Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 104
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    107
    vCash
    1500

    What is the problem?

    Joc Pederson is tearing the PCL apart .340 15hr 35rbi 13 sb. What the damn deal with this team not willing to give this kid a chance? Its not like any of the OF aside from Puig are providing any consistency that would make Joc taking over a spot seem like a regression in the outfield. Dodgers have talent but they just dont fit together. They dont compliment eachother. The middle of this lineup should be killing pitching. But theyre hovering around .250. They need t move some of these guys to make way for younger players.

    By the end of the yr i would love to see

    1B Adrian Gonzalez
    2B Dee Gordon
    SS Hanley Ramirez
    3B Alex Guerrero
    RF Yasiel Puig
    CF Joc Pederson
    LF Andre Ethier
    C Aj Ellis

    Trade Kemp, its time. He's not going to be what he was. But he still has some value. Dodgers would have to eat some of his contract but this ownership isnt short on cash, they can handle it clearly. An insurgence of youth is needed. These vets in the OF to injury prone to be depended on. Either IMO out of Kemp/Crawford/Either gives out the most consistency. Crawford nobody is going to take his deal so they are probably stuck with him and he provides alot as a 4th outfielder.

    Add in Guerrero when he gets healthy which shouldnt be too much longer. Let him platoon with Uribe and Ramirez.

    But the final word is these "stars" currently on the team just dont fit.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,417
    vCash
    1500
    The problem is chemistry due to many reasons such as the overcrowded OF and the Hanley contract talks. I say get the Hanley contract done or trade him asap. Also trade BOTH Crawford and Ethier for whatever i could care less for what's it for. Then bring up Pederson, if Hanley gets traded put Gordon or Guerrero at SS and the other at 2B. Our pitching is too good to be wasted on an offense with lots of intangible issues.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    107
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by numba1CHANGsta View Post
    The problem is chemistry due to many reasons such as the overcrowded OF and the Hanley contract talks. I say get the Hanley contract done or trade him asap. Also trade BOTH Crawford and Ethier for whatever i could care less for what's it for. Then bring up Pederson, if Hanley gets traded put Gordon or Guerrero at SS and the other at 2B. Our pitching is too good to be wasted on an offense with lots of intangible issues.
    I think the only they could trade right now is Kemp. Neither or them is playing up to par but Kemp is the youngest and could probably still recover to be a pretty good #5 hitter.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    san josYAY
    Posts
    10,955
    vCash
    1500
    I think Chemistry is totally over rated. The biggest problem was having Maholm pitch twice against the giants, and losing a lot of these players for extended periods. The only way Pederson comes up is if Puig is really hurt and has to miss time.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    242
    vCash
    1500
    Nobody is gonna want Kemp, I don't know if you've realized but he's nothing more than a vLHP LF, he's garbage but he's also not going anywhere.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,518
    vCash
    1500
    Time to do something. Keep piug and all others in outfield are expendable. Will have to eat some money,but we are buying hay for dead horses . Time to look at all options

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    san francisco
    Posts
    15,846
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ciaban View Post
    I think Chemistry is totally over rated. The biggest problem was having Maholm pitch twice against the giants, and losing a lot of these players for extended periods. The only way Pederson comes up is if Puig is really hurt and has to miss time.
    He pitched 3 times and he threw 2 QS. He wasn't the problem, the Dodgers offense was. They scored 1,1, and 2 runs in 3 of those games. I don't see why you blame Maholm when we are pitching Lincecum every 5th day who has been arguably worse.


    THE BEST DH IN SF GIANTS HISTORY!

    2010 and 2012 World Series Champs !

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    san josYAY
    Posts
    10,955
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by sf-fanatic View Post
    He pitched 3 times and he threw 2 QS. He wasn't the problem, the Dodgers offense was. They scored 1,1, and 2 runs in 3 of those games. I don't see why you blame Maholm when we are pitching Lincecum every 5th day who has been arguably worse.
    I was just kidding about that, and Maholm has been statistically the worst pitcher in baseball, and least while he was starting.
    And he had one Quality start, one awful start, and one start in between, 5.2 and 3rus is not a quality start. In fact, he allowed 7 base runners (3h, 4bb) in that time and only struck out two. If we can be objective about that game, the giants maybe should have scored more runs.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    929
    vCash
    500
    Ellis is out, Crawford is out, and Uribe is out, that's got to be part of it.

    Now Dee and Puig are hobbled.

    Should the Dodgers be 9.5 back?

    No, but realistically we'd only be another 4-5 games better with those guys.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    5,090
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Artful Dodger View Post
    Ellis is out, Crawford is out, and Uribe is out, that's got to be part of it.

    Now Dee and Puig are hobbled.

    Should the Dodgers be 9.5 back?

    No, but realistically we'd only be another 4-5 games better with those guys.
    I don't think we'd even be that much better. Maybe 1 or 2 games better... just as likely 1 or 2 games worse.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    929
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by handle View Post
    I don't think we'd even be that much better. Maybe 1 or 2 games better... just as likely 1 or 2 games worse.

    I can't believe we'd be worse. Crawford was raking, Uribe is better than Turner et al.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,825
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Artful Dodger View Post
    Uribe is better than Turner et al.
    Turner since Uribe went on the DL
    .314/.364/.549
    *http://www.fangraphs.com/statsd.aspx...-06-07&season=

    Turner with 3.3 Runs above reclacement in the last 2 weeks and 7.1 runs in the last 30 days.
    *http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.asp...=&players=5235

    Uribe, while being better than Turner, is unlikely to have performed better than Turner has over that time.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    929
    vCash
    500
    I don't buy the 2nd stat over 2 weeks, or over 30 days either.

    Also if Turner can hit those numbers so could Uribe and more.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    6,825
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Artful Dodger View Post
    I don't buy the 2nd stat over 2 weeks, or over 30 days either.
    You don't have to buy it
    It's free


    Also if Turner can hit those numbers so could Uribe and more.
    Or he could not reach them - which is the most likely outcome over any stretch of games for Uribe.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    929
    vCash
    500
    No wonder it's free seeing as it's BS.


    Or he could easily reach them and surpass them considering Turner did and he's a career backup and a career .260 hitter, whereas Uribe is a career .300 hitter.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •