Categorized | Mark Timmons

I Can See For Miles and Miles

I Can See For Miles and Miles

According to Tony Jackson, Aaron Miles had laser eye surgery last off-season, which could account for his productivity increase.  I will make the case for Miles and Miles (it’s simple):

Thanks to D-Romowill make the case for Miles:

  • Switch-hitter
  • Batting .364 this spring
  • Can play 2B, SS, 3B
  • Veteran presence
  • Been there, Done that!
  • Castro is old – needs to retire
  • Sellers is hitting .214 with 4 errors – back to AAA.
  • DeJesus needs to play everyday.

That’ settles it – Aaron Miles and Jamey Carroll are the Dodgers Super-utility players.   I actually like that a lot, especially if the laser surgery has made Miles a better hitter.  That’s a nice backup duo.

While I am at it, I’ll say that the Dodgers should cut Gibbons and move ahead with what’s left:  Kapler, Paul, Thames, Hoffman, Gwynn, et al.  May the best man win.

More Pictures below from D-Romo (TKX):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About Mark Timmons

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

8 Responses to “I Can See For Miles and Miles”

  1. Bootz says:

    Left field is a mess. Colletti needs to address this through trade or sign a line cook from Applebees (which would be better than the current group of wastrels).

  2. Bill Russell says:

    HHMMMM, Ned should consider scouting Applebees. I am on board with Miles.

    Question:
    Can the Dodgers send Gibbons to AAA? or do they have to release him?

  3. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Can’t disagree about Miles. He’s always been a good hitter (although not a great OBP guy), and while no youngster, he’s still only 34, which makes me more confident that he won’t be another Mark Loretta, who got old on us at 37/38 in 2009. And the switch hitter part makes him even more valuable off the bench late in games.

    I have never been a big Gibbons fan, so I have no problem letting him go. If he does have a role with the Dodgers it would be as a left-handed bat off the bench, but we already have enough of those (especially if you include Miles–although without the power–in the mix). If Gibbons can be traded, that too should explored. Although he’s unproven, I still like Paul’s quick bad, great arm and the speed that he brings (especially since we now have Lopes on board). Although his defense needs work, he’s still better than Gibbons in the field.

    There’s probably a little extra time to make a decision about Gibbons, since it’s conceivable the Dodgers will open the season with 11 pitchers, given that a 5th starter isn’t needed until April 12th.

    Now, back to Broxton from the previous thread:

    I DVR’d the infamous game, and just got through looking at it. Here are my impressions.

    1. His fastball did not look particularly hard, which is probably typical for a power pitcher at this time of year. Mattingly has used Goose Gossage as an example of a power pitcher who typically got lit up in the spring before his fastball reached its normal velocity. Hoffpauir’s HR came on a fastball down and over the middle of the plate.

    2. The breaking balls he threw were all of the slow variety. No hard sliders. It appeared that he threw some splitters (one of which was a swing and miss), and that he was working on a slow curve (Rizzo’s hit was on a slow breaking pitch that hung over the middle of the plate).

    3. The announcers mentioned that Broxton hadn’t pitched for 5-6 days. Anyone who has seen Broxton over the years should know that, although his control is generally pretty good, he has control issues when he’s had more than just a few days off between appearances. Mattingly’s announced intention of using Broxton for only one inning at a time should allow him to be used more frequently. And the presence of Kuo, Jansen, Padilla and Guerrier, should make it a lot easier to use Broxton for single inning stints.

    4. Mattingly didn’t let Broxton’s bad outing linger, but went out and got him before the inning was over. Most likely it was because Broxton had reached a pre-determined pitch limit. With Kuo, Jansen, Padilla and Guerrier in the bullpen, I expect that Mattingly will come get Broxton earlier on days he’s struggling, if only to avoid the stress on his arm that naturally goes with a struggling performance.

    For those of you who look at spring training performance results as being important, all I can say is, think again. I don’t know what’s being said to Broxton, but I hope he’s being told that he’s the closer no matter what his ST results are, and that he should concentrate on getting into pitching shape, work on any new pitches he might want to add to his repertoire (e.g., splitter, curve), and take his time getting gradually stretched out (which includes bullpen sessions) so that his velocity has reached it’s peak about the time the season begins, i.e., when it really counts.

    Bill,

    You said “Didn’t we see Jon’s performance in the second half of 2010?”

    Yes, we did! And we also saw Billingsley’s performance in the second half of 2009, and starting the 2010 season. Why is Broxton any different? Because he looks like a big Teddy Bear? I forget exactly, but I believe that Billingsley’s appearance irked some. And yes, it’s irrational (let’s say “unreasonable” for want of a softer word) to think that the beginning of ST is any indication that this is “a reoccurring theme….” And I don’t know that Broxton “…is reporting to camp over weight and out of shape.” From what I’ve read, he concentrated in the off-season on lots of running to get his legs in shape for the season. Since a big part of pitching success is related to strong legs, it sounds to me that he just might have reported to camp in shape. Maybe Broxton is a bit overweight, and maybe not. He’s a big-boned guy, and it’s probably normal for someone his size to come in somewhat heavy on the scales. What I don’t see is a big belly hanging over his belt, a la David Wells, or a number of other successful big league pitchers I’ve seen in the past.

    And I don’t know that Broxton not working on any new pitches over the winter means anything. For all any of us know, the Dodgers may have specifically told him not to pick up a baseball in the off-season.

    With all that said, I too have to see Broxton pitch effectively to see if he’s back to being the dominant closer I remember. But I thought similar things about Billingsley too. In fact, in Billingsley’s case I still need to see it this year before I’m fully convinced that he’s turned a corner (but I’m confident that he has). I’ll consider revising my thoughts about Broxton if 2011 becomes a reprise of the second half of 2010. But I won’t be swayed by ST performances or even by a bad outing or two during the regular season.

  4. Bill Russell says:

    Why is Broxton different than Bills?
    Bills was coming off of a foot injury over the winter of 2009. Anyway, I wasn’t the one claiming that Bills had to go during the bad days of Chad in 2009. We are talking about Broxton not Chad anyway.

    No need to keep rehashing this Broxton thing because only time is going to tell who the true Broxton is. I understand it’s only spring and these innings don’t count for the already chosen one’s. I don’t have the inside scoop on if he’s working on pitches during the games or if he’s going all out. I would want to build his confidence this spring if I was Don, but that’s just me. My issue from the last thread is the irrational thinking and irrational hated comments you made. I pointed out my issues last thread and you have stated yours. After stating my issues last thread, I hope you can see that there may be something to how I see Broxton, and it’s not irrational thinking. Lets see how he does. It’s in his hands now right? I am hoping like hell that I am full of Sh_T for the sake of the team.
    This is the reason why I like this site is because we all don’t think alike.

  5. Bobby says:

    enough of these platoon/retreads/AAAA guys fighting for LF.

    give jerry sands the damn chance to play. he wont do any worse than the other crap we’re hoping to stick out there!!

  6. Michael says:

    Yeah, Miles looks good besides Juan has a new baby take care of.

    Jay Gibbons Watch: He kept his streak alive with another 0 for. I’m rooting for you to see how low you can go{.050 BA}
    Go, go, go Jay go. Just GO away!

    It’s the shades mon

  7. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    This is part of what I said in the previous thread.

    “I don’t know if it’s an irrational hatred of Broxton, but it’s definitely irrational.”

    So for the record, I didn’t characterize anyone’s comments as being the product of “irrational hatred”. I used that phrase only because the issue of irrational hatred has come up with respect to Mark’s issues with Broxton. And in today’s post I substituted “unreasonable” for “irrational”, since the latter term can be more disagreeable, maybe even incendiary.

    Bill, the Billingsley remarks were not aimed directly at you. I have no idea whether you’ve criticized him in the past, or not. I just used it as an example of a player who had been afforded pretty much the same treatment as Broxton, given his [Billingsley's] problems in the 2008 NLCS against the Phillies, and his struggles in the second half of 2009. Maybe Billingsley’s broken leg had something to do with his poor start in 2009, although I believe it was more the result of a faulty approach that was addressed by discussions he had with Honeycutt last year. And if injuries are an issue, keep in mind that Broxton has had foot problems (a toe, I believe). Perhaps that’s part of the reason his slider started to flatten out in the second half of 2009 and into 2010.

    Furthermore Bill, I respect your opinion, and I recognize that my opinions can be filled with holes, much like my porous brain, which is losing brain cells at an alarming rate. Whereas some people have senior moments, I have senior events. I apologize if my use of “irrational” was in the least bit offensive, and hope that “unreasonable” was less caustic, although I’m sure that word can also carry with it negative connotations. Maybe I should have consulted a thesaurus.

  8. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Ely’s chances of replacing Garland to open the season were probably given a bit of boost today when Redding got lit up by the Giants. Based on past performance, I believe that’s the real Redding.

    It’s only a spring training game, but Gwynn’s chances of at least winning a platoon job with Thames in left were enhanced by today’s 3 for 3 performance and his overall .360 spring average.

    Bobby, I understand your desire to see Sands in the lineup. However, I believe that it’s probably already been decided that he will open the season in the minors, but will be watched closely to see if his progress warrants a promotion to the Dodgers come May, June or July. For now it appears as if Thames is a definite, with Gwynn, Gibbons and Paul competing for the left-handed side of the platoon.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks


Leave a Reply

Mandatory Daily Dodger Reading