2010 January « Mike Scioscia's tragic illness

Is Reed Johnson Your New Backup Outfielder?

January 31, 2010 at 3:13 pm | Posted in Blake DeWitt, Doug Mientkiewicz, Reed Johnson | 7 Comments

Lots of activity on the rumor front today regarding free agent outfielder, Reed Johnson, with Ken Rosenthal first tweeting that the Dodgers are “close” and then adding that the deal may actually be already done. We’ve been talking a lot about backup outfielders around here lately, and you may have noticed that Johnson’s name didn’t come up in my post about available players earlier this week. That’d be because Johnson is a righty hitter, which goes against everything we’d been hearing that the Dodgers were looking for a lefty bat. That could have big repercussions on the rest of the roster, but more on that in a second.

Johnson is a 33-year-old native of Riverside who’s spent the last seven seasons in the bigs with the Blue Jays (five) and the Cubs (two). He’s got a reputation as having some speed, though he’s stolen just 35 bases in his career. Johnson had a career year as Toronto’s everyday left fielder in 2006 (.319/.390/.479) followed by a brutal year in 2007 (.236/.305/.320), which led to his release by Toronto and two average-ish years in Chicago as a 4th outfielder (mainly in center) and defensive replacement.

For his career, Johnson has a .282/.344/.411 line, for a 95 OPS+. Despite being a guy with a reputation as a quality defender, UZR has him as below average in both center and right, though above average in left.

I’m somewhat unimpressed with Johnson on the whole, especially coming off a broken foot which ruined his 2009. That said, the Dodger outfield has two big needs. First, they need someone who can be a plus defender in left to spot for Manny, which Johnson clearly can. Second, though few people want to admit it, they need someone who can replace Andre Ethier against lefties, because Ethier is useless against fellow southpaws. Johnson fits that role perfectly – for this career, he’s lousy against righties (.707 OPS), but is just fine against lefties (.841 OPS). That split was even more pronounced in 2009. If you’ve got lefty-killers Manny and Kemp, and replace Ethier with Johnson, that’s an outfield lefties should be terrified of.

So assuming that the money isn’t big and the term is just one year, I’m okay with this idea. Sure, I’d like to see Xavier Paul just like the rest of you, but I understand that he might need playing time in the minors more than anything after how much time he missed in 2009 due to injuries.

The real question is, what does this do to the rest of the bench? Sure, it’s possible that a 5th outfielder like Paul or Jason Repko could be kept, but with Jamey Carroll and Casey Blake each having past outfield experience in a pinch, I find that unlikely. In particular for Repko, this seems to be a death blow, since Johnson does everything Repko does, and does it a little better. No, the real impact of Reed Johnson (should this signing actually occur, of course), is probably going to be felt by Blake DeWitt and Doug Mientkiewicz.

Going with Johnson rather than a lefty bat means the Dodger bench is likely to be extremely righty-heavy, as Johnson, Brad Ausmus, Carroll, and Ronnie Belliard all bat from that side. Assuming that Paul is unlikely to break camp with the team, the Dodgers will need at least one lefty bat, but much of this depends on DeWitt. If he breaks camp as the starting second baseman, then Mientkiewicz would seem to have the edge on the fifth and final bench role – however, that would then mean that the Dodgers are comfortable with Carroll and/or DeWitt as the backup shortstops. If DeWitt doesn’t win the job, he’s likely to go back to AAA rather than ride the bench. That would allow the Dodgers room to carry both Mientkiewicz and a backup shortstop like Nick Green or Chin-Lung Hu, but it would also sentence them to a Belliard/Carroll situation at second base.

Either way, it should be interesting to see how the bench shakes out. And due to his outstanding splits against lefties to spell Ethier, I’d be fine with seeing Johnson added to it.

A Preemptive Strike

January 29, 2010 at 4:04 pm | Posted in Garret Anderson | 11 Comments

Remember the other day, when I went through some options the Dodgers might be interested in for the role of lefty outfielder off the bench? One name I didn’t mention was the corpse of Garrett Anderson, because, well, why would I? I didn’t mention Marlon Anderson either, but he’s out there too.

I’d hoped to ignore that Garrett even exists, but both Yahoo’s Tim Brown and SI’s Jon Heyman are tweeting that the Dodgers are showing interest in him for a bench role. No one should be surprised that I think this is ridiculous, but it’s not for the reasons you think.

Well, not only the reasons you think. Yes, I don’t like him because he’s old (38 in June). Yes, I don’t like him because he’s coming off the worst year of his career despite having just moved to the easier league (.705 OPS, the third year in a row that decreased). Yes, I don’t like him because he is by all accounts a horrible fielder (-16.5 UZR/150 last year). Hey, a senior citizen who can’t hit or field? Sign me up?!

But what I like even less than the fact that Garrett Anderson is a terrible baseball player is the idea of Garrett Anderson. Let’s say he was where he was three or four years ago, when he was past his peak but still an average-ish hitter. That’s still valuable, but you’re not playing that guy over Manny, Kemp or Ethier, right? Nor was his glove so good that he’s really a huge upgrade over Manny in the late innings, agreed? And since he’s not much of a LF, you’re sure not going to put him into center or right to rest those guys either.

Because of the way the Dodger outfield is built, what you need more than anything is a speed type who can get on base and play above-average defense at all three positions. Juan Pierre wasn’t that guy because of his arm, and if Garrett Anderson from 2005 couldn’t be that guy, then Garrett Anderson of 2010 (the one who is well past his expiration date) sure as hell isn’t either.

Now, these are just rumors, so let’s not bash the team just yet. It’s just that bringing in a guy who doesn’t fit the needs at all, rather than giving a younger player like Xavier Paul or Jason Repko a chance, or even bringing in a young vet like Gabe Gross, makes no sense whatsoever.

Clearly, I don’t think this is going to happen, so don’t lose any sleep over it. I just want it out there in case it does. You never thought you’d hear me say this, but (since Heyman reported that the Dodgers and Angels could be in play), let’s go Angels!

You Can Never Have Too Many Guys Named “Timo”

January 28, 2010 at 11:02 am | Posted in John Koronka, Timo Perez | 11 Comments

Ken Gurnick tweets that the Dodgers have signed two more veterans to nonroster contracts with invites to camp: outfielder Timo Perez and pitcher John Koronka.

You’ll get no complaint from me on these non-guaranteed contracts to guys who are likely to be AAA fodder at best; usually I wouldn’t even bother to mention them. (Though as Jay Jaffe correctly points out, they’re likely useful only as organ donors.) For the sake of completion and to help pass the long, dark winter, here’s who these guys are…

Timo Perez. 35 in April, a lefty outfielder who once got some regular playing time for the Mets in the early part of the decade. He hasn’t played in the big leagues since 2007 with the Tigers, and he’s got a career line of .269/.308/.382. He wasn’t even in any team’s system last year, putting up good numbers for Veracruz in the Mexican League. However, what’s most intriguing about him is the sponsorship his baseball-reference page has:

The 2000 WS Met OF is a testament to how great a manager Bobby Valentine was. He got the Mets to a World Series with this man as his leadoff hitter. Timo Perez’s non-hustle in game 1 set the tone for a 00′s decade of futility. Why Timo, why?

Look at that – I found something interesting to say about Timo Perez. Who knew?

John Koronka. He’ll turn 30 this year, he’s a lefty, and holy hell am I having a hard time saying anything nice about him. In parts of 4 seasons with 3 teams, he’s got a career 6.25 ERA. The only time he really had an extended stint in the bigs was in 2006 with Texas, when he started 23 games, but put up a 5.69 ERA and a 1.536 WHIP. Both marks are the best season marks of his career. He doesn’t strike people out (4.4 K/9) and he doesn’t avoid walks (3.8 BB/9).

It’s not like he’s found more success in the minors, either. A career 4.41 ERA isn’t great, and his 2009 was brutal – in 30 games (23 starts) for Florida’s AAA team, he was 4-10 with a 4.83 ERA and 1.570 WHIP, allowing more than a homer per game.

Man, he sounds unqualified to even try out for the Isotopes. How is he worth the time, exactly?

So Who’s Next?

January 26, 2010 at 7:11 pm | Posted in Alfredo Amezaga, Endy Chavez, Gabe Gross, Randy Winn | 14 Comments

Nearly lost in all of the excitement over today’s confounding signing of Ronnie Belliard (though Dylan Hernandez says it isn’t guaranteed) and somewhat disappointing signing of Brad Ausmus was this tweet from Ken Gurnick:

The Dodgers are still looking to add a left-handed hitting outfielder to the bench.

You can read a lot into this. Most likely, it means that Blake DeWitt just earned himself a trip back to AAA, because having Ronnie Belliard and Jamey Carroll on the bench makes no sense, so if that forces DeWitt down to the minors then the Dodgers don’t have a lefty bat off the bench. It could also mean that Jason Repko and Xavier Paul have almost no shot at making the roster, since it’s likely the Dodgers carry just one backup outfielder.

But what I’m mostly interested in right now is, who? Let’s assume that we’re talking about free agents, since teams are unlikely to want to dump a power-hitting lefty outfielder, and the Dodgers probably wouldn’t want to trade for one anyway.

TrueBlueLA (jokingly, I hope and assume) offers up the names of the corpses of Garrett Anderson and Jim Edmonds, who is choosing between two unnamed teams. Otherwise, looking at the list of available outfielders… let’s just say, it’s not pretty. The most prominent lefty outfielder still available is Johnny Damon, who’s certainly not going to accept a pure backup role or the limited funds the Dodgers have left. Other viable lefty options include…

Randy Winn. Winn’s actually a switch-hitter, which is nice. He’s also an original Devil Ray (!) who’s 35 and coming off his worst season in a decade (.671 OPS), which is much less nice. Still, he’s a pretty fantastic outfielder (20.1 and 16.6 in UZR/150 the last two years) and he’s been a solid hitter for years, before his 2009 downturn. I actually wouldn’t hate this, assuming it was a one-year deal at the right price. Wednesday update: Winn signed with the Yankees.

Endy Chavez. Chavez, when healthy, is one of the – if not the best – fielding outfielders in the game. Seriously, look at his UZR numbers at FanGraphs and bow to his awesomeness. Unfortunately, he’s not much of a hitter (OPS+ the last three years of 84, 69, and 80) and he blew out his left knee last July. At 32, it’s hard to say what the knee injury will do to his defense, and if he can’t be an outstanding glove, then he’s not worth having at all. Pass.

Gabe Gross. Now here’s an interesting one, pointed out to me by Twitter follower TheJonLee. Gross is 30, just got non-tendered by Tampa, and hit just .227 last year. So why should we care? FanGraphs just ran an article about the lack of interest he’s received this offseason. Here’s the relevant passage:

And yet, even in this down season, Gross still was worth a pro-rated 1.5 wins per 600 plate appearances. CHONE and Marcel both expect for him to return to roughly average with the bat, and even accounting for regression on defense, Gross is a good bet for another 1.5 WAR/150 G season.

Eventually, some team will land a great asset in Gross, as no raise he gets will approach the $5M-$7M value that he is likely to provide. It’s only a matter of time until we find out which team that is.

Like the first two names, Gross is an excellent defender, so if his bat does bounce back, he could be very valuable. I’m not sure I like him more than Winn, just due to Winn’s track record.

Alfredo Amezaga. This is the scariest name on the list, if only because we know the Dodgers have previously shown interest in him. Remember what I said at the time?

What, going after any old 32-year-old who can’t hit isn’t enough, we need to find one who’s coming off major experimental knee surgery? To say that Amezaga isn’t an offensive threat is understating the situation; in parts of 8 seasons spanning nearly 1500 PA, his line is a sparkling .251/.311/.341. Do we really think Chin-Lung Hu couldn’t put up that line in the bigs?

Amezaga’s terrible bat and recent injury scare the hell out of me. Now, the one benefit with him is not only is he a plus defender in the outfield, he’s also got experience at shortstop. If you carry Amezaga, you can save a roster spot and you probably don’t need to suffer through Nick Green. On the other hand, is that worth having his lousy bat rather than someone with more potential, like Winn or Gross?

I’m not sure I’d prefer any of these guys to the lefty outfielder the Dodgers already have – Xavier Paul. But I could see the argument for Winn, Gross, or – I suppose – Amezaga. Thoughts?

Getting the Band Back Together: Ausmus Returning

January 26, 2010 at 2:49 pm | Posted in Brad Ausmus | 1 Comment

Big day on the unimportant signing front… Dylan Hernandez tweets:

The Dodgers have agreed to a new deal with backup catcher Brad Ausmus, according to a source who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Part of me would have liked to have seen A.J. Ellis get a crack, but I can’t really argue with this too much. Backup catchers are basically a dime-a-dozen, and for what Ausmus lacks on the field, he may have made up for in resurrecting Guillermo Mota. Really, if Russell Martin doesn’t turn it around, it’s not going to make a bit of difference who his backup is.

That said, I’m interested to see the salary; Ausmus made $1m last year and I’d be surprised if the Dodgers would spend more than that.

Update: Hernandez answers that question with his next tweet:

Ausmus’ deal with the Dodgers includes a mutual option for 2011. He will earn a base salary of $850k this year.

Ronnie Belliard… What Are You Doing Here?

January 26, 2010 at 2:30 pm | Posted in Ron Belliard | 5 Comments

According to a Tweet by Ken Gurnick and an official press release from the team, Ronnie Belliard is coming back on a one-year deal for $825,000, and I am, to put it lightly, confused.

In a vacuum, the deal is fine. Belliard’s useful-ish, he hit well as a Dodger last year, and he can (sort of) play more than one infield position. Any deal that’s worth less than a million dollar is negligible in my book, so on its own merits, fine by me.

Except… isn’t this exactly what Jamey Carroll was for? You know, a mediocre veteran who can play some 2nd and 3rd as needed? Because Belliard can’t play shortstop any more than Carroll can, and it was that “lack of a shortstop” issue that led to Nick Green getting a spring training invite.

So if this isn’t to fill that backup shortstop hole (since Belliard can’t do it) and it isn’t to be the 2B/3B backup bat off the bench (since that’s ostensibly what Carroll’s here for), what the hell is Belliard’s role? Please don’t tell me he’s the Opening Day 2B, not until Blake DeWitt is given a chance to fail, and not with guys like Felipe Lopez and Orlando Cabrera still out there with rapidly falling contract demands.

Even if the public face is that DeWitt is still the first choice, I don’t see how it makes sense from a roster standpoint. With Joe Torre’s well-known ways of burning through a bullpen, and with a starting rotation that’s hardly full of innings eaters, I don’t see any way the Dodgers don’t start the year with 12 pitchers. That leaves room for 4 backup players, 2 of which have to be a backup catcher and backup outfielder. If you’re carrying both Belliard and Carroll behind DeWitt, where is the room for your backup shortstop? (Okay, my math is faulty here. Jon helpfully points out that it’s 5 backups. The Dodgers spent much of last year with 13 pitchers, which left 4 backups, and that’s what I still had on my mind. Still, wouldn’t surprise me to see that happen again too.)

Again, the deal itself – $875k for a moderately useful player – seems harmless enough. Its what it says about the rest of the roster that worries me.

It Could Be Worse, Dodger Fans

January 25, 2010 at 9:09 am | Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments

For months, we’ve been bemoaning the impact that the impending McCourt divorce is having on the team. We’ve been calling them “selfish”, “cheap”, or worse. Fans have been unhappy that Jamey Carroll seems to be the marquee acquisition of the winter, while other teams go out and get their Roy Halladays, John Lackeys, and Jason Bays. We’ve seen front office staff laid off, and we’ve seen elderly scouts have their salaries slashed.

We’re saying these things because the payroll is likely going to be “only” around $95 million. No one expects them to spend like the Yankees, of course, but is it so wrong to think they could spend like the Cubs or Phillies?

We think these things about how spending “only” $95 million is akin to playing 25 minimum-salary rookies, and then we read things like this from Pirates owner Bob Nutting:

Q: So, your expectation remains that, if this group becomes competitive, you will be able to someday spend at the level of the Brewers and Reds?

A: I think that’s expected. I think it’s rational. I think it’s where Pittsburgh needs to be.

Dodger fans dream about spending like the Cubs do. Pirates fans, deep in the darkest sections of their dreams, harbor hopes of one day spending at the level of the Brewers and Reds.

It really is two worlds out there.

***********

I answered some questions about the Dodger offseason thus far over at Razzball. Check it out!

Reasons Why You Shouldn’t Be Unhappy With Vicente Padilla

January 22, 2010 at 9:46 am | Posted in Joel Pineiro, Vicente Padilla | 23 Comments

Though I was relatively upbeat about the Dodgers signing Vicente Padilla yesterday, I’ve seen a decent amount of negativity about it from Dodger fans around the internet, many upset with Ned Colletti’s comment that the team probably can’t afford another starting pitcher now. I don’t believe the Dodgers need another starter; Padilla’s a fine #4 and guys like James McDonald, Eric Stults, Scott Elbert, and Charlie Haeger are more than qualified to fight it out for #5, just like every other team does with that spot.

Still, the questions about Padilla persist. Let’s take a look at what some of the reaction has been to the signing.

But he’s not an ace!

No, no he’s not. You also don’t get aces for 1 year and $5m, and that’s not what he’s supposed to be. As we’ve been through here ad nauseum, the Dodgers were never going to get an ace. There’s just not that many available and for various reasons (not all involving money) Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee weren’t options. As we should all know by now, 2010 depends in large part on Clayton Kershaw and Chad Billingsley. If they take that next step, the Dodgers have a shot. If they don’t, then they’re in trouble. That was going to be the case regardless of who was signed to fill out the rotation.

But he’s not Ben Sheets, and signing Padilla means we can’t afford Sheets now!

True, he’s not Ben Sheets. And I won’t lie and pretend that I wouldn’t have liked to have seen Sheets in Blue. But I’m sure you’ve seen the rumors regarding Sheets’ asking price, right? He’s supposedly looking for around $10m plus a player option. So that right there probably puts the Dodgers out of the conversation entirely, Padilla or not. It’s also a lot to pay for a guy who didn’t even pitch in 2009 and has been injured with a variety of different ailments almost constantly since 2004. If he’s healthy, Sheets is probably worth the money for a team that can afford it. The Dodgers can’t afford the money or the risk, and Padilla’s signing isn’t the reason.

But we overpaid for a guy who got cut last year! He’s not worth it!

Isn’t he? $5m may sound like a lot, but for what starting pitching is going for these days – remember, Randy Wolf just picked up six times that – $5m really isn’t a whole lot. Yes, he got cut by the Rangers last year, but that was seemingly more for his off-field misdeeds than performance issues. We all saw how talented he can be in the playoffs for the Dodgers when he’s got his head on straight. Save for a lousy 2007 season in Texas, this is a guy who’s been hovering around league-average nearly every year for a decade. Just look at his “average” season – 29 starts, 183 innings, 100 ERA+. That’s a great 4th starter, and that alone is worth $5m. Then take into account that he’s spent almost his entire career pitching in two of the toughest places to pitch in baseball, Philadelphia and Texas. So yeah, I think he’s worth it.

But the Angels just got Joel Pineiro!

I’ve seen some complaints that this happened the day after the Angels signed Joel Pineiro to a 2 year, $16m contract, and how this supposedly means that the Dodgers are being reactionary and getting an inferior pitcher compared to the Rally Monkeys. And sure, Pineiro had a very nice 2009. I just think people are completely overlooking the risk inherent in a guy who was absolutely horrible in 3 of the previous 4 years (3 years with 5+ ERA), and who is now leaving Dave Duncan to come to a talented division in the tougher league.

Padilla was markedly better between 2004-08 (4.80 ERA isn’t great, but it’s a hell of a lot better than 5.34 ERA). Even in Pineiro’s breakout 2009, he tailed off at the end of the year, putting up a 4.64 ERA once the calendar turned to August. Then, he gave up 7 hits and 4 runs in only 4 innings in his NLDS start while Padilla threw 7 scoreless in the same game. That’s worth an extra year and 3 times the money?

But he’s a psychopath!

Well, yeah. We’ve all heard the stories about head-hunting, run-ins with teammates, and accidental shootings. This is all true and worth being worried about. That said, this is why you sign guys to one-year contracts. Ideally, the motivation for the next contract is enough to keep him in line, and if it’s not, then the few million dollars he cost is hardly going to send your season down the toilet.

I’ve also seen in some places that the fact that he got swine flu last year is held against him too, but that seems like a stretch. Millions of people came down with that, including – possibly – me. Am I a pyschopath too? Wait, don’t answer that.

So now what? Are we done?!

Well, the front four in the rotation is pretty set with Kershaw, Billingsley, Hiroki Kuroda, and Padilla. There’s no shortage of talent to battle for the 5th spot, and whomever loses either bolsters the bullpen or awaits their chance in AAA. (I think Eric Stults probably has the initial advantage, if only because he’s out of options and the Dodgers didn’t refuse to sell him to Japan just to lose him for nothing).

You can say, “but Kershaw’s young! Billingsley was lousy late last year! Kuroda’s old and hurt!” and you’d be right. Just remember, no matter who the Dodgers signed to their rotation, none of those three guys were getting bumped. The season depends on their performances, and that’s been the reality for some time.

Vicente Padilla Returns

January 21, 2010 at 12:58 pm | Posted in Vicente Padilla | 20 Comments

I’ve got about 3 minutes before a big important meeting here at work, but I wanted to get this up quickly since I just saw the official press release. Vicente Padilla is coming back on a one-year deal. No terms released as of yet, but how much could he really have received? Yes, he’s a jerk, yes he’s a psycho, but he’s also a pretty talented pitcher who gave the Dodgers some really important starts in the playoffs.

If we’re talking about $4-5m or so, I think that’s a great risk to take. Even if he turns into the next Milton Bradley, it’s not like you have $30m tied up with him. Besides, the one-year deal keeps him motivated. Based on what was left in the pitching market (and no, the Dodgers were not going to be Ben Sheets’ highest bidder), works for me.

Discuss!

Just One More Month Until Pitchers & Catchers Report

January 20, 2010 at 5:27 pm | Posted in Adam Kennedy, Joel Pineiro, Jon Garland, Russ Ortiz | 4 Comments

Yesterday, I wrote the following regarding the Dodgers signing a free-agent pitcher:

In fact – and there’s going to be a full post on this in the next day or two – I strongly prefer Jon Garland to Pineiro anyway.

The idea behind this was going to be basically that even though Pineiro had a fantastic 2009, he’s also coming off three horrible years in the four previous seasons and is going to be far more expensive. Can he survive away from Dave Duncan? Was his 2009 simply a contract push? Who knows? Garland’s never going to be as good as Pineiro was last year, but he was better in most of the years before that, he’s cheaper, and he’s nothing if not consistent – he gives you the same 200 league-average innings every year. Since neither is going to be an ace and the season is largely going to hinge on the progress made by Clayton Kershaw and Chad Billingsley, why not just save some money and sign the more reliable guy to give you some stability as a 4th starter?

Yep, that’s the post I was going to write, much more than a paragraph’s worth. And then Eric Seidman of Baseball Prospectus had to go and completely steal my thunder this morning by saying basically the exact same thing, just better than I would have, so if you’re a subscriber, check it out.

**********

Get ready to start hearing stories like this non-stop if Kershaw takes off like we expect him to:

Clayton Kershaw is coming off a strong season for the Los Angeles Dodgers, his second in the big leagues. He posted a 2.79 ERA and fanned 185 batters in just 171 innings of work. If the lefty takes another step forward in 2010, GM Ned Colletti may soon find himself in a similar situation that Seattle was with Felix Hernandez this winter, before signing the right-hander to a five-year contract.

Kershaw will not be eligible for arbitration until after next season, but that may be when the club starts to think about locking him up for more than one year to achieve some cost certainty and avoid a situation much like the one San Francisco is in with Tim Lincecum.

Hernandez got his deal after four years of service, so in that light the Dodgers have two seasons to go, but it might be smart accounting to do what the Red Sox did with Jon Lester — 5 years, $30 million after his second year of service, which is where Kershaw will stand a year from now.

You can see how Boston is saving money by doing so, too. For Lester’s contract to be worth more than Hernandez’s, he’d have to have an average annual salary of more $20 million in 2014 and 2015. In other words, it’s costing Boston about $48 million less for Lester over the same period of time.

Moral of the story: The Dodgers might be wisest not to wait.

As always, the divorce case looms over everything. But if Kershaw does take that next step in 2010, I think Dodger fans would do somersaults if he’d be willing to settle for $30m over 5 years. Remember, that’s not anywhere near what he would get on the open market, but this would of course be buying out his slave and arbitration years.

**********

Oh, look. A seemingly harmless story on Fox Sports. Let’s click it, shall we?

Kennedy down to three teams — 12:04 p.m.

The representative for free agent Adam Kennedy said he remains in talks with three teams about the infielder.

Two clubs are interested in Kennedy as their everyday second baseman, Paul Cohen said. Another has interest in Kennedy as a super-utility player.

“We have narrowed it down to three teams,” Cohen said.

Cohen wouldn’t address specific clubs, but the Cubs and Nationals are known to be looking for a second baseman.

Whenever a free agent second baseman is mentioned, you immediately think of the Dodgers (ESPN’s already tossed LA into this mix). But what’s important here is how the agent described the interest – two teams interested in Kennedy “as their everyday second baseman.” I’m not sold on Blake DeWitt yet, but we have to be hoping that the Dodgers aren’t one of those teams, right?

Actually, Kennedy’s not as bad as all that. Or at least he wasn’t in 2009, because after two horrific seasons in St. Louis (.572 and .692 OPS’s) that nearly ended his career, he parlayed a NRI from Tampa Bay into a .289/.348/.410 line with 11 homers playing 2B and 3B in Oakland. As a lefty batter, he’s almost useless against fellow lefties, but then again Blake DeWitt – also a lefty – has a reverse split, so you could theoretically see a platoon happening here.

On the other hand, the problem with Jamey Carroll is that he can’t play shortstop, and neither can Kennedy. So that probably rules that out. Still, it didn’t stop me from getting a chill down my spine when I saw that two unnamed teams are pursuing him to be a starter.

**********

Finally, via Diamond Leung, Troy from West Virginia has some strong thoughts on the Russ Ortiz signing (along with a wicked beard). Hey, I can’t say I disagree with him; Ortiz is abysmal and has been completely cooked for years. Troy is probably on his way to jail, and if the things in that article are true, then his future is well deserved. Still, when a man has that much facing him and he’s still bothered by a minor-league invite to Russ Ortiz… well, it probably means you shouldn’t have signed Russ Ortiz.