Nationals 4, Dodgers 3
A long day of baseball is finally over, but not before Clayton Kershaw came over from minor-league camp for his first taste of a major-league game ever. His inning was far from perfect, but it was in every way impressive. He started by giving up a towering home run to the first batter he faced, Luis Jimenez, then after striking out Felipe Lopez looking, Kershaw gave up a single to Ronnie Belliard and a double to Elijah Dukes before hitting Alex Escobar to load the bases with one out. Kershaw, who will turn 20 in about two weeks, then showed the poise of a big-league veteran, striking out Kory Casto and Humberto Cota in succession to leave the bases loaded. He froze Cota on a nasty breaking ball. Welcome to the big leagues, Clayton Kershaw.
``He has a (heck) of a curveball,'' Joe Torre said. ``He has a really good changeup, too, but he didn't get it down (to Jimenez). After the home run, he just sort of smiled. It was like, welcome to the big leagues. It's wonderful to see that kind of enthusiasm.''
Andy LaRoche went 2 for 4 with a HR and now is hitting .385 for the spring. Greg Miller struggled again, walking his first batter on four pitches, but he then got a GIDP from Chad Moeller (remember him?) and got Frank Diaz to fly to left. It was encouraging, but in the words of Torre, he still has a long way to go.
Finally, Torre decided to swap bullpens for what is believed to be the first time in the 60-year history of Holman Stadium. The Dodgers pitchers warmed up in the rightfield corner, just off the visiting clubhouse, while the Nats pitchers had to use the pen down the LF line. Joe said it was simply because he asks ALL of his pitchers to stay at least five innings, and he didn't want this mass exodus of pitchers walking across the field after the fifth inning.
With the split, the Dodgers go to 2-4-1 for the spring. At the Mets tomorrow.
Tony Jackson has covered the Dodgers for the Daily News since 2004 and has covered Major League Baseball on a regular basis since 1995. He previously covered the Colorado Rockies and Cincinnati Reds. He is a native of Springdale, Ark., and a graduate of the University of Arkansas.
Comments
From TJ's rebuttal in the last post.
"And if the rest of the lineup does what it is supposed to do (JP did what he was supposed to do last season, putting up the same numbers he always does), he WILL be a huge weapon in this lineup."
So, if the rest of the lineup makes up for Pierre's deficiencies, then everything will be okay? The numbers that Pierre put up last year are not better, nor do they help the team more than Andre Ethier.
Matt Kemp should be a given for the RF spot, which basically leaves this as a Pierre vs Ethier debate. Now, for the betterment of the team, not looking at player salaries, how is it even possible that Juan Pierre contributes more to winning baseball games than Andre Ethier.
Looking at any of the advance metrics that include all offensive capability (EQA, VORP, runs created, etc), none of them show Pierre to be a greater contributer than Andre Ethier.
Looking at traditional stats...
Pierre edges Ethier in batting average by a minuscule 6 points (.301 to .295). but..
OBP? Ethier
SLG? Ethier
Defensively, Pierre's most valuable asset is his speed. Putting him in a corner position negates his most valuable quality as a defensive player. When compared to Ethier, his arm is still atrocious and his jumps are marginal.
In essence, this comes down to Juan Pierre and his most valuable asset as a baseball player, his speed. Offensively, do his 50 or so stolen bases make his offensive contribution more valuable than Ethier? You are probably saying yes; this is where the disagreement takes place. Juan Pierre does not get on base enough to utilize his best asset. Juan Pierre's best asset is not what this team -a team that is desperate for extra power- needs currently.
Furcal can run. Kemp can run. Hell, even Martin can run. Speed wise, we are fine. Doubles, triples, homeruns are needed more than drag bunt singles or groundballs through the 8 hole.
Posted by: npurcell
|
March 4, 2008 9:48 PM
Meanwhile the Red Sox put the slow white guys with the .390 OBP's in the 1&2 holes and enjoy annual ticker tape parades. What a concept.
Posted by: bigcpa | March 4, 2008 11:00 PM
Tony,
It's very big of you to say that you will admit that you are wrong, if you should prove to be wrong. But, as with so many arguments, the disagreement is a matter of differing premises. You will admit you're wrong if Pierre doesn't do what? Hit .290 with 40+ stolen bases? Lead the team in ABs?
If you were to start Ethier and have him lead off, he would lead the team in plate appearances, but he would get on base far more than Pierre. He would hit for far more total bases than Pierre. Even if you were to add in Pierre's stolen bases as if they were extra base hits (as so many love to do, while discounting the times he is thrown out), Ehtier's total bases would probably still be higher, without all the extra outs on the basepaths. He would also certainly play much better defense than Pierre.
What is Pierre's special skill set that makes him more valuable than Ethier? He tries harder than Andre? Well, then Mr. Ethier is better than Mr. Pierre without the effort. We all love a guy who tries. But where would we be if we rewarded effort over merit? If someone gave me a major league contract, I promise I would try harder than Andruw Jones to succeed, but I have a feeling I wouldn't be started over him.
Please, Tony, please tell us what it is that makes you think that Juan Pierre is a better player than Andre Ethier.
Greg
Posted by: gpellamjr
|
March 5, 2008 5:25 AM
Greg, I never said Juan Pierre was a better player than Andre Ethier. I said he was a better fit for the Dodgers lineup than Andre Ethier, an opinion both Ned Colletti and Joe Torre seem to share. And yes, Ned was the guy who signed him, but Joe wasn't. And no matter how much everyone keeps beating this same drum on this and every other Dodgers-related blog, I don't think it's going to change the opinion of either one of those guys. As for bigcpa's point, the Marlins also had some ticker tape a few years ago with Juan Pierre and Luis Castillo at the top.
Posted by: tony jackson | March 5, 2008 6:33 AM
To clarify, I don't think winning a WS automatically enhances the value of players on a team's roster (notably the 83 win '06 Cardinals). I only brought up the Red Sox as a smartass counterpoint to the argument that "speed is essential at the top of a lineup." World Series or no, the last 5 years suggest the Red Sox know plenty more about optimal lineup construction than the Dodgers.
Posted by: bigcpa | March 5, 2008 10:12 AM