Categorized | Mark Timmons

Can Cruz Keep Cruzing?

  • Luis Cruz has been hot with the bat while displaying a stone glove at 3B.  I really hope Cruz can hit like he did last year (which isn’t great for a 3B, but so much better than Uribe, that it seems good).  Let’s realize that at age 29, he has a total of 437 AB’s in the majors and that even though he hit .297 in 283 AB”s last season, he only took 9 walks and struck out 34 times.  In his 12 seasons in the minor leagues he has accumulated 4,891 plate appearances and has taken just 214 walks.  He is a swinging-machine and I guarantee major league pitchers will quit throwing him strikes.  While I would love a 3B who could hit 20 HR and 85 RBI’s (which is what he would have put up if you double his AB’s), I see no way that those numbers are sustainable.  Don’t call me a Cruz hater – I’m not that guy, and I will root for him.  Maybe Big Mac can get him to change his approach, but after 12 minor league seasons, is that really likely?  It would be great if he can play that good and I really hope I have to eat crow on this one.  I just can’t build hope on his past record.
  • Capuano, Billingsley and Harang all look like they don’t want to be in the rotation.  Could Ted Lilly slip into that slot?  Unless someone is hurt, two of these guys won’t open the season with the Dodgers: Capuano, Harang, Billingsley.   Chad probably makes too much and his arm is a question mark, but could he be headed back to Ohio (where he is from)?  Drew Stubbs anyone?
  • The odds are long, but I can’t help but root for Alfredo Amezaga.
  • What is the over/under number of Uribe’s days on the roster?  I say 10.
  • I have been telling people that if Duke got Ryan Kelly back, they were NCAA champs.  Did you see his performance on his return?  That was one for the ages.  WOW!
  • If you don’t root for Ben McLemore, you should.  He is proof positive that your past and circumstances don’t define you.
  • If Carl Crawford opens the season on the DL and Puig keeps up his hot hitting, could he be the opening day LF?  It’s possible…


About Mark Timmons

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

48 Responses to “Can Cruz Keep Cruzing?”

  1. the truth hurts says:

    Cruz just deserves the nod. He earned it. Was it a fluke? maybe. I hope not, I’m on Cruz control. Now, is he the best?, absolutely not. My head is not in the clouds. With the options we currently have, I am content with Luis Cruz as our third baseman, for now.

    Ryan Kelly is one ugly dude. I saw his post game interview, big mug filling up the screen, yikes!

  2. Pete M. says:

    As much as it hurts to say it, I would not break camp with Y.Puig on the roster. He needs time and work on his overall game. I just hope that he accepts his demotion and remains positive…
    Somewhere in the bowels of Camelback is Donnie B’s office and adjacent to it is a war room of sorts. Names and possibly numbers of the ST roster. The toughest chore for D.M. and his staff is whittlin this list down to 25.
    Amezaga is one of my favorites at this time..This is the strongest IF group that I can remember…
    Alot being said of the Boston trade vs. loss of Webster and RDLR…Damn right it hurt, but you have to give something to get something…AGon will quietly as usual rake and give us +D @1B and Beckett I’m convinced will have a helluva spring back year…

  3. HemmorhoidRage says:

    Hey Mark, ever since you announced your retirement you have been blogging and posting more, hard to just drop it. I knew you still had the passion burning inside you. Keep it up, short and sweet is a good thing. Time to enjoy it now and not stress it. I think it is therapy for you to run this place.

    CROOOOOOOOOOOOZZZZZZ! I think the brass is doing the right thing and sending the right message to all the players on the roster and in the system. Good work should be rewarded with loyalty. Instead of assuming the the player will tank after playing well, the brass is going to take the glass is half full mentality and let a player show that he can do it again. Everyone (oops), many would rather go find a used up 3B (Rolen comes to mind) and give up players to obtain him, just to see if there is something left in the tank (usually the tank is beyond empty) instead of giving “their guy” a chance. What a awful way to run an organization, I can’t think of a more disloyal, low-class method to operate a club. If an organization wants to be a winner it has to have some class and operate like a winner by rewarding it’s producers.

    I have personally always (yes always) remained loyal, stood up for what is right and stood up to dumb ass bullies. It has served me well and would serve any organization well to follow those same benchmarks. With that in mind, GO DODGERS!, way to go management by giving Cruz his due, and everyone (oops), most of you have a great day!

  4. Ken says:

    We don’t need any people blogging in here who are masters at baiting.

    Cruz’s stats are eerily similar to Casey Blake’s. So far this spring he appears to be using both lines but NOT the middle of the field.

    Yes Alfredo is better than Uribe!

    Ryu in the bullpen for a few months so that Bills can start?

    Ben – Great story

    Puig is like Gordon was last year. He needs another year in the minors.

    The Indians need a more than one starting pitcher. Why not send 3 starters over there for Bourne? :)

  5. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Capuano, Harang, Billingsley. I don’t have a clue, except that it will probably all work itself out. I don’t take early spring training results seriously. It’s only the beginning of March. One or more of these guys will likely be traded at some point. When that is, I don’t know. I’m sure the Dodgers have a plan, and I’m sure they’re not going to signal us or anyone else what it is.

    Alfredo Amezaga? I liked him when he played for Florida. Haven’t seen him in a long time, but I suspect he’s a lot better alternative than Elian Herrera. However, with all the infielders the Dodgers have, and given that guys like Schumaker and Hairston can play the outfield, I’m not sure where Amezaga fits. But I’m not sitting here with a depth chart, so I’m not sure if he could fit on the 25-man, or just be depth at AAA.

    I have my doubts about Cruz (especially his OBP), but like roid I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Besides, if he doesn’t cut it at 3B there’s always Hanley. I liked the fact that Dee Gordon drew a couple of walks the other day. Maybe it’s a trend, maybe not. Maybe by the time we find out about Cruz (probably May or June), Gordon will have re-established himself, enabling Hanley to move to 3B. The possibilities are endless.

    Dodgers will probably send Puig out to begin the season, and consider bringing him back if he performs well. In the meantime it appears that Mattingly leaning towards a platoon of Schumaker and Hairston in left if Crawford can’t open the season.,0,4674835.story

    But I do concede that if Puig continues to impress that he might open the season in the Dodgers outfield. I believe he’s currently being paid on a big league contract, and that his clock has already started ticking. So there’s probably no financial reason for the Dodgers to delay his call-up to the 25-man. It’s possible if the Dodgers determine that he’s ready. But ST is young, so I wouldn’t jump to any conclusions at this juncture. The pitching will get tougher as the spring wears on, and even tougher when the season begins. I even wonder if the Dodgers would want him beginning his big league career against the Giants pitching staff to open the season.

  6. Bobbie17 says:

    Why can’t Spring Training help a guy bust onto a starting team? Are all the other guys that good? The days of pat positions should be over. It’s time to open this roster to new people if they deserve it. I don’t care what the finances are. If he’s better, he should play. No more prima donnas, please. Every job should be open. Our coaches are paid to know talent from pure potential. If they do not, they should be gone. If Puig performs in ST he should have the job and keep it until someone better comes along.

  7. Voldomer says:

    Puig as the opening day left fielder would be a great story, but is it best for his development? Also, are expectations for this team such that there would be little patience for a very talented but raw player to learn–and thus make MANY mistakes–on such a big stage?

    Honestly, though, it is too early to know how Puig might do. If he is still crushing the ball the last week of March, the decision might be more difficult.

    Puig’s salary would not be a factor with such an early call-up because he already has a major league contract, but wouldn’t it still affect his options?

  8. HemmorhoidRage says:

    Let me clarify, the dumb ass bullies I referred to was in connection with team management. If management let’s fans, media, prevailing opinion bully them into not giving a guy (like cruz) a chance to earn a position, then they should stand up to it. I mention that has a parallel to one of my personal motivations. So remove the wadded up undies Ken, don’t go looking for problems, please. I was told this wasn’t a thin-skinned group, for the most part I think it isn’t.

    • KEN says:

      Your responses consistently show that you have a very thin skin.

      Your constant baiting of others shows your basically uncivil personality.

      The problems are obvious in your posts but not your mind thus your inability to even have average issue recognition skills concerning your own posts and what they say.

  9. Badger says:

    I have no problem with opening the season with Puig in LF. It’s Donnie’s call and if he thinks Yazzie can handle it, who am I to question him? It would only be temporary and would give Puig a taste.

    Cruz is earning his spot. I still recommend plan B.

    Keep the excess pitching as long as possible. As the season draws near, desperation mounts.

    I remain confident.

  10. Leroy says:

    Keep up the blogs, big daddy.

  11. Quasimodo says:

    Hello Badger. Hey Mark. thanks for the heads-up on todays game on the web. Have it on right now.

  12. Mark_Timmons says:

    It\’s not quite MLB quality, but its good.

    … and free.

  13. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Here’s a good argument to resist the temptation to open the season with Puig.

    In the end, the decision will be made by the people who know best, i.e., those in Dodgers management.

    “The days of pat positions should be over…every job should be open.”

    B17, are saying that Matt Kemp, Adrian Gonzalez, Hanley Ramirez, Clayton Kershaw, etc., etc., etc., should not be assured of their jobs to begin the season? That’s what it sounds like. Exactly, might I ask, are you smoking?

    By your logic, if Skip Schumaker hits .400 this spring, and Matt Kemp hits .200, then Schumaker should open the season as our CF, and Kemp should either be benched or released. And if Pedro Baez has a great spring and Clayton Kershaw gets hit hard, then Baez should be our opening day starter, and Kershaw should be released.

    It all makes perfect sense to me.

  14. Badger says:

    Some positions are not open unless the player is injured. And that goes for left field. The job belongs to Carl Crawford, unless he can’t go. And who fills in is up to management. If Puig is still raking Major League starters in late March I have no compunction to let him start the season out there. Who knows, maybe Crawford gets Wally Pipped. Not likely but it could happen.

  15. HemmorhoidRage says:

    True all positions aren’t open to competition, for the reasoning that BD points out. I think the issue that bothers most of us is when a position isn’t granted on some of the past performance of a player. I can think of many instances, like Cruz currently, where us fans were frustrated that a player simple didn’t get a chance because a high-priced FA simply was given a position regardless of performance, in particular when time and time again the high-priced guy is proven to not have the skills required to “own” a position. In this instance, Uribe comes to mind. The high dollars paid makes an organization not want to give up on a player too soon and thus “throw their money away”. All in all, it’s a very tough call for any organization to make, but that’s why they get paid those big dollars, to make those tough calls.

    It is refreshing to see the Dodgers give Cruz a legitimate reward of allowing him to see if he is capable of owning the spot. Winning allows a team to wait and give a player a good look, losing forces a team to take a much shorter look at a player that is in question. Let’s all hope that winning gives the Dodgers plenty of time to sort out the Cruz-Dee-Hanley-Mark Ellis-Puig questions and not be forced into rash decisions.

  16. Bobby says:

    Speaking of Puig, did anyone see his HR today? A rocket shot to left center.

    Dude is exciting. I hope you rented, not bought, Andre, cuz you’ll be looking for a new home soon!! Any 3b out there that have a 2-3 year deal making a lot of money? That could be the trade bait for Puig until Saeger is ready?

    I love our future, kids!! Finances aside, as, the talent starts to come up, I think we’ll see our payroll drop to more normal levels ($175mil or so), and we’ll see some home grown studs coming up. The guys that deserve to be paid will be paid (Kemp, Kersh, etc)

  17. Pete M. says:

    Brooklyn – spot on…You’re Puig..You’re raking against a good percentage of NRI’s and AA pitchers…You’re the kid on the Titanic with your big breasted girlfriend and ‘On Top Of The World’…
    Welcome to Chavez Ravine and 50k + fans…starting LF…7 games in the spotlight…Cain, Bumgarner, Linecum, Vogelsong, Burnett, McDonald, Rodriguez…
    You can’t sleep now, appetite is gone… You need your Mom…
    Welcome to Bigs Son….

  18. Gonzo says:

    If Puig has a hot spring and CC is on the DL I’d let him start and hope he continues raking not to be wally pipped, but to hopefully build a package for one Giancarlo Stanton. Highly unlikely, but both are about the same age and Stanton is clearly unhappy.

    I know this horse has been beaten to death….TWICE, but again there is a 1 in 1,000,000 chance….. So like Lloyd in Dumb and Dumber said, THERE IS A CHANCE!!!

  19. Brooklyn Dodger says:


    Beat that horse to death. One in a million is waaaaaaay better than the odds of hitting the lottery. But if Miami was to consider that deal they’d probably do so even if Puig was raking in ALBQ or Chattanooga. And the fact that he’s Cuban can’t hurt in Miami.

    Maybe Puig will be the next Giancarlo Stanton. And maybe not. We’d have to part with other very good prospects to get that deal done, but I’d do it in a heartbeat. After all, Giancarlo Stanton is a young established big league star, whereas Puig has potential, and nothing more.

    With Stanton, Kemp and Ethier in our outfield, maybe Crawford could be an expensive 4th outfielder. Until Crawford shows he 100% healthy, I doubt if the Dodger would move Ethier. If the Dodgers paid a large part of his contract, maybe Crawford could be moved. The only thing I worry about, is that that deal will actually happen, Stanton will come to the Dodgers, slump in ST, and B17 will cut him because no jobs are guaranteed.

  20. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Could Cano become a Dodger next year?

    Seems as if Scott Boras is willing to wait until next years free agency period to get the Dodgers are involved in the bidding. I’d be shocked if Cano signs with the Yankees before this season is out, unless he gets a blockbuster offer that even Boras can’t ignore. But if Boras keeps to his usual script, I seriously doubt if Cano is signing without testing free agency next year.

  21. Badger says:

    Puig in a deal for Stanton does make sense on some levels – Stanton is from Southern California, Puig is from Cuba. But the fact is, Stanton isn’t a free agent until 2017. He is arb eligible in 2014, and he will be due a HUGE raise, so after this coming year he may be available. But now he is THE draw of that team. If Puig continues a fast track, that deal could be closer to fruition later this year, or even at the deadline if the Dodgers are willing to throw in some other top prospects. At this point, I am looking for Puig to become the Dodgers every day right fielder. And also, the trade proposal I read a while back makes more sense – Wil Myers and some other prospects for Stanton. Puig isn’t a top 10 prospect, and you know Miami is going to want one in any deal.

  22. KEN says:

    MLB had an interesting show a couple of weeks ago regarding star players who are missing more and more pitches over the last 3 years and whether that means that they will quickly have a reduction in their skills. Two of the players highlighted were Hamilton and Cano.

    It will be interesting to see whether or not this theory is correct and if these two players have a good or bad year in 2013.

    Hopefully the LAD can go with the old people platoon in LF for a month. However, if Puig starts the year with LAD that is really bad news for CC because that might mean that he is headed to the 60 day DL.

  23. Badger says:

    Cano is about to become one of the most overpaid players in the game. He will be 31 next year, and by today’s post steroid numbers, has maybe a couple good years left in him. Sure would be nice to put together, and keep together, teams on the right side of 30.

    Interesting thought Ken. As those two players age, the numbers they have put up will no doubt go down. According to an article on how players age, Bill James has this to say:

    The essay is most frequently referenced as a successful challenge the conventional wisdom that baseball players peak between 28 and 32, with James bluntly stating, “that one truism is blatantly false.” James used his “Value Approximation Method” (VAM) to measure player performance by aggregating individual VAM ratings of players by age. He found that the player-age of 27 had the highest total performance of any other age and concluded, “If you must assign a five-year peak period to all players regardless of description, the best shot would be 25 to 29.”

    If that is true, and I think it likely is, many of our guys have already seen their best years. Which is ok if they all can have “good” years. Clearly the model is to put together teams that are on the short side of 30 years old.

  24. HemmorhoidRage says:

    The barrage of PEDs totally gave the impression that a players best years were for players in there 30s. I am still of the opinion that with legal supplements as well as other PEDs, like testosterone to name one, that players will still have some very, very productive years well into their 30s. I wonder if Bill James took a historical view (like 50 years back) or took a more recent analysis (like just the last 15 years). Depending how far back he analyzed the productive years of MLB players could skew his results significantly. Besides PEDs, training methods and dietary tools have changed radically. Where once in time, players came to camp out of shape, players now show up in top shape (Andruw Jones a major departure). Players staying in shape year round has to contribute to a longer productive career. So I’m not sure if I buy into James’ conclusions without some more information from him. You got any more info on his article, Badge?

  25. Badger says:

    I read a book by Michener in the 70′s called “Sport in America” and he addressed this issue. He analyzed all sports and if I remember correctly he said baseball players peaked between 26 and 32, with their best years right in the middle of that range. (In a physiology class in college I learned that males start approaching senility at age 18). Training techniques today might expand that window a bit, but it seems obvious to me giving a player over the age of 30 a long term contract is very risky.

  26. Badger says:

    This is where I read that James’ info roid:

    I don’t know. Maybe. It’s his thing to analyze all the numbers. I would tend to agree with him. There are plenty of examples of guys who tore it up in their twenties, and didn’t in their early to mid 30′s. Raul Mondesi comes to mind. Then of course there is Alex Rodriguez.

  27. HemmorhoidRage says:

    Thanks for the link, I’ll give it a read.

    I tend to agree with you on age and performance, with some notable exceptions. I guess after 30 is when we see if a guy can use his experience to aid his game as his physical skills slip, Greg Maddox comes to mind as a prime example in recent times. The difference is often how willing an athlete is to work on his game as his natural abilities decline. Some phenoms do well as long as they don’t have to work to hard, then decline rapidly as extra work is required. Funny how the lesser physically skilled athletes tend to become the best coaches because they actually had to learn and work at the game more than the phenom did.

  28. Quasimodo says:

    Badger, I’ve read most books written by Michener, but that is one I haven’t. Seems like one to put on the ‘must list’, though its been at least 10 years since I’ve closed the final page of a book. Its a good guess it likely provides more than a thumbnail education on baseballs history. I’m also certain he didn’t leave out the notable exceptions that broke age performance reg. He was buddies with ‘Stan The Man’ after all. Wow, 10 years? Guess its time to read a book again.

    • Badger says:

      Michener does research like nobody else I ever read. He was also a real sports fan, so even though that book was not like any of his others, it was researched as deeply. Good read.

  29. jerry says:

    most of you think that every one on this team has to be perfect, a member who try.s and give it every thing he has me is better then the allstar that think he can do any thing he wants.i dont care how much you pay them ..i would sit them in a handley.. you do what the mangament wants or you sit…

  30. Quasimodo says:

    I don’t think any of us expects perfection. If that was true, would we be loyal Dodger fans?

  31. Badger says:

    I don’t expect guys like Crawford and AGon to do what they did when they were 28-29, but they are not that old. I would hope they have 2-3 very good years left in them. If a player takes care of himself, he can be productive to past 35. We just won’t likely see 40 home runs, or OPS+’s of 135 out of these guys anymore. 25 guys pulling on the same end of the rope is the goal.

  32. HemmorhoidRage says:

    Great article, Badge, it addressed some of my thoughts on the subject that I gained from gut feeling rather than statistical analysis. Since he began his sampling beginning in 1921, that may really skew his info. Most would agree that the PED era began in earnest in the 1980s, thus he uses about 60 years of pre-PEDs statistics and only about 30 years of post-PED statistics for his analysis, not to mention just advancements in training and nutrition methods that could skew his analysis. With this in mind, I am prone to think that the very productive years for a “good player” in today’s game might be age 27 – 33 maybe 34 years of age. Rather than look just at a pick age (single year of age) I think it is more helpful, when deciding how long you sign a top player, that you look at a range of years, like I mentioned like 27 to 34. Now I am not arguing with you, just discussing the idea of the prudence of clubs signing long-range contracts for players over 30. Like the article mentioned, many things fit into the picture of a players performance, skills – experience – work ethic – blue collar type competitor – etc. Obviously, the older a guy gets, the more potential risks exist when signing him to a long-range, high priced contract. I guess, like all things in life, it’s a crap shoot with no guarantees when any player is signed, I’m reminded of DeShields signing, he wasn’t that old when he came to the Dodgers (I don’t think) and yet he was a total bust. Also reminded of Roger Clemens being allowed to walk from Boston, the REd Sox thought he was thru and not worth the money and look what he did in Toronto, New York and Houston (yes, with the aide of science) So you really never know and I reckon that’s what gives the fans something to talk about.

    Again good article and definitely something to be considered. One more thing on that subject. I never have liked pitchers being signed to long-range contracts after they hit 30, that typically always ends up being a bust time and time again. I have more confidence in signing the position player to long-range contracts after the age of 30.

  33. Badger says:

    Agree with all of that roid. The bottom line for me is production, not money. If you are going to have a player over 33 years of age he should be a designated role player. The numbers are clear – if you sign a player over 30 to a long term contract, you are risking owning him, and paying him star money, when he is past his prime.

    With that in mind, and with my GM hat on, I don’t go after Cano, I go after Stanton. Find and develop players on the right side of 30. It’s my opinion THAT is the long term model for success.

  34. The Truth Hurts says:

    *que new thread Mark ;)

  35. AnewBlueDay says:

    Oh, just let it go to 99 posts, so we can remember Manny.

  36. AnewBlueDay says:

    Just saw this:

    Watch out ESPN.

    Fox is set to unveil a national cable sports network during a press conference on Tuesday, according to Richard Sandomir and Amy Chozick of The New York Times. Dubbed Fox Sports 1, the network will reportedly begin broadcasting in August 2013 and feature MLB, college football, NASCAR, soccer and UFC.

  37. KEN says:

    Nice to see former LAD Kuo pitching in the WBC this morning.

    Time to begin watching some pitchers throwing some breaking balls in the dry air of the Cactus League.

  38. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    I agree Badger. Getting players on the right side of 30 is imperative. I’m not convinced the Dodgers should go after Cano if he’s available. Maybe by that time they will have figured out 2B.

    Also, in spite of what we may think, in the long term, even the Dodgers may have to be careful about taking on too many star caliber contracts. Even in the case of Stanton, they may decide to exercise some fiscal restraint. If they’re reasonably sure that Puig will become a star pretty soon, they might consider it feasible, and cost effective to hang onto him rather than pursue a young star like Stanton, whose established credentials far outweigh Puig’s potential. Stanton is poised to begin making considerably more money than Puig, who I believe, still has at least five years left on the six year deal he signed last year.

    Of course, if the Dodgers decide to pursue Stanton, I have no problem with it. And if he could be acquired without including Puig (probably unlikely), I’d be a happy camper. Let’s see, an outfield of Kemp, Puig and Stanton sounds pretty good to me. What happens to Ethier/Crawford is anyone’s guess.

    Don’t take any of the above seriously. Just the irrational musings of someone taking a break from the real work of the world.

    All that being said, the Dodgers know their finances and needs a lot better than I do.

  39. Badger says:

    Not irrational at all Brooklyn. I found it well thought out.

    If Crawford can play, our outfield looks as good as anyone’s. If he can’t, then the team will address it. If we go after Stanton, I would think Puig would have to be part of the deal. It looks to me like he is currently the only prospect we have with A potential and possibly a top 10 talent. You can bet if Stanton does become available, those teams with top 10 talent, the dbacks being one of them, will be in the hunt. It’s my opinion, this early in the game, an outfield of Puig Kemp and Stanton is not likely.

    And we always have Ethier to bring up in the trade talks. He’s 31 in May, and could be a DH candidate by the end of his current contract. Who knows, maybe 18 and 17.5 million won’t be that much for a good hitter in 2017-’18. The way things are going, it could be an easy contract to move.

  40. AnewBlueDay says:

    Dodgers on MLB TV Network. Uribe just hit a double.

    Kershaw was hit all over the park in the first inning. Spring Training . . .

  41. HemmorhoidRage says:

    I would hate to lose Puig, I have not seen him play but he sounds like a monsta in waiting. He goes we probably kick ourselves in a few years as he tears it up for someone else.

    With that in mind, I hope we don’t make any moves in the outfield and go with what we have already, even if that means a platoon in LF (If CC is DOA for the season), Hairston and maybe this is where they give Dee Gordon some time to work his way into the batting order by playing some OF, God knows he has the speed for the OF. If he could figure it out adequately, I don’t see too many balls dropping in with an OF of Gordon, Kemp and Ethier. Wow can you imagine that, IF Gordon can catch on quick enough, plus his poor accuracy as a thrower in the IF would be somewhat negated as an OF, if he can play short he most likely has the arm strength for LF.

  42. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    And chances are that Gordon’s infield throwing problems could be remedied by a move to 2B, which appears to be a position in need of an upgrade, and one with no readily apparent long term solution. Yes, the Dodgers could bid on Cano next year, but maybe those dollars could be earmarked for other needs (and there always are other needs). As valuable as his range is at short, so too is it at 2B. And he could utilize his strong arm (probably inherited from his pitcher father), on balls hit up the middle, and to get the ball to first base quicker on 5-4-3 and 6-4-3 double plays.

    Might be that the best place for Gordon to begin the season is at ALBQ, playing 2B. Unless he starts for the Dodgers, I doubt if they would keep him around on the bench. He needs to be playing everyday.

  43. Badger says:

    While I agree that Gordon would make a great second baseman, anyway he could find his way into the lineup is fine with me.

    Sure wish Kobe had more help. That is one shallow Laker team. Not getting their money’s worth, that’s for sure. Gasol and Hill would make an enormous difference, but, not to be.


    Gordon leading team in BB. That is a very good sign.

    Uribe at .231. Got to give him credit for consistency. No way he is ever going to hit higher than that. More like .191, again.

    Is Tolleson ok?

    Kemp at .000 and Kershaw with an ERA of 9. Who cares.


Leave a Reply

Mandatory Daily Dodger Reading