Archive

Posts Tagged ‘baseball america’

The Slow Boat is Painted Dodger Blue

January 27, 2017 2 comments

image14

I hope everyone is doing well and surviving the election craziness with the post-election craziness. I decided, to lighten the mood, I would put together a few thoughts on the Dodgers recent moves and non-moves, for anyone who cares. If you disagree, hate me or are merely stupefied, feel free to move on to another blog. My feelings won’t be hurt. With that said, on with the show.

So Fangraphs came out with their usual prediction of Dodgers superiority. Gee, I wonder why geeks obsessed with Saber data would keep picking a team with a brain- (uggh) trust full of geeks obsessed with Saber data. Let me think about that for a moment. Ok, forget it.

The source is as suspect as you would think. If you agree with the obsession with data vs. reality, that’s all well and good. You are entitled to your opinion, and I mine. As hosts of one of the MLB Network Radio shows said the other day, Fangraphs has their opinions and they believe the Dodgers are the best team in baseball but unfortunately in reality games are not played on spreadsheets and real injuries and likely DL stints do matter. They said the Cubs don’t have these concerns, the Dodgers do. I’d also add, no matter what data you are looking at, you are either high or dumb to assume the Dodgers current pitching staff is championship quality.

I had a little back and forth with some folks recently who disagree and hold Fangraphs up as a Scientologist holds up L. Ron Hubbard’s work, and as you can imagine, that went nowhere. They insisted that “every analyst agrees” that the Dodgers are better than the Cubs and the favorite to win it all. I believe this was the same case made last year, but my main point of contention is that I listen to pretty much every show on MLB Network Radio, at some point during a week, and I have yet to hear anyone “agree” with Fangraphs assessment. In fact, I hear the opposite.

I hear a lot of questioning why Andrew Friedman and Farhan Zaidi would deal the same blue chip they planned for “baseball’s best second baseman”, Brian Dozier, in a deal for Logan Forsythe. As I’ve pointed out, the Dodgers had Dee Gordon, then had Howie Kendrick, then had José Peraza, and then Howie again and still found a way to have no second baseman, necessitating moving José De León for one.

I guess one could argue they solved all their problems if they added Dozier or even Ian Kinsler. But is it the same marked improvement getting Forsythe, a 30-year-old journeyman with a .255 career average and some question about his glove?

This is not to bash Forsythe, who I can see being an upgrade over Chase Utley and that bum who hit .190 but has nude photos apparently of the front office and therefore keeps making the roster, but is it worth passing on three guys we had and dealing a prospect that could have come in handy at some point either for the rotation or another deal – to get Forsythe?

Someone I heard referred to Forsythe as a kid. Umm, 30 is not a kid. In fact this morning the GM show on MLB Network Radio mocked how genius Tampa’s GM was to turn a 30 year old second baseman into an elite pitching prospect, age 24.

I am of the opinion, and I’ve said it many times, prospects are currency. This discussion is not about holding onto prospects, De León or most any other. I understand that a farm should ideally cultivate future big leaguers for your roster, as well as be used to deal for parts you might need. Holding onto every prospect is not to be applauded, it’s foolish. So a problem I have with the Dodgers front office is taking the slow boat in everything they do. Keep what you want, deal what you don’t. Surely even the Dodgers front office understands not each prospect will be a superstar. But perhaps, just maybe, you could deal some of them for useful parts – before their value is gone.

I have no real problem with dealing De León for Forsythe and again, suspect it will be some improvement over the mess at second base last season. That said, I don’t know if one can say it’s improvement over Dee, Peraza or even Howie (and in Howie’s defense, I say that meaning the longtime second base fixture Howie, not the utility fielding occasional player Friedman created last year).

My issue, or better, comment is that as always, the Dodgers seem to take the long route to everything. A guy like Theo Epstein comes in, with many fewer resources than Friedman inherited, and gets to work fast. Within a few years the team is completely made over and winning a championship. It’s not the time only, it’s the approach. Problems are fixed. With the Dodgers, it’s always breaking down what’s unnecessary to break down and trying something new. Money that can be spent on proven big leaguers instead paid to Cuban prospects. Aces dealt. Injury marred pitchers or AAAA nobodies acquired. It all just seems so unnecessarily exhausting.

I suspect if Theo had Dee, he would have kept him. If he felt Dee was a trade high candidate, and somehow he got Peraza, or wanted Howie, I think he would have done that. Friedman and his merry men had to go through 5-6 players to settle on Forsythe – the optimal word here is settle. They hoped to land Dozier, after all.

Again, no offense made to Forsythe, I suspect he will be a decent enough part, not spectacular, but decent. But it is terribly humorous (and sad) to see Friedman apologists spinning this as a genius move. They too wanted Dozier. Friedman made it seem like Dozier (he of the cold streaks that last a month) was the solution. The welcome mat was out, and then Forsythe is acquired. Not for less, mind you, but for the same prospect Dozier was targeted for.

The genius comedy comes from the spin then going to how De León wasn’t that good anyway. I have said many times that scouts have claimed De León was not the Pedro Martinez type many had crowed he was, but perhaps eventually a middle of the rotation starter. No one listened. Now when De León is dealt for Forsythe (why must it always be Tampa, by the way? And Oakland. They made a minor deal with Oakland this week as well – so embarrassing), the story is rewritten that Forsythe is one of the best players ever and De León was nothing special. Ho ho ho

So for whatever it’s worth, the Dodgers infield looks pretty much set. It’s a good infield – there, I said it. It’s got a superstar (Seager) and useful parts. The great depth falls off fast if anything happens to Turner or Forsythe but such is life. I would say the Dodgers infield is not an issue anymore, unless you start wondering about speed. The team’s foot speed and athleticism are still lacking, but then, Sabermetrics doesn’t care about that.

I am of the opinion the Dodgers are marginally better than they were in October, thanks to this trade. I was not impressed with the winter up until now, and I’m still not sure I can say I’m impressed. But, doing something more than retaining your own free-agents, is a start. I would temper anticipation by reminding loyalists that the division has improved and the cake walk the team enjoyed in the West last year might be harder to repeat. So, the question is – has enough been done to repeat as Western division champs, or go all the way, if such ideas are in your head.

I’d say the West is a dogfight with the Dodgers having a chance based mostly on the health of the rotation. The Giants, if I had to guess, look like frontrunners. The Rockies look interesting to. And at some point the Diamondbacks might get their act together.

I think the Dodgers lineup, depending what configuration they use in the outfield, is serviceable. If Yasiel Puig could ever get it together, or a real right-handed power bat in the outfielder were added via trade, I’d be a bigger believer. There are good parts, and some question marks. No one knows what the three outfield spots will look like, or how many outfielders Friedman will run out there to fill those three spots. Twelve?

I’m still a firm believer in things like speed (absent), health (absent) and a deep pitching staff (likely absent). I think you win series in October by lining up well with your competition and what we witnessed last October was hard to watch. I’m not used to seeing starters hoping to “gut their way” through three innings. I’m not used to a bullpen one deep (ok, two – but Blanton likely won’t come back, and his October performance sadly was his lowlight for the year).

I think when you put together a pitching staff you need to think foremost about innings. How many innings can I count on my starters for? If you have a bunch of injured pitchers and potential DL stints, it’s a huge problem. It means your day’s start is in question, as are the games after it, since you likely taxed your pen to make up for the innings your injured starter could not go. i.e. for every suspect member of your rotation, it costs 2-3 days afterward as well. So if you have 2-3 suspect starters, you likely will always be running on fumes. This was the case with the 2016 Dodgers and their spent bullpen that was asked to do too much in October.

You would think the lesson would be learned and a few horses were added to the rotation and a few stoppers to the back of the pen, but it’s virtually the same group we saw last season. Brandon Morrow was brought in on a minor league deal, but he’s just more proof to my point. It is only the end of January, so who knows, perhaps a trick is up Friedman’s sleeve. If so, I’d still say why does he always have to go the long way? Theo certainly wouldn’t.

That’s all I have for now. To summarize – Logan Forsythe may be a fine person and a decent second baseman. He certainly helps compared to what was at second most of last season. That said, as a Dodgers fan you had three answers already around and teased with a bigger fish and ended up with a 30 year old Tampa Ray and it cost you one of the top prospects in the organization. Was it worth it? Only time will tell. I will simply say the dancing around and shuffling of musical chairs was clearly unnecessary. A smarter front office wouldn’t have chosen this route.

I will also remind that this isn’t about holding onto prospects. Some of course you choose and hang onto for dear life – Seager is one, and Bellinger looks to be another. Every prospect a future superstar for your team? Only in some fantasy world. If you pick the guys you want and deal some others for needs, that’s ok. I’d argue that for all the credit he gets as someone holding onto prospects (mostly chosen and developed under Logan White and Ned Colletti), he did deal three to Oakland in July and another to Tampa this week. The net haul is the right to sign Rich Hill for a lot of money and Logan Forsythe. Not sure that’s exactly how you best use this important currency.

Another funny thing from the debate I had the other day. Someone was telling me how De León wasn’t that good anyway and luckily we have Grant Holmes, who will be much better. I had to break it to the guy that Holmes might be better, but he will be better in Oakland.

The final point of comedy I will share this Friday afternoon is a CBS Sports article I saw yesterday, again saying how the Dodgers are better than the Cubs. The article was very firm in that the Dodgers have everything the Cubs had and more and that Friedman and the front office are geniuses. Wow, something other than Fangraphs, saying the exact same thing.

As I am rather skeptical of such rhetoric, I did a quick Google search and found the author (Jonah Keri) of the CBS Sports article had written a book. The topic? What a genius Friedman is and how he transformed the Tampa Rays. Again, consider the source. I have not in all honesty heard such praise on the Dodgers winter or the Dodgers unseating the Cubs anywhere else. I listen to MLB Network Radio fairly regularly, read what the known baseball writers say, etc. but I am not hearing it.

Can the Dodgers win? Well, it’s been three decades and the team does have some good players, so sure, maybe. Would I say they are a favorite? Even in their own division? Would I say they are better than the Cubs? The Indians? The Red Sox? No, I couldn’t say that. They are the same team they were in October, with a new second baseman and a few hail marys added as “depth.” I’d say losing Blanton from the pen and not really replacing him makes it arguably a net negative.

Let’s see what else these guys do. It just shouldn’t take this long. Their route is very unnecessary, which tells me they are either extremely arrogant or clueless. You decide.

Advertisements

What Black Magic Can the Dodgers’ Hot Stove Conjure Up?

November 7, 2016 Comments off

gettyimages-484499393

The World Series is over; the clocks have changed and now baseball diehards get to await the Hot Stove league. It used to be my favorite time of the year but under Andrew Friedman, Farhan Zaidi and the rest, it’s less than thrilling if you are looking forward to your Dodgers making a big splash. The new normal seems to be to remain content with getting to the playoffs, not really making a push. Mark Walter confirmed this recently with his comments about ten years of getting to the playoffs being more prudent than making a big push for a go year. Sigh.

Fans of this group of executives crow that hey, even with a record amount of disabled list visits, the combined geniuses of the Dodgers front office made 2016 a pretty successful season. Of course, no thought goes into the obvious – the injuries were all inevitable since the front office invested in risky, often injured players, mostly pitchers. Whatever magic that happened in 2016, one must remember that it was indeed magic. To assume, for instance, that a team can be constructed of suspect innings in the rotation and that the pen can compensate once more, is foolish. It’s not a repeatable formula to have relievers and minor league journeymen fill in the innings left by management constructing a rotation of question marks.

We shall see, I suppose, what cards Friedman and Zaidi play. And if, more importantly, the Diamondbacks, with a new general manager and new manager, and Giants, in search of bullpen help, decide to make an effort in 2017. The division is weak and winnable. I’m sure Friedman and Zaidi, and the Dodgers ownership group, understands this. Of course, it’s possible that the two other teams who usually are in the thick of things, will make an effort in the coming season. If so, will whatever Friedman and Zaidi do this winter be enough? And what will they do? What can they do? Well, let’s consider a few things.

I would say the most obvious way to improve the rotation is by adding Zack Greinke via a big trade with Arizona, or someone similar in another deal. But, given the fact Friedman and Zaidi allowed Greinke to leave, would they even feel it necessary to go this route? After all, when Greinke left, they made no effort to add anyone of that talent level and only moved on to Scott Kazmir and Kenta Maeda once most every other option was off the table. But assuming rumors are true and Friedman and Zaidi would like Greinke back, or some other solid ace-type pitcher, that would certainly be the easiest way to add quality behind Clayton Kershaw, who has now shown besides being vulnerable in Oct play, is not super human and can end up on the disabled list. Again, repeating the magic that occurred once Kershaw hit the injured list, seems a poor strategy.

Assuming Friedman and Zaidi stick to their guns, however, and don’t believe Greinke is worth the investment, or even that another pitcher of that cost (think bottom line, we are talking about owners who are a large investment firm, after all), then what? Well, it would mean more of the same. The same being a rotation that likely looks identical to 2016’s – Kershaw, Kazmir, Maeda, and probably youngsters Julio Urias and Jose De Leon. The thought here, of course, everyone remains healthy and that Urias and De Leon make like the Braves young arms of the 80s and become top tier hurlers in no time at all. Seems like a stretch to me. One, that the kids can take on the additional innings workload so quickly and develop that fast vs. big league hitting, and two, that the walking wounded all stay healthy.

The word “depth” has been bandied around a lot by Friedman cultists. It’s to imply in its use that Friedman is a sorcerer, like Dr. Strange, and he has an ability to make the lower reaches of his 25-man roster that much more special than those of the other 29 teams in league. In other words, everything he touches turns to gold. It’s to assume that every other general manager has no concept of backups, on the major league roster or in the minors. It’s ridiculous and in reality, means not acquiring talent and relying on plans B, C and D.

Friedman devotees will point, as Mark Walter seemed to recently, that you just need to get to the playoffs and then “depth” and the dark arts take over and through luck and prayer you are as apt to win as a “better” team. Well, there have been cases where wild card teams have won, but I’d say most teams that have are fundamentally good teams and it’s not an accident they did well. I’d also say, as this year’s post season attests, that the Chicago Cubs were picked by Vegas and others to win the World Series in 2016. They had the most wins and they won, even when down 3 games to 1. Was it luck? No, it was an incredibly talented roster put together and masterfully played by Theo Epstein, who had done it before – in Boston, and a very solid manager in Joe Maddon. Luck? Perhaps a smidge, but while Friedman and Zaidi loaded up on players like Brandon McCarthy, Brent Anderson Chris Hatcher, Kike Hernandez, Kazmir, etc., Theo loaded up with Jon Lester, Ben Zobrist, Aroldis Chapman, etc. Luck didn’t have anything to do with it – understanding which players are great and collecting as many as possible, did.

It’s too early to predict what will happen in the Hot Stove this winter but I will say it would take a lot of good baseball work to improve the Dodgers more than hoping Ned Colletti and Logan White’s farm fills in the gaps. Last winter’s shopping season, which went largely ignored by Friedman and Zaidi, was so important because this winter the cupboard is bare. I believe the best free-agent pitcher available is Jeremy Hellickson, if that tells you something. I know Moneyball fans turn their noses up at anything that resembles the old way of doing things, but there’s a reason why most teams look to the winter meetings as the time to fill needs. It’s how business is done.

Say Friedman and Zaidi realize they better add reliable innings behind Kershaw, and they might. The cost will be more than dollars; it will be in the prize prospects so many baseball fans covet. Personally, I have no problem dealing young players, if it makes sense and if it fills needs for a chance to win now. After all, while the Dodgers have spent almost 3 decades doing it in a less than aggressive fashion, winning is what it’s all about. It’s why the Cubs and Indians both dealt huge chips in their farm system for a chance to play in this year’s World Series. It’s almost once in a lifetime – in fact, for the Cubs fans, it was once in several lifetimes. Do you think Theo regrets trading for Chapman? The Indians for Andrew Miller?

It would be curious to me to see Friedman and Zaidi, however, deal blue chips for pitching when said pitching was available this time last year for cash. I know, I know – the Sabermetrics lovers will say, but it costs a draft pick! Who cares? The way Friedman drafts, it’s inconsequential anyway. And what draft pick will undoubtedly become as good as an ace the team could have signed? It’s a one in a thousand shot (I didn’t use a Moneyball calculator, I just used that figure for dramatic effect, so don’t have an aneurysm trying to fathom that).

I would say, without knowing the war room plans of Friedman, Zaidi, the genius of Gabe Kapler and Josh Byrnes, etc. that more than likely the 2017 team will more or less resemble the 2016 bunch, except with more emphasis on Ned’s kids and less pixie dust. As I said, to bank on magic to be as plentiful next year as it was this, probably isn’t the best plan in the world. But, we shall see, we shall see. Fire up the Hot Stove, it will be a trade heavy winter as the shopping isn’t there. Let’s see what Friedman and his merry men can conjure up.

And Now They Act Surprised

June 29, 2016 Comments off

Capture.PNG

Well, here we are, the eve of July and the Dodgers are in a huge heap of trouble. With a thin rotation, now ace Clayton Kershaw’s back is bothering him. He’s flying back to LA to be examined but knowing Kershaw, he’ll be ok. But, what if he isn’t? Even if he’s fine, maybe a little less Kershaw-esque than he’s been throughout the year, it opens up a discussion I’ve brought up many times since last season, this past winter, this spring and all season long – Andrew Friedman and his Peter Lorre-like henchman, Farhan Zaidi, did a piss poor job of building a starting rotation and pitching staff, especially for a large market team desperately needing a win after 30 seasons, and most especially when payroll is over $230M.

The Dodgers under Friedman had holes last season but the reason they didn’t go deeper in October was the reluctance to add a viable third ace to the rotation. I understand not wanting to deal Corey Seager or perhaps even Julio Urias but to be so stingy with all of the kid pitchers when options like David Price and Cole Hamels were available, cost the Dodgers in 2015. As we knew then and now, Brett Anderson isn’t the answer in important October games. Kershaw did his job. Zack Greinke did his job. Another solid arm would have helped the Dodgers advance, but small market bean counters like Friedman and Zaidi were, well, thinking small. Hoarding young pitchers as if they were the crown jewels. Newsflash to those in decision making positions for big market baseball teams mired in a 30 year drought – you can trade prospects, especially pitchers. What’s the likelihood the kids held are ever going to be on the level of Price or Hamels? Almost none. Big market teams can always buy an arm in a pinch. This doesn’t mean I advocate gutting the farm all the time to win now, but if you can go further than you have been and already have two supreme pitchers (as the Dodgers did last year), you should be all in and do what it takes – save for moving Seager.

But even Seager could have been moved, if the price was right. If you could get Mike Trout, moron Bryce Harper or someone like that, anyone is in play. But let’s assume the Dodgers just needed something extra last July, as they did. If your acquisitions are of the bargain basement variety Friedman made, you end up shorthanded. Andrew Friedman and Farhan Zaidi are small market, small minded guys who think they are still in those tiny towns. If they were consistent, I wouldn’t have as much to say. But while cheaping out on big league talent, taking flyers instead on reclamation projects and injury marred nobodies, they still manage to spend a fortune on god knows what. All winter long we saw signings of unknown Cubans for lots of money, none of which has helped the Dodgers. Will they someday? Perhaps. But I’d argue with recent releases of the Stan Kasten batch of Cubans, and the failures of Yasiel Puig to put it together, it’s easy to debate that Cuban talent is overrated, especially at the price tags the players sign for. Let’s be frank – would you prefer unknown Cubans with “tools” and “potential” or proven big leaguers? Or strong performers from the Japanese league? (even ones without several injury concerns)

It’s quite a feat to both be extremely cheap and completely fiscally irresponsible. How does one even manage to spend so much and field a team with so little? Gone is Greinke, replaced with Kenta Maeda and several injury question marks there, plus Scott Kazmir, who was out of baseball not long ago. The pipedream of greatness from Mike Bolsinger or rebounds of epic proportion from Brandon McCarthy or Hyun-Jin Ryu and Brandon Beachy was always far-fetched. Now here we are, the end of June, and the Dodgers flagship radio station, 570 AM in LA, keeps making excuses. Who could have known? Who could expect? Umm, anyone? It was obvious even if Kershaw could stay healthy and win 20-25 games, it would be a challenge for the Dodgers to beat a reloaded San Francisco team. You need strong pitching to win and 1.5 to 2.5 starters isn’t enough. In fact, it’s a step backward from 2015.

Tonight the Dodgers are starting a guy who was pitching in A ball this year. All season long we’ve heard Friedman supporters talking about “depth.” All of the names that are called either fail or get hurt. When you troll the bargain bin, you can’t expect much. It’s unlikely 29 other teams all missed out and you’re just that much smarter than all of the other baseball executives. But that seems to be the case. The Dodgers front office is packed with big egos who consider themselves brighter than everyone else in baseball. It’s moronic, to them, to just go shopping in the off-season and get players that have track record of success, and hopefully good health. It’s too easy, so a deep thinker like Friedman, or one like Zaidi, don’t do things that way. A “dummy” like Ned Colletti would do that, and that’s not how they think. In complete honesty, Ned was a far brighter baseball mind than the idiots running the show now, and I’m the first to admit Ned was no genius, just a fairly competent, experienced baseball guy. The goal of a Friedman run front office is not necessarily to win – the Dodgers were already doing that under Ned and Stan Kasten – but to do it by showing the world they are smarter than everyone else. So if they could win with guys no one had heard of, waiver wire pickups, AAAA castoffs, injury guys, etc., the fruits of victory would taste that much sweeter.

Well, here we are. Excuses being made why everyone is hurt, or why others didn’t pan out. Excuses why the offense is one of the worst in baseball, why the pen has no real set up men and rotating no one’s on any given day. A great pitching staff can compensate for a low producing offense. Dan Evans, shackled by Fox ownership and given almost nothing to spend each winter, managed to field amazing defensive teams with strong pitchers – usually coming with different looks that confused opposing hitters. Evans’ teams were solid and just needed 1-2 more bats, but alas, it was never meant to be. Now here we are today, offensively challenged, still waiting for Puig to explode, but only the pitching is not what it was under Evans. The rotation is thin, the bullpen thin. We are told, wait, keep waiting. It’s been 3 decades, but we must keep waiting. I’d be happy to wait if an answer were on the horizon. I don’t see how you can ask patience while having the highest payroll in baseball. Those are mixed messages. If you have a payroll of what the current Dodgers do, it’s perfectly right for fans to expect it to be a go year. If you are rebuilding for 2018, as Friedman says he is, then payroll should be small. And if you’re building for years from now, you don’t really need Kershaw, who can walk in 2018, or Kenley Jansen, a free-agent after this year, or Adrian Gonzalez, or some of the other stars on the roster.

Dodger fans are divided – either confused, as I am, by what is going on. Or they’re young and never saw a winner. They have no point of comparison and assume this is a Dodgers team like the teams from Flatbush were or the 1970s juggernaut teams. Hey, they were blue caps with white lettering on them.

I feel sorry for fans of the Dodgers, both the old guard and new. The ownership group hired bean counters that have put their massive egos over the good of the fans and city. There is no real plan except to get cheaper, while apparently blowing that massive TV deal’s money and gate on items that can’t help the big club in any capacity. The pipedream is that somewhere down the line there will be a winning Dodger team filled with kids grown on the farm (mostly by Logan White under Ned’s supervision) and every prospect will be a superstar. Payroll will be very low, allowing the Guggenheim Group even larger profits, and isn’t that what America is about nowadays? Forget the fact it almost never works that way – a) that the prospects all hit, and b) that it could ever happen in a large market like LA anyway (or should).

Fans need to stop asking what happened or wondering how Kershaw could get hurt. They have to stop grousing about bad luck and how this could happen to anyone. No, it really couldn’t. Logically if the Dodgers had kept Greinke and added Price, Hamels, Jordan Zimmerman, Johnny Cueto, Jeff Samardzija whoever, they’d have three strong pitchers. They could have added Maeda, injury question marks or no, to the lower part of the rotation. Having 4-5 pitchers you know you can count on for the majority of their starts is what you should aim for when constructing a pitching staff. You also need a strong bullpen to shorten games. If you work backward, you can have relievers shorten a game to 6-7 innings, allowing you the luxury of 5-6 inning starts on occasion from your starters. The Dodgers under Friedman gambled with innings in the rotation as well as the pen. This is exactly what happens when you think like this. It’s not a surprise that at some point Kershaw, who has logged a ton of innings, might himself get hurt. It’s not a surprise that other guys either couldn’t deliver or are hurt. It’s what you would expect if you were paying attention and not focused on showboating how bright you are.

The Dodgers now are in a quagmire that not much can be done about. I would be surprised even if Friedman and Zaidi wanted to make a big trade or two, if it would be enough. The holes are throughout the boat, not just one or two places. The solution is easy and complex. To get the Dodgers sailing right, Guggenheim has to admit their mistake, bring in an actual baseball person and clean house. This means losing all the cooks in the current kitchen, as well as most of Dave Roberts’ know-nothing coaches, all hand-selected by Friedman, of course. This would be quite a shakeup and of course it wouldn’t help in 2016. The Dodgers are playing for a wildcard and even if they get there, should Kershaw win that game, then what? There are few options behind Kershaw and may not be until Urias develops into a solid option who can log 200 innings. Of course by that time, Kershaw will likely have opted out and be wearing a Rangers hat. Then the question for Friedman apologists will be, what do we have behind Urias?

Does Pepto-Bismol come in blue?