Yay

The Dodgers might not do anything stupid.

"There's potential for change, but as we look at the young players that we played a lot this past year, we're less likely to fill in [positions with veterans] as much as we have in the past and more likely we'll give the younger players a greater opportunity," Colletti said. "I'm curious to see how our young players, who really had a chance this past year to play full time, I'm curious to see what another year does."

Fan Bases and Winning Games

Seem like they're one and the same, right? If you win, people will come, right? Well yeah, but that's not the biggest reason.

Looking at the NL for the last 4 seasons, the biggest determinant of attendance was team payroll - if a team spent a certain amount of money, so many fans would come. Now, of course, this may actually be a faulty cause and effect; it might be that teams know their market and get what their attendance will afford. But still, take a look at this:

Regression Analysis: Att versus W, Pay
The regression equation is
Att = 199189 + 10498 W + 0.0222 Pay

Predictor - P
Constant - 0.608
W - 0.050
Pay - 0.000

S = 374825 R-Sq = 70.5% R-Sq(adj) = 69.5%

That is a very tidy regression. That is also a very low P-value for pay, indicating that we are very very sure that payroll affects attendance. Wins would appear to have some impact as well on atendance, but not entirely.

But this is more telling:

Regression Analysis: W versus Pay, RD
The regression equation is
W = 81.2 - 0.000000 Pay + 0.0969 RD

Predictor - P
Constant - 0.000
Pay - 0.975
RD - 0.000

S = 4.02786 R-Sq = 84.0% R-Sq(adj) = 83.5%

Taking into account the effect of payroll on run differential, there is some effect, so you are going to run into some multicollinearity, but still, the R-squared value is 20.7%.

It's really hard to define a model that actually tells you what you want to know, but my intuition seems to support the following: payroll is for putting fans in the seats, not winning ballgames. The Yankees have a $200,000,000 payroll, sure, but they're wasting money on guys like Carl Pavano in all that. Having good drafting and scouting helps. Being able to sign free agents is nice, but there are few free agents that are really worth what they might cost.

It is with that in mind that I ask whether one can really be sure if Matt Kemp is better than someone like Torii Hunter or Andruw Jones. He's certainly better than Juan Pierre.

2007 PrOPS

PrOPS estimates what players' batting lines should be based on batted ball types etc. Available at the Hardball Times, and developed by JC Bradbury.

Players with expected and actual lines:

Russell Martin .283/.367/.455 .293/.374/.469
James Loney .300/.350/.501 .331/.381/.538
Jeff Kent .288/.364/.478 .302/.375/.500
Nomar Garciaparra .286/.330/.403 .283/.328/.371
Rafael Furcal .278/.339/.376 .270/.335/.355
Andre Ethier .281/.350/.436 .284/.350/.452
Juan Pierre .293/.328/.358 .293/.331/.353
Luis Gonzalez .289/.368/.455 .278/.359/.433

Matt Kemp .261/.297/.430 .342/.373/.521
Andy LaRoche .257/.391/.363 .226/.365/.312
Delwyn Young .299/.332/.545 .382/.417/.647
Tony Abreu .267/.308/.366 .271/.309/.404
Chin-Lung Hu .261/.258/.527 .241/.241/.517

Glaring discrepencies:
Matt Kemp
Delywn Young
Andy LaRoche

LaRoche gets credit for his patience and PrOPS figures he should have hit the ball successfully more often given the batted ball types. Delwyn Young looks to be good, but not as much as he showed. Matt Kemp looks like he was the recipient of a ton of lucky singles. A ton. If this is accurate for predicting performance, it might not be a bad idea to trade Kemp with his value high, assuming of course he doesn't improve his patience or power or something like that.

Take A Look at this

Good Free Agents pre 2008
3b
A-Rod

cf
Andruw Jones
Torii Hunter
Aaron Rowand

dh
Barry Bonds

c
Michael Barrett
Jason Kendall

SP
Matt Clement

Good Free Agents pre 2009

first base
Mark Teixeira - 1B

second base
Orlando Hudson - 2B

outfielders
Pat Burrell - LF
Adam Dunn - LF
Bobby Abreu - RF
Vlad Guerrero - RF

closers
Jason Isringhausen - CL
Brad Lidge - CL
Joe Nathan - CL

starting pitchers
CC Sabathia - LHSP
Johan Santana - LHSP
Oliver Perez - LHSP
Mark Mulder - LHSP
Derek Lowe - RHSP
Greg Maddux - RHSP
Ben Sheets - RHSP

shortstops
Rafael Furcal

Good Free Agents pre 2010
1b
Nick Johnson
Adam LaRoche
Carlos Pena

2b
Placido Polanco
Brian Roberts
Freddy Sanchez

3b
Adrian Beltre
Chipper Jones
Miguel Cabrera

CF
Chone Figgins
Ryan Freel

corner OF
Jason Bay
Matt Holliday
Carl Crawford
Gary Sheffield
Jayson Werth

DH
Manny Ramirez

Starting Pitchers
Erik Bedard - LHSP
Dontrelle Willis - LHSP
Chris Capuano - LHSP
Brad Penny - RHSP
Jake Peavy - RHSP

Closers
JJ Putz -CL


Good Free Agents pre 2011
First base
Paul Konerko
Justin Morneau
Kevin Youkilis

third base
Wilson Betemit
Eric Chavez

catcher
Joe Mauer
Yadier Molina

Outfield
Eric Byrnes
Brad Hawpe
Alex Rios

Closers
BJ Ryan
Huston Street

shortstop
Derek Jeter

A smart GM would look at all the major league talent he has under control for this period of time, and check to see when would be the oppurtune time to deal and hold onto it. Nice to put out to look at.

Joe

Joe Torre is now the Dodger manager. Grady Little had enough of the season, so he just quit. Torre will probably not make but so much of a difference, but let's venture a guess.

Managing a pitching staff
Neither was known for trying to kill a starting pitcher. Torre had a reputation for picking favorite relievers, but Grady was picking that up with Broxton. To be fair, the Dodgers have a much deeper bullpen with Saito, Broxton, Proctor and Beimel all as capable relievers. Brazoban too, if he's ever healthy again. (If they give up on Yhency, though, a run at Gagne would be nice).

Managing a lineup
Tends to give players set roles, but this isn't bad. He liked Jeter in the 2 spot, which actually was wonderful - maybe he puts Martin there. Also not afraid to demote guys like Giambi, Damon, etc, although some utility players get a lot more credit than one might think. Making Abreu the utility man wouldn't be bad, though.

Handling the media
Torre is good for keeping people calm, although nobody in the LA media is like the NY media. Maybe Simers. On the other hand, Little wasn't too bad at this, and he was more interesting at times, often funny, and Torre may be more boring.

Clubhouse stuff
Apparently Torre has a bit more control, maybe because he's not such a joker.

Marginal at best, but probably not a bad move.