Garret Anderson Chooses an Appropriate Number
March 5, 2010 at 9:26 am | Posted in Brian Giles, Doug Mientkiewicz, Garret Anderson, Xavier Paul | 13 CommentsDespite the fact that Andre Ethier apparently offered to give up his #16 jersey, Garret Anderson decided to go with number that suits him best: #00. The double-zero is appropriate because that’s exactly the amount of contribution I expect the Dodgers to receive from him.
That said, we’ve learned a bit about the competition for the last spot off the bench in the day or so since Anderson signed. Brian Giles’ knee is apparently responding so poorly that the expectation is that he’ll call it quits in the next week or so, according to Tony Jackson. Jackson also reveals this interesting note about Doug Mientkiewicz:
After dislocating his shoulder last season, Mientkiewicz said he no longer can make the throw across the diamond from third base, meaning he will be limited to playing first from now on.
That, at least to me, is new information. I hadn’t heard anything that suggested Eyechart’s injury was still affecting him that severely. Since this bench spot is apparently ticketed for someone who only fits the qualifications of “old and left-handed”, whether or not Eyechart can play anywhere other than 1B might not be a big deal. Still, one of the few reasons I liked him was because he did bring some nice versatility, and that appears to be gone.
So on that level, the signing of Anderson makes a little bit more sense, since Mientkiewicz isn’t what we thought and Giles may not even be in the competition. Yet what this also does is shine a light on the fact that the way the bench competition was structured this offseason was done so oddly that the team is now in a situation where Anderson may actually be the best option, just because they’re desperate for a lefty bench bat.
Simply put, it didn’t have to be this way. You could have been looking for the best bench option, rather than the best lefty bench option, and quite easily. They could have signed a lefty 4th outfielder (like the names I suggested, such as Randy Winn or Gabe Gross) rather than righty Reed Johnson, and it’s not even that I have a problem with Johnson, it’s just that it was an odd choice from the beginning to add another righty bat since it’s not like Johnson was a “must-have” addition. Or (and yes, I promised I’d stop harping on this) they could have added a lefty-hitting infielder like Felipe Lopez rather than Jamey Carroll. If either of those things happen, the Dodgers aren’t so desperate for a lefty bat that they’re going to choose between the old (Anderson), the old & infirm (Giles), and the old, infirm, & hard-to-spell (Mientkiewicz).
Of course, the correct option is right under our noses. Wouldn’t it be great if there was a lefty bat who’s likely to be as productive as any of these three, and not only won’t kill you in the outfield but has a strong arm and would be a great defensive caddy for Manny? Sounds like Xavier Paul to me, and as Jon astutely notes, the Dodgers have not had a good history with 35+ reserves. Let’s hope we don’t have to add another name to that list.
13 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a Reply
How Many McCourt Sins?
MSTI on the web
MSTI Library
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
RBIs are such a funny stat, they make it so easy for most to miss that Anderson, in a full season, has never had an OBP above .345
Comment by KempKershaw— March 5, 2010 #
Ohh, that’s cuz he was a run producer! Nobody asked him to take walks or get on base! They’d rather have him trade an out to get a guy to third or hit a weak tapper to 2nd to get the run in. Outs? There’s plenty of those to be had in a game! It’s getting the RBI that matters, don’t you know?!
…that’s my Joe Morgan impression :P
Comment by Trevor— March 5, 2010 #
And I am duly impressed.
/golf clap
Comment by KempKershaw— March 5, 2010 #
Isn’t the reason Paul isn’t in the mix is because he wouldn’t get in enough at bats, so better to give him another year in AAA.
Comment by Ed— March 5, 2010 #
Yeah. And I’m sort of torn on that. It’s probably the right thing to do, but it would also actively harm the major league team.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— March 5, 2010 #
Ha ha, “old, infirm, & hard-to-spell” is my favorite thing that’s ever been written about Mientkiewicz.
Comment by Casey— March 5, 2010 #
Historically, the Dodgers have not been much for strange uniform numbers. They made an exception in Manny’s case (99), because he is a special (goofy) case. Double aught sounds like buckshot, but in Anderson’s case he should have gone for #7.5, bird shot.
Comment by SamAdams— March 5, 2010 #
Maybe he’s trying to kick start his career like Willie Mays Hayes.
Comment by Trevor— March 5, 2010 #
Eyechart’s only played 34 games at 3rd his entire career, and with DeWitt such a stud at 3rd and 2 2B bench players likely to make the roster it would seem silly to plug Ol’ Man Mientkiewicz in at the hot corner. I don’t think it’ll really affect Torre’s hot man crush or how the Dodgers would have used him if he makes the team. I do hope it will add to Paul’s case for making the team out of ST.
Comment by Archie Netherbottoms— March 6, 2010 #
[...] is no surprise, as we’ve been hearing for about a week now that Giles’ knee just wasn’t allowing him to perform, which largely precipitated the [...]
Pingback by Our First NRI Bites the Dust « Mike Scioscia’s tragic illness— March 11, 2010 #
[...] Unfortunately, the Dodgers signed Garret Anderson for that role, a decision which bothered me in the spring… Of course, the correct option is right under our noses. Wouldn’t it be great if there was [...]
Pingback by MSTI’s 2010 in Review: Right Field « Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— November 1, 2010 #
[...] rotation questions, was sold off to Japan without much of a reason. And despite several rounds of begging on my part, Garret Anderson was signed and made the [...]
Pingback by MSTI’s 2010 in Review: Management « Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— November 26, 2010 #
[...] of evidence displaying that he was past his prime. Though he wore #00 throughout the spring, an appropriate choice based on what our expectations were of him, he switched to #9 when he made the team. (A.J. Ellis [...]
Pingback by Dee Gordon and the Redemption of #9 « Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— June 8, 2011 #