2011 Dodgers At Bat: What Marcel Tells Us

When I look at the upcoming season, I try to envision what the Dodgers will be able to do at the plate. At this point, it seems that the Dodgers are much weaker at the plate (and in the field which could be important but not as important as hitting). A lot of pressure will be put on Matt Kemp and Andre Ethier to drive the Dodgers' lineup through the long and arduous season. After that, who will be able to do so? Rafael Furcal is more than capable but he has to stay healthy. Juan Uribe may have some leftover magic left from last season but he won't be asked to play above his career averages (though he will be asked to hit #3 and #4 in the lineup quite a bit. James Loney might (10 to 20% chance of that, IMO) and Casey Blake won't carry the team. Don't even ask the catchers and left fielders about helping in that department.

However, the sum of the Dodgers' parts might be enough to contribute to what should be a good amount of quality starts from the starting rotation. I am choosing to look at Tangtiger's Marcel projections and compare the team totals of the Dodgers. Though you have to account for some over-counting as some of the utility guys on the Dodgers have been given more at-bats than they may see but there are some things that stand out to me regarding the Marcel projections (yes I put Aaron Miles on there but only to induce nausea):

Name	mAB	mR	1B	mH	m2B	m3B	mHR	mRBI	mSB	mCS	mBB	mSO
Kemp	544	79	98	150	26	5	21	78	24	10	47	137
Ethier	494	72	84	139	32	2	21	76	5	2	55	96
Gibbons	217	29	38	57	10	1	8	32	3	2	18	44
Thames	314	39	49	79	13	1	16	45	1	2	28	86
Loney	530	63	102	146	30	3	11	78	8	4	51	80
Uribe	484	58	77	124	26	3	18	68	3	2	37	95
Blake	481	62	78	122	26	2	16	64	3	3	47	121
Barajas	383	43	56	90	19	0	15	54	2	1	21	72
Furcal	433	67	83	120	23	5	9	42	15	5	43	70
Carroll	386	55	83	103	15	2	3	33	9	4	44	77
Gwynn	363	46	65	87	13	4	5	27	14	5	43	65
Navarro	281	30	51	70	14	0	5	28	3	2	21	42
Ellis	233	24	45	61	11	1	4	30	3	1	24	44
Paul	241	33	40	61	14	2	5	27	5	2	21	48
Miles	268	31	55	70	11	1	3	21	3	2	17	38
m2011	5652	731	1004	1479	283	32	160	703	101	47	517	1115
br2010	5426	667	949	1368	270	29	120	621	92	50	533	1184

The projections do not account for pitcher or John Lindsay at bats while the Baseball Reference totals from last year do but the projections fill out well enough. The Dodgers were 14th in the NL in total at-bats so the numbers might not be that far off if the Dodgers can have longer innings more often.

I look at the HR totals (160 vs. 120) and that is a significant increase over last year. Even if Marcel gives Thames and Gibbons too many at bats, the projections look for the Dodgers to have more power than last year. Getting 64 more runs would be nice as well. That should equate to roughly 6 more wins if the Dodgers match the projection. The Dodgers may also strike out less (69 times less says Marcel). While striking out isn't the capital crime it was decades ago, the Dodgers doing less of it should translate into putting the ball in play and having more outcomes determined by the opposing fielders.

This isn't meant to be ground-breaking, deadly accurate or terribly insightful. I had some concern over what the Dodgers would do at the plate this year without Manny, Russell Martin and some players in decline. Some of my fear are dispelled because you can add Juan Uribe, Marcus Thames and Rod Barajas which will increase the power in the lineup but this team may in fact hit more home runs.

I have been talked out of the Dodgers' offense collapsing for a second straight year. I still don't think they are going to win the division this year but they might just prove that a lineup without much pop in the heart of it isn't necessary to score runs on a team level. I do expect the players who may not carry the team to play above replacement level, however. The catcher, first base and left field positions have to not suck.

Please excuse the lousy transfer of the numbers from the spreadsheet. Thanks to Baseball Reference and Tangotiger for the archive and projection numbers respectively.

The Bums are Stacking Up!

Aaron Miles is the next bum that Ned Colletti is taking a flier on. Add Miles to a list of non-roster invitees that includes Mike MacDougal and Gabe Kapler. Now, it may be foolish to fret about NRI's but it may be even more foolish to bet against Ned Colletti putting bums on the Opening Day roster. Eric Gagne didn't make the roster but both Ortiz pitchers made it and Garret Anderson stuck for far too long.

I was wondering how Ned was going to fill the slappy white void in the middle of the infielder. What better way to do it than by giving one of the worst players with a real contract. His wOBA never touched .300 while he was making nearly $5 million total during the last two years. How about a wRC+ of 14 while with the Cardinals? There just isn't much to like with Miles or with MacDougal and Kapler for that matter.

It seemed like the whole Chin-Lung Hu trade was disappointing though it was good to get something for him but, if Aaron Miles makes the Opening Day roster and matters in any capacity, that will be bad news. It's not that I believe that a young player should be the only player in competition for a roster spot but throwing bums at a problem isn't a good M.O. either.

If one of the bums is going to stick, I would like it to be Mike MacDougal. At least he can pull a good year out of nowhere like relievers are known to do sometimes. While it's true that MacDougal and all these lottery ticket players are insurance policies, is it really better than doing what small market teams do by filling a gap with farm hand youth?

It's like I thought things were going to be different this year or something.

McCourts Bad

I was reading Christina Kahrl's "Who Wants To Be a Millionaire?" article in Baseball Prospectus. She made a joke that the McCourts would star in a reality TV show called "See You In McCourt!" I had to google it because I gave a slight chance that it was a real show. Would it be surprising if they would try to take this media circus to the next magnitude?

I will continue to attempt to bash the McCourts but this might just kindle another burst of nausea for fans of the Dodgers. Berry Petchesky named Frank McCourt one of the 10 Worst Guys in Sports on Deadspin. His rant sheds more of the same light on the situation that attentive Dodger fans have gleaned during the past two plus years. This whole experience has just sucked. When the McCourts leave the Dodgers and baseball, whoever takes over had better not be one thing: crazy.

Can the Dodgers owner and high-positioned wife be considered sane of mind? How about that for a start? If you pay Vladmir Shpunt any money for his "psychic services," you are a crazy person. We all know this but it's worth restating. You know what a great gimmick for getting good vibes from people? Each year, 3 million people pay the Dodgers to give good vibes but the McCourts found a way to pay for something they sell.

Ned Colletti is a fixture on the McCourt Dodgers, which makes Frank and Jamie's case even worse. In Bud Selig's baseball, I guess all of this is natural behavior. I think a well-functioning professional sport would get the team out of Frank and/or Jamie's hand(s) soon. I guess diluting the playoffs is more important.

Though this sentiment has been beat into the ground, the McCourts are beyond incompetent. This circus of an ownership can't go away fast enough. Garret Anderson went away faster.

_________________________________________________________

Lastings Milledge signed a minor-league contract with the Chicago White Sox today. I was thinking that a team would give him a multi-million dollar major-league contract but I am going to infer that the collective snub of Milledge may mean that this is his final shot and teams don't want him in their clubhouse. The Dodgers could have got him which would have been alright with me but his character risk could have a wide range of negative value to a team. I am fine with them passing on him because I can't say for sure if he would be a problem or not.

I'm not a big believer in avoiding all negative character guys. I liked Manny coming aboard but he can hit. Milledge may not be able to offset any negative value his character brings. Milton Bradley had some good seasons but he is the shining example that, well, Jim Hendry is a bad GM (still employed for the record) and players with known character issues had better be worth it.

It will be interesting to see how he does with the White Sox. If Milledge sticks to the roster, Ozzie Guillen could be arguing with him in no time. Any Dodger fans headed to Camelback Ranch may have a front row seat.

_______________________________________________________

Dodger Left Field Platoon Solidified But Not Solid

The funniest part about this whole situation is that it takes a 34 year old washed up Oriole to get Ned excited about using his farm system. Xavier Paul: summarily ignored. Ivan DeJesus: not a chance. Chin-Lung Hu: he's no Juan Castro. Not that I think these guys need to (or needed to) be handed a starting job but it is clear that Ned is terrified of giving a young player a chance to have a spot on the roster.

I am OK with Marcus Thames as the right side of the left field platoon. It would be better if he batted left-handed so he could get the majority of at-bats but I think he should get some chances against RHP's because I don't think Gibbons is going to be good enough to face every righty.

I would say that we should put our hopes in Trayvon Robinson knocking on the door by June but it would involve Ned making that call. This is a guy who stuck with Garret Anderson for over four months.

The combination of Thames and Gibbons may hit league average but the defense is going to suffer again. Manny was bad in the field but you could deal with it because of his bat. Gibbons has a lifetime -1.3 UZR/150 in the field and Thames' UZR/150 is -7.6. As bad as Andre Ethier is in the field, the outfield could have used an upgrade in that department and, instead, it got old. Sure, there is a chance that Tony Gwynn Jr. comes in and takes a good amount of playing time, thus improving the outfield's defense but he has to get on base.

As much as the Dodgers need power, I will probably be focusing more on James Loney. If he can come back to life, the Dodgers won't need Jay Gibbons or Marcus Thames to much more than hit behind Loney and try to knock him in.

One thing that is reassuring in this is that Ned has dropped his love of the slappy and grindy players. The best thing that Gibbons and Thames do is hit home runs. They probably won't hit a lot but unlike Scott Podsednik and Ryan Theriot, you can expect to see Gibbons, Thames, Juan Uribe and Rod Barajas to hit home runs in relative regularity,

Other than Bill Plaschke, it is hard to find a fan of the current version of the Dodgers left handed platoon. Matt Klaassen doesn't buy Jay Gibbons at all, MTSI is not a fan of the deal, look around and it is hard to find  much support for a guy who had 80 plate appearances in garbage time and, while Thames is better, he doesn't seem to be a guy who can take the position away from anyone else since he never did so with the Tigers and Yankees.

I don't see doom and gloom in left field - just disappointment.

Chad Billingsley and Yankee interest (?)

I don't think that Chad Billingsley is going anywhere but it's not a lock with the Yankees still needing pitching. They decided to go heavy in the bullpen but they have a glut of some impressive prospects and Joba Chamberlain's stock is about as low as it can be.

CBillz and the Dodgers have agreed to a contract for this year at $3.85 million and the Dodgers have arbitration rights for the 2012 season as well. It's unlikely that the Dodgers would give up Billingsley with two cheap years left unless the Yankees made it worth their while.

I am not advocating for CBillz to leave the Dodgers. I still believe that he can reach 200 strikeouts again, continue whittling down his career-low WHIP (1.278) and continue cutting down his walks. I'm just saying that if the Yankees are thinking of dangling Manny Banuelos, Dellin Betances or Andrew Brackman among other prospects in their farm system, the deal may be more enticing.

It's just food for thought on this January day before the NFL Divisional Playoff Round kicks off. I have high hopes for Chad and I think he will stay a Dodger for at least this year. Remember, it took Billingsley a while to get going because of his hip injury in the last off-season. This year, he should have the benefit of health and he should resemble the pitcher he was the second half rather than the first.

My 2011 Hall of Famers

I go with the less is more approach. If I had a ballot, I would vote Roberto Alomar and Bert Blyleven for sure. I've looked at the numbers of the rest and I see a large collection of great players for a long time. I don't buy most of their cases though they had great careers.

Let's consider Tim Raines. Rickey Henderson really does overshadow Raines but it shouldn't diminish the grand numbers Rock put up (6 years of 70+ steals, >80% SB/SBA). His best season, 1981, wasn't a full one but he still managed to get 71 steals. He finished with a .294/.385/.425 slash line and 123 OPS+. What sets him apart from a lot of the other HOF candidates is putting him in doesn't mean that you have to put other players like Kenny Lofton and the like in. Still he doesn't have the WAR that the shortstops below do.

Barry Larkin is a struggle for me. I am saying no to Alan Trammell, though his case is compelling but Larkin had a lot going for him. He won an MVP in 1995, he had more walks than strikeouts, stole a base above an 80% clip and is most similar to Alan Trammell.

All in all, I am going to go with less is more. Blyleven and Alomar are the only ones I would vote in. If your list is long, be happy I don't have a vote. I like to keep the HOF special and I would be all for removing players from it rather than adding.

Michael Young to be Available?

With the Texas Rangers apparently close to signing free agent 3B Adrian Beltre, Michael Young could move to the Rangers. He could also be traded. Young isn't a great fielder but he isn't traditional DH material (though I would consider DHing him) and they may want to get some of those millions they are paying to Beltre. Selling Young would be taking a loss on his actual value but I don't think that the Rangers are inclined to care because they are trying to take another shot at the World Series.

The Dodgers could use an upgrade at 3B. Casey Blake could move to left where he can be the righty-masher in a platoon with Jay Gibbons. Not great but that is much better than anything the Dodgers have lined up. Young is under contract with the Rangers for three more years at $16 million per year. I think given his worth for the first two years of the contract ($32 mil), they are going to have to send some cash with him wherever he goes.

Young is 34 so Ned probably already wants him on the team, he has been worth 21.8 WAR since 2004 when he first showed up on the MVP ballot and he still hits for power. However, the Dodgers probably can't afford him even if they had some cash thrown their way in the deal. Chad Billingsley would be a bold move but I don't think that the Dodgers should give him up in a deal with Young unless the Dodgers get a prospect as well.

Michael Young would be a good fit for the Dodgers. Perhaps if Ned hadn't brought a $4 million reliever on board, a $3.25 million on an old catcher or a $7 million Juan Uribe, Michael Young could be more readily obtained. As for Chad Billingsley, he could have the attention of the Yankees as well if they are serious about getting another starter on board.

The deal should be entertained but it is probably out of reach. More thoughts on Billingsley's value later.