Categorized | Mark Timmons

The Kershawshank Redemption – First CG

The Kershawshank Redemption – First CG

Clayton Kershaw’s first complete game, a 1-0 four-hitter against the hated Giants on their home turf, should put the Ace of the Dodgers Staff Crown squarely upon Clayton’s head.  In a season run amok, Clayton Kershaw has stepped up, and as Jon Weisman proclaimed a few weeks ago, “This is Clayton Kershaw’s Team.”  Manny let the Dodgers down. So did Raffy.  Russ, James, Andre and Matt all underperformed, but Clayton Kershaw has stepped up and seized the day.  Make no mistake about it:  It’s “Derek Jeter and the Yankees”, “Tim Lincecum and the Giants”, “Ryan Howard and the Phillies”, and it’s “Clayton Kershaw and the Dodgers!”

Clayton Kershaw is officially anointed by me as the Dodgers’ Ace!

Other than my “pet whipping boy” Jon Broxton, the failure of the Dodgers to flourish this year has to be laid squarely upon the shoulders of the coaching staff, especially the hitting coaches, Jeff Pentland and Don Mattingly.  Both are long-time baseball guys but whatever they are teaching, nobody is learning from it.  No explanation needed.  Results are all that count.  Both are out the door at season’s end with Joe Torre…. at least they should be.  The Dodgers can save $4+ million by letting Torre walk and replacing him with Wallach.

Most people on this board predicted that the Dodger starting pitching would be their undoing.  That never came to pass.  The Dodgers TOP THREE STARTERS are arguably as good as any trio in baseball.  Consider this:

Roy Halladay has given up 22 HR.  Clayton Kershaw and Chad Billingsley have given up 21 HR… COMBINED!

Clayton Kershaw has pitched 192 Innings, allowed 152 Hits, struck out 201 while cutting his walks down to 77.  He presently has a 2.85 ERA and sits with a 12-10 record.  He should have 16-18 wins, but doesn’t, thanks to a lack support and Jon Broxton.

Hiroki Kuroda has a 10-12 record with a 3.32 ERA, also being a victim of the pen and lack of hitting.  He has pitched 176 innings, allowed 162 hits, 13 HR and has struck out 142 while walking 45.

Chad Billingsley who  is 11-9 with a 3.65 ERA, has pitched 165 innings, allowed 156 hits and struck out 136 while walking 63.  He has only allowed 8 HR!  He has re-established himself as a TOP Starter.

That’s darn good starting pitching.  Who knew that our strating pitching would be our strength?

Look at this:

Pre All-Star Game:

Hitting – The Dodgers were 3rd in both Batting Average (.269) and Runs Scored (423) in the NL and averaged 4.8 Runs Per Game.

Pitching – Before the All-Star Game the Dodgers were 7th in the NL in ERA (4.09) and 7th in Runs Allowed.  Their save percentage was 73% (not great) and their Team WHIP was 1.33.  Their catchers caught 33% of the attempted base thieves.

Post All-Star Game:

Hitting – The Dodgers are 15th in Batting Average (.235) and tied for last in Runs Scored with the Mets at 183.  That’s an average of less than 3.3 Runs Per Game.  That is a total breakdown and it is worse than pitiful!  It is unacceptable and heads must roll!  Torre, Mattingly and Pentland must face the Guillotine!

Pitching – Since the All-Star Game the Dodgers pitching was 4th in ERA (3.70) to San Diego’s 3.44.  The Dodgers were #1 in lowest Batting Average Allowed (.229) and tied for first with San Diego for lowest OB% with .304.  The Dodgers also had the best Team WHIP at 1.22.  Where they really stumbled was in saves, where they converted just 60% of them (compared to 90% for the Padres).  The Dodgers also were the worst in the NL in catching runners at 19%.

The Starting Pitching has been wonderful, but the bullpen betrayed the Starters and the hitting was just abysmal!   That’s the story of the season.  You can feel free to blame McCourt, but I believe the blame falls squarely upon the coaching staff.  You can’t fire all the players, but you can fire all the coaches and the manager, and the Dodgers should!

Final Question: Could it be that Rod Barajas is a better receiver than anyone else on the Dodgers?


About Mark Timmons

When you see the invisible, you can do the impossible!

26 Responses to “The Kershawshank Redemption – First CG”

  1. Badger says:

    We do have 3 starters that are good. But there are two teams in our own division that have better pitching. In sortable pitching stats, Kershaw is currently 14th in MLB, Kuroda 28th and Bills 45th. Not bad, but let’s not get too excited about it. Even after his complete game, Kershaw is still tied for 23rd in IP. Again, not bad but considering there are 30 teams out there our ace isn’t at the top. Our 4th and 5th starters have been a question mark all year.

    Having said that, I agree that Kershaw has established himself as an elite pitcher in the NL. To take care of business on a night when his offense gets 1 hit and no earned runs is very Koufax like.

    But this team will need to do something about pitching over the winter and I am not optimistic about the ability to pull it off. Kuroda is as good as gone, and as much as Lilly might want to stay in L.A., some team out there is going to offer a Wolf like contract and he would stupid not to take it. The Dodgers are going nowhere next year, and Lilly would have to pitch like Kershaw every time out to get victories. Why would he do that? I think he is gone too. That leaves Kershaw, Bills, maybe Padilla, Haeger, Monasterios and who knows to rack up as many quality starts as possible.

    I like Barajas. He is as solid a .230 hitter as I have ever seen and he works his ass off behind the plate.

    • Ray says:

      there are 150 starters in baseball, and LAD has 3 in the top 45 and you are upset??

      • Badger says:

        Upset? where do you get that?

        I said “not bad”. There are other teams with three pitchers in the top 50, heck, St. Louis has 3 in the top 22 and Philadelphia and San Francisco are pretty deep. And many teams with 5 legit starters. What I am saying is the Dodgers starting pitching is 3 deep, and after that it has been a crap shoot.

  2. Ken says:

    If Manny and his deferred compensation, which caused the Dodgers to be in violation of their loan covenants with B of A, was not traded, and Lee was not given an 5 year $5,000,000 guaranteed contract (including $250,000 commission for his Dad?), then Bud would not have approved a bonus for Lee and B of A would not have allowed deferred comp for Lee, and Lee would not have been signed. The Dodgers gave a great contract to Lee which will allow him to return to college football at age 23 and if he performs well will go to the NFL at age 25, a bit earlier then a certain Rams quarterback and former MVP.

    Take all of the financial contraints from all of the parties and aply to the facts if you want to arrive at the correct answer. When a MLB team breaches the operating statistic formulas contanined in the MLB agreement then they are subject to quasi-receivership by Bud. Just as many believe that it is in the best interest of baseball to get rid of the McCourts, it is in the best interest of baseball to allow teams to operate in a manner that allows them to pretend that the team is not insolvent. Even Texas is allowed to make some moves. Welcome to the financial world.

  3. lawdog says:

    Interestingly, the LA Times has indicated the Dogs were more than $400+ million in the red coming into the 2010 trial and simultaneously, (today), indicate they made $35 million last year (2009.)

    Which is it? Or does that mean McCheapBastard spent more than $435+ million dollars since the end of the 2009 season??? :shock:

    McCheapBastard and his shrew have to go and go now! :mad:

    • Jared Massey says:

      I think the implication is the team earned $35 last year, but the McCourts have been racking up debt since they got the team. I don’t think $35 million was their net profits, debt obligations included.

  4. Badger says:

    Not sure I followed that Ken, but I am sure you are right.

    Was Manny actually traded? I thought he was just given away to save $4 million. We got nothing in return, and we still owe him millions. Not exactly a “good trade”.

    I think your point about the real estate values is valid ldog. I have no idea if the court accepts those numbers. I didn’t read anything to the contrary, but we all know real estate in California is down at least 20%. My property in Napa is down more than that. Let me ask both you and Ken, do the courts ask for current appraisals on property listed as assets? or do they accept the purchase price as the value?

    The $35 million made must be above what they paid on their debt load. That’s possible, considering parking went way up, and ticket prices did too. I haven’t been to the park in years, but I assume beer and Dodger Dogs went up in price as well. I know it was dang expensive down in Glendale when I was there. If demanded to do so, wouldn’t they have to sell everything, pay off the $435M, then divide what is left? That is what happens in most California divorces, but these people live in a world above laws, so, maybe it’s different for them.

  5. Michael says:

    There are a couple rumors over at Ben Maller today about scenarios on how who and why a change in ownership is not out of the question.
    Barajas is a gamer and without a doubt the best we have at the positon.
    After reading that Wallach story yesterday, I think I’m sold.
    Another story I read this week after squiriling it from a couple weeks ago was the interview with Sandy Koufax. I was totally stunned to find out he smoked, back in the day anyway.

  6. lawdog says:

    All assets–real and personal are valued as of the date the trial judge enters his decision. Or at least that was the law when I was practicing. Everyone I’ve talked to on the west coast who owns property indicates they’ve lost somewhere between 30-50% of the value of their “investment”. If the McCourt duo put down 80% on their purchases, all of their real property should now be worth less than what they paid for it–and they paid for it with borrowed money. They’ve leveraged themselves into bankruptcy–and problem prison once the IRS audits them and holds them accountable for spending hundreds of millions of dollars while paying no income taxes for all those years.

  7. Badger says:

    I just read that article this morning Jay. Intrestin ain’t it. Selig is alive, sitting up and taking nourishment, but I doubt he does anything other than to encourage the McCourts to make this thing go away. I didn’t see the attached comments on your link, but I think they are here, and they too are good reading…..

    http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-0915-dodgers-mccourts-20100915,0,6362764.story

    ldog, I would have thought asset evaluation would have to include current appraisals of all RE owned properties, but what do I know about how millionaires are looked at by the courts. Millionaires have made law for years so, it would not surprise me if they were able to hide assets legally. As for the taxes, what I read a while ago says these must be paid….. eventually. And you know who will pay them. I recall years ago when DeBartalo was fined by NFL for illegal payments to players, parking for the next game doubled. I had a friend with season tickets and we figured the fans had that fine paid for by years end. Whatever this costs, the fans will pick up the tab.

  8. lawdog says:

    That’s what I meant to say Badger. Maybe I slipped and fell over my own fingers while typing. Real Estate, like all other property, is valued as close to the time as trial as possible. The courts want present value, not the value at the time of purchase. If it was the latter and not the former, there would be nothing to fight over most of the time and too many lawyers would starve… ;)

  9. lawdog says:

    From Paul Oberjuerge’s blog posted a few minutes ago:

    SI and ESPN Catch Up to McCourts September 14th, 2010 · No Comments · Baseball, Dodgers, Sports Journalism

    We are proud to say, here at oberjuerge.com, that we have been sounding the alarm on the owner(s) of the Dodgers for most of a year now. From the moment the divorce of Frank and Jamie McCourt picked up speed, it was clear to everyone, even those naifs who view life through Dodger Blue glasses, that this would result in one of only two outcomes.

    1. It would be very bad for the club.

    2. It would be disastrous for the club.

    And as we have discovered just how much money those two cretins have taken out of the ballclub, essentually using a Southland civic treasure as their personal ATM, even as the club has disintegrated here in the stretch run … well, it clearly is disastrous for the club.

    Now, the national media are noticing.

    To wit:

    ESPN.com’s Howard Bryant has a scathing piece on the McCourts … which you may read here. He takes this back to the beginning, wondering how it was possible for MLB to approve the highly leveraged McCourt bid to purchase the club from Fox. His short answer: Because commissioner Bud Selig wants another club’s ownership to be indebted to him and firmly in his camp.

    Bryant notes that the Dodgers are now $433 million in debt, and that banks have been turning down Frank’s attempts to borrow more money. Which may have a lot to do with why the Dodgers have been a couple of quality pitchers short this entire, divorce-blighted season.

    In short, he spends a lot of time on the money side of things, which is good for hard background.

    A few days later, Lee Jenkins of Sports Illustrated also got after the McCourts, and his well-researched story begins with Peter O’Malley, and draws the enormous distinctions between the stewardship of the club under the O’Malleys and the disaster that has enveloped the franchise in the seven seasons the McCourts have been around.

    SI goes for more shocking/appalling numbers that surround the McCourt Disaster.

    For example:

    –How the two of them budgeted $150,000 per year for hair care.

    –The $400,000 paid to a crony to run a charity that essentially raised no money.

    –The $600,000 per year paid through the Dodgers to two of their sons who had no official capacity with the club.

    –And the truly sickening one … the estimated $20 million in legal fees the McCourts are spending on their divorce. And where do they get that money? From Dodgers fans, “laundered” through the ballclub.

    I have been yammering about the McCourts … but my soap box does not stand quite as high as those commanded by ESPN and SI.

    It’s nice that others are noticing what is going on.

    Oh, and to make clear … SI suggests that we all should be pulling for Jaime to be awarded co-ownership, because that scenario seems likely to lead to a sale. Though the judge could order one.

    We can hope.

  10. Badger says:

    Yes, we can hope.

    But what concerns me is the McCourt’s legal right of appeal. If that is the chosen route, it could take months, even stretching into years.

    I still believe that these two will see that it is in both their best interest to keep this cash cow in the family barn. They will come to some sort of agreement that allows Frank to keep the team, and Jamie to share revenues for years. Think about it…. it is how Frank does business with his players, he will just defer Jamie’s contract into the future. She gets to keep her royal lifestyle, he gets to keep his baseball team and they both live fat cat lives off the Dodger fans. Of course, there will be very little improvement in the club but, so what? 3.5 million will show up no matter what, the t.v. contract will be in place in a few years and both McCourts win.

    The losers will be the Dodger fans.

    But we can hope. I hope I am wrong. I hope these two people are run out of town. But they slithered into this deal, it’s what they do, and they may just outsmart everybody and strike a deal between themselves.

    • Ray says:

      it didn’t take years for the Padres to be sold, did it? I am asking, not sure, to be honest.

      • Badger says:

        Not even close to the same situation Ray.

        Too many details to go into now to explain it to you, but if you read everything that has been posted here on the subject, then google on article on the Moores sale you will see how vastly different the two situations are. Hint: p.m.a.

        • Badger says:

          or…. M.P.A. … depending on which term you choose to use…….

          at any rate, this divorce is really much, MUCH different.

        • Jared Massey says:

          The easy response to this is that Moores’ wife didn’t co-own the team and had no interest in running it.

          • Badger says:

            I think the team was actually considered community property Jared, and that is the reason Moores had to sell it.

            In the McCourt case, the Marital Property Agreement, or the Postnuptial Property Agreement, puts this case in doubt.

          • Jared Massey says:

            Right, The point I was attempting to make was Moores’ wife wasn’t involved with the team and had no intention of running it. Thus, Moores was able to sell it quickly instead of trying to figure out who owned it.

  11. Badger says:

    Pretty quiet in here. I guess most everything has already been said.

    I rarely agree with Joe Morgan, especially when he is doing Dodger games because his bias is so blatantly visible, but he made a point last night I thought was a good one – in the 8th inning with a fast runner on third and less than two outs the Dodger infield was half way. It cost them a run, and eventually the game. That is a huge tactical defensive mistake, and one that you won’t even see on a high school field. You either play up, or back. It was a one run game and it was late….. you play up in that situation, cutting off the run. The Dodgers played it wrong. Who is responsible for that mistake? Got to ask Joe what was he thinking……

  12. Mark Timmons says:

    He wasn’t!

  13. Badger says:

    “He wasn’t”

    You got that right. No big deal to the Dodgers, but a very big deal to San Diego and Colorado. Oh well. Joe does a lot of things that have me scratching my head. So did Tracy. What do I know. I never coached past junior college.

  14. Badger says:

    With as bad as the Dodgers are playing, even if he says he wants to come back, why would the team want Torre back at such a high price? This team is going to finish sub .500 and it doesn’t look like many changes will be made to make it better.

    Are the Dogs just going to chalk it up as an “off year” and bring everybody back?

    Lilly has been clobbered in two of his last four starts. Is he settling in and becoming a true 2010 Dodger?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. [...] The Kershawshank Redemption – First CG | – Daily … Pitching – Since the All-Star Game the Dodgers pitching was 4th in ERA to San Diego's The Dodgers were #1 in lowest Batting Average Allowed and tied for first with San Diego for lowest OB% with [...]


Leave a Reply

Mandatory Daily Dodger Reading