<$BlogRSDURL$>
Proceeds from the ads below will be donated to the Bob Wuesthoff scholarship fund.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Schadenfreude? Really?

With regards to this, I note in passing that the Dodgers' opening day rotation is
  1. Hiroki Kuroda
  2. Randy Wolf
  3. Chad Billingsley
  4. Clayton Kershaw
  5. James McDonald
So let's review: in order, we have
  1. a Japanese import who spent quite a good bit of time in 2008 fighting inconsistency
  2. a pitcher with a sizeable injury risk who failed to pitch a single inning in the second half for the Dodgers in his last stint (though in fairness, he actually pitched better with the Astros in the second half of 2008 than he did with the Padres)
  3. a pair of young pitchers who could find themselves going the wrong way at any moment
  4. a young starter who has never pitched 150 innings at any level in one year
You fight with the army you have — I get that. But at least the Angels have the starting rotation depth to be good some time in May. The Dodgers don't even have that.

Labels: ,


Comments:
Wolf started 18 games and had 102 IP w/ a 97 ERA+ in his first stint w/ the Dodgers.
 
I meant to say, "in the second half". Fixed.
 
I never argued that the Dodger rotation would be better than the Angels at midseason.

That being said, how can you say the Dodger rotation couldn't be good in May? I hear all the worst-case scenarios ... do we get any alternative scenarios?
 
You fight with the army you have, but don't you also dance with the girl you brought?
 
Okay, Jon, what's the argument for Dodger rotation adequacy? I certainly don't see it, and I don't see depth, either.

Orel -- I'm looking hard for a simile -- maybe "Ugly Betty"?
 
Chad Billingsley - ace
Hiroki Kuroda - 114 ERA+ in 2008
Clayton Kershaw - um, he might be good.
Randy Wolf - Houston 2008
James McDonald - easily as adequate as the Angel minor leaguers who need to step up in 2009.

Those are not pie-in-the-sky scenarios.
 
Individually, yes. Collectively, no. It's like betting you're gonna roll sevens four out of five times. Sure, seven is the most likely roll on a pair of dice, but the odds are stacked heavily against you even on a single roll (only a 1-in-6 shot). That's overstating things a bit, but the Dodgers need a lot of things to go right.
 

Post a Comment



Newer›  ‹Older
This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
Google

WWW 6-4-2