM
Also, does the fact that Farmar hasn't played during the fifteen minutes I've been watching mean that he's too good to play in garbage time, or that he's not good enough to play when the other team is only down twenty-five?
Posted by: Andrew Shimmin | November 08, 2009 at 08:14 PM
Ah, Mad Men.
Posted by: Jon Weisman | November 08, 2009 at 08:43 PM
Xeifrank College Football Playoff System
Playoff Matchups
#5 Cincinnati vs #4 TCU
#8 Iowa vs #1 Florida
#6 Boise State vs #3 Texas
#7 Georgia Tech vs #2 Alabama
Here is how things currently shake out. There will definitely be some changes in the upcoming weeks. But for entertainment purposes, here is what the playoffs would look like if the season were to end today.
vr, Xei
Posted by: xeifrank | November 08, 2009 at 08:57 PM
Stanford has about 300 athletic scholarships out of an undergraduate population of 6000 or so, so about 5%. That seems too high a percentage to me.
Posted by: Jack Dawkins | November 08, 2009 at 09:09 PM
Diamond Leung reposted a possible trade (or rumor) about the Dodgers and Royals talking trade:
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/story/1557629.html
>>One rumor to watch: A deal sending second baseman Alberto Callaspo to the Los Angeles Dodgers for catcher A.J. Ellis, a 28-year-old rookie who currently projects as a backup to Russell Martin following the anticipated free-agent departure of veteran Brad Ausmus.<<
Hrm.
Callaspo seems to have a good bat but also supposedly not much range at 2nd? Ellis projects as a backup so it might still be a good deal for LA but still seems a bit odd.
Posted by: underdog | November 08, 2009 at 09:54 PM
In other words, Callaspo sounds like a younger Belliard. Good bat, not a great fielder. Still, why the Royals would give him up for a backup catcher...
Anyway... on to Mad Men!
Posted by: underdog | November 08, 2009 at 09:55 PM
This is only tangential, but a friend of mine who has been a lifetime Yankees fan has renounced them because 1) they tore down historic Yankee stadium; 2) they fired Joe Torre. He is now a Dodger fan.
Posted by: WBB | November 08, 2009 at 10:46 AM
Wow- you just described me, more or less! It was more Mattingly than Torre, and I've lived in SoCal for a long time, so I was pretty much just looking for an excuse, anyway. (And of course, Torre wasn't fired, but pretty close to it. "forced out" is more like it)
Posted by: sarcastro | November 08, 2009 at 09:55 PM
Have the Callaspo wife-abuse charges come to a conclusion? Can't find a final outcome.
Posted by: Andrew Shimmin | November 08, 2009 at 10:08 PM
>>I love the picture Lasorda posted on twitter of him working out in Murrieta. That's where I'm from, and he totally dissed it. Not only that, looks like he is getting ready for a throw down with Bevacqua.<<
Don't tell me that feud is still going on. Come on Kurt. I absolutely believe you would hit water if you fell out of a boat.
Posted by: artieboy | November 08, 2009 at 10:14 PM
>>For example, when a team is in a rebuilding year, when it's not going to win a pennant anyway, and has a short period left on the contract of an ace before he can file for free agency and the team can't afford to retain him, it would make sense for that team to trade him for top prospects.<<
Have the Dodgers ever been in that situation? Have they ever had to trade a starting pitcher to avoid losing him to free agency? I know Piazza was a "victim" of that in 1998 and it wasn't until 2002 that we got back on track, but I don't ever recall a pitcher being traded to avoid him leaving. I understand your point nsxtasy I just don't think the Dodgers have to worry about that...hence don't trade your starting pitching.
Posted by: artieboy | November 08, 2009 at 10:27 PM
>>Liga de Beisbol Dominicano update (and thoughts)...<<
Way to go Craig. Winter baseball is awesome. Puerto Rico, Republic Dominicana, Mexico, Venezuela. It's exciting and a party all at the same time: musica, cantina, and beisbol all rolled into one.
Posted by: artieboy | November 08, 2009 at 10:36 PM
Andrew, according to Wikipedia anyway:
>>Callaspo was arrested on Thursday, May 10, 2007 by Phoenix police for domestic violence at his home; the charges for Callaspo were later dropped. He was placed on the restricted list without pay the day after the arrest. The MLBPA filed a grievance on his behalf and he was reinstated within a week. Callaspo and his wife, Marianny Paola, remain together, and they have one child.<<
Reading about his defense is also disturbing.
But he can hit!
Meh, rumor may be bogus anyway.
Posted by: underdog | November 08, 2009 at 10:43 PM
>>Callaspo was arrested on Thursday, May 10, 2007 by Phoenix police for domestic violence at his home<<
I don't think you should label a guy for life because of one incident. But in terms of the ball club, lets stay away from him. Even if he can hit let him be someone else's headache.
Haven't we learned enough from Milton Bradley???
Posted by: artieboy | November 08, 2009 at 10:48 PM
Maybe he just needs a 'fresh start'.
Posted by: PismoBruce | November 08, 2009 at 11:09 PM
Looks like he had a DUI a year after the spousal abuse charge. No arrests this year, though, I guess.
Posted by: Andrew Shimmin | November 08, 2009 at 11:15 PM
Vicente Padilla came to the Dodgers with a bad reputation. And at least he didn't shoot himself in the league until after the season was over.
Or got shot in the league.
Who know the truth?
Posted by: Phenomenal Smith | November 08, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Craig, I think I saw your car. The license plate read "#1 USC fan". :)
I'm hoping that Joe Torre comes back. I'd be more verbose but it's very late, and I'm at work, and it's so very not awesome.
Posted by: Maddz | November 09, 2009 at 01:17 AM
>> I understand your point nsxtasy I just don't think the Dodgers have to worry about that...hence don't trade your starting pitching.
Oh, I agree - there's no reason for us to trade our starting pitching. Especially since it's one area where we need more, not less. However, the case I described, which applies to Toronto this off-season, is one in which we might participate as a trading partner. I'd love to see us trade prospects for Halladay, as long as the deal includes a contract extension for the Doc. However, that would take a major commitment of salary budget, for 2010 and (assuming the contract extension) future years. I think that's exceedingly unlikely. I think we're likely to see the Dodgers take on several new contracts this winter under $10 million a year, but I doubt we'll see any that are significantly over that figure. (I believe Halladay will receive $15 million in 2010, the last year of his current contract, and as a free agent starting 2011 may command up to $20 million, the amount Sabathia is receiving.)
Posted by: nsxtasy | November 09, 2009 at 07:12 AM
Any thoughts on Marco Scutaro possibly played second base next year? He can also play SS?
Posted by: Package | November 09, 2009 at 07:28 AM
New post up top.
Posted by: Jon Weisman | November 09, 2009 at 07:39 AM
"I'd love to see us trade prospects for Halladay, as long as the deal includes a contract extension for the Doc. However, that would take a major commitment of salary budget, for 2010 and (assuming the contract extension) future years."
That's the flip side of trading for a pitcher, the contract extension. Was Kevin Brown worth the $ (probably not). Was Schmidt worth the $ (definitely not). How do the Giants feel about Zito's contract? How does Atlanta feel about Hampton's contract?
Yes Sabathia is the current positive example (also Schilling and Martinez with Boston)...but it's a gamble especially when you expect four or five years of performance. We've been burned before with signing free-agent pitchers to multi-year contracts and also trading young pitchers (Martinez, Jackson) without giving them a real chance. And that puts you in the position of having to sign the Bret Tomko's, Andy Asby's, and Scott Erickson's of the world.
Posted by: artieboy | November 09, 2009 at 10:47 AM