Mar 30

Marching toward April

Posted on by

Feeling Opening Day excitement and the writing bug late on a Saturday …

• I’m reasonably excited about this year’s Dodger team, but part of that is a perverse excitement about just how bad on offense that left side of the infield might be, at least while Hanley Ramirez is out. That makes the decision to go with Justin Sellers fun for kicks, however dubious. Still, I have always liked the idea of emphasizing defense where offense isn’t an option.

• It only just now occurred to me that I was in the stands last year at the game in which Sellers was hurt and the one in which Dee Gordon was hurt.

• Do you realize this will no doubt be the fourth consecutive year that Kenley Jansen isn’t the Opening Day closer but eventually moves into that role?

• One thing I don’t miss about baseball season is the whining whenever a save gets blown, as if it should never happen. Heaven knows, though, it will happen.

• Carl Crawford has me excited. Truly didn’t think he’d be ready this fast, but this is the one case where I’m allowing myself to be swept away by past success and heady Spring Training numbers.

• I think lingering effects of his labrum injury will keep Matt Kemp below 25 home runs this year, but that doesn’t mean he won’t be productive.

• At first, I thought that with no true right-handed outfielder in reserve, the Dodgers would need to keep Adrian Gonzalez and Andre Ethier spaced out in their lineup, or lefty relievers will just crush the team. But Gonzalez has had success against left-handers, so that helps. It’s still not necessarily a bad idea to insert a right-hander between them, though – as long as it’s a decent one.

• My initial plan for any free writing time that emerged this spring was that I would spend it offline on a long-term project. I did begin work on that project early this month, but with baseball season starting, I’m wavering. What might happen is a mix, where I post on Dodger Thoughts not infrequently, but not comprehensively. The risk is feeling like I’m doing both things halfway.

• Another intervening factor in my life is that Youngest Master Weisman, now 5, is six days away from his first T-ball season, and he is raring to go. (His team: the Tigers.) After playing with a pretend ball inside the house several times, we made it out to the park for the first time, and he was knocking balls through the infield and reaching the grass. Also in the past day, I’ve begun trying to teach him how to scoop balls on defense. It’s crazy.

• Older brother Young Master Weisman, now 8 1/2, took a few swings, but piano is his game. He’s composing his own material for his May recital performance. Young Miss Weisman, a whopping 10 1/2, is also wonderful on the keys.

Mar 28

Reasons to watch

Posted on by

The times of the year in spring and fall when first-run TV and Major League Baseball intersect the most are tough for me. (I do love my shows.) I almost never watch nighttime exhibition baseball as a result, particularly when my DVR is bubbling.

But I checked on the Dodger game after dinner tonight, almost for no other reason other than to acknowledge the team was back in Southern California, and not only was it scoreless in the fifth, which was kind of interesting, but the Dodgers hadn’t allowed a baserunner, which was very interesting.

It whetted my appetite for baseball. My curiosity.

In the seventh inning, I paused to pay attention to a Juan Uribe at-bat, which is like pausing to pay attention to a fallen leaf. Uribe has had … not the worst spring, and I entertained myself with the thought that I would spot something different about him.  I didn’t, but I did get to see him get his second hit in three at-bats tonight, a broken-bat single off Mark Lowe, that pitcher the Dodgers released earlier this week.

Later in the inning, there was a mini-version of one of those just-when-you-think-you’ve-seen-everything moments, something Vin Scully might remark upon if the stakes were higher. Uribe was on second base with two out, and Tim Federowicz hit a soft single into left field. In a 0-0 exhibition game, I figured Uribe would be waved home to try to score and hardly minded, but given that he was rounding third as the left fielder was reaching the ball, I also figured he would be thrown out easily – and that’s without factoring in that the left fielder was superman Mike Trout.

But Uribe was safe. Easily. He was running in mud, but he was safe.  Maybe he was saving himself for the regular season, but Trout just put nothing on his throw. Welcome back, unpredictability.

And then in the next inning, Matt Kemp hit an opposite-field RBI triple. Giddy.

I like having reasons to watch. I like being reminded that I have reasons to watch. I admit, there are moments that I think this game has nothing left to offer me, at least relative to what the rest of the world can. But baseball keeps putting up a fight. It’s relentless.

Mar 28

Praising Burt Hooton

Posted on by

… (Chan Ho) Park made one more appearance before the Dodgers shipped him to Double-A San Antonio. There he met Burt Hooton, a pitching instructor and former Dodgers starter.

“Burt Hooton was my best friend my first two years,” said Park, who spent most of the 1995 season at Triple-A Albuquerque before breaking through with the Dodgers in ’96. “He was like an uncle to me. He cared about me, my emotions, while he was helping me learn techniques.

“One thing I told Ryu was that meeting good people is very important. I told him to try to make his pitching coach his best friend. When I got my first Major League win, I called Burt Hooton before I even called my parents. That’s how important he was to me.” …

— Ken Gurnick, MLB.com

When I ranked the top 50 Dodgers of all time a year ago for ESPNLosAngeles, Burt Hooton was 29th. But generally, you don’t hear much about him when the pantheon of great Dodgers is discussed.  Nice to see his name brought back to life, particularly in this extra, nurturing dimension.

Hooton gave the Dodgers 10 years of a 3.14 ERA and though he’s often thought of as a postseason goat thanks to one outing in Philadelphia, recovered to have a 2.79 ERA in his 10 other Dodger playoff games, including a remarkable 0.82 ERA over five 1981 postseason starts. (He was the Most Valuable Player of the 1981 National League Championship Series, pitching 14 2/3 shutout innings.) That’s some big stuff that no one ever talks about.

He managed to do this despite averaging five strikeouts per nine innings, a rate that would almost assuredly signify failure in this era. Opponents had a .659 OPS against Hooton over his 15-year career. Since 1972, Hooton has the eighth-best opponent OPS+ among all Dodger pitchers (minimum 600 innings).

Footnote: Hooton is a member of the College Baseball Hall of Fame and was named the No. 4 college baseball player of the 20th century by Baseball America. Here is his induction speech …

Mar 27

Dodger pitching: Safety in numbers

Posted on by

‘Twas interesting, in the space of 24 hours, for relief pitcher Mark Lowe to go from Dodger camp to pitching against the Dodgers in the Freeway Series.

That the Dodgers would cut loose the 29-year-old Lowe, who was nothing extraordinary but fits the profile of the Jamey Wright types that annually make the Opening Day roster, was the latest indication of how overflowing the Dodger pitching staff is, five days shy of the 2013 season.

That depth is a key weapon for the team this season, because there is so much uncertainty over how healthy and effective so many of the pitchers will be, whether it’s concerns over Zach Greinke’s elbow, Chad Billingsley’s health and consistency or the legitimacy of Brandon League’s late-2012 revamp.

While roster decisions in general should be made based on talent and capability, I won’t mind if the Dodgers stash such relievers as Paco Rodriguez or Josh Wall in the minors (as they have with Javy Guerra and Shawn Tolleson) in order to test the 2013 mettle of those without minor-league options.

The last thing the Dodgers should do is rush into a low-value trade of one of their excess starting pitchers – Chris Capuano, Aaron Harang or Ted Lilly – just so they can make room for a Wall or Kevin Gregg in the back of their bullpen. If they can make a good deal, super – Los Angeles certainly has weak spots among the position players to address, namely in the infield and on that shaky bench. But the end of March is not time to give away starting pitchers for nothing, especially when the existing Dodger starting rotation has its own set of interrogative punctuation (or as they are popularly known, question marks).

It might mean you don’t have the most exquisite 25-man roster for Opening Day. You need to think about the long haul, and the 2013 season, like every other, will absolutely be a long haul.

Mar 25

Top target for 2014: Robinson Cano?

Posted on by

Years after those Matt Kemp-for-Robinson Cano rumors were all the rage, could they end up being teammates?

Tim Dierkes of MLB Trade Rumors today listed the Yankee second baseman as the top free agent possibility of the 2013-14 offseason. Cano, who had a .929 OPS for New York last year, will be 31 1/2 when the 2014 season begins. Assuming all goes well for him this year, he’ll no doubt be the latest ballplayer to set some kind of salary record for position or age or what have you — but as you might have heard, the Dodgers are players in that game these days. On top of that, Los Angeles will have a vacancy at Cano’s position.

Of course, the Yankees figure to be players in that game as well — especially if they falter on the field in 2013, as so many expect, and will find themselves desperate not to lose such a key player.

* * *

Another interesting tidbit from MLB Trade Rumors today: Former Dodger Jamey Carroll explains why a 27-year-old minor-leaguer who has no negotiating power could still use an agent.

“They were into finding out who I was in the [Montreal Expos] organization,” Carroll said, “what the organization felt about me, and where I fit and what my chances were to keep getting opportunities.  I think that’s one of the most important things, where you sit within the organization.  How they view you and what goals they have for you, I think those are tough questions to ask and they were able to do that for me.  I was at a time where I had quite a few years in the minor leagues and wasn’t sure what my future held.  To me that was more important than worrying about contracts and shoe deals and stuff like that.”

Mar 11

Revelation of the day/week/month/year

Posted on by

Thanks to this Lyle Spencer interview with Vin Scully on MLB.com, we learn that the night Scully broadcast the Dodgers’ 1955 Game 7 World Series win, he went on a date with future “Sesame Street” creator Joan Ganz Cooney.

… “After the third out, Johnny Podres having shut them out, I was taken in a car to the Lexington Hotel with some other Dodgers people,” Scully said. “I had a date, and I left the group to get my car and go pick her up. We drove over to Brooklyn for the party at the Bossert Hotel.

“It was like V-J Day and V-E Day rolled into one when we came out of the tunnel. There were thousands of people on the sidewalks leading to the hotel. There were policemen, and parking attendants who took your car about a block from the hotel. Walking down that street to the hotel, that was an unforgettable scene.”

Young Vin really knew how to impress a date.

“Her name was Joan Ganz,” Scully said. “She was from Arizona. I’m pretty sure she later became the creator of ‘Sesame Street.’ You can check on that. We liked each other and stayed in touch, but it never got serious. I haven’t told this story, but what the heck. That was a long time ago.”

An internet check confirmed Scully’s recollection of the future of Ms. Ganz, a publicist in New York City when they met. In 1966, Joan Ganz Cooney oversaw and directed the creation of “Sesame Street,” which premiered in 1969. As the first executive director for Children’s Television Workshop, she was among the groundbreaking female executives in American television.

A Presidential Medal of Freedom award winner in 1995, Ganz Cooney was elected in 1989 to the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences Hall of Fame, and three years later was inducted into the National Women’s Hall of Fame. Her date that memorable October night in 1955 also is a Hall of Famer, of the Cooperstown variety. …

Feb 21

My favorite films of 2012

Posted on by

Thanks to my new duties last year as awards editor at Variety, I saw by far the most films I’ve ever seen in a year. Including documentaries and a smidgen of 2013 films that I got a sneak preview of, I took in 84 in all. And it was a good year to take a deep dive, with lots of interesting, quality offerings.

So here is my annual ranking of the films, using the system I designed long ago. (Important clarifications, for work purposes: I am obviously not a professional critic, and these rankings are my own and completely unaffiliated with Variety.)

As I’ve said before, it’s a system that is decidedly personal, because film is decidedly personal.  I don’t think there’s any such thing as a “best” film, but only a “favorite” film, because what we bring to a film and what we desire from it is so idiosyncratic.  Here’s the boilerplate explanation:

Ambition (1-7): How much the film is taking on, in subject matter and in filming challenges? For example, is it offering both a romantic story and social commentary at once? How difficult was the film to make technically? This allows one to distinguish between two equally well-made films when one is Casablanca and the other is Animal House. Ambition isn’t the be-all and end-all, but it allows some extra credit to be given where it is due.

Quality (1-10): This is essentially how most films are graded – simply, how good are they. As objective as I can be, how well do I think the film succeeds in achieving its ambitions?

Emotional resonance (1-13): How much did the film affect me personally. This category gets the most weight because it’s the most important – I’d rather see a flawed film that touches me than a technically perfect but emotionally stultifying picture.

Just to give you a quick idea of how this works, here are the scores of my favorite films of all time.

The Misfits: Ambition 5, Quality 9.5, Resonance 13, Total 27.5
Casablanca: Ambition 6, Quality 10, Resonance 11.5, Total 27.5

Both are great movies in my mind, with Casablanca being objectively better and The Misfits being the most powerful to me emotionally. Now, there probably aren’t 10 people in the world who would consider these films equals, but that’s the whole point, isn’t it? This system helps us rank our favorites without trying to say that they’re definitively the best.

And, for comparison, down near the bottom of the scale …

The Bad News Bears Go To Japan: Ambition 1.5, Quality 2, Resonance 2, Total 5.5.

Two last quick points: I wouldn’t get caught up in single-point distinctions – those don’t amount to a significant difference between films. In fact, each time I look at the list, I feel like tinkering with some of the grades.

That last point is so true – I really find myself wanting to change the point totals again and again, and finally told myself I just had to stop.

If you want to look back, here are three past charts: my favorite films of 2011, of 2010 and of 2006.

Here we go …

A O ER T Comment
A Late Quartet 4.0 9.5 11.0 24.5 This movie has everything (that I need, anyway).
Beasts of the Southern Wild 4.5 9.0 10.0 23.5 Stunning. Unlike anything I’ve seen, but so much more than that.
Seven Psychopaths 3.5 9.5 10.0 23.0 Loved this. Funny, clever, meta, and also thoughtful and sensitive.
The Perks of Being a Wallflower 4.0 9.0 10.0 23.0 They should make more movies like this about adults. A few quibbles but really well done.
Zero Dark Thirty 4.0 9.0 10.0 23.0 Like United 93, doesn’t mess around – and grips on multiple levels.
Argo 4.0 9.0 9.5 22.5 Riveting entertainment and great mix of humor and terror.
Django Unchained 4.0 9.0 9.5 22.5 Features style and substance, earns being provocative, and fun on top of it all.
Dangerous Liaisons 3.5 9.0 9.5 22.0 Spot-on adaptation, luminous and enjoyable and with no wasted moments.
Ginger & Rosa 4.0 9.0 9.0 22.0 Very believable mix of political and personal in a coming-of-age story; Fanning’s perf peaks in amazing ways.
Les Miserables 4.5 8.0 9.5 22.0 Bit of a bumpy journey for the otherwise transcendent material. Hathaway soars, Crowe sinks.
Mea Maxima Culpa 3.0 9.5 9.5 22.0 Thorough, impactful indictment of the blindness to horror.
Moonrise Kingdom 3.0 9.0 10.0 22.0 Sincerity of the story undermines any potential problems with preciousness.
No 4.0 9.0 9.0 22.0 Really interesting, sincere and important storytelling.
Looper 4.0 8.5 9.0 21.5 Cool mix of Terminator, Logan’s Run and Inception. Felt a little long but still strong.
Quartet 3.5 8.5 9.5 21.5 A bit of a sluggish start but ultimately a lovely journey in performance and aging.
Rust and Bone 3.5 8.5 9.5 21.5 Strong story with rough edges – plot gets forced a bit toward ending, but very compelling.
The Secret World of Arrietty 3.5 9.0 9.0 21.5 Lovely, earnest film – slow-paced but completely justified in being so
Wreck-It Ralph 3.5 8.5 9.5 21.5 Great ride and really inventive, even as it was grounded in familiar.
Any Day Now 4.0 8.5 8.5 21.0 Significant yet unpretentious, with key perf from actor with Downs Syndrome.
Brave 3.5 8.5 9.0 21.0 The mother-daughter relationship evolves in a way I’ve never seen in an animated film.
End of Watch 3.5 8.5 9.0 21.0 Gritty police drama in the absolute best sense – not cliché. Gyllenhaal shines.
Searching for Sugar Man 3.5 9.0 8.5 21.0 Modest start yields great rewards – earns its smiles.
How To Survive a Plague 3.0 9.0 8.5 20.5 Some amazing historical footage highlights thorough history of HIV treatment battles.
Salmon Fishing in the Yemen 3.5 8.0 9.0 20.5 Cuts some corners but knows where its bread is buttered. Charming.
The Intouchables 3.0 8.5 9.0 20.5 A really entertaining and warm film, even as it risks relying on the conceit of the magical black healer.
Amour 3.0 8.5 8.5 20.0 Tender, well-told story but takes you exactly where you’d think it would, in a very insular world.
Central Park Five 3.0 9.0 8.0 20.0 Utterly persuasive and compelling, ranks with the best work of the Burns family.
Life of Pi 4.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 Powerful visually and the narrative mostly matches up. Not sure it achieves all it set out to, but worth seeing.
Ruby Sparks 3.5 7.5 9.0 20.0 Some contrivance early on is mitigated by really strong and thought-provoking finish.
Smashed 3.0 8.5 8.5 20.0 Really strong, human-yet-unsentimental portrayal of dealing with alcoholism
The Grey 3.5 8.5 8.0 20.0 As harsh and beautiful as the world around it, with one of the best-written endings of the year.
The Iceman 3.0 9.0 8.0 20.0 Rock solid, with Michael Shannon giving dominant performance.
Lincoln 4.0 8.0 8.0 20.0 Solid but not quite moving or natural. Day-Lewis great but almost not in same world as others.
War Witch 4.0 8.5 7.5 20.0 Can’t argue with intense story in this dark companion to “Beasts of the Southern Wild.”
Bully 3.0 7.5 9.0 19.5 Indispensable message but with some frustration at lack of insight into the causes.
Flight 4.0 7.5 8.0 19.5 Some Hollywood elements but otherwise pretty unflinching, plane stuff was good.
Promised Land 3.5 8.0 8.0 19.5 You wonder how Damon’s character ever got ahead in the business, otherwise fine.
Safety Not Guaranteed 3.0 7.5 9.0 19.5 A couple of loose plot issues don’t undermine the overall sincerity and charm.
Silver Linings Playbook 3.5 8.0 8.0 19.5 Appropriately manic, I suppose, and energetic – good but storytelling had its hiccups.
Chimpanzee 3.0 8.0 8.0 19.0 Satisfying journey into the chimps’ world.
Frankenweenie 3.0 8.0 8.0 19.0 Good, atmospheric, but doesn’t really deal with its central theme.
Head Games 3.0 8.0 8.0 19.0 Straightforward and convincing.
Madagascar 3: Europe’s Most Wanted 3.0 7.5 8.5 19.0 Defies logic but it was fun.
Middle of Nowhere 3.0 8.0 8.0 19.0 Solid story about love and life on hold with a mesmerizing lead.
The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel 3.5 7.0 8.5 19.0 A little tidy in the storytelling but very warm and enjoyable.
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey 3.5 7.5 8.0 19.0 Entertaining but long, 48 fps is cool even though it gives it a Teletubbies feel.
The Impossible 3.5 7.5 8.0 19.0 Incredible story, epic tsunami but simplistic outside of action.
The Sessions 3.5 7.5 8.0 19.0 Saccharine to a large extent, with a distracting outing by Helen Hunt, but strong finish.
To Rome with Love 3.5 7.5 8.0 19.0 Silly and a little padded but fun.
West of Memphis 3.0 8.5 7.5 19.0 Powerful stuff, of course, but troubled by the partisan production team.
Your Sister’s Sister 3.0 7.5 8.5 19.0 Sweet, sincere, meaningful if a bit light on what made characters the way they are.
Peace, Love and Misunderstanding 3.5 7.0 8.0 18.5 Servicable movie; I enjoyed Fonda, Olson and Keener.
This Is 40 3.5 7.0 8.0 18.5 A good amount of hardcore reality and some fun, interrupted by phony moments.
Bernie 3.0 7.5 7.5 18.0 Fun, if a bit slight. Role was simply made for Jack Black.
Killing Them Softly 3.0 7.5 7.5 18.0 Ending makes sense of it all. Solid with good performances but not transcendent in any way.
Rise of the Guardians 3.5 7.5 7.0 18.0 Actually a fun story, though it doesn’t really make its theme of defeating fear anything more than a fantasy.
Skyfall 4.0 6.5 7.5 18.0 Bardem wonderful, rest of the movie uneven – good moments and turgid ones.
The Gatekeepers 3.0 8.0 7.0 18.0 Enlightening. Didn’t give much reason for optimism on Israel.
To the Wonder 3.5 6.5 8.0 18.0 Eloquent, beautiful love story sandbagged by inexplicable lack of attention to Affleck’s character.
Holy Motors 4.0 7.0 6.5 17.5 The most unique movie of the year by a factor of 1,000, but it didn’t affect me.
Paranorman 3.5 7.0 7.0 17.5 Felt that I should have liked it more than I did. Story just never grabbed me. “Coraline” superior.
The Master 3.5 6.5 7.5 17.5 Impressive performances and visuals but a story that doesn’t take you anywhere.
The Waiting Room 2.5 8.0 7.0 17.5 Visceral window into ER nightmares and heroic health-care pros, but was there much insight?
Damsels in Distress 3.0 6.0 8.0 17.0 If you don’t like Stillman’s style, this film has no chance with you. Hard one to buy into.
Ethel 3.0 7.0 7.0 17.0 Completely adequate but seemed mistitled and unsure of its purpose.
Hitchcock 3.5 6.5 7.0 17.0 Has good moments but left me shrugging. Narrow.
Samsara 3.0 7.0 7.0 17.0 No shortage of interesting images, but don’t know what else to say about it.
The Company You Keep 3.0 7.0 7.0 17.0 Kind of fine, kind of fun (always with Julie Christie), but nothing standout.
Trouble with the Curve 3.5 6.5 7.0 17.0 Terrible start and a horrible baseball movie, but nice father-daughter stuff.
Not Fade Away 3.5 6.0 7.0 16.5 Some good elements but doesn’t come together in a useful way.
The Lorax 3.5 6.0 7.0 16.5 Fine for kids but definitely felt the adaptation was a bit brash and strained.
The Deep Blue Sea 3.0 6.5 6.5 16.0 Weisz strong but the film seemed thin and the ending forced. What was special about her heartbreak?
The Five-Year Engagement 3.0 6.5 6.5 16.0 Several funny moments but overall just long and kind of slow. Just inconsistent.
Arbitrage 3.0 6.0 6.0 15.0 Rich, handsome lout gets away with stuff. Well-acted but pretty pointless.
The Dark Knight Rises 4.0 6.5 4.0 14.5 I’m sure it’s very good despite its flaws, but mostly bored me to virtual tears.
Celeste and Jesse Forever 3.0 5.0 6.0 14.0 Some redemption but mostly misfires in its attempt to be instructive about relationships
On the Road 3.5 5.0 5.5 14.0 Craziness does not equal insight. Whole is less than the sum of its parts.
Anna Karenina 3.5 5.0 5.0 13.5 Outside-the-box approach spottily executed, and key character utterly useless. A long haul.
Compliance 3.0 5.5 5.0 13.5 For all its true-story basis, the film never convinces you to buy in to its outlandish reality.
Magic Mike 3.0 5.5 5.0 13.5 Harmless but almost fascinatingly dull outside the dancing. Character arcs like anthills.
Cloud Atlas 4.0 4.5 4.0 12.5 Trite, corny, doesn’t justify its expanse.
The Paperboy 4.0 4.5 4.0 12.5 Tries stuff, but really never feels anything but silly.
Hyde Park on Hudson 3.0 5.0 4.0 12.0 Pointless, with Laura Linney’s weird desperation disguised as meaningful emotion.
Cosmopolis 4.0 3.0 3.0 10.0 Sound and fury, signifying nothing new.
Feb 13

Tyra’s college application essay on ‘Friday Night Lights’

Posted on by

“Two years ago, I was afraid of wanting anything. I figured wanting would lead to trying and trying would lead to failure. But now I find I can’t stop wanting. I want to fly somewhere on first class. I want to travel to Europe on a business trip. I want to get invited to the White House. I want to learn about the world. I want to surprise myself. I want to be important. I want to be the best person I can be. I want to define myself instead of having others define me. I want to win and have people be happy for me. I want to lose and get over it. I want to not be afraid of the unknown. I want to grow up and be generous and big hearted, the way people have been with me. I want an interesting and surprising life. It’s not that I think I’m going to get all these things, I just want the possibility of getting them. College represents possibility. The possibility that things are going to change. I can’t wait.”

Feb 11

Pitchers and catchers and writers report

Posted on by

These are melancholy times for an old blogger …

I don’t feel capable of doing Dodger Thoughts right now, and honestly, I’m not sure how much I’d want to get back in the grind of it right now. But with pitchers and catchers reporting, I sure do miss the idea of it.

The site meant something to me, and as much as I’ve used the vacated time to focus on my paying job, spend some extra time with my family or occasionally relax (but unfortunately, not to exercise or reduce stress), I haven’t been able to really replace what it meant. Not for lack of trying.

Baseball is a mystery, and I’m definitely curious about The Hardy Boys and the Case of the Expensively Brittle Baseball Team. But most of the day-to-day stuff is amply covered elsewhere, even the stuff I have specific viewpoints on. If there’s anyone that needs to be told at this point that Lovable Luis Cruz’s lack of walks are a warning sign, or that money doesn’t necessarily buy baseball happiness (though it’s better than not having money), or that both Matt Kemp and Chad Billingsley are medical red flags, well, just know that I appreciate your loyalty, because the other Dodger blogs have touched on these points. There were times, not all that long ago, when I might have been the only one. Not any more.

I still think I have something to contribute to the conversation on the Dodgers, but have wondered if it was worth the effort. For example, by now, I’d be working on the annual Dodger Thoughts Spring Training Primer, which I was always proud of, but the time commitment just seems disproportionately large.

Meanwhile, my position as Awards Editor at Variety has been interesting and fulfilling, but I’m the Jonny-come-lately on that beat, and it’s taken all my professional energy just to carve out my own insights. And I’m still missing things. I’ve done good work, but that doesn’t make me special.

With Dodger Thoughts, I felt special, once upon a time, though those days were fewer and farther between in 2012.

I’ve been poking around some new writing ideas that I think would be exciting to pursue, though I’ve had real issues of confidence over whether I could deliver them. And all the misgivings linger over whether I can afford to write something that would likely have no financial return. Still, I am getting closer to the point of throwing aside caution and just writing one for the sake of writing. That seems healthy, if perhaps wasteful. They are good ideas, if nothing else.

Mostly, I’m still not the person I want to be. Not even close. My main goal is to get there, and in September, I came to think Dodger Thoughts was becoming a hindrance to that. I’m less sure of that now, but I’m not sure of several things. I’m not sure what part of the equation writing is. If it ever seems like Dodger Thoughts is the answer, I’ll be back. It sure was fun while it lasted.

Jan 22

Analyzing the Dodgers-Time Warner Cable deal

Posted on by

Here’s my Variety analysis of the imminent deal between the Dodgers and Time Warner Cable that will create a new network dedicated to the Big Blue Wrecking Crew.

By partnering to launch a new regional cable network in an overflowing market rather than making a straightforward rights deal, the Los Angeles Dodgers and Time Warner Cable have doubled down on their belief that skyrocketing revenues in the sports TV world are anything but a bubble.

The Dodgers could have simply sold their post-2013 cable rights to Time Warner Cable Sports Net’s English and Spanish components — joining a pair of networks that only launched less than four months ago — or to current host Fox Sports Net. Either way, the Dodgers could have counted on getting $6 billion or more over the next 20-25 years (triple the price that Guggenheim Partners paid for the entire team in March), with no need to worry about the future health of sports TV revenue.

For its part, Time Warner Cable could have said that two new networks were enough and held fast against launching any more into a market that some believe has plenty, thank you.

Instead, according to sources commenting on a deal that has yet to be officially announced, the Dodgers will draw a still healthy commitment from Time Warner Cable that comes with the heightened risk/reward scenario of an ownership stake. …

Read the rest of the story here.