Problem here is he isn't ready. Can't be throwing guys into the fire when we're trying to win championships. My hope is Hanley accepts a three or four year deal where he isn't getting paid twenty a year. But that's just hope.
Hanley is getting paid either by us or someone else. We need to extend that QO, play him at 3rd and hope the Skanks don't give him what he's looking for. Signing him long term is not in this teams best interest. Random idea just came to mind. And if it works we are golden. 1) QO to Hanley 2) He declines and signs with someone else 3) Trade Ethier for Beltre
the problem is what we're trying isn't working says a lot that we had to routinely take hanley out of games in the latter innings for a defensive replacement how valuable is hanley when he's essentially a 7-inning player? and how do we know seager's not ready? admittedly, some of you guys are more in tune with the minor leagues than i am but everything i've heard about him is that he's the real deal imo someone else will almost surely offer hanley 3-4 years for what he's looking for, qualifying offer or not seager + bullpen help and/or another top starter >>> hanley + garbage (read; ned) additions
I would love to have Beltre back, but I don't see it unless the Rangers think all the injuries that ruined them this year happen again.
2B-Dee CF-Puig 1b-Gonzales RF-Kemp 3B-Beltre LF-Crawford SS-Arrubarrena C-Ellis Bench SVS Uribe Turner Pederson Kfed
They are going to need an OFer once Rios bolts and Ethier would rake in Texas plus Beltre is getting long in the tooth. I think it can work. Maybe we even throw in Guerrero for a bp arm
how do you figure? they're in line to win three titles in five years whereas we haven't been to a world series in nearly 30 years whatever they're doing is working while what we're doing is not
disturbing stat... our top three rbi leaders this postseason (agon, hanley and kemp) had 7 total rbi's matt carpenter had 7 by himself
Luck? The just beat arguably the best team in the NL with Peavy, Hudson, and Vogelsong. The only game they lost was started by Bumgarner. Just because it hasn't worked out for the Dodgers doesn't mean they're a better team. However, if you want to say "more successful" team the last 5 years or so, I concur. We'd wax their asses though, I know it.
we're gonna disagree on this one bubba once could be luck, twice not so much, and a third... we're talking a dynasty we might be better position by position (except catcher, 3b and pen) but it's how well they play together, and not just the sum of the parts in 1988 we beat both the mets and the a's, both who were much more talented but we were the better "team"
Biggest difference between us and the Giants is they don't psych themselves out. They can be beat, no doubt, but they rarely have wasted at bats. They're a group of guys who have game plans when they step up to the plate. We have a bunch of free swingers like Uribe, Puig who is a hot head and Dee, who while he has certainly gotten better, can still put together a poor at bat. Don't know what it'll take, but they need to hammer it into these guys that they need to play smarter. I don't believe in the whole chemistry thing. In the game of baseball, I don't think it exists. Basketball, hockey and football, where guys need to be on the same page to make their game work because of routes and positioning, yeah, but in baseball, I don't think it's there. We lose because we beat ourselves. We try to play the hero. I think that's why AJ did so good in the playoffs. He's always been able to work counts. He went up there with a game plan. Sometimes it works, other times, it doesn't. But it's better that to just hack and hope you hit it out the yard.
I do think their management of the team plays a big role in their success, but overall the Dodgers are better. I'm not a believer that the team who wins the World Series is the best team necessarily. Baseball is the one sport where you get to the playoffs and anything can happen. Any team/player can have a good/bad series. The Cardinals offense is nowhere as good as that series indicated. The Dodgers didn't step up, pretty cut and dry there.
I disagree on the part where the Dodger hitters don't have a game plan. Just look at games 1 and 2. They executed a plan against Wainwright and made Lynn work (who had some sick stuff). Puig and Uribe can get themselves out in time, but I believe Puig's BB rate was one of (if not the highest) the highest rates on the team this year. I don't really have anything to back this up other than just watching the games, but it seems like the Dodgers don't capitalize on mistakes at the plate. You see it a lot where Kemp, Hanley, etc got meatball pitches and fouled them straight back.
agreed although chemistry can be interpreted in different maybe its the wrong word players don't have to like each other but they have to play well together... collectively, as a single unit define better more talented, sure but a better team? like the term chemistry, depends on your interpretaion
