BLUE THINK TANK

2008-05-21T11:02:00.001-07:00

Aloha!

2007-05-18T00:37:00.001-07:00

Hi, I am back from the dead. (For now.) I am on an extended vacation from blogging, as I am slowly recovering from from the dreadful '05 season. Still.

I've been slacking off on my blogging because I simply ran out of things to say. Plenty of other Dodgers websites, many more insightful than me, have given better analysis than myself. (Although I am quite proud of what little knowledge I may have passed on here.)

Meanwhile, I have spent my time schmoozing ladies, cooking, fixing my house, working on my '71 Bimmer, walking my dog, and occasionally putting in some effort at work. Perhaps I'll return to blogging; perhaps not. But I'm still a fan of the Boys in Blue and I catch a game whenever I can. I haven't gone away. I am just hibernating.

As for baseball activity, I've been spending my time playing fantasy baseball with Slackfarmer and others. We are over at a Yahoo! league called Sabertooth Dodgers, and I'm not doing too bad. Best ERA in the league! But I am still kicking myself for letting someone else take Russell Martin before me because I had to take a young promising 2B. Barfield. I am an idiot indeed.

Maybe I'll return here more often. Dunno really. I still post occasionally over at the Dodgers.com forum, and lurk over at Big Blue Wrecking Crew. I am looking forward to the Freeway Series and hope that Penny dominates in his next start against the Halos. (Okay, he's on my fantasy team, so I am obviously going to root for Fat Boy, but I still mean well.)

Bowden GMUI

2006-04-18T12:41:00.000-07:00

Now we know why Bowden is driving the Nats into the ground -- he's drunk (aka general managering under the influence). As Rotowolrd says, "the joke possibilities are tremendous".

Ross Goes Apeshit in Pittsburgh

2006-04-15T10:29:00.000-07:00

Or should I say that Ross (Cody that is) went ballistic on Tracy's pitchers, and everyone went apeshit over Ross. E.g., here's dodgers.com and here's Dodger Thoughts. I guess 7 RBIs in one game can change peoples perception of you. With Lofton's return from the DL, Ross was set to be DFAed. Then YB conveniently needed TJ surgery and opened a spot for Ross to remain with the club.

Classic case of small sample size. Sure the guy had one hell of a game, but overall he just ain't that good. He's known as a very good defensive outfielder, but with the exception of one afternoon in Pittsburgh, his bat isn't all that. Zips projects him with a .718 OPS for 2006. OK for a backup center fielder. Bolstered with 7 RBIs in one game, he should have some trade value.

The sad thing is that even though Ross "just ain't that good", he's better than the Dodger's other options. Lofton is an injury-prone old guy whose gold glove days are behind him. While Repko has speed, he is a mess in the OF. Both of these guys project to underperform Ross with the bat:

Zips 2006 Projections

Player	OBP	SPC	OPS
Ross,Cody	.296	.422	.718
Repko,Jason	.307	.391	.698
Lofton,Kenny	.320	.352	.672

The topper, of course, is that Lofton is making almost $4mils a year, while Ross and Repko are making the minimum of just over $300k. Maybe Mr. Ned could find a new home for Lofton and just leave Ross in CF.

Hee Seop Choi is God and He Doesn't Much Care for McCourt

2006-04-15T09:25:00.000-07:00

I thought the comments to this piece over at 6-4-2 were especially humorous (and I wanted to try Rob's new linkback feature).

And The Slowest Player In Baseball Is...

2006-04-14T15:41:00.000-07:00

As soon as I read the first line of this article at the Hardball Times, I knew, just knew, that our catcher from last year would be mentioned somehow. Congrats, JP! Your zombie trot shall never be forgotten!

More on Dodgers (and Angels) Attendance

2006-04-13T14:49:00.000-07:00

A few months back I did an analysis of Dodger attendance trends, and one of the commenters wondered about the impact of the Angeles on Dodger attendance. Nate Silver has an interesting article on the free portion of BP that explores this issue in more detail. His conclusion is that an increase in Angel attendance revenues leads to an increase in Dodger revenues and vice versa.

The idea is that if you're a baseball fan and you can't get a decent ticket at one club's game (sold out, out of town, etc.) then you will go to the other. Alternately, if one club is doing well on the field (and therefore drawing well at the stadium) that there will be a buzz about baseball that will encourage folks to go even to the other club's games.

Beltre a Bust?

2006-04-10T10:29:00.001-07:00

According to this article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Beltre is "on his way to becoming one of the great busts in Mariners history". Of course, if Depo had not been a cheapskate and resigned Belly, then he would have continued his 2004 production in happy Dodgerland. The blue would have also won the NL West instead of losing 91 games, Depo and Tracy would have kept their jobs (much rejoicing in Pittsburgh), and even Tommy Lasorda would be happy.

Speaking of ex-Dodgers gone bust, apparently Steve Garvey is in deep financial troubles. I guess child support payments for all those illegitimate children really adds up. See this LA Times article for more details.

Trade Barry

2006-04-02T20:25:00.000-07:00

Check out this ridiculous CNN video. Obviously some Dodger troll has more money than he or she knows what to do with. It also proves the Giant fans are in denial. Dodger fans would never be as oblivious if one of our own were a juicehead. Even if he were a pitcher. Game over.

Celebrate * ?

2006-03-28T14:27:00.000-08:00

Update 3/29: MLB has hired former senator George Mitchell to investigate steroid use by Bonds* and others. Let's hope this is a real investigation and not a PR whitewash.

According to ESPN, MLB plans to celebrate Bonds* run for the HR crown. What the f***? Hasn't Game of Shadows put to rest any reasonable doubt that the guy* was juiced up. Instead of celebrating him*, MLB should ban him*.

Mr. Ned Goes Shopping

2006-03-24T11:12:00.000-08:00

Update: It appears that Mr. Ned chose the wrong backup at 1b, as Dodger Thoughts reports that Choi has been waived. So the final roster spot will likely go to Martinez.

* * * * *

As opening day draws near, Mr. Ned is a few roster cuts away from closing out his first offseason. So how did he do? In this post I'll ignore the pitching side and just look at some of the hitters he signed.

Mr. Ned's first big free agent signing was Furcal for ss. Then he added 3b Mueller, c Alomar, 1b?! Garciaparra and cf Lofton. How do these guys stack up to what we had last year? Here's how the 2005 Dodgers players hit:

2005 Dodger Performance
	OBP	SPC	OPS
as ss	.310	.338	.648
as 3b	.344	.378	.722
as c	.314	.357	.671
as 1b	.341	.487	.828
as cf	.364	.481	.845

And here's Zips 2006 projections for Mr. Ned's guys:

Zips 2006 Projections
		OBP	SPC	OPS
Furcal#	ss	.352	.431	.783
Mueller#	3b	.369	.441	.810
Alomar	c	.273	.328	.601
Garciaparra	1b	.321	.469	.790
Lofton*	cf	.333	.368	.701

Looks like an upgrade at ss and 3b, and a downgrade a c, 1b and cf. Before we get into the analysis though, note that the Zips projections are based upon where these guys came from. Later in the offseason, the Zips were revised to take into account Dodger Stadium park effects, which put a sizeable bite in some of the numbers. Here are the revised projections:

Revised Zips 2006 Projections
		OBP	SPC	OPS
Furcal#	ss	.340	.419	.759
Mueller#	3b	.350	.416	.766
Alomar	c	.273	.328	.601
Garciaparra	1b	.321	.469	.790
Lofton*	cf	.320	.352	.672

So we have the same upgrades and downgrades, but the upside isn't as high and the downside is worse.

Of course there are some playing time adjustments that need to be made. Alomar won't play very much, really he replaces Bako who managed a .662 OPS last year. So Alomar is a downgrade at backup catcher, but Navarro (and Martin) will get the bulk of ABs available for catchers.

On the other hand, it's equally unfair to think Furcal, Mueller and the other starters will take every AB at their positions. For example, without Edwards and Robles 3b sub-.650 OPS ABs, the Dodgers would have had a very strong 3b last year. So if we factor in some Izzy and Robles as ss and some (probably more) Robles and who knows at 3b, the upgrades at ss and are reduced even further. Even with these adjustments, Furcal is still a significant upgrade at ss. Mueller begins to look like a wash.

Lofton and Garciaparra not playing everyday should actually increase overall production at their respective positions -- assuming, of course, that Mr. Ned and Grady spell them with the best subs (Zips projected OPS: Cruz .761, Werth .757, and Choi .822) rather than Tracy's friends (Zips projected OPS: Repko .698, Robles .684 and Martinez .652).

So where does that leave us? A material upgrade at ss, a wash at 3b and 1b, and a material downgrade at cf. And a downgrade a backup catcher, to the extent that makes much difference at all. All this for only about $20 million in added salary.

There is also the idea that when Izzy is healthy he will play 2b and move Kent over to 1b. Such stupidity would effectively replace the nearly .800 OPS of Garciaparra/Choi/Saenz with Izzy's projected .662. No way this could really happen. I mean, who would possible replace a platoon OPSing around .800 with someone with an OPS in the mid six hundreds? Oh yeah, he's managing in Pittsburgh now.

Blue Think Tank Fantasy Baseball PLUS

2006-03-19T18:56:00.000-08:00

Update: All full. Let the games begin.

We've upgraded to Yahoo Sports Fantasy Baseball PLUS, so here's the new info: follow this link to Yahoo Sports Fantasy Baseball PLUS, enter League ID "3944" and Password "scully". Live draft on Sunday at 11:30 LA time. Trash-talking Dodger fans preferred, but all are welcome.

FYI, here's the complete league settings:

League ID#:	3944

League Name:	Sabertooth Dodgers II

Password:	scully

League Paid For:	By Commissioner

Season Type:	Full

Draft Type:	Live Draft

Draft Time:	Sun Mar 26 11:30am PST

Max Teams:	20

Scoring Type:	Head-to-Head

Player Universe:	All baseball

Max Moves:	No maximum

Max Trades:	No maximum

Trade Reject Time:	2

Trade End Date:	August 13, 2006

Waiver Time:	2 days

Can't Cut List Provider:	Yahoo! Sports

Trade Review:	League Votes

Post Draft Players:	Follow Waiver Rules

Min Innings Pitched:	30

Weekly Deadline:	Daily - Tomorrow

Start Scoring on:	Week 1

Divisions:	No

Roster Positions:	C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, OF, OF, OF, Util, P, P, P, P, P, P, P, P, P, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN, DL, DL, DL

Stat Categories:	HR, SB, BB, OBP, SLG, IP, HR, BB, K, ERA

Baseball Salary Treemap

2006-03-18T12:08:00.000-08:00

This thing is totally cool. It takes a bit to figure out how it works, but once understood it delivers tons of information in a really intuitive way. Sort of like higher math through pictures.

Thanks to Catfish Stew for pointing it out, and to Andrew Koch for pointing it out to Catfish.

Blue Think Tank Fantasy Baseball

2006-03-15T23:46:00.000-08:00

It's been almost three months since my last post. Is such delinquency the result of my still smoldering resentment at McCourt for canning Depo? Too damn much work? The wife banned me from all things baseball? Just too f***ing lazy?

No. It's fantasy baseball withdraw-induced coma. Now is the time to rouse from hibernation and enjoy some baseball (of the fantasy variety -- cause I'm certainly not too excited about Mr. Ned's over-the-hill gang of ex-sox&jints).

So follow this link to Yahoo Sports Fantasy Baseball, enter League ID "245831" -- Password "scully", and let the games begin.

Fire Jason Repko!

2006-01-26T17:29:00.000-08:00

According to Dave Pinto's "Probabilistic Model of Range", Jason Repko was one of the worst defensive centerfielders last year. Only the geriatric duo of Griffey and Williams appear to be definitely worse at getting to the ball.

At the other positions so far listed, Furcal, as expected, was in the elite, while Kent more than held his own. And Robles is indeed a slow little dude.

The Power of OPS

2005-12-21T09:30:00.000-08:00

Last year Depo went after players with more power, this year Mr. Ned is chasing guys with higher batting averages and less power. Many people use OPS (on base plus slugging) as a quick approximation of hitting skill. However, in Moneyball, Depo was quoted as saying OBP was four times as important as slugging. So what really leads to scoring runs? Or, put in statistical jargon, what stat or combination of stats has the highest correlation to runs scored?

I thought I'd take a look into these questions with a focus on the Dodgers. So I ran some regressions on Dodger runs scored per year compared to various stats in the same year since 1962 (i.e., since the club moved into Dodger Stadium). Actually I compared runs scored per game, otherwise the number of games would have the highest correlation. Here are the results:

stat	r^2
BA	0.7192
OBP	0.8226
SLG	0.8169
OPS	0.8868

In other words, variation in the Dodger's team batting average explains about 72% of the variation in runs scored by the Dodgers, OBP or SLG about 82%, and OPS about 89%. OPS is clearly the best of these stats, but what of Depo's idea of four times OBP plus slugging? Does this only apply to the A's? And what of other combinations of OBP and SLG? I found that on base percentage is more important than slugging for the Dodgers, but not quite as much as Depo found (for the A's?). Depo's 4*OPB+SLG has an r^2 of 0.8959, but the highest correlation I found was 2.4*OBP+SLG with an r^2 of 0.9017.

So why did Depo go after power hitters? Was it just that they were underpriced, and Moneyball had driven up the price of OBP? Take a look at the numbers above. While they show the importance of OBP, it's also clear that SLG is only slightly less important.

Or was it something else? Has the relative importance of slugging increased since the days of Koufax and Wills, at least for the Dodgers? To figure out if things had changed over time, I looked at the value of different combinations of OBP and SLG in predicting runs scored for each decade (note that Dodger Stadium opened in 1962, so for the sixties I used the years 1962 through 1970; other decades have the full ten years except the current one). Here are the combinations of OBP and SLG with the highest correlations to Dodger runs scored per decade, the corresponding r squared values, and for comparison, the r squared values for OPS over the same decade:

decade	formula	r^2	r^2 for OPS	delta
60s	5.4*OBP+SLG	0.9658	0.9525	0.0133
70s	4.4*OBP+SLG	0.9321	0.8904	0.0417
80s	1.0*OBP+SLG	0.8502	0.8502	0.0000
90s	0.8*OBP+SLG	0.9312	0.9307	0.0005
00s	0.6*OBP+SLG	0.9983	0.9943	0.0040

DS era	2.4*OBP+SLG	0.9017	0.8868	0.0149

So slugging clearly has become more important over time. There are many theories why this is the case, such as expansion watered down the quality of pitching, new parks like Coors, steroids, etc., but why is an entirely different topic and I choose to punt. The important fact here is that for the Dodgers in recent years, getting on base holds no great edge over power. Further, the gain in predictive value of other combinations of OBP and SLG over the simple 1 and 1 addition represented by OPS is minimum (except in the 70s).

What about the more involved metrics like runs created (RC), equivalent average (EqA), etc? Well, Baseball Reference doesn't have the component stats (such as HBP and SF) necessary to calculate these metrics, and I was too lazy to look them up elsewhere. I did find that adding stolen bases and caught stealing to the mix would allow you to squeeze a little more predictive power. For the Dodger Stadium era, the maximizing formula is 1.8*OBP+SLG+(1.9*SB-CS)/(AB+BB). In correlation to runs scored, it yields an r squared of 0.9294 -- or nearly 4% better than OPS alone at predicting runs scored. However, as shown in the chart below, the value and predictive ability of SB and CS has decreased over time.

decade	formula	r^2	r^2 for OPS	delta
60s	1.9OBP+SLG+(1.9SB-CS)/(AB+BB)	0.9907	0.9525	0.0382
70s	4.1OBP+SLG+(1.3SB-CS)/(AB+BB)	0.9332	0.8904	0.0428
80s	1.3OBP+SLG+(0.8SB-CS)/(AB+BB)	0.8679	0.8502	0.0177
90s	1.0OBP+SLG+(0.4SB-CS)/(AB+BB)	0.9397	0.9307	0.0090
00s	0.4OBP+SLG+(-0.4SB-CS)/(AB+BB)	0.9996	0.9943	0.0053

DS era	1.8OBP+SLG+(1.9SB-CS)/(AB+BB)	0.9294	0.8868	0.0426

Hence, for purposes of comparing historical teams and players, employing formulas that incorporate SB and CS stats would be helpful. On the other hand, for evaluating current players or projecting runs scored for current Dodger teams, SB and CS add very little value. Further, OBP and SLG are typically more consistent for a given player from one year to the next than number of SB and CS -- so OPS may be predicted with higher accuracy than SB. Given its ease of use and fairly accurate predictive ability, it's hard to beat OPS.

Ain't Much Going On...

2005-11-30T16:51:00.000-08:00

A lot of rumors floating around, especially the supposed offers made to Giles and Furcal. It's unlikely that the Dodgers sign both of them due to payroll limits, whatever that may be. While signing Giles makes plenty of sense, Furcal at first glance seems superfluous given the depth in the middle infield.

It's also possible (even likely) that LA misses out on both of them, and will have to resort to trades to fill needs, as there are slim pickings in the free agency market. Time will tell whether Colletti has a trade idea or two lined up to shore up the roster. I hope he does, anyway.

Meanwhile, here are some recent off-topic things that caught my eye.

Kanpai, Bobby!

I finally found a photo of Bo Beer, named in honor of Bobby Valentine and his championship-winning season in Japan as manager. Too bad the mugshot doesn't include the fake glasses and moustache combo.

Circle Illusion

Why does the blank spot always turn to green? Must have something to do with complementary color schemes.

Ronald McDonald robs Wendy's?

Imagine the taunts this guy faced at work before he decided to rob it. Come to think of it, imagine the taunts he faces now:

"Robble Robble Robble!"

Bucs Score Big with Bay

2005-11-19T07:36:00.000-08:00

While Colletti is busy giving Collins a pity interview, other teams are busy signing players. One really great recent signing was the Pirates deal with Jason Bay. For $18.25 the Bucs lock up Bay for 4 years. And the contract is really back loaded, so if the small-market team needs to trade Bay for prospects before the last year of the contract, they'll save a bundle.

Bay has now logged over 1000 major league ABs and can be considered the real deal. He was 10th in MLB in OPS last year (.961), has a career OPS of .940 and a career EQA of .314. He wouldn't be considered a frontline defensive CF (career Rate2 of 98), but he is a fine defensive corner outfielder (career Rate2 in LF of 104). At 27 he's just entering his prime and should perform at or above these levels for the duration of this four-year deal.

Obviously this contract replaces arbitration years and not free agency years, otherwise Bay would be asking for Matsui/Giles money. Still, I think the Pirates are saving money over what Bay could have received in arb and circumventing the hassle and ill will that goes along with annual arbitration hearings. Say what you may about Littlefield's taste in managers, but I agree with BP when they say that "it doesn't get any more canny than this".

Dark Day in Dodgerville

2005-11-15T18:25:00.000-08:00

Read it and weep.

It's not that there is no possibility of Colletti being a serviceable GM, but compared to what we had (Depo) or could have had (Epstein or Ng), Colletti is a big downgrade.

Late Night Potpourri

2005-11-09T21:45:00.000-08:00

The Nightmare, AKA the LA Mets

No GM, no manager, no coaching staff ...

Getting drowsy......
*yawn*
Zzzzzzzzzz......
.....
Floating through a dimly lit corridor, a door opens and a press conference appears...

"Mr. Phillips, what is your vision-"
"Call me Steve, please."
"Alright Steve, what is your vision for the Dodgers as the new GM?"
"My job is to immediately return the Dodgers to its rightful place among the elite. As such, I would like to announce our first moves of this offseason. Ladies and gentlemen, you may know this guy. The Dodgers have just signed Mike Piazza to a 3 year contract. Welcome home, Mike."
// camera flash all around, a roar amongst the press //
"In addition, the Dodgers have just acquired Adrian Beltre from Seattle in a six player trade -"
// a collective gasp //
"Steve, can we get the exact details involved in that trade?"
"Sure, just give me a sec." // whispers to Lasorda and smiles // "We acquired Belly and Eddie Guardado in exchange for some minor leaguers. Seattle will also be chipping in about $4 million a year for the next 4 years, which we think-"
"Who are the prospects that went to Seattle?"
"Uh," // pulls out some memos //" Chad Billingsley, Russell Martin, Andy LaRoche, and a player-to-be-named-later. We feel that this trade helps us win right now, and the money offset from Seattle gives us the financial flexibility to..."
.....

"AHHHHH!!!"

A nightmare. Cold sweat. TV still on.

Damn, I must have fallen asleep while watching ESPN... What's this? A press conference with Steve Phillips as the GM? What kind of a sick joke is this?

Wait, the scrolling words at the bottom...it's fake. So that must have caused my nightmare...

The Mets a few seasons ago were an overshadowed, second-class team that often made transactions in short-sighted desperation. (Steve Reed for Jason Bay!) Here in LA, the Angels are making all the headlines, and surely the PR-sensitive McCourts surely will demand immediate improvement from the new GM.

Even though the salaries of Dreifort and Green finally came off the books, the freed-up payroll might not be wisely spent; the free agent market is thin. LA may also be outbid by those teams with deeper pockets, like the Mets. The alternate way to acquire proven talent would be to trade away the prospects that Evans and DePodesta were loath to give up. This is especially possible if the new GM is from outside the organization. The mandate from McCourt seems clear:

Fix this mess right now, otherwise you'll be outta here faster than you can say "DePodesta"!

An outside GM would have fewer qualms burning up the farm system, as he would be on a short leash AND would have zero ties to the players. I don't like this scenario at all - as I've said before, it's a return to the days of FOX without the dinero.

It may be preferrable if all the outside candidates turn down the job, and Kim Ng gets promoted by default. As for bringing in "experience" and "Dodger tradition", why not hire a senior advisor to the GM who has ties to the organization? Would Dave Wallce be interested in returning to his old club?

Needed: Korean Translator

Here are some recent Korean articles on Hee Seop Choi. It looks as if he's taking instructions from former hitting coach Reggie Smith. Can anybody translate?

OT: Two Time Killers

1) For those who like popping bubble wrap... (Edit: Pretend that each bubble is a GM prospect who says no.)

2) This is a bit more challenging. Use the various items lying around to advance to the next room.

Dodger 2006 Home Attendance: 3,417,575

2005-11-08T18:04:00.000-08:00

Or at least that's my best estimate without knowing how the club will perform on the field next year. As explained below, over 70% of the variation in home attendance during the Dodger Stadium era can be explained using external (i.e., non-baseball) factors and prior club performance. If you could magically know how the club will play next year, then nearly 90% could be explained. (Why is it that the same magic that tells you how the team plays couldn't just tell you the attendance as well? I don't know -- it's magic. I'm talking stats here, bear with me.) So here are the refined attendance numbers corresponding to how the club finishes in the NL West in 2006:

3,564,380
3,433,714
3,303,048
3,172,382
3,041,716

In other words, even if the club finishes dead last, they still should draw over 3,000,000. On the other hand, even if the club wins the West in 2006, it would draw fewer fans than it did in 2005 on a 4th place finish. In fact, last season's 4th place finish has a lot to do with why the club won't draw as well next year.

What?

So how did I come up with these estimates? Smog's post got me thinking about the relationship between team performance and attendance. So I ran some (linear) regression analyses to see what correlation there is between various measures of performance and attendance. First I looked at the current year's winning percentage, then the prior year's, then averages of prior two years, etc. Surprisingly, I didn't find much correlation at all (e.g., current year's win percentage vs. average per game attendance r^2=.0114, prior year's r^2=.0001). Whether the club made the playoffs or world series also weren't very predictive. Division rank yielded slightly better results (rank current year, r^2=.2106; prior year r^2=.0975), but still not as high a correlation as I expected. [Note on tests of statistical correlation and the reporting thereof: if references to r^2 aren't familiar to you, then take this very perfunctory explanation offered by Microsoft Excel: "The r-squared value can be interpreted as the proportion of the variance in y attributable to the variance in x." In this case, the proportion of variation in Dodger attendance explained (although "explained" is really too strong) by the variation in other factors, such as the Dodger's win percentage. Calculating r^2 values is best left to Excel or other statistics software, and further explanation of statistics is best left to someone else.]

It's More about When than What

So I stepped back and a took at the plotted data to see if anything obvious jumped out at me. FYI, here it is (source: baseball-reference.com) (click on the graph to see a larger, more legible version):

Note that the graph shows per game average attendance, not total annual attendance. I used per game rather than total numbers so strike-shortened seasons could be compared with others. The strikes didn't seem to have much effect on Dodger draw, perhaps because the Dodgers won the series in 81.

The one noticeable thing that stands out to me is the overall steady increase in attendance. In fact, the one factor that best correlated to attendance was simply the year (r^2=.4621). Here's the same chart with a trend line added:

The resulting equation (i.e., the equation of the trend line) is: average Dodger per game home attendance equals 357.81 multiplied by the year minus 674,738. So without looking at baseball factors at all, we could estimate next season's attendance at 43,028.86 per game [43,028.86 = 357.81 * 2006 - 674,738] or 3,528,367 in total (82 games).

Does this make sense, or is it just luck? Given that baseball factors didn't yield better results, I surmise that the correlation to the year really shows correlation to external (non-baseball) factors such as growth in population, disposable income, etc. To test this I looked up population numbers for the five county area (aka, the Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County CMSA). Unfortunately, I could only find annual numbers as far back as 1970. Over this period the population correlated fairly well with attendance (r^2=.3005), but not quite as well as years over the same period (r^2=.3525). Perhaps the difference is due to increase in disposable income, expanding economy, etc. It was a big enough pain in the ass hunting through the census info to find annual population data that I decided to punt on testing the economic factors and just settle on using years as a proxy. Besides, I wanted to use all the attendance data from the entire Dodger Stadium era and I only had population data going back to 1970.

The Baseball Factor

So if the general trend toward increase in attendance over the years explains about 46% of the variation in attendance, what about the rest? To test this I compared various baseball factors versus the difference in actual attendance in each season from estimated based upon the foregoing trend equation. In other words, residual analysis. Again I found that divisional rank was far better at predicting attendance than raw win percentage. But what really surprised me was the factor that best correlated with the attendance residuals wasn't the current year's rank, or prior year's, or the average of two or three year's, but it was the club's average divisional rank over the prior nine years (r^2=.3702). Apparently, most Dodger fans have long memories.

Using multivariate regression analysis, we can look at how well these two factors, when taken together, explain the variation in Dodger home attendance. ("Multivariate regression analysis" sounds pretty gnarly, but from a user perspective, it just involves adding another column of data to the spreadsheet.) And the answer is about 68% (r^2=.6851). After testing a number of different factors, I found that the highest correlation between a given year's attendance and things other than current year's performance was about 71% (r^2=.7117). To get this I regressed Dodger home attendance versus four variables: 1) the year; 2) the Dodgers' average divisional rank over the prior nine years; 3) the Dodgers' average divisional rank over the prior three years; and 4) a playoff factor equal to 2 if the Dodgers reached the world series in the prior year, 1 if the Dodgers finished 1st or 2nd in their division in the prior year (i.e., were in the race for the playoffs), or 0 if the Dodgers finished 3rd or lower in their division in the prior year. Here's the resulting equation: average Dodger per game attendance = 283.22878 * the year - 4293.465343 * 9yr av rank - 924.4837235 * 3yr av rank + 878.7310142 * playoff factor - 513,349.8755. Do the math and you should come up the attendance number in the title (or one or both of us has our math wrong).

In order to predict attendance with higher confidence, one must turn to current year performance. Not surprisingly, the most useful current-year factor is division rank. Adding this variable to the analysis described in the prior paragraph allows one to describe nearly 90% of the variation in Dodger home attendance (r^2=.8918). The resulting equation: average Dodger per game attendance = 254.9744543 * the year - 4885.943458 * 9yr av rank - 653.1594398 * 3yr av rank + 1224.126037 * playoff factor - 1593.488331 * current year rank - 452406.8777. Here's what it looks like graphed:

As you can see, the estimate is pretty close to the actual. So what makes up the other 11% variation in attendance? There are lots of possibilities, such as Fernandomania, good/bad PR, or the price of beer. It would be interesting to see if ticket price had much impact, or to see if the correlations that hold true for the Dodgers work for other clubs. I'll leave all that to another day, or maybe Smog will want to take it up.

BP on Epstein & Depo's Departures

2005-11-03T10:53:00.000-08:00

If you're a Baseball Prospectus subscriber you really should check out this fine article by Joe Sheehan. He lays bare the myths of the bitgod crowd and takes a few warranted shots at the McCourts, including this one:

I can't say for sure where McCourt is taking his counsel these days, but I have no doubt that he's getting bad advice. As good as 2006 may be on the field, the long-term prospects for this organization are terrible, and it's McCourt's fault.

In a similar vein, norcaldodger has added this articulate post to what's otherwise become a sea of idiotic Depo-bashing over at dodgers.com. He even goes so far as to suggest that McCourt suck it up and take Depo back:

The McCourts, who have in the past paid lip service to "making mistakes", should admit this latest one and bring DePo back. After all, DePo's under contract for three more years . . . the money saved might bring a quality bat.

Unfortunately, that's not going to happen. In fact, it's much more likely that McCourt hires Bowden. Until I hear otherwise, I'm going to hang onto hope that somehow the club can land Epstein.

Blue Sox

2005-11-01T10:51:00.000-08:00

All Things Boston

Wacko conspiracy theory to explain Depo's firing: McCourt's lust for all things Boston peaks when he finds out he has a shot at Theo Epstein, so he dumps Depo to open up the GM spot. Then he trades for Manny, signs Johnny Damon and Nomar, and hires Grady Little as skipper. To top it off he changes the name of the club to the Boston Blue Sox of Los Angeles.

Don't think Frank would go that far? All the evidence you need is his interview with Depo. It's not readily apparent from the transcript of the meeting in which Depo discusses his baseball philosophy, use of statistics, etc. To really understand what happened you have to experience it as McCourt did:

Depo: blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Harvard blah balh blah blah.

McCourt: You went to Harvard? Isn't that near Boston?

Yes, much like Ginger, McCourt only hears one thing -- in his case, Boston. Of course, McCourt was later dismayed to find out that Depo worked for Oakland and Cleveland. That simply wouldn't cut it when there was a real Bostonian to be had.

Back in the real world, whatever McCourt's machinations, this scenario will not come to pass. Epstein quit because he had conflicts with Lucchino, so why on earth would he subject himself to McCourt and Lasorda. Also there is that little problem that Frank won't / can't afford to shell out the cash that Theo would demand.

Worst Case Scenario

By the time Theo bursts McCourt's Boston-philic bubble, Gillick and Hunsicker may well already have jobs with Philly and Tampa. Then Tommy gets his wish and McCourt turns to Bowden.

To make matters worse, Arizona has already hired Theo's former assistant Josh Byrnes as GM. Towers could well go to Boston because he is buddies with Lucchino, which could induce San Diego to hire Epstein for revenge. There's also a good chance Depo could take a front office job with Colorado to work with his friend Dan O'Dowd. Of course the only thing that could possibly follow in this nightmare scenario is the hated Giants firing Sabean and then somehow convincing Beane to cross the bay.

What Actually Happens

The chance the club can land Epstein is pretty slim. Of course if McCourt somehow managed to, it would mean the club was in good hands. While he might not be quite the genius Depo is, he does seem to be more outgoing and more adept at PR. And the WS ring would give him some cover to make tough moves that Depo clearly didn't have going for him.

The likely choices appear to be Gillick and Hunsicker. Although a step down from Depo, neither would be a disaster (unless they let Tommy meddle too much). But McCourt does have competition for these guys and will have to pay relatively big money to get them.

Hence, Bowden is a real possibility. The combination of McCourt, Lasorda and Bowden would be really hard for this Dodger fan to take. Of course, Bowden would mortgage the farm to bring in some big names now (albeit big names with team chemistry). The team will do much better in 2006 -- maybe even make it to the first round of playoffs -- and Bowden will be hailed as a savior in the idiotic local press. All the while other clubs in the west will be building a base for sustained future success.

PR Run Amuck

2005-10-30T18:11:00.000-08:00

What to make of Depo's demise at the hands of McCourt and Lasorda? I'm still too bowled over to make heads-or-tails of it. I've read many stories, heard quite a bit of (mostly inane) commentary, and laughed at a few posts, but one quote from an LA Times article keeps sticking in my craw:

A strategic communications firm hired by the Dodgers in spring training became frustrated by DePodesta's seeming indifference to public relations and helped convince McCourt that someone more fan-friendly was necessary.

You know ownership has hit rock bottom when it gives a PR firm a voice in baseball decisions. One of the things I have always enjoyed about this and similar sites is they focus on winning baseball games. Argue whether this player, that manager, or some other style of play has the best chance of winning, but it's always about winning. As Dodger Thoughts rightly points out, that is the Dodger way. Maybe it's his wife's counsel, Lasorda's kibitzing, or his precarious financial position, but whatever the reason, it's clear that McCourt has taken his eye off the true goal.

Wag The Dog

2005-10-29T17:01:00.000-07:00

Some quick thoughts on DePodesta's termination.

Something smelled fishy when DePodesta did not join in on the meeting between McCourt, Lasorda, and Hershiser, but who expected the firing of the GM? It sounds as if McCourt overrid DePodesta's authority in picking the manager, and ultimately decided to remove DePodesta altogether.

In some ways, this situation is no different from Tracy's, whose "creative differences" with DePodesta eventually led to the dismissal. Right or wrong, bosses have the right to dictate an employee's role and judge his effectiveness. Still, 18 months on the job is nowhere near enough to evaluate a GM, unless he shows himself to be utterly incompetent. (DePodesta wasn't)

The McCourts own the team, and they have decided to make DePodesta the sacrificial lamb for the lost season. It's a convenient way of earning some PR reprieve, saving their "brand" in the short term at the possible expense of long term stability of the "product"... Obfuscate the crisis at hand by creating a bigger diversion, which may end up backfiring.

Way to wag the dog, ~~Wormtongue~~ Tommy! A return to the Dark Ages of FOX without the stupid money to throw around!

Perhaps it's not so gloom-and-doom. The McCourts may end up hiring a terrific GM, although it's hard to figure out why such a candidate would want to come to LA if he knows that his authority would be limited. At this rate of turnover, it wouldn't be surprising that if the team needed a new farm director, and a new scouting director, and a new.... My previous post's title "McBroke And His Dominatrix", which was meant to be a joke, doesn't seem so funny anymore.

Somewhere, the Pink Mouse roars.

The PR Problem, AKA "McBroke And His Dominatrix"

2005-10-24T23:01:00.000-07:00

What a crappy way to start the week. Nothing like getting a flat tire on a Monday morning while going to work. Anyhow...

There was yet another turnover in the PR staff, as the incumbent VP of Communications was ousted after just six months, and was replaced by Tipper Gore's ex-aide. It seems as if the McCourts change PR people like the fictitious band Spinal Tap change drummers.

Also, the LA Times on Sunday stated that DePodesta's job may not be safe, either. Such guesswork isn't worth elaborating on, except to say that his detractors probably wish for a quick, mysterious death by either spontaneous combustion or by choking on someone else's vomit. (Eeck, couldn't help that one last reference to "This Is Spinal Tap")

The following quote caught my eye.

Dodger employees and prospective employees, according to sources, have been directed by the McCourts and their lieutenants to "think of the McCourts as the brand and the Dodgers as the product."

Assuming that this is indeed true, here are some thoughts.

Given their backgrounds, the McCourts are certainly intelligent and, at times, bold.
As with any sane business owner, their objective is to turn a profit, either from team operations or from a related venture.
They are learning the business of baseball on the fly by applying their backgrounds in real estate and law as they see fit.
Their public personae of "mean" and "penny-pinching" may or may not be apt.

The so-called "family operation" back in the O'Malley era is a fond notion that most fans, rightfully or not, associate with the glory days of Koufax, Drysdale, and Valenzuela. The McCourts tried to revive some of these ideas this year. (Tie-ins to the 1955 season immediately comes to mind) In other words, the McCourt "brand" was to become the successor to the O'Malleys in spirit. The reason to do so not only lies in the hopes of greater profits, but also in raising their own public stature for future benefit.

This effort to be associated with past glory has largely failed. A better year wouldn't have made much difference, I believe. As a fan, I flat out don't care how nice a man Frankie is, whether Jamie can bake a mean apple pie, or how they project a leadership quality that will surely bring the World Series to Chavez Ravine. When I go to a game, I'm happy as long as the team is winning and the environment is relatively affordable and safe. Forget the "brand." I care about the "product."

Maybe that's the reason the PR staff has completely been upended again. It is difficult enough to promote the team when the team finishes 20 games under .500, one of the best players goes berserk (again), and the manager is fired. Instead, imagine trying to promote the ownership, the masthead that oversaw this entire mess. The McCourts may have reduced the PR job to that of a replacement-level drummer, an impossible job to fill.

To be fair, I understand that businesses are run in the interests of the owner. Perhaps the changes were overdue in the corporate team. Times have changed, and the business paradigm should evolve accordingly. Such a change is no different from DePodesta's roster overhaul from a financial perspective: shedding the overpaid, underperforming employees while acquiring those who will be more productive.

PR is virtually useless when the product goes sour. One course of action would be to forget about the "brand" and focus on the "product" exclusively, for now. Field a team within an acceptable(ly high?) budget that wins consistently year after year and everything, including the image problem, will take care of itself. Unfortunately, there is a strong possibility that DePodesta's plan probably won't reap rewards until about 2007 or so.

The McCourts have found it difficult to maintain any positive public image while restructuring the team under their philosophy. Some of the criticism is well-deserved, some not. Another losing season or two might mean alienating many fans, which would be quite an ignoble feat given the heralded history of the Dodgers, a team with the greatest attendance figure in all of sports. A good 2006 campaign is a must.

Half-Baked Lineup Ideas

2005-10-17T11:16:00.000-07:00

Tentative lineup for 06, assuming that Bradley is gone:
3B Aybar
SS Robles or Perez
CF Drew
2B Kent
LF ????
C Navarro
1B Choi + platoonmate
RF Werth

Bench:
C Bako?
OF Ledee, Repko
IF Young?

Trade bait:
C Phillips
CF Bradley

Reinforcements in 07?:
3B LaRoche
?? Guzman
C Martin
1B Loney

The only regulars virtually guaranteed of starting roles next year are Kent, Navarro, and Drew. Bradley's probably gone, and his production must be replaced. An outfield acquisition is highly likely, as that fills an immediate need and doesn't hinder the long term goal of easing in the primo prospects, until Guzman is shifted to the outfield, anyway. A short term hedge in case the corner infielders do not pan out wouldn't be a bad idea, either.

Outfield

The team could simply long-term either Matsui or Giles in the free agent market, but that may be cost prohibitive given the dearth of quality FAs. (The bidding has apparently started at 3 years, $35.5 million for Godzilla.) Another route would be to sign a second-tier free agent such as Lawton and hope for the best, but to do so would probably require a bigger offensive upgrade elsewhere.

The trade route may be more sensible. There are a lot of names swirling out there, including Manny Ramirez. Acquiring an mega-contract like ManRam is probably out of the question unless the other team is willing to chip in a significant dollar offset. Which raises the question: Why would a big market team like the Red Sox pay to get out of a contract when the savings cannot be efficiently reinvested to make up for the lost production?

Instead, it sure would be nice to acquire someone relatively underpaid like Dunn, as new GMs look to revamp their rosters and payrolls. Unfortunately, acquiring such a player still will cost aplenty, and DePodesta has shown great reluctance to trade the top-tier prospects for short term gain. It figures to be seen whether DePodesta's small market counterparts are more willing to trade now that free agency looks closer for Dunn, Huff, and others.

Somewhere in between the albatross contracts and the desireable ones are the likes of Jenkins, who is owed about $7 million a year until 07. While Overbay is the player most often mentioned as trade bait, he's cheaper. Overbay was an outfielder in college, and Milwaukee might be ready to call up Fielder to play 1B. Trading Jenkins instead Overbay might give the Brewers the payroll room to improve other parts of their roster and perhaps improve on their freakish .500 record last year. For LA, Jenkins is a reasonably priced #5 hitter who shouldn't cost a bundle of prospects.

On a greater scale is someone like Burrell, who is owed about $12 million a year until 2008. The Phillies just fired their GM and may be looking for a change of direction. No team will take on Thome and his bad back unless he comes steeply discounted. (Cleveland? Seattle? Dream on.) Someone else with a large contract (Abreu? Burrell?) may go instead. Too bad that ManRam just acquired 10/5 rights, because otherwise Burrell, Thome, and a prospect for Manny and Arroyo sounds about right for both teams...maybe LA can do something here?

Infield: 1B

If a big name outfielder is indeed acquired, there would be less financial wiggle room to upgrade the infield. Konerko's bat would be nice, but it would seem that an upgrade at 1B is not a priority given that the Choi/Saenz platoon did just fine offensively. (I refuse to refer to Phillips as a 1B.) Not upgrading 1B with someone like Konerko may mean better served upgrades elsewhere.

The problem is that Saenz may attract more attention from an AL team, as he seems better suited to being a DH. It's possible that Choi needs a new platoonmate.

One name that I recently noticed was Matthew LeCroy, a DH/1B/C recently outrighted off the Twins' roster. It looks as if he might be a younger version of Saenz: good righthanded bat with an .800 OPS, shaky glove, and slow as molasses. Given that no less than 3 players on the roster can play 3B, perhaps having a 1B platoonmate who can instead catch on occasion isn't a bad thing, especially when the 21 year old starting catcher will catch the bulk of the games.

Infield: "6-5-4"

LaRoche might be ready in 2007, so hopefully the 3B situation might be resolved by then, and Aybar did look smooth with the glove at the end of the season. But was his .901 OPS in 86 ABs a true indication of his abilities? His SLG and OBP are significantly higher than his minor league numbers in ANY GIVEN YEAR.

Add to this the injury to the Gold Glove shortstop, and the left side of the infield is potentially a mess. Maybe Perez, Aybar, and Robles prove themselves. If so, the problem shifts over to 2B in 2007 if Kent's bat is not retained.

It would be nice to acquire a proven hitter who could fill in at shortstop for half the season, shift over to 3B if others prove deficient, and then shift to 2B after Kent's contract ends. More or less a 6-5-4 relay...

6 then 5 then 4
6 minus 5 plus 4
5
#5
NOMAH!

Garciaparra has been rumored about for the past two offseasons, and he very well could be pursued again, especially since he has shown a willingness to switch positions this year with the Cubs. His injury history and declining range are worrysome, but it seems that he may be a good hedge against the current infield uncertainty IF he's willing to shift around according to the team's needs. A two year offer with a team option for a third sounds reasonable.

Half-Baked Pitching Staff Ideas

2005-10-10T18:11:00.000-07:00

While DePo's away in Europe, there ain't much goin' on here. Might as well throw some ideas around. Here are some thoughts on the pitching staff.

The 2005 season's silver lining may have been the bullpen, as the younglings gained valuable experience while Gagne, Alvarez, and others mended. Here is next year's pitching staff, for now.

Starters - Penny, Lowe, Perez, Houlton? Jackson? Billingsley mid-year??
Closer - Gagne
Setup - Sanchez, Brazoban, Broxton
LOOGY - Kuo
ROOGY - Schmoll
Swingman - Dessens (mutual option 06)
Others - Osoria, Wunsch?

Assuming that Gagne returns back to his old dominant self, the bullpen certainly looks deep, while the rotation seems shaky at the back end. (My guess is that Weaver rejects arb and gets his 4 or 5 year deal elsewhere.) It seems as if the #5 spot is Houlton's to lose, but can the young Billingsley or even Jackson be counted upon to hold the other free spot? Can Perez stay healthy the whole year? The rotation could use one more pitcher with a major league track record.

Unfortunately, there are slim pickings in the free agent market outside of Weaver and Burnett. There probably exists some organizational desire to avoid a long-term contract, as that would block the blue chip prospects on their way in 2007 or so. (Not to mention $$$.) If free agency is a seller's market, then the trade route would probably be cost-prohibitive also, and DePodesta surely doesn't want to give up prospects for a marginal starter. And I'll be damned if another scrap heap special makes the team after the failed Erickson experiment.

So here is my outlandish idea that just could work... Would it be a bad thing to convert Sanchez back to a starting pitcher? (He was a starter in the minors before 2002.) I don't remember the source, but there were murmurs during the last winter that Sanchez and his "rubber arm" might be given a look as a starter in spring training. Now that he has seemingly mastered the changeup, wouldn't his 3 pitch repertoire be more valuable starting games instead of setting up for Gagne?

(A similar idea would be to send Broxton back down to work again as a starter, but that would hurt the major league club in the immediate future and undo the major gain in his velocity. That's a no-go for me. )

The farfetched notion of giving Sanchez a shot at starting is obviously out the window if Gagne does not revert back to form OR someone fails to step up as a setup man. But it can't hurt as an experiment during spring training, right? If Sanchez can hold his own, I would prefer him at the back of the rotation than Jackson or Houlton, and probably most of the second-tier free agents, too.

So by starting Sanchez, you could save a few bucks on the pitching staff that you can instead use to bolster the lineup. According to Hardball Dollars, the current 2006 payroll is about $65 million with the arbitration eligible players figured in, minus Bradley. DePodesta can probably acquire two premier talents without going over budget, which is hopefully around 2005's $88 million.

Outlandish? Yes. Impossible? No.

I'll follow up with some thoughts on the lineup sometime later. Hopefully they won't be nearly as whimsical...
__________________________________

I just found this, a quick mention on former executive Bob Graziano getting what appears to be a decent gig.

Novus Ordo Seclorum

2005-10-04T11:20:00.000-07:00

So it might not rank with the American Revolution, but the parting of Tracy should usher in full implementation of the DePo era in Dodger baseball. Much has been said good and (mostly) bad about Tracy. Even if you are a confirmed Tracy-basher, it would be a huge stretch to blame 2005 entirely on him -- but his firing does provide a clean break from that awful season. Now it's all up to DePo.

Turning to an even less revolutionary change, I have signed on as a contributor to the Blue Think Tank. Fresh from my victorious fantasy baseball season, I will lend a hand to secondhandsmog as we critique, discuss and mock the 2005-6 offseason antics. Soon the managerial selection circus will begin, then onto roster moves. Let the Tracy-free fun begin.

Ch-Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes

2005-10-02T19:25:00.000-07:00

I still don't know what I was waiting for
And my time was running wild
A million dead end streets and
Every time I thought I'd got it made
It seemed the taste was not so sweet... -David Bowie

Well, it's over. Time to forget this miserable year and look forward to next season. Many changes ahead...

Changes to this blog

New to this blog as co-writer is slackfarmer, an insightful poster at the Dodgers.com forum who has apparently decided to move on from the riff-raff therein. (Didn't all Dodger bloggers evolve from their muck?) Welcome, slackfarmer! The check's in the mail, I swear!

Changes to the roster

It's way too early to start guessing the off-season maneuvers, but the focus of the overhaul will probably be in acquiring a big bat or two, and possibly a starting pitcher who will be cheaper than Weaver, as he'll probably move on to bigger dollars elsewhere. (Back to Detroit perhaps?)

Everyone will clamor for the likes of Matsui, Giles, and Burnett, but acquiring needs by trading away spare parts and/or prospects is a possibility, as that would both fill immediate needs on the ML roster and free up some much-needed room on the 40 man roster.

Was all that recent playing time for Aybar an audition for 3B next year or to bump up his trade value? Surely Phillips' value is higher than the last off-season, when he was acquired for less than nothing. What's this about Beltre being shopped around? So many possibilities...

Changes to the coaching staff

Will Tracy be back next year? Probably not, but we'll know soon enough. Is it possible that an in-house solution such as Royster or Collins has been discussed? It's not entirely outside the realm of possibilities. Will the other coaches be back? Their futures are in limbo until Tracy's situation is solved. Why do I start asking and answering my own questions the moment I mention Tracy? It must be the five years of listening to his talk that's affecting me.

To my knowledge, the coaching staff is one of the few parts of the organization that has been left relatively intact since McCourt's purchase. It may be time for an overhaul so that they are more in step with the rest of the organization instead of having "creative differences."

Other changes

I was watching the pregame show today and yet again there was a reference to the 1955 World Series champs. Terms such as "team" and "chemistry" were interspersed with images of "winning" and "championship". But which is the cause and which is the effect? Who can say, really.

The same goes to the public image of the entire organization, which is that of a team run by a cheapskate and his "Screaming Meanie" wife intent on squeezing every penny out of its fans. The players are nameless commodities whose values are determined by a spreadsheet run by a 32 year old kid with a fancy degree from Harvard.

The team's in ruins! Bring back St. Paulie LoDuca and his irreplaceable "heart-and-soul"! And on and on and on...

For me, one beauty of the game is when a crushed ball is miraculously caught by a diving fielder, or the meekest of squibs somehow falls in for a big hit. In the context of a full season, a parallel would be the production from key players and the emergence of the little-known players who earn and fill roles otherwise unoccupied. This year's team had its share of the no-names who filled in valiantly, but that was nowhere enough to make up for the lost production from the broken cornerstones.

The team image took a blow this year. And now on to next year and hopefully a return back to the glory days.

Time may change me
But I can't trace time
I said that time may change me
But I can't trace time

Open Letter To Jimbo -

2005-10-01T20:37:00.000-07:00

Dear Jim:

It seems as though you're seriously fed up with your lame duck status next year, and think that you deserve an extension. After all, you're still the same guy who led the team to a playoff berth last year. So it can't be your fault that the team tanked this year, right? You obviously want to keep your job, and you don't want people to point their fingers at you for this disastrous season.

So you lay the blame on the roster overhaul and thereby imply that it's DePodesta's fault.

"Familiarity goes hand in hand with success, in my mind. ... Some of the elements we had last year that made us successful were [not here]." LA Times

Here's some advice, Jim. Don't bemoan how this year went south because LoDuca, Cora, Lima, and others aren't on this year's team, because that is an embarrassing marginalization of the truth.

What this sounds like is sour grapes from a man whose market value is low following a bad year and thus has little leverage in contract negotiations. Since you don't like your current situation and there's a good chance you'll be axed anyway, it couldn't hurt to roll the dice and ask for a major raise, right? Something to the effect of "If they don't want me, they still owe me another year of pay if I don't opt out...I'll still be paid no matter what so might as well shoot for the moon..." Why else take the tone of "Gimme a raise or fire me!" if otherwise?

It hurts to say this, but I think that you are a competent manager who respects his players and most of them in turn respect you. The embarrassment of Bradley's recent antics might have been ho hum in the days of Carlos Perez, Sheffield, and Devo. I daresay that you've probably done a good job minimizing the friction inside the clubhouse.

Or did you? Was the relative peace in the clubhouse in the past five years a product of your people-managing skills or the relatively easy-going nature of the players themselves? How would Davey Johnson, a man that I despise to this very day, fare with the current roster? Jim, how would you have looked after Mondesi went off on you with an F-bomb tirade?

We'll never know, and that's fine. But you're dropping the ball, Jim. Your mouthing off on the roster is no better than Johnson blowing up and getting ejected in his last game as the Dodgers manager. One parting shot, never to be heard from again...

I realize that you're not responsible for the injuries that ruined this season. You didn't throw that pitch that broke Werth's wrist in his first ST game and you didn't trip Wunsch as he warmed up in the bullpen. You didn't block the plate when Valentin hurt his knee, you certainly didn't tear up Gagne's elbow. (Although you kept putting him out there when he clearly wasn't 100%...)

But you also didn't foul off 14 consecutive pitches before hitting a homerun, nor did you hit the walk-off grand slam that secured a playoff berth. As much as you're mostly not to blame for this year's collapse, you are also mostly not responsible for last year's terrific finish.

Perhaps what you were really trying to say about the roster overhaul was that your boss kept acquiring players with a history of breaking down, physically and/or mentally, and that the end result wasn't too surprising. That's debatable, and ultimately that's not your job to decide, Jim. You don't go around telling your boss what to do. Speaking of which...

If your boss gives you an order, you follow it. If DePodesta asks you to develop certain young players and give away fewer outs, then you do that with no questions asked. Whether you're right or not, shit always flows downhill. No boss wants an insubordinate employee, especially after times of crises that reveal the true nature of a man's character. You just showed yours by questioning your boss's skills AND demanding a raise after the worst season in recent memory.

So let's say that you don't get your two year extension, which is likely. Who will you work for? Pittsburgh? Tampa Bay? Do you think those cheapskates will pay you handsomely AND field a competitive team? Believe that and Lou Piniella has a home he'd like to sell you in Tampa. The Marlins? They don't even have a stadium to call their own. The Cubbies? Mariners? They could be great opportunities, except those positions are safe, as far as I know.

I guess what I'm trying to say is: The grass isn't always greener on the other side.

I think that you're a fairly good manager, Jim. I really do. But you are also eminently replaceable, either by a respected name (Leyland?) who might want to get back to coaching or by a young ambitious type looking for his first gig. (Girardi? Washington?) There are even talking heads who cover the team (Kennedy) who would jump at the chance to manage this team, one with a heralded history and more importantly, big market resources.

Maybe last year's success went to your head, Jim. I guess you started believing in all the accolades and view this season as an abysmal failure of others' undoing. Chances are that DePodesta would fire you immediately except that he doesn't want to risk another PR nightmare. So he'll probably play nice and offer a lowball extension that you'll surely reject, and agree to part ways as amicably as possible.

So long, Jim. Your probable parting is an appropriate end to a miserable season. Thanks for the memories, some good, some bad. It was nice knowing you.

Customers Aren't Stupid, Frank (And Jamie)

2005-09-27T14:52:00.000-07:00

Below is a graph that represents the difference in total attendance between last season and this season.

What a difference a year makes. It sure looks as if the fan enthusiasm that carried over from last year's playoff appearance died right around the end of July. Funny, that's exactly how I felt. There was little activity at the trading deadline this year amongst all the clubs. But when the Dodgers stood pat that seemed to ensure a slow death 'til the end.

The recent turnstyle count has to be way, WAY lower than the official attendance figure. All the lost concession sales, parking fees,...it's hitting somebody's wallet.

The Dodgers have currently drawn 3,469,599 with 3 home games left. It's a slow lurch towards the attendance record of 3,608,881.

22 Years Ago...

2005-09-11T00:01:00.000-07:00

The greatest Dodgers game that I ever saw as it unfolded wasn't Game 1 of the 88 World Series. For whatever reason, my TV screen went fuzzy just before that game, leaving me in a sea of curses. Fortunately, the audio still worked so I could "see" through the words of Vin Scully. So there I was screaming and yelling when Vin exclaimed "Sheeee is gone!" as Gibson hit the homerun - staring at a TV screen filled with black-and-white static.

Last year, I was stuck at work on the Saturday that Finley hit the walk-off homerun that clinched the division. All I had was a small radio and GameDay. Again, happy with the win but bitter about missing the moment...

The most memorable game that I did catch was a while back. It was an afternoon game on TV, and the Dodgers had slowly fought back. R. J. Reynolds then laid down a squeeze bunt in the 9th to win the game. A SQUEEZE BUNT! I distinctly remember a shot of the celebration that ensued on to the field and in the stands. Lasorda jumped out from the dugout with his hands in the air as if he lost his mind. I too was jumping up and down, absolutely shocked at the play and deliriously happy.

I was 11 years old. I was hooked.

That game was on 9/11/83. Thanks to Dodger Thoughts for bringing back some good memories.

Life As A Raptor

2005-09-06T20:10:00.000-07:00

Meet Jason Mooneyham, a 40th round pick this year.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

Written by Marty Renzhofer of the Salt Lake Tribune.
______________________________________________

New to the sidebar is madboy's Trash Talk, a Dodgers blog in Chinese. I think it's Chinese, anyway.
______________________________________________

Baseball Prospectus currently lists the Dodgers' likelihood of making the playoffs as about 1.5%. Great.

Milking It For All It's Worth

2005-09-03T17:20:00.000-07:00

To think that I wolfed down 50 chicken wings and a pitcher of beer a few years ago over a mere $20 bet...

The Marlins batboy who was suspended for 6 games for accepting the milk dare from Brad Penny will attempt the same feat for an online gambling website. (Thanks to Gaslamp Ball for the link.) Bettors can witness the action live via a video feed on 9/11. (Insert joke here.)

I don't think puke boy wants his old job back.

Our Enemy Plays For Texas Now

2005-09-02T18:43:00.000-07:00

If the Dodgers lose the division by a few games to the Padres, I'm blaming Phil Nevin.

It was he who invoked his no trade clause and blocked the trade that would have sent Sidney Ponson to San Diego in July. Instead, Nevin accepted a trade to Texas that sent Chan Ho Park to the Madres.

Park is currently 4 -1 for his new team, albeit with an ERA around 6. Call it luck or whatever, but wins are wins. Park has been serviceable.

Meanwhile, the Orioles gave up on Ponson and his 6.22 ERA and released him a few days ago. In August, he gave up 11 earned runs in 7.2 innings before going on the DL, and shortly afterwards racked up his second DUI of the year. At least he didn't attack a judge this time.

Nevin's refusal to go to Baltimore might have cost the Dodgers a few games in the standings already. Bastard.

This is the same Phil Nevin who did not sign out of high school when the Dodgers drafted him in the 3rd round in 1989.

Double bastard.

Halfway House

2005-08-31T19:30:00.000-07:00

There was an article in the Washington Post a few weeks ago where DePodesta was quoted as:

"When I first got here...looking at the roster, the bulk of our team was free agent eligible in a year...I thought, 'Let's see if we can be proactive about it.' We said, 'Let it be over in one year.' We wanted to build a foundation and then move forward. Once we started doing that, there was no going halfway. The most perilous position to be in is halfway."

It could be strongly argued that the success of the 2004 team was mostly sheer luck, as demonstrated by the 2005 stats of Finley, Beltre, Lima and others who have since departed. The house was going to fall no matter what. However, the new foundation is already showing cracks. The only thing "halfway" might be for Bradley's anger management very soon.

There was a sense that the Dodgers were in a panic during the last offseason, as DePodesta belatedly snatched up Drew and Lowe, the last of the major Boras clients not named Beltran. Blame it on lack of foresight or inexperience; most of DePodesta's maneuvers have not paid off so far. The upcoming offseason probably won't be another major reconstruction job like the last one, but it'll take more than a coat of paint to fix this mess.
_______________________________________

Dodgers.com is reporting that 2 prospects will be called up as the rosters expand this Friday, and that the likely duo is Broxton and Donovan. Shouldn't a catcher such as Rose or Martin be called up as well? Tracy has frequently started Navarro and Phillips at the same time. From a matchup point of view, (and Tracy LOVES matchups) it's hard to maneuver PHs and double-switches in the later innings when both catchers are in the lineup near the bottom of the order.

Yesterday, Tracy yanked Phillips for Choi at 1B as part of a double switch in the 6th inning. Werth probably was the emergency catcher and would have come in the game had Navarro been forced to leave. The last thing I want to see is the emergency catcher make an appearance, a la Trinidad Hubbard a few years ago.

(I could go into a rant on Choi's playing time despite a superior OPS compared to Phillips', but others have covered that thoroughly. Tracy probably believes that Phillips makes more consistent contact, while Choi does so less consistently, albeit with a lot more power. I don't find the notion of a "professional hitter" convincing, but whatever. )

I say call up Martin. It would be a good way let Martin know that he is very much part of the future, even if Navarro is hogging the limelight as of now.
_______________________________________

Let's pretend that there is a singles bar called the "NL West", and there are exactly 5 girls inside. Each team is represented by one of the girls.

The Dodgers girl just stumbled of the hospital and can't put 2 words together.
The Giants girl is the 40-something divorcee applying a thick coat of makeup.
The Diamondbacks girl just fell on her face after tripping over herself.
The Rockies girl is the fugliest of them all, beyond all hope.
The Padres girl is the prettiest only by default.

Too bad one of them has to go home with you. Sorry, Bud.

Field Of Dreams

2005-08-30T19:20:00.000-07:00

If I had to spend $13,000 in discretionary income in one day, I can think of many ways to blow it all. Buy a motorcycle, book a month-long vacation across the world, etc. This sure looks like a blast, too. A lot of past Dodger names on that staff....

8/24/05 Emergency Meeting Transcript

2005-08-24T22:25:00.000-07:00

10:25PM

F. McCourt: Alright, is everybody here?

DePodesta: Tracy's conducting interviews. He'll be here shortly.

Ng: Jamie, where's your son Drew?

J. McCourt: I told Drew to fetch me some aloe vera. I got sunburned a bit during the game.

Ng: During a night game?

J. McCourt: I'm so white that I'm practically an albino, you know.

Lasorda: Can we order some meatball subs or something? This is going to be a long meeting, right? I mean, I haven't eaten since the 3rd inning!

J. McCourt: (pulling out cell phone) Drew, get us some munchies too... Just go into the clubhouse and take some from the post-game spread... How can THEY be hungry? They did nothing today!... Don't forget the aloe vera. (hangs up) Food's on the way, Tommy.

F. McCourt: Let's start the meeting now. First, let's discuss the team record and what we can do to turn this around. Paul, let's start with you. What can we do to fix the situation?

DePodesta: Well, there's been a lot of injuries to key players. What can you do except hope that they heal and return?

Lasorda: That's it? Injuries? Just injuries? Where's the team camaraderie and chemistry? We have our best player crying on TV warbling on about the injustice to "his people", for Christ's sake!

DePodesta: They DON'T have to like one another. Just play hard, avoid stupid mistakes, and don't overmanage.

F. McCourt: Wait a minute, what do mean by "overmanage?" Are you pinning the blame on Tracy?

DePodesta: To some degree, yes. But I will say that I respect his opinions still, and I think the players do, too. Although lately he's been taking it right on that pointy chin of his...
.
.
.
10:59PM

Tracy: Sorry I'm late, folks. The reporters were all over me just now. Simers kept bugging Kent with a toy monkey he called the "Bradley Monkey," and it took a while to calm Jeff down after he stuffed the little monkey into Simers' mouth. Whew. What'd I miss?

F. McCourt: Perfect timing, Jim. Have a seat. Let's talk about Milton. I defended Milton on national TV - NATIONAL TV! - last year after he went berserk, and now he's blowing up again like a 4 year old. What more can I... What's that I smell off you, Jim? Is that whiskey?

Tracy: Uhhh, no, that's my new aftershave. It's supposed to be a hit with the ladies! Kimmy, do you like it?

Ng: No. And don't call me Kimmy, Jimbo.

Lasorda: Hey Trace, can I try some of your "Eau de Captain Morgan"? Thanks. (Gulp.) Yowza! Where's that damned sandwich, Jamie? I need something to wash down El Capitan!

J. McCourt: Paul, be a dear and trade seats with me. Tracy reeks. Literally reeks.

DePodesta: I don't want to sit next to Jim, either.

Tracy: C'mon, sit next to me, Paul! You can give me a little lineup advice, and I can continue to ignore them! Heh Heh Heh!

DePodesta: That's real funny, Jim. By the way, your payroll check will go out under the name "Buntminster Fuller" from now on.

Tracy: Sure, 'ombre. What the hell does that mean, though?

J. McCourt: I got it! That's was lame, Paul.

DePodesta: Sorry.
.
.
.
11:24PM

Lasorda: Godammit! I'm sick of watching these scrubs wearing Dodger Blue. Gio Carrara? What is that, a convertible? And what about that Jason Whatshisname?

Ng: Which Jason?

Lasorda: The funny-looking one who runs after flyballs as if he's walking through a minefield!

Ng: We sent Grabowski down a few weeks ago.

D. McCourt: Food, everyone! Here's your lotion, mom.

Lasorda: Oh,...(Eating noise.) good! Paul, when we needed help a few years ago, I got Shaw, Perez, and Grudzielanek. All you got this year was Jose Freakin' Cruz!

DePodesta: But Tommy, you traded away Konerko! And that team went nowhere anyway.

Lasorda: I did something at least, didn't I?

Ng: Sort of like not knowing the transaction rules and begging Shaw to come back after he bailed out of his contract?

Lasorda: Why you little...
.
.
.
11:39PM

DePodesta: You're from Ohio, right Jim? Just how far is your hometown from Cincy?

Tracy: Fire me and find out, kid. While you're at it, take your laptop and shove it up-

J. McCourt: Stop acting like children and shut up already! Not you, Drew.

F. McCourt: Calm down, everyone. We accomplished absolutely nothing during this meeting, but... Who took my sandwich? Gimme that!

D. McCourt: Hey, that's mine! Give it back, dad! I licked it!

Thoughts About The Past Week

2005-08-17T22:27:00.000-07:00

Finally got over whatever illness that was hampering me the past few days. Some quick thoughts.

Jamie McCourt and I share something in common.

It's tempting to make some sexist remarks and predict the doom of the franchise now that the team has a woman president. Labeling Jamie McCourt as the real-life Rachel Phelps is somewhat cheaply entertaining, using examples such as the rumored Fernando ticket downgrade last year. It's humorous, but that's an unfair attack on someone I do not know. So I decided to check out out her qualifications a bit.

I was aware that she has a background in real estate and law. What I didn't know was that she received an MBA from my alma mater. Curious, I logged in to my alumni website and did a search for McCourt. Sure enough, she showed up as "Ms. McCourt, Jamie D." It turns out that we're sort of classmates, as she and I received our respective degrees in 1994.

(Her alumna listing also showed her home address. Befitting its $25 million price tag, the home's street name is one I'd never heard of in all my years in LA. I don't know whether one's address is considered public knowledge, but since the information is from a private website, I will resist the temptation to post it here and save the McCourts the disgrace of having their home address listed in a fan blog. )

Congrats to a fellow Beaver, the highest ranked woman in baseball. If I ever bump into her at an alumni function, I'll make it a point to say hello. Now if I could just get the Rachel Phelps cardboard cutout reference out of my head...

Ticket sales idea.

Back in April, there were some young door-to-door solicitors selling Dodgers tickets at my workplace. I had never seen a sports team not named the Clippers resorting to such tactics to sell tickets.

The Braves had a promotion this year where an autograph from a young player would be given out for purchasing a 9 game package. A similar promotion might be a good fit for the Dodgers, whose future might lie with all those prime prospects who might make the Show from now to about 2007.

There are no attendance problems. LA is currently averaging about 46,000 per game, which might set a team record. Seeing how Mrs. McCourt is a "classmate" and all, that's my small suggestion to raise ticket sales without looking desperate like the Clips.

The bullpen is back, for now.

There has been one deficiency after another throughout the year, given all the injuries. First, the starting rotation was in shambles. Then the offense went into a funk as every important bat except Kent missed significant time. Lately, the loss of Gagne has been magnified as the bullpen collapsed, the exclamation point being that horrific loss to Philly last Wednesday that resulted in Brazoban's demotion from the closer role.

LA's bullpen has recently done a reverse. Prior to tonight's debacle, the bullpen has pitched 10 innings while giving up 1 earned run since last Wednesday, allowing 0 HRs, 1 walk, and striking out 7. In that same span, the hitters got some clutch hits off the opponent bullpen.

All hope not yet lost?

OT: Reverse pedophilia discrimination.

Why didn't I have a teacher like her when I was in middle school? It's sick and twisted and all, but the comments in the link are are absolutely hilarious.

On a related note, I wonder how the movie "Big" would have been if the plot had been about a 13 year-old girl who grows up overnight.

Eh, never mind. That sounds like a cheesy porn waiting to happen.

Haiku

2005-08-10T22:57:00.000-07:00

What a pathetic loss. It sure feels as if the season is over, as the Dodgers crawl towards the finish line.

Anyway, I need to vent. Some verses in the Haiku 5-7-5 syllable format, an ode to a season going down the drain...

Edit: It looks like I may have started a trend. Haikus here, here, and here.

Easier to spell
than Hiram Bocachica.
Just as crappy though.

Jason Grabowski

Getting divorced for
banging the clubhouse cutie...
Next time, lap dances.

Derek Lowe

Wrist and knee this year.
Rib cage and elbow last year---
Walking MASH unit.

Jayson Werth

If hurt, a Dodger.
If healthy, opt out next year:
Ugly contract clause.

J. D. Drew

Good glove, cartoon swing.
Look as if chopping a tree.
Leaving Las Vegas?

Norihiro Nakamura

No tantrum this year!
But two-thirty, runners in
scoring position.

Milton Bradley

Gave up twelve dingers,
struck out fifteen. Blame defense...
Wife is still hot, though.

Scott Erickson

Grand slam to Howard,
ERA now above 6.
Hurry back, Gagne!

Yhency Brazoban

DFA'd two times.
First game in Blue: 3 strikeouts.
Cruz Sr. he's not.

Jose Cruz Jr.

Does any skipper
look smart when ev'ryone's hurt?
Maybe. Win games? No.

Jim Tracy

"our medical staff...
five standard devs from the mean..."
Translation: blame Trace.

Paul DePodesta

Just After I Defend Bradley's Bunt On Sunday...

2005-08-03T18:40:00.000-07:00

Bradley pops up a bunt in the top of the 8th today with a runner on 1st with 0 outs, with the team down by a run. To quote myself in the comments section in the previous post, "bradley is an EXCELLENT bunter, though. he doesn't bunt often, but i've never seen him botch one." Well said, stupid.

That's it, I just hexed the team. That's what I get for defending Tracy for once. A mouthful of crow. And a discouraging loss, as well.

I'm need to be very, very careful of black cats and broken mirrors for a while.

I'm so puzzled by today's attempted bunt...No bunt will help you score 2 when there's only 1 baserunner. The team needed 2 runs to grab the lead. That's a completely different scenario from Sunday's, which was a tied game in the bottom of the 9th.

Had the bunt even been successful, Kent probably would have been intentionally walked again, with Valentin batting next. Jose just got off the DL and hasn't been a proven bat all year like Saenz.

So was that bunt a sac attempt or one for a single? If that was a sac attempt, I'm goint to be ticked off...

I'd Have Bradley Bunt Too

2005-08-01T20:14:00.000-07:00

I was screaming bloody murder yesterday in 2 instances. First was when I realized that Tracy burned up the bench too soon and was forced to use Weaver as a PH in the 11th inning. More galling was when Bradley bunted with 0 outs in the 9th in order to advance the runners to 2nd and 3rd. Why have the #3 hitter, usually the best hitter in a lineup, give himself up when it was obvious that Kent was going to be walked intentionally to load the bases?

Forget Bradley's slump (.179 BA in 28 ABs) since returning from the DL. Forget his .208 average with RISP this season. Forget "clutch" altogether. Anyone can argue that Bradley is the better hitter and more likely to drive the runner in than Saenz. Here's a breakdown of ways to score.

Scoring with runners on 1st and 2nd, 0 outs:

Bradley gets a hit, and the runner on 2nd scores. (.282 BA)

Scoring with bases loaded, 1 out:

Saenz gets a hit, and the runner on 3rd scores. (.289 BA)
Saenz hits a successful sac fly. (He has 2 for the season.)
Saenz draws a walk. (17 walks in 227 PAs.)
A breakdown such as a wild pitch, balk, or HBP. (Unlikely.)
A suicide squeeze. (Really unlikely considering I've never seen Saenz bunt.)

There are a lot more possibilities with the bases loaded. I would say that the likelihood of scoring is higher with Saenz at the plate, considering that Bradley isn't astronomically better with the bat than Saenz.

Another way to compare the likelihood of scoring is to calculate "win expectancy." Here are some of the historical probabilities of scoring a certain number of runs given the out/base situation, courtesy of TangoTiger. I have it broken down this way.

Score zero runs -

Scoring 0 Runs, 99 - 02 Historical

The Dodgers win the game in the 9th if they score score at least 1 run. This is the inverse of scoring 0 runs.

ScoreAtLeastARun(0 outs, runners on 1st and 2nd) = 1 - ScoreZeroRuns = 1 - 0.359 = 64.1%
ScoreAtLeastARun(1 out, bases loaded) = 1 - ScoreZeroRuns = 1 - 0.33 = 67%.

The historical likelihood of scoring is a tad higher with the bases loaded and 1 out.

As a check, here are the historical probabilities of scoring exactly 1 run, which is all the Dodgers needed.

Score a single run -

Scoring 1 Run, 99 - 02 Historical

ScoreOneRun(0 outs, runners on 1st and 2nd) = 21.9%
ScoreOneRun(1 out, bases loaded) = 25.2%

Again, it's slightly preferrable to have the bases loaded with 1 out. It appears that Tracy made the right decision. Too bad Slomedo hit into a DP to end the inning; a walk would have been more appropriate. The Cards were handing out walks like those chicks infront of Staples Center who give out free passes to Spearmint Rhino.

(Edit: Slackfarmer in comment #2 correctly points out that the assumption of a 100% bunt success rate is erroneous. This does even out the odds a bit, I would think. Good thing it wasn't Antonio Perez up there attempting a bunt... )

Now if only I could figure out why the Tracy inserted Alvarez into Robles' #2 spot during the last double switch. Phillips could have taken over for Navarro, who was hitting 7th and had caught 3 straight games...

Roster Space

2005-07-29T10:02:00.000-07:00

This is my breakdown of the current players on the roster with respect to next season. Hopefully I got most of them right.

May Not Return - FA/Marginal:
Pitchers: Dreifort, Weaver, Erickson, Wunsch, Carrara
Catcher: Bako, Rose
IF: Valentin, Saenz, Edwards
OF: Ross
Total: 11, although Saenz or Wunsch may be retained.

Under Team's Control:
SPs: Penny, Lowe, O. Perez, Houlton
RPs: Gagne, Brazoban, Schmoll, Alvarez, Sanchez, Dessens maybe (mutual option 06)
Catcher: Phillips
IF: 1B Choi, 2B Kent, SS Izturis, 3B Robles, UT A. Perez
OF: Drew, Bradley, Werth, Repko, Ledee
Total: 21.
Remaining 4 Spots: 1 SP, 1 reliever, 1 backup catcher, 1 corner infielder to replace Saenz

The top high school prospects from Logan White's first draft in 02 (Loney, Miller, Broxton) have to be protected to the 40 man roster this offseason or risk losing them via the Rule 5 draft. Andy LaRoche, who was drafted as a 19 year old out of a community college in the 03 draft, also has to be protected. Wunderkind Joel Guzman was first signed in 2001. Hong-Chih Kuo, first signed in 1999, is striking out everyone by throwing 95+ again.

(Caveat: I am no expert on the farm system. Get a shovelful of salt ready...)

That's 6 likely additions to the 40 man roster. Also worthy of consideration is Mike Megrew, a 02 draftee who was looking good until TJ surgery this past offseason. Chin-Lung Hu has a good glove and was signed in 03 just after his 19th birthday. Who knows, maybe Brandon Weeden, drafted in 02 by the Yankees, will make the Kevin Brown trade even more lopsided by suddenly improving. There are plenty of other prospects, as the system is deep.

The prospects on the current 40 man roster are as follows.

Pitchers: Jackson, Ketchner, Hanrahan, Osoria, Thompson
Catcher: Martin, Navarro
IF: Young, Aybar
OF: None
Total: 9, but make that 8 as Thompson just had TJ surgery.

Add the aforementioned 6 probable newbies to the protected list and the mumber swells to 14. Granted, some of the prospects could conceivably jump to the 25 man roster next year, as there are 4 roles open: a starting pitcher, a reliever, a backup catcher, and a corner infielder. The extra starting pitcher spot could be filled in-house if Jackson or Billingsley step up. The bullpen might take care of itself if the flamethrowers such as Broxton or Kuo can hold their own. Navarro might take the extra catcher spot. Nothing's guaranteed, though. Not every hole will be filled by the minor leaguers.

(Edit: It looks as if Navarro will be called up today.)

(Edit 2: Jonathan Broxton also has been called up today. Thanks to 6-4-2 for the news. Let the roster-shuffling begin!)

The ETA for most of the blue chip prospects is supposedly 2007; incubating the younglings another year in the minors wil inconvenience roster flexibility. It's a tight fit for the 15 or so protected prospects on the roster next year. Add the 21 major leaguers to the prospects, and the 40 man roster is bursting at the seams. Someone probably needs to be bumped to make room. (Hanrahan? Osoria? Aybar?)

Last December, 6 Dodger prospects were plucked by other teams via the Rule 5 draft. One of them looks like a find. (That kid Carvajal taken by the Rockies would have been nice, eh DePo? ) It's likely that vultures will once again roam this December. It's the same story repeated every year - will someone claim Thurston? Chen? Prokopec? Clemente? It wouldn't be a bad idea to trade some of the prospects for long-term roster flexibility AND short term talent. If you can't protect 'em, trade 'em.

(Edit 3: Commenter #3 has listed Pilkington, Stults, Totten, Figueroa, Ojeda, B. Perez, A. Castillo, Juarez, Nixon, and A. Gonzalez as the second-tier prospects not mentioned who are eligible for the Rule 5 draft this winter. Thanks for the comprehensive list!)

LA's biggest depth in prospects is pitchers and middle infielders. For example, there was also a rumor of Edwin Jackson and A. Perez for Adam Dunn a few days ago. That's probably too little in talent to acquire Dunn, but the basic idea seems about right. I also have a nagging suspicion that the Dodgers offered 2 or 3 second tier prospects for Joe Randa but were outbid by the Padres, who wanted better production from 3B AND didn't want LA to improve.

Just a hunch.

The Entire NL West Should Wave White Flags

2005-07-22T14:21:00.000-07:00

Before winning the last 2 games, LA was 8.5 games behind 1st place San Diego and 8.5 games infront of last place Colorado. Talk about mediocrity. If it weren't for the non-strike call on Phillips' checked swing, the team would have lost six straight right after the All-Star Break.

Yet LA is still in the race, thanks to the ineptitude of the other teams. San Diego just got swept by the Mets, getting embarrassed yesterday despite having Peavy on the mound. Kudos to Kaz Ishii for pitching as if his former team is still paying for some of his contract. Come to think of it... never mind.

The Dodgers are somehow 6.5 games out of 1st place despite continually shooting themselves in the foot.
____________________________________________

The annual rumor mill before the non-waiver trading deadline is now in full gear. It seems as if A. J. Burnett and Adam Dunn will be joining every contending team. Dunn's name has often been linked with LA. He's a scary slugger, but the steep cost in terms of young talent (Billingsley, LaRoche, more?) might not be worthwhile in the long run. Especially if Dunn doesn't sign a reasonable contract to cover some of his free agency years.

Besides, the reinforcements are on their way as Bradley and Valentin are both undergoing rehab assignments. Bradley's the largest piece of the puzzle that's been missing during the extended slide. His presense may mean about a 1/2 a run per game better than a ~~scrub~~ replacement player like Chen. The team has truly missed Bradley's bat in the #3 spot.

As for Valentin, at the very least he lengthens the lineup. The problem is getting him at-bats after his extended absense, as Robles has so far exceeded expectations (albeit not very high) in filling 3B. The year-long search for a 3rd baseman since Beltre's departure has netted an excess of temporary fill-ins, each one somehow imperfect. Somebody out of Valentin/Perez/Robles/Saenz/Edwards is trade bait. Beware, Neifi Perez and Cristian Guzman!
____________________________________________

The list of prized minor leaguers who must be protected on the 40 man roster from the Rule 5 draft this winter is long, as LaRoche, Loney, Miller, Broxton, and others now must join that list. No one out of this prized group is "untouchable", but it's difficult to imagine trading the blue chippers for a player whose skill level is only marginally better than the incumbent, when fully healthy.

The following is a summary of what I consider the current roster's strengths and weaknesses.

Curent excess:
The wealth of middle infielders masquerading as 3B
Some payroll space for 2005 and beyond
Pitching prospects

Temporary needs:
Bullpen
A rental power bat in the corner outfield

Needs beyond 2005:
A real 3B
1B or a platoonmate for Choi

Weaver, Valentin, and Saenz are veterans whose contracts expire this year and are thus expendable as long as their roles, especially Weaver's, are assumed by someone else. Newbies such as Robles or Antonio Perez might be worth more to other teams looking for a young and cheap everyday player. Then there are the older prospects such as Hanrahan who could lose their spots on the 40 man roster as younger prospects grab the spotlight.

Only a few of these names carry much trade value, so the players obtained in return might be mere stopgaps to fill the temporary holes in the roster. Such a trade is what I would call a "horizontal" trade; deal away from your strength to address a weakness without burning up the farm system.

In a way, the LoDuca trade last year was a horizontal trade. Neither team dumped blue chip prospects in order to improve the major league roster. Instead, both teams addressed weaknesses by trading from depth. Mota was expendable as LA was bullpen-rich, and Penny was likewise expendable as FLA was SP-rich. Florida needed a catcher and a future closer, and LA needed an ace and a ... catcher when Charles Johnson declined to waive his no-trade clause without an extension. Anyway, major prospects were not sacrificed for short term gain.

So I would not be surprised if DePodesta pulls off a similar trade or two while preserving the farm system. He'll have to be creative again - a 3 way trade netting a struggling 3B like Lowell at a much discounted price would not surprise me.

Rambling Thoughts, Part III

2005-07-14T18:55:00.000-07:00

I can't remember the last time I cared so little about a series against SF. It's been quite a few seasons since both teams were this far out of the playoff race this early.

Meanwhile, the division-leading Padres have Nevin and Loretta coming back "within a week." They'll be at almost full strength minus Eaton; the 7 1/2 game lead over the Dodgers is looking insurmountable.

A pre-emptive trade before the non-waiver trade deadline looks more and more likely for the Dodgers. DePodesta might want to take note from former boss Beane, who netted a veteran reliever and a young SP without giving up prime prospects through 2 trades within the past few days.

Valentin has started taking BP recently. His eventual return makes Antonio Perez and his hands of stone tradeable, as AP has value (youth, good bat) and is replaceable from within. Perez's skills might be more valuable to another team looking for a leadoff hitter. (Mets? Indians?) Maybe Perez and some second-tier prospects will net a decent 3B who is not a rental.
______________________________

LA's sweep by the Astros last weekend might have had an unintended effect besides the W-L record. It looks as if the Astros have climbed back into playoff contention, and now might be a serious bidder for Adam Dunn.

It's possible that Houston is willing to take a gamble like last year's Beltran trade. Houston's window of oppportunity with Clemens is ending soon, and Oswalt becomes a FA after 2006. Houston needs a power bat in either the outfield or 1B. Dunn is also a Texas native who might be relatively easy for Houston to sign beyond 2006. Dunn makes perfect sense for Houston.

I expect every contending team with a need at either 1B or corner outfield to sniff around for a bat like Dunn's. If the bidding gets too rich, DePodesta hopefully will acquire cheaper upgrades elsewhere.
______________________________

I watched the repeat broadcast of the HR derby at midnight Monday to catch Choi's 5 HRs. I saw every one of Abreu's 24 HRs. I saw every one of Bay's hopeless grounders to 3B. The repeat broadcast then completely skipped Choi. What a travesty.

Anyway, this HR Derby prank letter given by Torii Hunter to Brad Radke is hilarous. The Twins' clubhouse must be a loose one - it helps to be a winning ball club, I suppose.

I wish someone in the Dodgers organization gave Erickson the same prank letter.
______________________________

Over the weekend, Odalis Perez went off on a public tirade after feeling singled out while defending Antonio Perez during a players' meeting. Surprise, surprise. I wonder whether OP will change his tune after AP boots a few groundballs behind him.

Surprise Giveaway!

2005-07-08T17:43:00.000-07:00

Breaking news!

For the upcoming homestand, the Dodgers have announced a new giveaway, jointly sponsored by Centinela Hospital and the other Milton Bradley. All kids 14 and under will receive the commemorative 2005 Dodgers edition of the classic board game "Operation".

In addition, the first child to match each injury with a Dodger player or coach will get an autographed MRI signed by Dr. Jobe.

Buy, Sell, Or Hold?

2005-07-04T23:20:00.000-07:00

Just as the starting rotation was looking complete with the return of Odalis Perez...

The outfield, once the strength of the team, is now a weakness as Drew has joined Bradley on the DL. Those two standouts had a combined VORP run rate of .804 per game. The actual run differential is probably almost a full run per game as the replacement quartet of Grabowski, Ross, Chen and Edwards are nowhere near as good defensively. What a huge loss.

(My post over a month ago on the Giants' looking for an OF with a power lefty bat can now be applied to the Dodgers. Lawton, Huff, Dunn...)

In the minors, Hong-Chih Kuo, the lefty with the 95+ MPH fastball when healthy, hurt his arm again. Given his extensive injury history in the form of 2 TJ surgeries, his career could be over.

And finally, first time All-Star Izturis has limped on to the DL with the hamstring problem that won't go away.

In exchange for the return of the #3 SP, the baseball gods have taken away the #3 hitter and the Gold Glove shortstop. It's like digging out of an avalance only to fall into a crevasse. There are now glaring holes in the outfield along with the season-long hole at 3B. After 2 strong years, the bullpen is shaky with the loss of Gagne. Last year's unexpected playoff berth looks more and more like a convergence of luck and health.

As the team is 5 games under .500, the season could be over with another disaster like the last road trip. Still, LA is only 5.5 games out of 1st place. Every contending team has flaws, injuries, or both. The NL West is turning into a race of cripples crawling to the finish.

So what's going to happen from here on out?

1) Dump payroll now and rebuild for next year.

This is out of the question. The 51s are not who I want to see when I fork over $10 for the privilege of being stuck an hour in the parking lot after a game. Rebuilding is for the penny pinchers in Cincinnati, not a large market team like the Dodgers.

2) Make immediate trades to fill holes.

This is possible, but would probably be minor transactions, and not whoppers like Oswalt or Dunn. The trades that might be worthwhile in this sense are with teams similarly in playoff limbo AND have roster strengths that match up with the Dodgers' weaknesses. For example, a trade involving Aaron Boone and a reliever for Saenz could be a fit for both CLE and LA.

3) Stand pat until the non-waiver trading deadline and decide accordingly.

The non-waiver trading deadline is still almost 4 weeks away, so at this point the trade market is still in its infancy, as many teams, including LA, are unsure whether they will be buyers or sellers. Until then, A major trade is unlikely as one side would have to overwhelm another, as in "lift the offer". The rumors of Dunn and, more recently, Lawton are premature at this point, unless DePodesta goes in full panic mode, which is unlikely.

LA has the rumored payroll space and the prospects to trade. If the team manages to cling on to playoff contention, I expect DePodesta to fire off at least one trade at the end of July. I don't expect a whopper like Dunn, who is great but would cost half the farm system. A couple of short-term acquisitions like Randa and Lawton might do as there should be plenty of firepower returning from the DL.

Until the Dodgers acquire some help, here's hoping that Werth and Choi go on a tear, Izturis heals quickly, Odalis is 100%, and Kent doesn't get hurt. (Knock on wood...) If LA can somehow stay in the playoff hunt, the return of Bradley and others would mean a huge boost late in the season. Until then, I am at least resigned to the Ja(y)sons at the bottom of the lineup as being better than Green, Werth, Cora, and Ross last year.

If the team can't break even the next 20 or so games against teams with a combined 44% winning percentage, this year is beyond help. Let the vultures roam above the carrion for now. Nothing is over in the worst division in baseball. Right now would be a very good time not to suck.

Hee Seop From The Block

2005-07-02T20:10:00.000-07:00

Today's broadcast mentioned that Choi likes to sing karaoke, especially songs by Jennifer Lopez. I'm trying to imagine a 6'5", 240lb Korean dude belching out fluff songs such as "Love Don't Cost A Thing". It's not a pretty image.

Speaking of Choi...

MLB has announced that 8 players from different countries will compete in the Home Run Derby "to celebrate the inaugural World Baseball Classic", which is scheduled for March, 2006. According to the article, 16 countries are expected to compete in those series. They are: Australia, Canada, China, Chinese Taipei, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Italy, Netherlands, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Panama, Puerto Rico, South Africa, United States, and Venezuela. Here are the the HR leaders for some of the countries, as of yesterday.

US - D. Lee (24), Texeira (22), Ensberg (21), etc.
Dominican Republic - Pujols (21), Soriano (20), Tejada (19), etc.
Venezuela - Abreu (17), Cabrera (16), Mora (14), etc.
Puerto Rico - Delgado (15), F. Lopez (13)
Canada - Bay (15)
Mexico - Cantu (12)
Japan - Matsui (11)

Those countries are probably shoo-ins for the Derby. That leaves 3 countries vying for 1 spot, in my opinion.

Netherlands, sort of - A. Jones (25)
Panama - C. Lee (22)
Korea - Choi (13)

It looks as if Choi will be squeezed out.
____________________________________

Lowe did a fairly spot-on imitation of Erickson today, serving up 4 HRs in 3 innings. Those HRs don't worry me, as Lowe's track record strongly suggests that was an aberration. I'm more concerned about Lowe's tendency to often blow up after a fielding mistake. According to the Hardball Times as of 7/1/05, Lowe has a ERA/RA difference of 1.15, which is the fourth highest among 109 "qualified" MLB pitchers.

Last year, Lowe's ERA/RA difference was 1.38, which was the highest among 70 AL pitchers with at least 100 innings. The 04 BoSox had a bad defense most of the year, especially in the infield. Combine that with an extreme groundball pitcher and BOOM! Disaster. Hopefully it's nothing more than freak luck that Lowe is once again one of the worst; otherwise, this might imply the Dodgers' infield D has been nearly as shoddy.
____________________________________

Edit Before Taking Off 'Til Tueday, Probably:

I can't knock Mike Edwards for a lack of hustle, but that diving attempt on a flare in the 4th inning... Mike, if you dive for the ball, you usually want to be in the same area code. And Duaner, remember the 3rd to 1st pickoff move last week when you caught the runner taking off, but you didn't throw to 1B? Add to that today's balk on the same move... STOP USING THAT PICKOFF MOVE.
____________________________________

Edit 2: Hey, Edwards!

1) Once again, stop diving at balls when there is no chance of catching it.
2) Know the score. When down 5-0, don't turn a double into an out at third, no matter the out count.

We Traded Piazza For Whom?

2005-06-30T20:33:00.000-07:00

Some quotes over the years from Mr. Bubbly himself.

"We get paid a lot of money just to play baseball, and Mondy's got to realize that Davey is the manager and Kevin is the GM... You just can't have this. I'm sure there are millions of guys out there who would love to do what we're doing."
- Regarding Mondesi's antics in 1999. Sniff, sniff.

"...here I am, their biggest player, and I'm fifth on the team payroll? I don't want to be portrayed as a greedy athlete, but let's be fair about this... I'm getting less than Dreifort? I'm getting just $3 million more than Carlos Perez? It's not my fault they signed Perez to that stupid contract..."
- 2001 before being traded to Atlanta.

"If I'm not happy, you don't want me on your team, period... That's just the way it goes. That's life. I have to deal with what they dish out, they got to deal with what I dish out, period. That's just the way it's going to be... I'll ask for everything... You're going to inconvenience me, I'm going to inconvenience every situation there is."
- Recent comments on trade rumors to the Mets.

Greedy come, greedy go.

Jeter: "Let go of my ass, Sheff."
Sheffield: "Not until I check your back pocket, boy."
Jeter: "What for?"
Sheffield: "I heard that you got a nice fat contract, and I want a piece of it."
Jeter: "Go frisk A-Rod, then."
__________________________________

No game today. Couple of fun websites.

"Bye Bye Miss American Pie..."

Find the #1 song on the day you were born.

Warning: May Make One Dizzy

Which box is it?
__________________________________

EDIT: Where Is The Love For Bill Plaschke?

I hate sentence fragments!

Mostly Random Stuff

2005-06-28T22:46:00.000-07:00

It is indeed a sad game when Scott Erickson is the only pitcher not to allow a run. Not to mention Izturis and Perez getting on base only once thanks to an error.

I could have sworn Jim Tracy not playing Choi against Brian Lawrence last week because of "arm angles". That double looked good enough to me...
___________________________________

Both Baseball Prospectus and the Hardball Times list the Dodgers' team defensive efficiency as mid-pack in baseball, but better than any other team in the NL West.

This division really stinks. That's good. The Dodgers still have a chance.
___________________________________

OT:
I recently saw this photo. This is such an odd trio that I can't resist this one.

Clinton's got the biggest smile out of the three. What could they be staring at?
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
Maybe this?

Hef, that lucky bastard.
___________________________________

Completely OT:
I cracked up when I saw this.

Thanks to Dead Guy.

My 3B Shopping List

2005-06-25T22:53:00.000-07:00

It seemed clear about a month ago that the #1 trade possibility was for starting pitching. Since then, Bradley has gone on the DL, Ledee hurt his hamstring, Gagne is out for the season, and Bako is also done for the year. Drew has missed a few games with a sore knee, and given his past medical history, a trip to the DL would not be a surprise. The current roster has holes everywhere, but hopefully most of the needs will be filled as the injured players return.

Assuming that everyone returns healthy, the one trade I would make to improve the team would be for a 3B. Collectively, the LA 3Bs are 6th worst in OPS in the majors. The in-house candidates all have flaws. Nakamura couldn't hit, Antonio Perez has been shaky defensively, Saenz has the mobility of an oven, and the rest are AAAA players. It's also hard to say how effective Valentin will be when he returns in about a month. It's possible that he will not be 100% with a surgically repaired knee. Even if fully healed, he could be rusty after missing so much time. So trading for a veteran 3B with a decent bat and glove might be a prudent move.

In my opinion, a top-of-the-rotation SP or a power bat such as Dunn are the only acquisitions for whom DePodesta is willing to give up the top prospects. A 3B upgrade could be a short term rental who would cost little in terms of talent. LA probably has enough payroll space to take on a medium-sized contract.

Here are my thoughts on potential 3B acquisitions. The salary data is from Hardball Dollars. Fielding and hitting stats are from ESPN. Line drive %, BABIP, and and a predictive measure called PrOPS are from the Hardball Times.

Here is a graph mapping the major league hitters' line drive % versus BABIP as of 6/24/05. Certain third basemen are noted in color. Antonio Perez and Jeff Cirillo were crudely drawn in by hand as they did not have enough at-bats to be "qualified".

r sq = 0.22, slope = 0.52, stan err = 0.032

Line drives turn into hits about 75% of the time, while flyballs and groundballs turn into hits about 25% of the time. So the "slope" should be about 50%, which it is. A player below the trend line could be considered "unlucky", and may be due for a regrssion to the mean. Conversely, a player above the trend line could be considered "lucky", and may be due for a crash back down to Earth.

Note how "lucky" Antonio Perez has been so far. His .330 BA could plummet, just as Izturis' BA dropped this month. If so, Perez's value would drop, as hitting is his only notable skill; his fundamentals aren't exactly stellar. It might be a good time to "buy low and sell high", trading Perez ideally for an undervalued 3B.

Likewise, Inge's and Mackowiak's luck could run out soon. On the other hand, Crede, Lowell, and Boone look to be "due".

A couple of months ago, the folks at the Hardball Times came up with a predictive measure called PrOPS, which more or less predicts what a hitter's OPS SHOULD be had he gotten an average amount of luck. This approach is nice because it incorporates ball-in-play events with defense independent events, mainly Ks, BBs, and power. Here are the same players' PrOPS compared to their actual OPS, as of 6/19/05.

As with the line drive graph, Antonio Perez is due for a tumble. (Trade bait!) Inge and Mackowiak also have been rather lucky, along with Cirillo, who is having a huge rebound year. Those players' values are probably overinflated, as their numbers might come back down from the stratosphere. Unlucky or not, Beltre and Lowell have not justifed their large contracts.

That leaves 5 names who might be undervalued. Chavez is a great player, but his large contract probably makes trading for him difficult. Crede has a small contract and is due for some luck, but it's unlikely the White Sox would trade him given their record, which is the best in MLB. If anything, the White Sox will amass more talent, not trade them away.

This leaves 3 names. Boone, Randa, and Ensberg.

1) Cleveland, currently 37 - 34 and probably looking for offense.

Aaron Boone
2005: .599 OPS, .762 ZR, .959 FPCT as of 6/24/05
career: .767 OPS, .774 ZR, .952 RFCT
32 years old, 7th year in MLB
$3 mil salary in 05 with a team option at $4.5 million for 06, with incentives

Boone has been a distaster with the bat, but he is my pick out of the group, mainly because he probably has a low price tag given his lack of production. According to the graph above, Boone may be the unluckiest hitter in baseball, and is seriously due. Indeed, he appears to be headed towards a rebound, as he has a healthy .918 OPS so far this month. With the return of OF Gerut from the DL, the Indians' outfield looks a bit crowded. By trading Boone, Cleveland could put Casey Blake at 3B and save a few bucks in the process.

The problem in trading with Cleveland is the standings. The Indians are currently 12.5 games out of first place in the division, but only 4 games out of the wild card. Who knows whether they'll be buyers or sellers at the end of July. If they're sellers, some second-tier prospects might do. If they're buyers, they are probably looking for an established right-handed power bat to replace Juan Gonzalez, who is once again on the DL. If Cleveland wanted Olmedo Saenz in exchange for Boone and a reliever, I would do that trade as long as Bradley and Drew prove healthy. Better yet, a straight swap between Boone and Perez would give the Indians a leadoff hitter with a "high" OBP.

Saenz or Perez might seem a steep price to pay given their levels of production, but trading for Boone could be similar to the Jason Phillips trade: acquiring an "unlucky" player due a major rebound for a "lucky" one, while giving the in-house prospects another year to develop. Since the top 3B prospects such as LaRoche or Guzman probably will not be ready until 2007, holding a $4.5 million 2006 team option on a starting 3B might not be a bad thing.

2) Cincinnati, where there's going to be a fire sale soon.

Joe Randa
2005: .870 OPS, .812 ZR, .983 FPCT
career: .770 OPS .751 ZR, .963 FPCT
35 years old, 10th year in MLB
$2.15 million for 2005

Randa might be a perfect short term upgrade, and is probably available on the trade market immediately. For the Dodgers, he could be this year's Steve Finley. Cincinnati is probably handing the postion next year to top prospect Edwin Encarnacion, and can fill the position in the meantime with Aurillia or Freel.

Given the current turmoil in Cincinnati, no transaction is off limits. Unfortunately Cincinnati probably wants young pitching in exchange, and that's proably what DePodesta does not want to trade away, unless he gets in return a premium player such as Dunn. A megadeal between LA and Cincinnati would not be a surprise.

3) Houston, which is out of the playoff picture.

Morgan Ensberg
2005: .908 OPS, .780 ZR, .964 FPCT
career: .830 OPS, .760 ZR, .954 FPCT
29 years old, 4th year in MLB
$450K salary in 05

Roy Oswalt would be nice, but such a trade would be a whopper, as he would be very expensive to acquire. Ensberg may not the Astro that everyone is clamoring for, but he would represent a serious upgrade, as he is currently 3rd in OPS among qualifed third basemen. He is also arbitration eligible and cheap, salary-wise. In other words, acquiring Ensberg would be fairly costly.

Houston has Mike Lamb, who could fill in at 3B, but their outfield looks relatively thin next year. Biggio is in the last year of his contract, and the Lastros have young 2B Chris Burke playing LF. Bagwell's career is in jeopardy after undergoing season-ending surgery on his shoulder, and OF Berkman has shifted to 1B for the time being. They might want a young outfielder with pop, along with some prospects. A trade for Ensberg involving Jayson Werth, who is finally displaying the power seen last year, could be a good match for both teams.

All this is if and only if Bradley, Drew, and Ledee get healthy soon. Otherwise, the hole created by trading Werth or even Saenz could be bigger than the one made up at 3B.

Sunday Edit: Never mind on Werth. A 2 HR game doesn't make a career, but LA desperately needs his power bat now that Saenz was seen limping in the 9th inning. Of course, judging Werth on one game would be similar to touting Grabowski for a Gold Glove for that fantastic diving catch today...

Was It Over When The Germans Bombed Pearl Harbor?

2005-06-22T22:44:00.000-07:00

Hallelujah! A 1 game winning streak!

The positives:
Jayson Werth finally showed the power bat that he displayed last year. Brazoban got the save, hopefully the first of many to come. A positive pitching performance by a couple of rookies, Houlton and Osoria.

Houlton is has so far been impressive as a starter, considering that he is a mere Rule 5 pick. Some numbers during his 4 starts:

22.1 innings
2 HRs allowed
9 bases on balls
21 strikeouts

Once Odalis returns, it remains to be seen who stays in the rotation - Houlton or Dessens? It could be Houlton, as Dessens may have more value either out of the bullpen or as a trading chip.

In the negative column:
J. D. Drew has a sore knee and will probably miss a few games. It doesn't sound serious, but given his injury history, nothing's for certain. Drew sitting out probably means F. P. Grabowski gets more playing time. Oy vey.

Antonio Perez botched yet another bunt attempt. That's now 3 on this road trip, 2 of which were quite costly. I don't have a problem with today's bunt in itself - after yesterday's failure to advance the runner, Perez probably worked on bunting quite a bit before today's game, and Tracy probably wanted to show his faith in him.

I do, however, think that a tied game in the 6th is NOT a bunt situation. Save the littleball stuff for the later innings of a tight game, when "run expectancy" often veers from "win expectancy."

Good win. Finally.

How To Lose Every Game in 6, 7, Now 8 Days

2005-06-20T16:25:00.000-07:00

I bailed on a group dinner at Asia de Cuba and presumebly some follow-up drinks at Skybar due to feeling incredibly asocial this weekend. Instead, I ended up watching "How To Lose A Guy in 10 Days", starring Kate Hudson and Matthew McConaughey. (Don't ask. It was the only movie on TV that I hadn't seen.) I stopped watching about half way when I realized that the ending was going to be some sort of a get-back-together routine, and Kate Hudson wasn't going to show any skin. Typical chick flick. No reason to watch it, unless coerced by the significant other.

The plot is about a female columnist who, for the purpose of writing an article, tries to have a guy dump her by intentionally doing all the wrong things in a relationship. Buying him a hairless poodle, barging in on a poker night with a PMS-induced tantrum, ruining a dinner cooked by the guy by saying she's a vegetarian, etc. I bring this movie up because it mirrors the recent plight of the Dodgers, who found every creative yet painful way of losing 6 straight. A quick recap -

How Not To Bunt
Game 1 vs. KC: Down by 1, the Dodgers strike out 3 times in the 8th despite 2 gift baserunners via a walk and a hit-by-pitch. In the 9th with a runner on 1st, the Dodgers give away 2 outs with botched bunts while facing one of the worst closers in baseball.

Takin' Pity On An Old Friend
Game 2 vs. KC: The Dodgers' bats fall silent in order to give ex-teammate Jose Lima his first victory of the year. Apparently the Dodgers are overwhelemed by so much "heart-and-soul" facing them on the mound.

The Return Of Jose Offerman
Game 3 vs. KC: Lead-gloved Antonio Perez commits a fielding error in the 6th inning, and Lowe, haunted by the memories of the early 04 Red Sox defense, implodes immediately.

Bullied By Buerhle
Game 1 vs. CWS: The Dodgers start a Rule 5 rookie pitcher against the staff ace of the team with the best record in baseball. The game is decided before it starts. The Dodgers are promptly shut out.

The End Of "Game Over"
Game 2 vs. CWS: Despite the umpires' best efforts to hand out a mercy win by giving LA a gift insurance run in the 8th, LA still manages to lose as new closer Yhency Brazoban blows a 2 run save. The walk-off HR is hit by ex-Giant Pierzynski, adding insult to injury.

Misssster Hee Sssseop Andersssson...
Game 3 vs. CWS: Proving that Chan Ho Park is not the only Korean major leaguer with martial arts skills, Hee Seop Choi demonstrates the Neo "dodge the bullets" move during a bunt attempt, and hinders Kent's play at 1B. Overall, 3 errors and 2 unearned runs.

What's next, an on-field brawl amongst Dodger players? An inside-the-park HR allowed to the opposing pitcher? Giving up 2 grand slams in the same inning to the same hitter? (Oh wait, that's been done before.)

Fortunately, the division is so terrible that LA is still only 4.5 games out of 1st place despite losing 33 out of the last 54 games. The Dodgers are hopefully running out of ways to lose, so maybe the team is due for a turnaround. Who knows if there is a happy ending like the chick flick, but the rest of the season can't be as bad as the current stretch.

I hope so. The Dodgers need wins as much as Kate Hudson needs some boobs.
_____________________________

Edit:
13 Ks Baked By Jake
Game 1 vs. SD: LA gets mowed down by Peavy, the young stud ace of SD. Down by 1 in the 8th inning, the Dodgers get a gift runner on 2nd with 0 outs, thanks to a fielding error. In keeping with the recent skid, the runner does not score, never mind advance even a base.

Dios mio.
_____________________________

Edit 2:
How Not To Bunt, Deja Vu
Game 2 vs. SD: In a game eerily similar to the first game of the losing streak, the team is down by 1 in the 9th with runners on 1st and 2nd base due to a rare catcher's interference call and a walk. Antonio Perez manages to get a bunt down this time, but right at the pitcher. Easy out at 3rd. Different game, same result.

It's hard to watch the team repeating the same mistakes over and over. LA has run out of new and creative ways to lose.

Pain And Wasted Power

2005-06-18T16:03:00.000-07:00

I hurt myself today
To see if I still feel
I focus on the pain
The only thing that's real
The needle tears a hole...

- Trent Reznor, "Hurt"

Today's lineup, brought to you by Centinela Hospital:

DH Perez (in place of Saenz, who has a sore foot)
RF Werth
CF Drew
2B Kent
1B Choi
C Phillips
LF Grabowski (in place of Bradley, who is on the DL)
3B Edwards (in place of Valentin, who is on the DL)
SS Robles (in place of Izturis, who has a tender hamstring)

SP Dessens (in place of Odalis Perez, who is on a rehab assignment)
_________________________________

The somewhat ironic aspect of all the injuries is that J. D. Drew, who has averaged only 121 games in the previous 6 seasons, is SECOND in games played, just 2 games less than Kent.

Drew's OPS so far this month is 1.212, and for the season has climbed to .899, just below his career average of .904. Along with Drew, Kent (1.087) and Choi (1.107) have been stellar this month. Hitters 2 through 4 have produced.

Meanwhile, Izturis (.257) and Antonio Perez (.671) have done little at the top of the lineup, and thus the power from the middle of the lineup has been largely been wasted. Of the 16 HRs hit by Choi, Drew, and Kent this month, only 3 have come with men on base.
_________________________________

Last year, the team was only 3 games above .500 as late as July 2nd. That July, the team caught fire and won 21 games while losing 7; the team scored an average of 5.8 runs per game while allowing only 3.6. This is obviously not to imply that this year's team will also go on a roll, but with the season only 40% complete, it's too early for "gloom and doom" rants. Yet.
_________________________________

Here is an article about how some of last year's top picks are adjusting to the daily grind of professional baseball.
_________________________________

MAJOR EDIT AFTER THE GAME

...with the season only 40% complete, it's too early for "gloom and doom" rants. Yet.
-eponymous

I'm now pissed.

How the hell do you lose a game like that when Dessens was on, Sanchez was lights out, and the team got a gift insurance run in the 8th?

Robles twice gets caught on the basepaths, both with Antonio Perez at the plate. In the first save opportunity since Gagne's injury, Blowzaban walks the 1st hitter, allows a stolen base without even a toss to 1B, and gives up a walk-off HR.

LA is now under .500 for the first time since opening day.

I'm gonna go home, get drunk, and kick my dog. I'm mad.

Gagne Hurts His Elbow Again

2005-06-14T17:55:00.000-07:00

The DL is now 10 players, in all likelihood.

Eric Gagne had an MRI done on his elbow today, and was diagnosed with a "second-degree sprain of the ulnar collateral ligament." I'm no doctor, but this sounds more serious than the earlier problem with the elbow in April, when Gagne went on the DL with a "mild sprain of the medial collateral ligament in his right elbow." The ulnar and medial collateral ligaments are the same ligament, the one that required Tommy John surgery in 1997.

According to my friend who is a doctor, (He just passed his his boards in radiology and is moving on to a Fellowship in interventional radiology at Stanford. Congrats!) a second-degree sprain is a partial tear of anywhere from 1% to 99% with a chance to heal. My friend had a grimaced look when I told him the person was Gagne. That's not good. He looks at MRIs all day.

Gagne missed 35 games with a mild sprain in April. He could be out much longer with a second-degree sprain. Let's hope that the tear is closer to 1% than 99%.

Brazoban did a fantastic job earlier filling in as the closer, so I don't think the 9th inning is a major concern. More worrysome are the 7th and 8th innings, as Carrara and Sanchez must fill in for Brazoban. It's time for the bullpen to step up.

My earlier wish for a starting pitcher via trade is no longer. The team might need a starting pitcher AND a reliever.

Edit: I just got back from some celebratory drinks at a local bar with my radiology friend and saw Antonio Perez AND Izturis waste 2 outs in the 9th with attempted bunts. I know that Choi hit another one out, and Tracy probably wanted Choi to bat with the game on the line, but waste two outs with TWO ATTEMPTED BUNTS? I heard no sound as I was at a loud bar, so I don't know whether Izturis was ordered to bunt or not. Still, those bunts gave away two precious outs, and that's not right.

Great Way To Close A Homestand

2005-06-12T18:32:00.000-07:00

Just got back from the game. Some thoughts.

The fielding today was shoddy; the glovework of Izturis and Bradley were sorely missed. No way would those two let a shallow flyball drop between them as Perez, Grabowski, and Drew did today. The 6th inning was nearly disasterous, as Drew misplayed a ball that sailed over his head, Rose muffed a popup, and Choi lost a popup only to be saved by Kent's hustle at the last second.

Houlton needs some polishing; he made no attempt to hold the runner at 2nd base before the double steal/run-and-hit play. Still, Houlton kept his poise throught the game, and probably earned a start next weekend along with Dessens, who allowed 1 hit and 0 runs while striking out 5 in 4 innings of work today in AAA. (Edwin Jackson: 7BBs and 5 hits allowed in 3 innings. Yikes!)

Grabowski ended an inning as he attempted to score from 2nd base on a single, with Choi on deck. Grabowski was out by a mile. Choi promptly hit his 3rd home run leading off the next inning. Hindsight is 20/20, but Choi had already hit 2 home runs earlier in the game. Why not hold Grabowski at 3rd base, Glenn "Wendell" Hoffman?

And the man of the hour...

HEE!

SEOP!

CHOI!

Choi displayed his power Saturday night when he absolutely crushed one almost out of the ballpark. That moonshot may be the longest home run I've seen in person at Dodger Stadium, and the second hardest hit. (Piazza once launched a line drive where the ball zoomed right at me, and I could see its seams. The ball was knuckling as it landed 2 seats from me.) Choi has hit 6 home runs in the last 3 games. The Dodgers 1st basemen, thanks to Choi and Saenz, are fifth in OPS in the majors, according to ESPN.

Just don't forget your shades during day games, Hee Seop.

Mr. Lisa and Coyote Ugly

2005-06-09T21:00:00.000-07:00

In the last 3 days, Ricky Ledee and Wilson Alvarez joined the DL with a strained hamstring and shoulder tendinitis, respectively. There are now 9 players on the DL, including one starting pitcher and two swingmen. Fortunately, the off-day today and on June 13th means that the #5 spot in the rotation can be skipped until June 18th, and the bullpen can get some rest after 16 games in 16 days.

It's truly strange saying this, but Dessens is starting to look like a savior when he finishes his rehab assignment and joins the starting rotation, possibly in time for the game on June 18th. The question is who gets bumped when Dessens is activated. Which brings me to....
____________________________

I was at White Lotus last week and noticed that many of the girls were wearing fluffy bohemian blouses over jeans. This must be some sort of a hideous fashion trend I was not aware of. Why a girl would go clubbing wearing a translucent shower curtain was beyond me, until I realized that wearing such a shapeless outfit is perfect for masking deficiencies underneath.

The same applies to Mr. Lisa and his "homerun-air" disease, despite all my wishes to the contrary last month. In my linked post, I supported the notion that Erickson could still be serviceable, since most pitchers regress to a HR rate of about 10% of flyballs. (The Hardball Times explains it better here.) Mea culpa for thinking Erickson is like "most" pitchers, those who can actually get major league hitters out instead of throwing BP.

His 6 inning, 2 run outing immediately following my article turned out to be false hope, nothing but a tease from an ugly chick hiding her chub by wearing the fluffy blouse thing. She may look OK initially, even semi-cute after a few drinks, but once you get close and personal, the hideous nature of the beast becomes apparent.

Erickson may no longer have his good stuff, but he still has his confidence intact. He STILL thinks he deserves to start. He is probably correct that he is better as a starter than a reliever, but I take this to mean that if he can't cut it as a starter, he's worthless as a reliever. The ugly chick hasn't mustered the courage to look at a mirror yet.

Also in the linked article -

So if Erickson continues to struggle in a relief role, his Dodger days might be numbered.

His upper lip stiffened again.

"What's to worry about? I've played 15 years in the major leagues. When I was a kid I wanted to play one day in the major leagues," Erickson said. "I've had an amazing life."

Erickson knows that he is probably gone with one more bad outing. Someone has to go when the pitchers on the DL return, since it seems that Thompson has earned a role as either a #5 starter or a lefty reliever. Barring a miraculous turnaround or further injuries to other pitchers, Erickson might be the one given the slip. It's almost time for the coyote to gnaw off its own paw in order to escape.

Job Listing

2005-06-06T22:10:00.000-07:00

Company: Los Angeles Dodgers
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Job Title: Starting Pitcher
Work Type: Full-time until Oct/Nov 2005
Industry: Professional Sports Entertainment
Required Education: None
Pay Scale: Competitive salary and bonus.

Contact: Paul DePodesta at (323) 224 - 1 - HIT

Company Description:
With a prestigeous history that dates back to the 19th century, the Los Angeles Dodgers are an industrial leader in the field of sports entertainment. The company has historically given its employees a wealth of opportunity for career growth and personal development, along with competitive compensation and benefits.

Responsibilities:
The Starting Pitcher is directly responsible for hindering the opposition's run production once every five days. The rest of the time is to be spent recouperating and going over scouting reports, while assisting the others on staff to to meet their individual, team, and company goals.

Qualifications:
We are searching for a results-driven, motivated individual with a positive attitude to serve as a member of the field-based team. The ideal candidate will be a career-minded individual who focuses on executing his part in a team environment. Experience in the major leagues as a starting pitcher is preferred, but is not required.

Requirements:
Must be over 18.
Must be willing to wear a uniform.
Must be able to pass a drug test.
Must possess the personality to thrive in a merit-based environment.

This position is available immediately. If you are ready to advance your career and like the idea of working in an area with excellent growth opportunities, we encourage you to apply.

Equal opportunity employer.

SF In Desperation Mode

2005-06-02T06:45:00.000-07:00

LA is in a major funk, but at least I can take some pleasure in the downfall of the Archnemesis...

As of earlier today, the Giants are 23 - 28, 9 games out of first place. They recently upgraded the bullpen by acquiring LaTroy Hawkins for two good pitching prospects. It's clear that this is a short term fix with a clear motive: hold on until Bonds and Benitez return.

To clear a roster spot for Hawkins, the Giants designated Matt Herges for assignment. I have not seen Herges nor Hawkins pitch this year, so I don't know how much of an upgrade Hawkins represents. According to the ESPN stats as of 5/30/05:

Herges, 21 innings, 6 Ks, 7 BBs, 2 HRs
4.82 DIPS ERA, 4.71 ERA

Hawkins, 20 innings, 14 Ks, 7 BBs, 4 HRs
5.35 DIPS ERA, 3.15 ERA

If Hawkins is an upgrade, the DIPS ERA doesn't show it. Historically, these 2 relievers have similar strikeout rates (about 6 per nine innings) and bases on balls, (about 3 per nine) with Hawkins a tad more prone to giving up the long ball. I realize that Hawkins throws harder, is more "established", and pitched in a hitter-friendly park, so the DIPS ERA may be biased. But according to The Hardball Times:

Herges, 21.3% line drives given up
Hawkins, 13.6% line drives given up

The average line drive rate given up is about 18%, so one would expect Herges and Hawkins to regress to the mean. If so, Hawkins is in trouble as balls hit in play are more likely to land as hits.

(As if to prove myself correct, Hawkins gave up 4 runs last night. Here's hoping that Herges catches on with another team and repeats as the next Nathan/Hermanson.)

The Giants are probably not done with moves. Their ship is sinking quickly, and need help immediately. According to this article,

General manager Brian Sabean, keeping with his here-and-now philosophy and realizing three NL West teams have better records, suggested Saturday's LaTroy Hawkins trade might be just the start. He's still focused on seeking a left-handed hitter, perhaps an outfielder, given how the Giants are 13-18 against right-handed starters.

"For us to hang in and get to the point where we could play with these teams, we're going to have to make a stand now and reshape the roster now," Sabean said. "That's really based on how you view the competition and what you're up against in the division and league."

The following lefthanded outfielders are those who I think may be available immediately at the right price. I considered salaries, team standings, payroll, and market size; this is an incomplete list, at best. Primo names such as Adam Dunn or Bobby Abreu are not included because I don't think SF has neither the payroll space nor the bargaining chips to afford them. Contract data is from Hardball Dollars.

PIT Lawton, $7.5 million in 2005
CIN Griffey, 10/5 rights, $6 mil a year til 2008, $57 mil deferred from to 2009 to 2024
NYM Floyd, $6.5 mil in 2005 and 2006
TB Huff, $4.5 and $7.5 in 2005 and 2006
SEA Ibanez, $4 mil in 2005 and 2006
TX Dellucci, $1 mil in 2005 and 2006
KC Stairs, $1.2 mil in 2005

The most improbable name on this list is Griffey, who would at least fill some empty seats while Bonds is out. As injury-prone as Griffey is, his salary structure is palatable in the near future since much of his payments are deferred after his contract period ends. Griffey may be willing to waive his 10/5 rights in order to bail from a team in ruin. A package including Alfonso ($7.5 and $8 mil in 05 and 06) and a top prospect might fit the bill for Griffey, 3B Randa, ($3.75 mil for 2005) and some help with Griffey's deferred payments.

As much as I would like to see Bonds, Griffey, and Grissom tripping over their walkers in the same outfield, a far more likely scenario is acquiring a one year rental such as Lawton or Stairs. However, no desperate move would surprise me at this point as long as there is a chance that Bonds will come back this year. The window of opportunity for the Giants is closing rapidly, and Sabean knows it. The Giants are willing to sacrifice their future for a short term gain, and are desperate enough to knowingly make a bad deal.

It stinks that LA has dropped to .500 right now, but the situation is far worse up north as the West Coast Mets scrounge for whatever they can get. It's a small consolation, at least.

Raul Mondesi, -Sigh-

2005-05-30T17:27:00.001-07:00

It seems that Raul Mondesi will soon be out of a job with the Atlanta Braves due to poor numbers and a nagging leg injury. At a relatively young age of 34, it's possible that Mondesi could be out of baseball, with most of his skills still intact.

He was at one time my favorite Dodger, a five tool player with jaw-dropping talent. The cheer "Rauuuuuuuuuuuuuuulll!" was commonplace at Dodger Stadium in the 90's, and Mondesi was absolutely electrifying. His 1999 opening day performance may have been his greatest day, as he hit a 3 run HR off Gregg Olson to tie the game with 2 outs in the 9th inning, and later hit a game-winning HR in the 11th. That was the single greatest game I ever witnessed at Dodger Stadium.

I remember another game where the opposing hitter hit a single to right field. As he jogged to 1B, Mondesi casually charged the ball, and absolutely gunned a one hopper to 1B for an out. The crowd went nuts with chants of "Mon - De - Si! Mon - De - Si!" I was sitting in the RF Pavilion. I cheered.

Mondesi played with reckless abandon at times, and his raw talent was evident to all. But all that "raw talent" never matured into "skill." He missed cutoff men at times, rarely showed plate discipline, and swung for the fences on virtually every slider off the plate. In a game loaded with adjustments, Mondesi rarely changed his game.

The bullheaded Mondesi eventually went off in the famous F-bomb tirade against LA management. This act, among others, ultimately got him traded to Toronto in exchange for choir boy Shawn Green. A few years later, Mondesi got dumped from the Yankees due to clashing with management. Just last year, Mondesi managed to get axed from 2 teams for basically not showing up. He was a headstrong bull on and off the field, which was both a gift and a curse.

Mondesi's talent was good enough to sustain a nice 10 year career, but he could have been the superstar everyone thought he would be. So much for the second coming of Roberto Clemente. What a talent gone to waste.

Current Standings, and Mrs. Benson

2005-05-27T18:37:00.000-07:00

The team to beat in the division looks more and more like San Diego. The Padres are 2nd best in the NL in runs scored while 6th best in runs allowed. (LA is 3rd best in runs scored and a miserable 15th best in runs allowed.) Prior to the SF series, LA finished a tough stretch against 4 potential playoff teams: St. Louis, Atlanta, Florida, and Anaheim. The team managed to win 4 out of 13. San Diego also faced St. Louis, Atlanta, and Florida, and won 9 out of 10.

LA has had numerous problems, and many are a duplicate of last year.

1) The pitching depth looks thin again after a surplus of arms in ST.
2) Werth has done a good impression of himself by missing most of April and May.
3) Erickson has been so thoroughly Nomo-like that I suspect that Mr. Lisa will break a fingernail and land on the DL soon.

The current record is also similar to last year.

2005: 12-2 on 4/20, 24-22 on 5/27
2004: 9-3 on 4/18, 24-21 on 5/27

Last year's team was only 2 games above .500 as late as June 26th. So there's hope.

The rotation is in shambles behind Lowe and Penny, but the schedule is relatively soft after 3 games against Arizona. The Cubs, Brewers, and Tigers have inferior offenses, as they have scored runs lower than the ML average. It's an opportune time for someone to step up and fill in until Odalis returns and Weaver recovers from "dead arm".

Things could be worse. It's possible that Ishii would be the #3 starter right now if it weren't for the Phillips trade. (As I stated a while ago, thanks, Omar! ) I wonder if the Mets are suffering from "Ishii-itis" yet: 16Ks and 18BBs in 29 innings. At least the Mets fans can enjoy the fine writing skills of Mrs. Kris Benson, among her other talents. A quick excerpt to display her writing talent:

They happened to lose Friday, but all I had to do is take my clothes off and Kris felt all better.

Cute story. I wonder how long before the folks at Baseball Tonight/Yard Work jump on this one.

Why Not Bat Bradley #3, Choi #5?

2005-05-24T20:30:00.000-07:00

Tracy flip-flopped Drew and Choi over the weekend, and I would like to see another change. Just as Beltre forced his way up from the #7 spot to cleanup last year, Bradley has made a strong push to move up from his #5 spot. I would like to see a lineup where Choi drops to #5, and Bradley jumps to #3.

First off, I realize that a change in the batting order is relatively insignificant as long as something stupid isn't done. (Leave it to Tracy to bat Robles #2 and Choi #7.) Secondly, this isn't a knock on Choi, as he is starting to fulfill his potential. It's just that somebody needs to move down if Bradley moves up in the order. I don't think Drew should be the one bumped down. Even though Drew has struggled, his OBP has been quite good due to his high walk rate.

From The Hardball Times:

Drew's OBP is a tad lower than Choi's, but look at the difference in power.

Runs are mainly scored by getting men on base (OBP), and then driving them in (SLG). The top 5 batters have OBPs within 0.030, which is fairly close. Meanwhile, the difference in Drew's SLG to the power trio of Bradley/Kent/Choi is substantial. Put another way, Drew is not better suited to hit #2 than Choi, but Choi is WAY better suited to hit #5 than Drew.

In addition, breaking up Choi and Drew would prevent the opposing team from using their top situational lefthander on consecutive lefthanded batters. Similarly, when Werth comes back and probably hits in the #6 spot, Choi would break up the righthanded bats. Moving Bradley up would also give the top of the lineup a bit more speed.

It's interesting to think how good this lineup could be once Drew gets out of his slump. Compare Drew's "line drive percentage" so far this year to last year.

Once Drew starts hitting, he becomes an OBP machine. With good speed on the bases, to boot.

Many have said that Choi's power would eventually be best used in a run-producing spot. I think that now would be as good a time as any, since Choi has seemingly figured it out.

"Beat LA of Anaheim!"

2005-05-20T18:21:00.000-07:00

About five years ago, I was sitting in the Pavilion for a Giants game. The SF fans wearing orange were being pelted with food by the usual thugs in the cheap seats. One errant toss hit a young guy wearing an Angels cap on the head. He turned around, pointed to his cap, and yelled out, "Why'd you hit me for? I'm an Angels fan!" The overwhelming response was laughter, myself included. Admitting to being an Angels fan was akin to driving a Yugo in LA.

In my mind, the Angels were nothing more than the cute little team by Disneyland. Stories such the Indian burial site, Dave Henderson's HR, Donnie Moore's subsequent suicide, and the team bus crash added up to a cursed lore which was both tragic and somewhat humorous.

Then it all changed. Proving that anything really can happen, the little Rally Monkeys won the World Series in 7 games over the Giants, a grand finish to a miracle season. (Yes I watched, if only to root against the Giants.) Soon afterwards, a new owner stepped in with bold visions of turning SoCal into the "City of Angels."

What if Spiezio didn't hit that HR in game 6? This budding rivalry would not exist if the Angels didn't win the World Series. The emboldened cousin to the south wears the newer crown while the blueblood to the north brags of past tradition despite only a single playoff win since 1988. So the rivalry builds, and not only on the field.

Petty acts such as selling "LA Dodgers of LA" caps, announcing the Halos as "The Angels of Anaheim", and listing the Angels as "ANA" on the scoreboard only raises the public perception of the Angels to that of the Dodgers. Moreno wants a rivalry, and McCourt has taken the bait. This catfight between the Parking Lot Attendant and the Billboard Painter could turn into the business equivalent of Chan Ho Park's karate kick.

The Freeway Series starts tonight. I'm hoping for a warm reception for Finley, and chants of "Beat LA of Anaheim!" afterwards.

Rambling Thoughts, Part II

2005-05-18T18:00:00.000-07:00

Antonio in, Grabs out:

Perez got called up after spending much of his rehab assignment working at 3B. This leaves only Robles and Bako as the left-handed bats off the bench if a right-handed pitcher starts against LA, assuming that Tracy sticks with the Ledee/Repko platoon.

Apparently Grabowski had a sore shoulder from throwing. That's strange since I thought you had to catch the ball before throwing it.

Homerun-Air Disease:

Weaver must have contracted this near-fatal virus before his start today. Previously, the virus infected Erickson, who finally appeared to shed those same symptoms over the weekend.

Quarantine Mr. Lisa! He's contagious!

"He's not a dog. A dog is loyal and runs after balls."

I just noticed that the website darrylstrawberry.org is on sale for $2500. Someone should forward this info to the webmaster at darylewardsucks.com.

Only 50,000 ever made:

The free Dodgers.com t-shirt given out on 5/16 is a "great collector's item", according to this Ebay seller. (Included is the ticket stub - Woo Hoo!) Now I know what to do with my 3 Fred McGriff bobblehead dolls collecting dust somewhere.

I personally like this shirt better.

EDIT: Even though the team has been struggling, things could be worse. According to Baseball Prospectus, San Francisco's former closer Hermanson is currently ranked #1 in "expected wins added" while new closer Benitez is near the bottom. It's Joe Nathan redux. Bonds is hooked up to a 24 hour IV, Schmidt's on the DL, and Pierzynski has an OPS of .814 with the White Sox. Misery by the Bay...

The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly

2005-05-16T17:23:00.000-07:00

"There are two kinds of people in the world, my friend: Those with a rope around the neck, and the people who have the job of doing the cutting." - from the movie The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly

A few thoughts and clarifications on Erickson, who apparently managed to cut the rope around his neck with yesterday's fine performance.

The graph that charted line drive % versus defensive efficiency showed that the defense was not helping Erickson out, but not by an overwhelming amount. (Thanks to 6-4-2 for the mention.) The thing that I should have stated is that ERICKSON IS NOT A STRIKEOUT PITCHER. Erickson's strikeout rate is about 4 less per 9 innings than the average LA pitcher, so the fielders must turn more balls in play into outs. The underformance by the defense is thus magnified.

As for yesterday's game...

{ theme music from The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly }

The Good:

Erickson saved his own neck with a great performance. He carried a one-hit shutout into the sixth inning by mostly keeping the ball on the ground. (3 to 1 groundout to flyout ratio.) Hee Seop Choi continued to swing the bat by driving in a run with 2 outs in the 2nd inning.

{ theme music from The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly }

The Bad:

I don't have a problem with Izturis attempting a bunt sigle in the 9th, but why stand there hoping that the ball goes foul? This and the unsuccessful stolen base attempt cost the team 2 outs. As for Tracy calling for a bunt by Robles with runners on 1st and 2nd in the 3rd inning ... position players who can hit should never bunt so early in the game. So why did the unproven Robles hit 2nd and Choi 7th? It's usually wise to give the ABs at the top of the order to those who can hit. In all, 3 failed bunts.

{ theme music from The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly }

The Ugly:

From 1st place to 3rd place in a day. 10 runners left on base against a shaky Tim Hudson. Dave Roberts, of all people, hitting a 3 run homerun to help the Padres pass the Dodgers in the standings.

Sometimes I want to move over to Fire Jim Tracy and rant, rant, rant.

9 HRs, 12 BBs, 5 Ks

2005-05-14T13:40:00.000-07:00

Erickson currently has a 7.83 DIPS ERA, which is 398th out of 423 ML pitchers according to ESPN as of May 10th. Unlike almost everyone else, I'm not ready to jump on the "Dump Mr. Lisa" bandwagon yet. (Emphasis on "yet") Here are some of his numbers.

3.2 BB/9, 1.3 K/9, 1.7 G/F (from Hardball Times)

Erickson's walk rate is not high compared to the NL average (3.5) and the Dodgers average (2.8). He's not striking anybody out, so the ball is going into play frequently, but he's keeping the ball mostly on the ground as he has done throughout his career. When the ball does go in play...

11.3% line drives given up, 72.4 defensive efficiency (from Hardball Times)

Believe it or not, among NL starting pitchers, Erickson is ranked fourth best in avoiding line drives. (!!!) Historically speaking, line drives become outs about 25% of the time, while groundballs and flyballs are converted into outs about 75% to 78% of the time. In this sense, Erickson actually looks good! But is it? The average line drive rate for NL pitchers with at least 50 innings last year was 18.7, with a standard deviation of 2.4. Erickson's low line drive rate is bound to go up, if he continues to get innings.

"I think I was much better than the results indicated, and I'm sure the coaches would say the same thing," Erickson said. "A lineup like that is a tough one to give extra outs to. I don't think many pitchers can be effective when they get outs that don't turn into outs." Daily News, 5/11/05

The following is a graph of the 74 NL starting pitchers in terms of line drives given up versus defensive efficiency, which is a percentage of outs when the ball goes in play. The dark blue dot represents Erickson, and the 4 light blue dots represent the other Dodger starters. Elmer Dessens was not included with his single start.

(r sq= 0.159, slope = -0.435, stan err= 0.0442 )

A quick eye-balling of the graph indicates that the defense hasn't helped Erickson out relative to the other starters, but not outrageously so. (Brad Penny is the highest light blue point, and so must be the beneficiery of a terrific defensive effort so far.)

And now back to the ugly...

"A couple of balls left the building," Tracy said. "It's hard to make those plays, too." Daily News, 5/11/05

2.3 HR/9, 24% HR/Flyball (Hardball Times)

Ouch. Out of 74 NL starting pitchers, Erickson is 6th worst in HR/9 and 4th worst in HR/Flyball as of May 10th. The league average for HR/Flyball is usually around 11%. Here's a graph that compares flyball % versus the adjusted HR/9 rate (strikeouts removed) when the ball goes in play.

(r sq= 0.26, coeff/27= 0.16, st err=0.73 )

Erickson usually keeps the ball on the ground, but when the ball does get in the air, it's leaving the yard at an alarming rate. Bad luck? Sample size? Or are the balls simply being mashed? Possibly all three. If they're getting mashed, what is the quality of the opposing batters? According to Baseball Prospectus on May 12th, Erickson has so far drawn a tough set of opposing hitters.

The differences may look small, but that's about a half a run difference expected per 9 innings between Erickson and Weaver. Assuming that Erickson stays in the rotation, this should even out eventually.

So it's possible that Erickson will give up fewer homeruns. He might allow more line drives, but should get better defensive support. He'll also probably walk a few, and maybe the strikeouts will go up - it can't go much lower. So what does Erickson need to do in his next start?

KEEP THE STUPID BALL ON THE GROUND!

Rambling Thoughts

2005-05-12T16:57:00.000-07:00

1) Now that Hee Seop's swinging the bat...

All of a sudden, Choi's glove is supposedly suspect. As repeatedly pointed out by Joe Morgan on ESPN last night, Choi was unable to make plays on 3 or 4 sharply hit balls while fielding only 1. Come on, IT'S ONE GAME!

Choi is surprisingly athletic for someone his size. He may never win a Gold Glove, but he's much better than Saenz or Grabowski. Let's not forget Eric "The Statue" Karros in his later years with LA. He didn't dive at sharply hit balls - he fell. Choi is better.

What will the detractors say next when Choi shows some skill with the glove? He can't bunt? He smiles too much?

2) Izturis is on fire

An obvious fact. His improvement is astonishing.

04: 20.2% line drive %, .317 BA for balls in play
05: 28.9% line drive %, .358 BABIP (from Hardball Times)

That line drive rate is by far highest on the team. Only Miguel Cabrera has a higher line drive rate amongst NL starters. This is both amazing and worrisome - can he continue to maintain that pace? On the other hand, given the high line drive rate, his BABIP is actually low.

Izturis' pitches per plate appearance is also way up, although that has not yet translated into a higher walk rate. I should look into this a bit more...

3) Broadcasters should give stats, not interpret them

During last Saturday's day game, Steiner explained that Cincinnati was a losing team because "their hitters strike out too much, and their pitchers don't get enough strikeouts." Apparently Steiner is unaware that Cincinnati's pitchers never face their own hitters.

Speaking of broadcasters,

4) I don't like the 2 man TV broadcast

Perhaps I'm so used to the single voice format that I am simply not used to the 2 man chatter. I don't mind it on the radio, where I find a second voice actually helpful in describing the action. On TV, I prefer less chatter because i can see what is happening on the field. That's part of what makes Scully so great. He knows when to talk, and he knows when to "shut up", as he puts it.

McCourt In The Black?

2005-05-10T00:05:00.000-07:00

McDebt no more? The Dodgers almost broke even last year, and things look better this year.

McCourt's purchase of the Dodgers included a $15 million payment from FOX for this season, which nearly matches the $20 million stadium upgrade during the off-season. The Dodgers decommissioned $6 1600 Pavilion seats in favor of 1600 new seats with an average ticket value of about $100, according to the Daily News. More than three quarters have already been sold, so that's a net gain of about about $7 to 8 million so far.

Thanks in large part to the terriific team last year, the total attendance was about 3.49 million, which was the highest since 1983. This year's attendance is currently at 647,000 in 14 home games, according to ESPN. Take out the home opener sellout, average it out to 80 games, and add back in the home opener, and the team is on track for about 3.7 million visitors, which would set a team record. That would be an additional 200,000 tickets sold over last year. Figure that an average seat is about $19 buckos, and that's about $3 to 4 million more.

Say that each one of the estimated extra 200,000 attendees spends about $10 on food and merchandise. Say that they show up in sets of 4 and park for $10. I think that's conservative, and thats about $2.5 million more.

By my calculations, LA could take in about $14 million more than last year in ticket and stadium sales alone. And if the team stays in 1st place, more people might show up. After all, a game at Dodge Stadium is still a bargain compared to other cities, according to the Fan Cost Index. Not to mention going to Staples Center to see the lottery-bound Lakers and Clippers.

Payroll is down about $10 million, for now.

The net difference from last year to this year is already looking to be almost $25 million. This doesn't include the extra advertising all over the Stadium, nor the new sponsorship agreement with FOX that kicked in this year. And who knows the details of the penny-pinching the McCourts are doing within the organization. Cutting unneeded employees from the payroll? Collecting cans in the parking lot? Who knows. I'm guessing a turnaround of about $35 million compared to last year.

McCourt managed to buy from a motivated seller by somehow borrowing more than what he paid. After FOX and Malone nearly ruined an organzation by overspending and depleting the farm system, McCourt stands to possibly turn a decent profit in just his second year of ownership. The organization as a whole is leaner and trimmer, and not just on the baseball side, where Depodesta is continuing what Evans started, albeit with a different evaluation mindset.

The cash flows are looking good for McCourt. The PR department could use some work, though.

A Simple Look At RBI Totals

2005-05-08T01:38:00.000-07:00

The ability to hit better in critical "clutch" situations has never been statistically proved, and is usually shoved off as luck. I agree with this, although the ability to "choke" seems harder to disprove...

I quote the following from Baseball Graphs word for word.

If you take the statistical totals of any league in baseball history, multiply its OBP by its total bases (the key component of SLG), you will get a number that is almost always within 1% of total league runs scored! When you apply this math to individual teams, you usually get a number within 5% of team runs scored. This is an astounding mathematical concept. The person who discovered this basic truth must have felt like Archimedes, running down the hall naked and shouting "Eureka."

OBP and SLG correlate incredibly well with runs because:

1) get on base (hits + walks = OBP)
2) drive a runner in (total bases = SLG)

For example, the Dodgers scored 761 runs last year. Multiply the team OBP of .332 by .423 SLG by 5542 ABs and you get 774.4. It's a good, quick estimate. This is what I consider the general form of the Runs Created concept, which is:

RC(Ver 1.0) = { (Hits + Walks "OBP")*(Total Bases "SLG") }/(At Bats + Walks)

Introduce some extra terms such as stolen bases and sac flies, and you have the modern version of Runs Created, which is a theoretical value of of runs contributed by a single player.

What I did is a precursor to the Runs Created concept. Instead of multiplying a hitter's SLG by his own OBP, I multiplied a hitter's SLG by the previous hitter's OBP - RBIs mainly happen when you drive in those in front of you after all. For example, I multiplied Ken'ts SLG with Drew's OBP. I then normalized the results a tad because not every run is an RBI. The result is a predicted RBI for a hitter that can be compared to his actual RBI total. Best of all, it's in a format that everybody understands - RBIs.

I realize that this method is simple, is not original, has been tried by a gazillion people, and most have eventually come up with a better solution. I am making no attempt to account for runners prior to the guy infront of the hitter, say the leadoff guy getting on infront of the cleanup hitter. My original grand plan was to embed a Markov run expectancy matrix in a Monte Carlo simulation - a numerical method that usually works well. I don't have the time to code a program, so I am using this ridiculously simple (and crude) method instead.

First, the 04 season:

The most "clutch" hitter was the #7 spot, which was usually Encarnacion in the 1st half, and Cora in the 2nd half. Checking their numbers, those two indeed hit better with runners in scoring position last year. The big "choker" was the #5 spot, which was usually occupied by Mr. 0.199 with RISP.

Here is this year's team, as of 5/5/05.

Clutch: The #8 spot, with the catching tandem of Phillips and Bako hitting over .400 with RISP.
Choke: The #5 spot, which is Bradley, who is barely over the Mendoza line with RISP.

In terms of absolute RBI totals, Drew's slump to begin the season is clear at the #3 spot. Choi and Repko have apparently been fine in the #2 hole.

Anyway, I like simplicy... the fact that this method even works is a testament to the importance of OBP and SLG, and not my method, which is full of holes.

1 Month Tendencies: Pitching & Defense

2005-05-07T14:24:00.000-07:00

I compared the line drive rate given up by the pitchers to the team's defensive efficiency 13 games into the season. The defense looked barely average back then. It's now two weeks later, and here is the new graph, as of 5/5/05. The data is again from The Hardball Times, and is "raw" - unadjusted for park effects, etc. As before, the blue dot is LA, and the red line is the 04 NL trend line.

(r sq = 0.083, st err = 0.012, coeff = -0.273; LA LD = 17.7%, DE = 0.699)

For comparison, a graph of the 04 NL teams plotting the line drive % versus defensive efficiency is here. (r sq = 0.279, st err = 0.008, coeff = -0.953) LA's defense last year may have been the best in the league, according to that graph.

As expected, the line drive rate is no longer 13% as it was 13 games into the season. The defensive efficiency has correspondingly dropped from 0.740. Once again, the defense is looking barely average.

Comments on some other teams:

Florida (17.2%, 0.719) represents the highest point on the graph. Combine that defense with a park that is unfriendly to HRs, a power pitching staff, and a lineup that added Delgado in the off-season. They're my pick to finally unseat Atlanta for the NL East division crown. With Burnett healthy and in his walk year, their time is now.

Chicago (19.7%, 0.673) represents the lowest point on the graph. (Aramis and Jeromy, take a bow.) Fortunately for them, their pitching staff has had the highest strikeout rate (8.4 per 9) in the league, so fewer balls have gone in play. But with Wood out for a while, the K rate figures to drop. Bad defense, no bullpen, one of their 3 aces out...Baker's brushing up his resume.

Colorado (17.1%, 0.682) is not only subpar, but their pitching staff is allowing a league worst 5.1 K/9, and a league worst 5.0 BB/9. They have in effect cloned Kaz Ishii - scary.

The Yankees (18.9%, 0.655) are the worst in both leagues, as was the case 13 games into the season. Their strikeout rate of 5.6 per 9 is also near the bottom. Balls are going into play a lot, and they're not being caught. Trouble brewing in the Bronx...

Back to LA:

The team defense independent ERA stands at about 4, which is slightly better than the league average. The strikeout rate is near the bottom at 5.7 per nine 9, but at least the pitchers are not giving out too many free passes. (2.6 BB/9, lowest in the league) The 3 sinkerball SPs are contributing to a 1.46 ground/flyball rate, and the infield defense might be better now that 3B Nakamura, the 5 time Gold Glove winner in Japan, should get more playing time with Valentin out. (Although to be fair, Valentin was looking better with the glove recently. )

Whether Nakamura can justify a starting spot is another matter, given his cartoon swing. If not, Robles, Edwards, someone via trade...

Penny has come back strong, Alvarez is settling in, and Gagne looks to be back mid-May. Strikeouts should go up, and the infield defense should be better with Nakamura. (for now)

It's lookin' good.

Ross Porter Memorial Stats

2005-05-04T15:00:00.000-07:00

In the spirit of Ross Porter's goofy stats while on the air...

These numbers are culled mainly from ESPN and MLB. Some are interesting, some are trivial, and some are downright misleading,

1) Pitchers have been terrible on the road.

Home: 3.08ERA, 1.07WHIP, 6.50K/9, 3.25K/BB, 5 HR allowed
Away: 4.89ERA, 1.48WHIP, 4.42K/9, 1.33K/BB, 15 HR allowed
23 runs allowed in 3 games at Coors Field, 22 allowed in 3 games at the BOB.

Park effect? Possibly. The difference in the K/BB rate is eye-popping, though.

Despite this-

2) The Dodgers are 9 - 4 at home, and 8 - 5 on the road. Similar.

LA at home has scored 58 while giving up only 39, but on the road has scored 76 while giving up 69.

3) The opponent is scoring first.

The number of times the opponent got ahead first at the end of an inning is 14 out of 26. LA has been playing catch-up, and has so far been successful with a 17 - 9 record. In the first 14 games when LA won 12, LA got ahead first 10 times. In the next 12 games when LA won 5, they got ahead first just twice.

Burning out the opposing starting pitchers with high pitch counts? Maybe.

4) Valentin just went south of the Mendoza line. Uh oh.

He also has a .722 OPS due to his high walk rate.

5) LA is 2nd in the NL in pitches per plate appearance at 3.83. But the hitters aren't hitting with 2 strikes.

0 and 2, .179 BA
1 and 2, .192 BA
2 and 2, .208 BA
3 and 2, .200 BA

So the hitters should swing earlier? Actually, averages by pitch count may be the most misleading stat ever. The numbers are naturally lower with 2 strikes because another strike ends in an out, whereas with 0 or 1 strike, the at-bat continues after another strike.

Come to think of it, I can't imagine Ross Porter misleading the audience with the last stat. (That is Tim McCarver's territory, I believe.)

Choi's Swing According To Wallach

2005-05-02T21:00:00.000-07:00

Wallach said the following about Choi during the postgame radio interview after Choi's grand slam last Friday. (I'm paraphrasing here off memory - writing down quotes while driving 75MPH on the curvy stretch of the 110 freeway north of downtown is not a good idea.) According to Wallach, Choi needs to swing "inside" the ball so that the balls hit hard aren't pulled foul.

I've been looking for a way to describe why Choi's swing is so long and loopy, and Wallach hit it right on the head. I used to to do the same thing playing softball after a long layoff. Everything I hit hard was pulled foul. Fixing that problem is a apparently much easier in beer league softball than facing a 93 MPH fastball.

What baffles me is how Choi came to LA with that ridiculous swing in the first place. What did the Cubs and the Marlins teach? Was Choi incapable of learning then or were his minor leagues numbers so good that they left him alone? Did his swing fall apart overnight? According to some Cubs fans, he had the tendency to crouch down and come up while swinging during his rookie season. Wasn't this problem only recently corrected during this year's ST?

Choi is starting to get rolling. His OPS has climbed to .833 in 61 ABs, which is about .200 higher than a week ago. And the aggressiveness - what Wallach described as "patient aggressiveness" - is coming along. That grand slam was on a first pitch fastball that Choi was sitting on.

Next agenda for Wallach: Nakamura and his Paul Bunyan axe chop.

The Markov Value of the Stolen Base: Part III

2005-04-30T18:14:00.000-07:00

I have previously linked this article on Markov matrices as applied to baseball as a good read for the non-math geeks. Please read if you are unfamiliar with its concept.

I have discussed the value of the stolen base in 2 previous posts, on 3/30 and on 4/3. Using Dave Roberts' 04 regular season (38 out of 41) as an example, I calculated that Roberts' stolen bases were worth about 5 "expected" runs over the course of the season - not a whole lot.

In the second post, I stated that there is a difference between "winning" and "scoring runs". (The point is to win, whether by a run or 10 runs.) In a tight late inning game, the strategy is not necessarily outscoring your opponent by as many runs as possible; the team may try to eke out a single run to tie or win. So a stolen base, as with other situational plays, can make a big difference in the game's outcome.

Here is the historical "expected run matrix" for all games between 1999 and 2002, courtesy of TangoTiger. (Thanks, Tango!) It is basically the number of runs you "expect" to score given the out count and the runner situation.

Expected Runs, 99 - 02 Historical

Let's say that with no one else on, if a runner attempts to steal 2nd from 1st with 0 outs:

ExpectedRuns(0 out, runner on 1st) = 0.953
ExpectedRuns(0 out, runner on 2nd) = 1.189
Successful SB = 0.236 "expected runs" added

ExpectedRuns(0 out, runner on 1st) = 0.953
ExpectedRuns(1 out, no one one) = 0.297
Caught SB = 0.656 "expected runs" subtracted

In terms of "expected runs", a stolen base adds a mere 0.236 runs, while getting caught has a more severe penalty of minus 0.656 runs.

It's Game 4 of the ALCS, bottom of the 9th, Boston is a run down with 3 outs to go. Millar draws a walk. Runner on 1st with 0 outs. Dave Roberts enters the game as the pinch runner. A stolen base would add 0.236 "expected runs". Not a whole lot - But:

What is the probability of winning this game? How much would a stolen base help? To calculate this, I once again dug into TangoTiger's website. Here are some of the historical probabilities of scoring a certain number of runs given the out/base situation. I have it broken down another way:

Score zero runs -

Scoring 0 Runs, 99 - 02 Historical

Score a single run -

Scoring 1 Run, 99 - 02 Historical

Score 2 or more runs -

Scoring 2+ Runs, 99 - 02 Historical

(I realize that these numbers are historical "average" numbers and don't figure for the dominance of Rivera on the mound nor the strength of the batter, but they're worth looking at, nonetheless.)

In the bottom of the 9th while down by a single run with no outs and a runner at 1st, Boston can win the game if:

1) Boston scores 2 or more runs (win for sure)
2) Boston scores one run to tie (50/50 chance of winning in extra innings)

According to these charts:

WinPct(0 outs, runner on 1st) = ScoreTwoOrMoreRuns(Win) + (1/2)*ScoreOneRun(Tie)
WinPct(0 outs, runner on 1st) = 0.261 + (1/2)*0.176
WinPct(0 outs, runner on 1st) = 34.9%

Boston has a 34.9% chance of winning with no outs and a runner on 1st. Roberts attempts to steal 2nd. Had he been caught:

WinPct(1 out, no one on) = ScoreTwoOrMoreRuns(Win) + (1/2)*ScoreOneRun(Tie)
WinPct(1 out, no one on) = 0.072 + (1/2)*0.101
WinPct(1 out, no one on) = 12.2%

It's a good thing he wasn't caught. That's where Roberts' basestealing skills (92.7% success rate in 04) certainly factor in. He makes it under a close tag. Now the situation:

WinPct(0 outs, runner on 2nd) = ScoreTwoOrMoreRuns(Win) + (1/2)*ScoreOneRun(Tie)
WinPct(0 outs, runner on 2nd) = 0.284 + (1/2)*0.348
WinPct(0 outs, runner on 2nd) = 45.8%

Roberts' stolen base increased his team's chance of winning by almost 11%, which is substantial. Everyone knows what happened at this point. Dave Roberts - forever the folk hero in Beantown with a measly 0.236 "expected runs" gained.

Situational moves such as a stolen base can make a big difference in a close game, even though they may be worth little to overall run production during the course of the season.

EDIT: I finished this post in a hurry due to a dinner reservation on Saturday. As the commenters point out, there is plenty I am leaving out. Studes' article on "Win Expectancy" gives a more general (and better worded) description over at The Hardball Times.

Nakamura/Valentin

2005-04-28T03:07:00.000-07:00

Due to the current roster makeup, Nakamura is the probable candidate to be sent back back down to AAA when Antonio Perez returns from the DL. Before this happens, I would like to see Nakamura more at 3B. I would then occasionally rotate Valentin to the middle infield to rest Izturis or Kent. So for the time being until Perez returns, I would have Valentin rover around as a super sub, a la Hernandez last year. The side benefit is this:

As I commented over at The Fourth Outfielder the other day...

If Nakamura proves that he's capable of manning 3B everyday, the Dodgers would hold a trading chip in Valentin. For example, the Cubs just lost Garciaparra for a while with a torn left groin tendon, and could be looking for a stopgap replacement. Valentin is a better SS than a 3B, is familiar with Chicago, has a 1 year contract, and is capable with the bat unlike Neifi Perez, Garciaparra's probable replacement. So Valentin would be of greater value to the Cubs than to LA. If Valentin is indeed traded, LA can then bring up Oscar Robles, who looked good during ST and can be put on the ML roster with certain restrictions.

Let's run with the Cubs example for a bit. Their needs are where the Dodgers are strong. The Northsiders need a shortstop, relief pitching, and perhaps an outfielder to replace the production lost when Sosa and Alou departed. (Dodger rejects Hollandsworth and Burnitz now man the outfield.) So the Dodgers have what the Cubs need, but what would the Dodgers want in return?

Assuming no further injuries, the only possible "needs" for the Dodgers are a frontline starter (Doesn't everybody?) and a 1B if Choi stalls. This is obviously wishful thinking, but what would it take to pry either Prior or Zambrano? Weaver and Penny are both in their walk years, and blue chip prospects such as Jackson, Ketchner, and Billingsley are just that at this point - prospects. A package including Valentin, Werth, and Brazoban would be a serious starting offer - three needs filled cheaply, with two of them just starting to blossom. I would be willing to take back a bad contract (Remlinger) or two if it meant getting Prior.

Of course, the Cubbies aren't trading Prior or Zambrano, and can't trade Wood due to his no-trade clause, so it's a moot point. But I wouldn't be surprised if a small trade involving Valentin/ Repko/ Sanchez occured. According to the Cubs Reporter,, their farm is deep in pitching. Maybe a "need" trade isn't in the Dodgers' best interest. A long-term "opportunity" trade would work, too.

This is not meant to be a knock on Valentin, who has so far displayed an erratic glove and a power bat, as expected. He is, however, a mere one year stopgap who was signed prior to Nakamura becoming available. If Nakamura shows that he's capable of holding the 3B job, it would be in the Dodgers' best interest to see what the market offers for Valentin.

5/5/05 EDIT: Now that Valentin's out for at least 2 months with a knee injury, we'll see what Nakamura can do. So far, good glove, no hit...

Big Choi or Bok Choi?

2005-04-26T21:42:00.000-07:00

Sample size.

Prior to tonight's game, Hee Seop Choi's OBP was .294 with a SLG of .311, which is downright abysmal for a 1B. In a move that showed Tracy's waning confidence last night, Choi was pulled in favor of Saenz against a RHP.

So far in tonights game, Choi is 4 for 4 with a HR. His OPS is now up to .775. That puts him about mid-pack amongst starting 1Bs, with a paycheck near the league minimum.

Choi's swing has improved since last year, when his hips would rotate way before his hands and be halfway to the visitors' dugout when he made contact, if at all. His current motion is still a bit long with the arms, and he still has a slight tendency to pull off to first base a la Ichiro. No matter, if Choi can ever improve to a point when he can consistently make contact, he would make a fine power bat with good plate discipline.

Who knows whether Choi is the next Paul Konerko or Billy Ashley, but at his salary and service time, the upside worth the gamble. Choi has had only 49 ABs this year. Give him a chance to figure it out.

I Did Not Know This

2005-04-25T17:16:00.000-07:00

Apparently runners attempt more stolen bases against sinkerballers. According to an article written by Tony Jackson at LA Daily News on April 24, 2005:

Running game: Dodgers catcher Jason Phillips worked with bullpen coach/catching instructor Jon Debus over the weekend on controlling the opposition's running game, a season-long bugaboo. Phillips entered Sunday's game having thrown out just two of the 14 runners who had attempted to steal on him. ....
"We have three sinkerball guys, and teams notoriously run on sinkerballers just to avoid the double play," Phillips said. "It's not even trying to steal a base, per se. And the other thing is that sinkerballers rarely use the slide step (to hold runners close) because it throws off their sinker to some extent because they can't get out front. And, a sinkerball always challenges a catcher (throwing out runners) because the ball is always down in the zone."

Just about everything Phillips says makes sense. The intricacies of baseball...the more you know, the more there is to learn.

Early Graphs: Pitching & Defense

2005-04-21T01:00:00.000-07:00

As a follow-up to the previous article:

To visually see the relationship between line drives given up (pitching) and fielding efficiency (defense), I ran a linear regression and plotted a graph for all NL teams during the 04 season. The data is courtesy of the Hardball Times. LA is the blue dot.

r sq = 0.279, stan err = 0.008

The relationship is straightforward: the less line drives your pitcher gives up, the more likely the fielders will turn balls hit in play into outs. The black line is the best-of-fit trend line using a simple linear regression model.

Some thoughts:

1) Park effects for balls put in play are not incorporated. To my understanding, Dodger Stadum traditionally suppresses doubles and triples.
2) The lowest line drive rate given up was 17.9% by Milwaukee, and the highest was 19.5% by Houston. The difference is only 1.6%.
3) The highest fielding efficiency was 71.1% by LA and St. Louis, and the lowest was 67.8% by Colorado. The difference is only 4.7%.

Over a full 162 game season, the differences are small.

Given a line drive rate, a team above the trend line made more outs than predicted, and hence was a superior fielding team. Likewise, a team below the trend line was an inferior fielding team.

Note how good the Dodgers' defense was last year. Despite the pitchers giving up more line drives than the average team, the fielding efficiency is tied for the highest. So this supports the notion that LA had the best defense in the NL last year. In stark contrast are is Milwaukee, who at 69.5% fielding and 17.9% line drive rate would make them the worst fielding team.

Let's look at the current season, after 13 games. (I know, sample size...) For comparison, the trend line from the 04 season is included as the red line.

r sq = 0.218, stan err = 0.023

As expected, the R squared value is lower than in the 04 season, and the standard error is higher than the 04 season. That's 13 games versus 162 games in a nutshell, a greater range of values:

1) The lowest line drive rate given up is currently 13% by LA, while the highest is 20.9% by the Cubs. That's a difference of 7.9%.
2) The highest fielding efficiency is 75.8% by Florida, while the lowest is 66% by Arizona. That's a difference of 9.8%.

By the way, the Yankees over in the AL are giving up a line drive rate of 21.1%, while their fielding efficiency is only 64.3%. That is easily the worst combination in the majors, and no wonder they're 5-9 while giving up 6.5 runs a game.

According to this graph, the Dodgers' fielding efficiency so far has been subpar in relation to last year's team and also in relationship to the 04 trend line. Even though LA has the second highest fielding efficiency, one can see from the graph that given the low opponent line drive rate, the efficiency rate has not been stellar, even though LA may be perched above the 05 trend line. Again, sample size and park effect at work...

I think the biggest culprit so far is from having so many new position starters this year, especially the infield. The rotation, with 3 sinkerballers, is inducing more groundballs (1.3 groundout/flyout so far) than last year, and the corner infielders have been especially shaky. Valentin, usually a shortstop, is playing 3B. While 1B Choi has looked decent with the glove, his lack of a bat has meant significant playing time for Grabowski/ Saenz/ Nakamura, not exactly a stellar trio with a 1B glove. Even Izturis has looked shaky at times.

Once again, the sample size is small, so the numbers might be very raw. The park effect for balls in play is not incorporated. However, as the season progresses it's reasonable to think that the infield will improve by repetition and familiarity. It had better, given that the pitchers have so far given up line drives 13% of the time and that last year's NL rate ranged from 17.9% to 19.5%; the 13% rate is almost certain to shoot up by a bunch.

Early Tendencies: Pitching & Defense

2005-04-20T01:00:00.000-07:00

Baseball Prospectus came out with a slew of numbers on 4/19/05. Instead of rattling off that the Dodgers are 11 and 2 due to outscoring their opponents 88 to 51, I want to see what the team is doing with the bat and the glove. Due to the small sample size, I'll call these "tendencies" instead of "statistics." First, I'll analyze pitching and defense.

The team ERA is 3.58 after 13 games, good for sixth best in the majors.

According to Baseball Prospectus:

Defensive Efficiency:
defined as: 1 - (hits -HR -reach on error)/(PA -K -BB -HBP -HR)

In the first 12 games, LA is 2nd in the majors at 0.7399, behind Florida at 0.7645. MLB.com uses a slightly different formula and also lists Florida and LA as #1 and #2. The current Dodgers defensive efficiency rating is actually higher than last year's 0.7178, when LA led the majors.

By the way, Florida's league-leading 1.79 ERA is not a surprise, given their terrific defense and dominant pitching. (0.98 WHIP, 1st in MLB) They look like a major contender despite their "measly" 8-6 record, considering that their bats will rebound.

Fielding Percentage (from MLB.com):
0.979, 22nd in the majors

I can't emphasize sample size enough here. It's only 11 errors! With 3 less, the Dodgers' fielding percentage would have been 0.985, which is mid-pack. The high fielding efficiency more than compensates this anomaly. Besides, the 2 biggest culprits (Izturis with 3, Valentin with 4) surely will improve.

Also, courtesy of Hardball Times:

Opponent Strikeout Rate:
4.83 K per 9 innings , lowest in MLB. (average is 6.51)

Tha ball has gone into play a lot, and the defense has apparently gobbled up the chances, according to the defense efficienty rating.

But the defense is not solely responsible for the sixth best ERA in the majors.

Opponent Line Drive Rate:
12.7%, lowest in MLB (average is 17.3%)

The Dodger pitchers are not generating many swing-and-misses, but so far have been successful in generating soft outs. Perhaps this is somewhat due to:

1) flat out luck (probable)
2) playing games against weak lineups (somewhat unlikely)
3) having pitchers that the NL hasn't seen (Lowe, Schmoll, Carlyle, Wunsch, etc.)

This is worrisome, since you would expect a return to "norm", especially if the hitters are not swinging and missing. Eventually they will make good contact.

Still, the pitchers have held its own without ace SP (Penny), stud closer (Gagne), and versatile swingman (Alvarez). Those are three guys with historically high strikeout rates, and hopefully will balance out the "line drive luck" that the Dodgers have been enjoying. Barring further injuries, the pitching staff looks to be in good shape in the future months as everyone gets healty.

Casting Call for "Major League 4"

2005-04-18T12:55:00.000-07:00

This is an offshoot of some comments off a game thread in Dodger Logs. This is how I would cast various roles in the "Major League" movies with current and former Dodgers.

Premise :

A mish-mash band of unknown misfits overcome all odds to win the World Series despite efforts by ownership to trim payroll to $0 and raze Dodger Stadium to replace it with high-rise condos.

Starring :

Tom Goodwin as Willie Mays Hayes
"You may run like Mays, but you hit like sh*t." - Tracy to Goodwin

David Ross as Rube Baker
"They're gonna send me to Pittsburgh, and I don't even live there."

Steve Howe as "Wild Thing" Rick Vaughn
Reason? There's a strong possibility that Howe has also played in the California Penal League.

Hee Seop Choi as Pedro Cerrano (Major League 2 Pacifist Monk)
"I no walk, I swing now."

Milton Bradley as Hiroshi "Kamikaze" Tanaka
"You have no ... MARBLES!" - Milton to Hee Seop

Gary Sheffield as Jack Parkman
"I'm the only winner on this team. The rest of 'em, they're losers. Either by choice, or by birth."

Vin Scully as Harry Doyle
" You know, I used to hate Sheffield when he was with the Marlins. It's amazing how a new uniform can change your attitude about a guy. He's STILL a d*ck! "

And Introducing:

Jamie McCourt as Rachel Phelps
"First Class? Stick that fat Mexican in Coach!" - unconfirmed quote regarding Valenzuela

Last Minute Script Change -

The nude cardboard cutout of Jamie McCourt has been replaced by a cutout of Mrs. Lima, in the interest of public decency.

Stat Cherry-Pickin' Time!

2005-04-15T17:29:00.000-07:00

Here are some noteworthy numbers from some ex-Dodgers.

David Ross just hit his 2nd HR, raising his OPS to 1.287 in 6 games for PIT.
Kaz Ishii has an ERA of 3.29 in 2 starts for NYM.
Hideo Nomo gave up only 1 run in 6 innings for Tampa Bay.
Shawn Green has an OBP of .432 after 10 games for the Dbacks.

To make myself clear...

(courtesy of MIT OCW 15.075)

A season is a 162 games, not 8.

Choi (.158 BA), Drew (.125 BA), and Erickson (12.4 6ERA) deserve some patience.

EDIT: Ross hit another HR and bunted a single. Go figure...

The Worst Transactions of the Offseason

2005-04-14T12:00:00.000-07:00

The easy answer is not resigning Beltre. However, Beltre chose to sign elsewhere; such is the reality of free agency. Rather, what irks me is how the team chose to replace Beltre's production in the lineup. To quote Depodesta from a Dodger Thoughts interview:

"Our biggest fear was being left standing without a chair when the music stopped"

Depodesta called this an "audible", but this sure sounds like a scramble to me. I warned against that scenario in the Dodgers Forum way back in last October, and sure enough, it happened. Boras timed the Beltre signing beautifully. Glaus and Koskie, the other big-name FA 3Bs, had already signed, forcing LA to look for offensive production elsewhere. The premier position FAs left were catcher Varitek (no chance), 1B Delgado (LA was set on Choi), and the overpriced Boras clients such as Beltran, Drew, and Magglio.

Perhaps I should have called this post "The Beltre Hangover".

1) Giving J. D. Drew a Player Opt-Out Clause

Drew is a potential top 10 player when healthy, and may be worth $55 million over 5 years, if not more. My main gripe is the out clause. (See an earlier post for an explanation of its value - eerily similar to Beltre's contract) I just can't root for a player who will opt out 2 years if he performs well, or possibly saddle the team payroll for 5 years if he underperforms. Small upside, big downside.

Kent is a massive upgrade over Cora for a relatively low price at 2B, as is Phillips over Ross/Bako at catcher. Drew may be able to match Beltre's production, but he is NOT a massive upgrade over Green given the $55 million contract with an ugly clause versus $16 million for 1 year, especially figuring in the $10 million sent to AZ in the Green trade.

2) Trading RF Shawn Green

In itself, trading Green and $10 million for catching prospect Navarro and a handful of B prospects is not bad. Who knows how an aging Green will perform in 2005: .199 BA with RISP in 2004 or .970 OPS in 2001. Besides, the trade shored up a minor league system thin in catchers, and freed up some 2005 payroll to sign SPs - the biggest priority off the offseason, in my opinion. But I do not like this trade because it was made necessary by the Drew signing, which was in turn made necessary by the Beltre fallout. Trading Green to a division rival with a stadium that is kind to decent power hitters is not a good idea, either.

One could say that Green waived his no-trade clause for an extension; I would say that Arizona pursued him because they were reasonably sure that they were one of the few teams willing to extend Green's contract and take on a decent RF in the middle of their lineup. (It helps that Green's former agent runs the Dbacks now.) Hence they were probably the only serious bidder for Green's services. When you are forced to make a move, chances are that you won't get equal value in return.

3) Resigning Elmer Dessens

This isn't the worst signing in LA history. Afterall, it's only a small one year deal. Who knows, maybe I don't like anyone named Elmer. But let's face it, this is the same guy who got bumped from the rotation of the worst team in baseball last year. Alvarez, when healthy, is clearly the better swingman. Dessens came up golden the other day, and I hope that he continues to be serviceable filling in for the pitchers on the DL. But I think he was resigned because:

1) He is the only Mexican player in a large Mexican market.
2) He is a Depodesta acquisition.

Neither of these reasons translate to performance on the field.

Home Opener, WOW!

2005-04-12T20:26:00.000-07:00

It felt like 10/2/04 all over again.

The Giants spent much of the offseason addressing their weaknesses in the bullpen and on defense, and it happened again.

The Giants' bullpen imploded as Hermanson and company morphed into Benitez. The Giants' defense failed them as Ransom morphed into Ellison.

It's only 7 games into a 162, but a massive comeback win in the home opener against the Archnemesis is sweet.

The Best Transactions of the Offseason

2005-04-11T18:41:00.000-07:00

1) Trading away SP Kaz Ishii for C Jason Phillips

A Phillips trade had been rumored in December, and this trade fell into Depodesta's lap when Trachsel went down. At first, I was skeptical. (and not because I am opposed to trading a SP for a backup C...) LA looked thin in the rotation to start the season - Odalis and Alvarez suffered setbacks during ST, and Penny was unable/unwilling to air it out. Phillips had a dismal .624 OPS in 2004 after a solid 2003 season, which is strangely Ross-esque. Then I read the following article, written by Tom Meagher of the Fourth Outfielder:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/all-batted-ball-types-all-the-time/

"How rough was Jason Phillips' season? He had fewer singles than his batted ball types would suggest, but he also had fewer doubles, fewer triples, and fewer home runs...perhaps he just had the unluckiest season in baseball. "

Phillips should be a solid starting catcher, will cost near the league minimum this year, and is a huge roster upgrade over Ross, who, to quote Lasorda, "couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat." As for Ishii, his 13-8 W/L record last year is not indicative of his performance; he enjoyed the best run support of any NL SP. The trade also makes it likely that the two blue chip prospects, Navarro and Martin, are not rushed to the bigs. So this trade is perfect for the roster, for the short term and the long term.

Plus I won't be chugging Pepto once every five days. Many thanks to the Mets!

2) Signing 2B Jeff Kent

Back in December, I posted this on the Dodgers forum just after Kent signed a 2 year $17 million contract with LA. I did this to throw some sense to the critics who were harping that LA signed a surly, slow-footed, pornstached, redneck former Giant with a propensity for popping wheelies on his bike. I compared Kent to Finley and concluded that Kent was the better fit for the Dodgers.

Finley ended up signing with Anaheim (that's right, NOT LAAofA) for a few bucks less than expected, but I think my point is still valid. Finley is nowhere near the upgrade over Werth/Bradley/Green(now Drew) as Kent is over Cora. LA upgraded from a #8 slap hitter to a cleanup hitter with a mere 2 year commitment. All this with a minimal downgrade on defense, to boot.

I know that it's only six games into the season, but I'd say he's gaining a few fans with his leadership, defensive play, and his 1.275 OPS.

3) Tie - Resigning RP Alvarez/Acquiring 3B Nakamura

Alvarez resigned with LA over the offseason for 2 years, $4 million. The portly one-time ace has found a nice niche as the swingman for LA, and provides veteran leadership to a bullpen where, outside of Gagne, is rather inexperienced. I realize that "experience" means nothing to a hitter facing a 95MPH fastball, but.... Alvarez is a 13 year veteran who provides versatility out of the pen, and is effective right-handed batters. Plus that "Fat Boy" gag last year...classic.

Nakamura, who recently got called up to the majors, could be a find. If not, it's no big deal - his contract is a "mere" $500,000. Beltre left a huge hole at 3B, and Valentin is a one year stopgap. (I know it's only 4 games into the season, but 3 errors in the first six games... although Jose is on fire with the bat) Will Nakamura pan out? I think he's capable, and if so, he would help the lineup overall - he has 5 Gold Gloves in Japan. Valentin would then fill in/platoon at 3B, SS, LF, and perhaps 2B - a la Jose Hernandez last year. That would be ideal.

The Drew Out Clause as a Financial Option

2005-04-09T13:19:00.000-07:00

I was reading an article dated 4/4/05 in the Fourth Outfielder where J. D. Drew's opt-out clause is discussed in comparison to Aramis Ramirez's similar clause. The article basically states that Drew's opt-out clause is nowhere near as bad as Aramis'. It seems as though that there was quite a disagreement between the readers on which is worse. (I am comment #29, by the way, dated 4/6/05.) Studes also commented on the article and gave his own thoughts in The Hardball Times on 4/7/05.

I would like to expand on what I stated in the Fourth Outfielder: the player opt-out clause has a significant value, and its value can be estimated.

To me, a player opt-out clause is similar to a financial option, which is a product traded in the derivative market, my former field of study and work. (Many thanks to Prof. Cox for the pleasant naps during his option theory class) Here is a quick summary.

http://www.riskglossary.com/articles/option.htm

After two years in LA, Drew has the right to void the last three years ($33 mil) of his contract if he believes that he can get a higher offer in the open market. Logic would dictate that the option would not be exercised otherwise. In effect, Drew has a "European call option" with a strike price of $33 million.

For the sake of simplicity, let's say there are two 50/50 possible scenarios in two years: Drew has played marvelously for two years and his market value has climbed to $46 million, or he has been ineffective/injured and his value has sunk to $20 million.

A Simple Binomial Option Model

If Drew signs a contract for $46 million in the open market, then he will have pocketed an additional $13 million. If his worth drops to $20 million, Drew still earns $33 million in LA and loses nothing.

What is the value of this option? Let's assume that the annual interest rate is about 4%. I'm going to skip a lot of numbers and say that this option is worth about $7 million, or $7.24 million to be exact.

If we were to use a trinomial model - say there is a 33%/33%/33% chance of being a $46 mil/$33/$20 player - the option is worth about $5 million. Not as much, but still significant.

I realize that these values are based on an extremely simple model, but the numbers are still significant. (A better way would be to determine a historical distribution for contract fluctuations amongst similar players and then value the option, in spirit with a Black-Scholes model.) The point I want to make is this: a five year $55 million contract with a player opt-out clause after two years is about equivalent to a five year $55 million contract sans the clause and WITH AN ADDITIONAL $5 TO $7 MILLION UPFRONT. Put another way, this is in essense a 5 year contract worth about $62 million, with $17 to $18 million in the first year.

(drum roll....)

That's essentially Beltre's contract from Seattle. To refresh everyone's memory, Beltre turned down the Dodgers' six year $60 million offer for Seattle's front-loaded five year $64 million offer. ($17 million or so in the first year) Depodesta then signed Drew to replace Beltre's production in the lineup. Hindsight is 20/20, but Depodesta lost out on Beltre and replaced him by signing Drew, overpaying to a point where the $ amounts were, in essense, similar.

No wonder Scott Boras was reportedly cautious during Beltre's Seattle press conference when asked about the Dodgers. I wouldn't be surprised if he probably had this scenario lined up all along - take Beltre elsewhere, offer Drew and his "Moneyball" numbers to LA. I believe that Depodesta got taken here. Love him or hate him, Boras is pretty good.

Opening Day!

2005-04-05T01:00:00.000-07:00

"Ladies, and gentleman, here are your Los Angeles Dodgers!"

The Jamie McCourt/Gagne love child is classic.

The Markov Value of the Stolen Base: Part II

2005-04-03T14:59:00.002-07:00

I need to throw in a big caveat regarding my previous post evaluating the value of the stolen base. Using the Markov process, i calculated that stolen bases have a minimal effect on runs scored over a season. What naturally follows is that the more runs you score versus runs allowed, the more games you would expect to win. (the famous Pythagorean Theorem of Baseball)

BUT BEWARE! Runs do not equal actual wins.

All runs are not equal. A run that ties a game in the ninth is more significant than a run while down by 10.

Boston is down by a run in the bottom of the ninth in Game 4 of the ALCS. Kevin Millar leads off the inning with a walk. Francona ponders how to give his team the best chance to win, and chooses pinch-run Dave Roberts and his 92.7% 04 SB rate for the snail-like Millar. Roberts successfully steals 2nd, and scores on an RBI single. Game is tied, and eventually won in extra innings.

The Markovian value of Roberts’ stolen base is a mere 0.231 expected runs. That contribution, however, was the critical run that saved the game.

The following article is a good read on changes of managerial strategy at various stages of the game.

http://ite.pubs.informs.org/Vol5No1/Bickel/

To quote the article:

The types of strategies that maximize expected runs may not be the same as those that maximize the probability of winning late in the game. It is for this reason that baseball strategy changes as the game progresses ... The objective of baseball is to win, not to score runs.

If the game is close, the managerial decisions in the late innings may not optimize runs scored versus runs allowed. At such times, going for a single run can be the best chance of winning the game, whether by a sacrifice bunt, hit and run, or a stolen base - "expected" runs be damned.

The Markov Value of the Stolen Base

2005-03-30T16:54:00.000-08:00

I posted some thoughts on the value of the stolen base on Dodger Logs (a good site for the Dodger Sabermetric fans) a few days ago and got a positive response, so here is an edited and expanded version...

The following article on the Markov/stochastic process as applied to baseball is a good read for the non-math geeks.

http://www.harvardmagazine.com/on-line/050221.html

This transient-state quantification of baseball is an elegant way of modeling out-by-out/base-by-base sequences, and is helpful in determining the value of certain events, such as walks, stolen bases, sacrifice bunts, etc. I'll illustrate the value of the stolen base here.

Look at the green chart in the middle of the article. It gives you the historical "expected" run value from the 01 AL season depending on the out count and the runner situation. There are 8 possible runner situations (no one on, runner on 1st, runner and 1st and 2nd, etc.) for either 0, 1, or 2 outs. So there are a possible 24 out/runner combinations, or "states" in math-speak.

Let's consider a stolen base from 1st to 2nd with 0 outs. I'm taking numbers directly from that chart.

ExpectedRunValue(0 outs, runner on 1st) = 0.907
ExpectedRunValue(0 outs, runner on 2nd) = 1.138
Difference = 0.231

If the runner is successful, according to the data he has added 0.231 "expected" runs to his team.

If he's caught,

ExpectedRunValue(0 outs, runner on 1st) = 0.907
ExpectedRunValue(1 out, bases empty) = 0.294

Difference = 0.613 if the runner is caught, he has subtracted 0.613 "expected" runs to his team.

So at what success rate does the runner actually help the team? Let's determine the breakeven point.

Let:
x= success rate
1-x = caught rate

0.231x = (1-x)*0.613
0.231x +0.613x = 0.613
0.844x = 0.613
x = 72.6 %

With 0 outs, the breakeven point is 72.6% according to the data. With 1 and 2 outs, and the breakeven point is similar: 71% with 1 out, and 68.9% with 2 outs. Basically you have to steal at a rate significantly better than 70% to 75% to add any relevant value to your team when stealing 2nd.

If the runner is stealing 3rd from 2nd with no one on 1st, the breakeven points are 80% for 0 outs, 75.2% with 1 out, and and 88.7% with 2 outs - figures all higher than stealing 2nd. They also fluctiate more, but consider that:

1) It's highly likely that a runner would score from 2nd with 0 outs - by an RBI hit in 3 chances or by 2 productive outs - so it might be wise to stay put instead of risking an out.
2) It's virtually pointless to steal 3rd with 2 outs when, barring a freak occurence such as a passed ball or a fielding error, one would probably score from 2nd anyway by an RBI hit.

It makes sense that the best out count to steal 3rd is with 1 out, which gives the hitter an RBI opportunity with either a hit or a sacrifice. Still, it's risky according to the numbers.

So how valuable is a stolen base? Let's take Dave Roberts' 04 season with LA/BOS. He stole 38 bases while being caught 3 times, which is a phenominal success rate of 92.7%. Here is the breakdown:

1) 1st to 2nd, 0 outs: 17 out of 18
2) 1st to 2nd, 1 out: 8 out of 9
3) 1st to 2nd, 2 outs: 8 out of 8

4) 2nd to 3rd w/ no one on 1st, 1 out: 1 out of 2
5) 2nd to 3rd w/ no one on 1st, 2 outs: 1 out of 1

6) 2nd to 3rd w/ a runner on 1st, 2 outs: 3 out of 3

I will use the valuess from the green chart even though the 01 AL season (where the values are derived) has nothing to do with Roberts' 04 season - but you figure that there is a strong relationship, regardless.

1) (17 * .231 expected runs ) - (1 * .613 expected runs) = 3.314 expected runs added
2) (8 * .176) - (1 * .430) = 0.978 expected runs added
3) (8 * .108) - (0 * .239) = 0.864 expected runs added

4) (1 * .200) - (1 * .606) = -0.406 expected runs (ouch!!)
5) (1 * .044) - (0 * .347) = 0.044 expected runs added

6) (3 * .036) - (0 * .486) = 0.108 expected runs added

Overall, Roberts "added" 4.902 runs with his nearly perfect base stealing ability. In other words, NOT A WHOLE LOT. I would rather have 5 Shawn Green Specials (bases-empty HRs) than steal 38 out of 41 bases.

This may seem like a trivialization of the stolen base, but it's not. Speed is always good, whether stealing bases or chasing a flyball. However, the following 2 conditions have to be met before a runner can steal a base:

1) You have to get on base
2) There can't be another runner infront of you

Add to this the inherent risk/reward factor (the aforementioned breakeven points) and the relatively low payoff, and I can see why the art of the stolen base is starting to become something of a rarity.

Baseball "Luck" and the Dodgers Offseason

2005-03-28T15:01:00.000-08:00

Here's an interesting article on baseball. I'll relate this to some of the recent Dodger transactions.

www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/if-line-drives-could-speak

To summarize, there's a correlation between the % of line drives hit and AVG . This makes sense - if you hit more line drives into play, more of your ABs are likely to be hits. So if a hitter's batting average is unusually high compared to the his line drive rate, then there is a good chance that some luck was involved. (even if he's a fast runner, or has good power so the line drives are usually smoked, etc.) It would then follow that there is a good probability for a return to the norm - you can't be lucky forever. In a similar analogy, the same applies to a pitcher in that if he allows more line drives, his AVG-Against will likely be high. If a pitcher is unually out of step with this notion, there may be some luck involved.

In a similar argument (but more roundabout), an ERA lower than what defense-independent pitching stats (K, BB, HR) would suggest implies a bit of luck, too.

The article analyzes on the 2004 season and lists the luckiest/unluckiest players. Six Dodgers from either the 04 or 05 roster are listed, and they are shown as follows:

Jason Phillips was unluckly.
Lowe was extremely unluckly.
Alvarez was somewhat unlucky.

Ishii was lucky.
Lima was luckly.
Odalis was somewhat lucky (although his numbers were still good, lucky or not)

The article does not encorporate park effects or fielding efficiency. I would think a part of the "luck" that Ishii, Lima, and Odalis enjoyed had to do in part to the strong fielding lineup the Dodgers had in 04. If so, then Alvarez was not "somewhat unlucky" but "strongly unlucky" - the line drives fell for hits despite the fantastic glovework of Izturis and Co.

What I find significant is how this relates to the Dodgers offseason. Alvarez (unlucky) was resigned, Lima (lucky) was not resigned, Ishii (lucky) was traded for Phillips (unlucky), and Odalis (somewhat lucky) was resigned at terms lower than many expected (way lower than Lowe). Coincidence? I think not. Depodesta obtained the undervalued (unlucky) players while shedding the overvalued (lucky) ones.

Food for thought.