What I said? Forget it.

So after a lengthy diatribe explaining why A-Rod was unlikely to come to Los Angeles, it is now being reported that Joe Torre is likely to replace Grady Little as the next manager of the Dodgers. Wow.

I'll be honest, I totally didn't expect this. I'm no huge fan of Little, but he wasn't the worst manager in the MLB, just not the best. And Torre comes with an enormous amount of baggage, regarding both his recent history with the Yankees franchise and what would likely be a very hefty contract. Let's examine that a bit, then get back to Rodriguez.

One storyline that has seemed to surround the Dodger organization the past few seasons is the issues with the front office. Communication problems with Paul DePodesta are the most oft-reported note, but fan issues with ownership decisions also pop up now and again. Clearly, the Los Angeles media is nowhere near as virulent as its counterpart in NYC - though DePodesta might not agree - and I'm not sure any ownership can match the stress levels caused by working for El Steinbrennario. But it's not like L.A. is without its own problems or potential landmines.

Torre seems excellently suited to handle both, I must admit, but I'm surprised at his willingness to jump right back into the fray in such a high-profile market, given what seemed to be a degree of weariness following this past year. Nevertheless, if Joe's willing to take the job, I'm more than happy to see how he manages this young Dodger team. He's known as a "player's manager," skilled in handling personality disputes and the like, which could be just the tonic neccessary after the back-and-forth that occurred between the youth movement and the vets at the end of last season.

But one concern is Torre's contract. He's not cheap - the man did just walk away from a $5 million deal, after all. Even hoping that he'll accept some sort of a pay cut given the realities of working for any organization not located in Boston or New York, he must know the Dodgers are hardly penniless. I can't really see him working for Little's estimated $600,000 a year (ironically found in an article titled "No changes on managerial front"), and the several million dollars that might have to be allocated towards Torre's salary could end up costing the Dodgers one of their young players. Why? Well...

Torre's arrival now brings to light the possibility that A-Rod, and even Mariano Rivera, might be looking to move to Southern California (as well as Don Mattingly, who will be organizationally linked with his prospect son, Preston). The potential addition of players like Rodriguez and Mo suggests the Dodgers might be looking to move some of their higher-priced talent as I had hoped... but potentially might send along some of the youngsters who become redundant in order to ensure they keep salary off the books. Players like Andy LaRoche and Jonathan Meloan become expendable pieces in the quest to free up salary for A-Rod.

ToyCannon of True Blue LA has once again put together a good piece explaining why A-Rod and the Dodgers are a good fit, and I'm not totally inclined to disagree (though I shudder to think of the columns already being penned in the minds of Bill Plaschke and TJ Simers). I especially like reason #10 why A-Rod would love being in L.A. - "What better place then Los Angeles to break Barry Bonds home run mark" (Hear Hear!). But a big organizational shakeup a move like this would necessitate gives me pause, given Colletti's track record, and the necessity of finding both salary and space for a potential addition of A-Rod/Mo/Torre (potentially $45 million plus for the three).

If Ned sides with the 'vets' in a reorganization, LAN could potentially have $65 million tied up in salaries for the manager, an otherworldly 3B, an effective-but-aging closer, an effective-but-aging 2B (Kent), and a moderately-worthwhile-at-best CF (Pierre). When some of the young talent begins looking towards contract restructuring in the next few years, there may not be much money left in the coffers, and the Dodgers could end up much like the San Francisco Giants (Colletti's previous haunt) have been for the past few seasons.

The only thing I can really say for certain is that this offseason promises to be veeeeeery interesting - and hopefully the addition of a few big names (and please please pleeeeeease no reduction in the youth movement) could bring the Dodgers some major national relevance in the Fall once again.

Roundball is upon us!

So this week the Coaches Poll came out for college basketball. The UCLA Bruins are ranked #2, a bare 5 points behind the North Carolina Tar Heels(739 to 734). The Bruins actually received more 1st-place votes than UNC (12 to 10), yet ended up behind them in the poll. Directly after UCLA, with 8 first place votes and 731 total poll points, are the Memphis Tigers. Following this top three, the coaches clearly believe a significant divide exists, as 4th-place Kansas received the only #1 vote not given to UCLA, UNC, or Memphis. After drops of 5 and 3 points going from 1-2 and 2-3, there is a 62 point fall-off to KU, and another 44 point drop to 5th-ranked Georgetown.

UCLA hopes that the arrival of much-touted freshman big Kevin Love can offset the loss of talented swingman Arron Afflalo, who was picked in the first round of the NBA Draft by the Detroit Pistons after leaving school a year early. As the Bruins return pretty much every impact player from last year's Final Four team other than Afflalo, the trade-off from small to big will hopefully allow the Bruins to continue playing at the same high level they have attained the past two seasons. But it won't be easy...

The Pac-10, at least if this particular preseason poll is to be believed, is by far the toughest conference in the country. 6 of the top 25 teams are found in the Pac, with Washington State (10), Oregon (13), Arizona (17), USC (18), and Stanford (21) all expected to be among the best in the nation alongside the Bruins. Among the traditional power conferences, the Big East has 5 teams named (out of 16 total teams), while the ACC has 3 (out of 12 total). The SEC, home of reigning champions Florida, has 3 teams as well, but interestingly, the Gators are not one of them. Furthermore, with the Pac-10's unusual true round-robin system, the Bruins will be forced to face each of the difficult opponents within the conference twice this year.

That having been said, UCLA's out-of-conference games are moderately tough at best. Davidson, Maryland, Texas, and a potential game against Michigan State in the CBE Classic's 'championship' game are probably the only real potential road blocks. The remaining games are, for the most part, a fairly fattening creampuff schedule with a heavy emphasis on home games as well. Aside from the CBE and the "neutral site" (read: Anaheim) Davidson game, UCLA only goes on the road once, to meet Michigan (I am so sick of John Beilein, he's like Billy Donovan but without the slick hair or immense amount of talent on the bench). Even so, if the Pac-10 ends up being even remotely close to as tough as it is predicted to be, the Bruins will have their hands full for the majority of the conference schedule anyway.

But as long as Kevin Love can avoid getting kicked during practice (Hat Tip: BBR), UCLA seems poised for another successful season with the potential for a deep tournament run.

One can only hope.

L.A.-Rod?

Yeah, I know, horrific pun - but I can almost promise at least one local copy editor is considering it for tomorrow's sports page right now.

Anyway, Alex Rodriguez has opted out of his contract with the New York Yankees, the remainder of which was worth "$72 million he was owed over the final three seasons of his record $252 million, 10-year deal..." So how does this pertain to the Dodgers and Angels?

Well, to the Dodgers, probably not so much. Let's pretend Dodgers GM Ned Colletti has managed to get over his dislike of A-Rod agent extraordinaire Scott Boras for his role in the J.D. Drew circus of last season. Even then, the team's payroll seems pretty locked in at around $120 million or so, and is unlikely to jump 25% with the addition of the $30 million dollar man. According to ToyCannon over at the excellent True Blue LA blog, the Dodgers are going to be on the hook for $90 million or so next season, even before factoring in several big names that will likely end up receiving new deals in some fashion (most notably Russell Martin, Chad Billingsley, and Jonathan Broxton out of the current MLB lineup).

This does ignore the possibility of Ned Colletti suddenly throwing caution to the winds, handing the reins of the team over to the youngsters, and trading away the majority of the (overpriced) 'veteran' talent for pennies on the dollar in order to free up cash. Somehow vacating the salaries of Jeff Kent, Nomar Garciaparra, Juan Pierre (ohpleasegodgethimofftheteam), and Esteban Loazia (with Jason Schmidt receiving a tentative "Do Not Open 'Till XMAS" sign on the off chance he comes back healthy) would free up around $35 million in salaries. If those players were replaced largely with low-cost bench filler, enough might be left to sign Rodriguez.

However, the likelihood of Colletti somehow finding the courage to wipe out so many big names at once seems incredibly low, even if the team itself would seem to improve even if the Dodgers then failed to land A-Rod: First, one out of Tony Abreu/Chin-Lung Hu takes over second, with enough of a defensive improvement to hopefully offset some of the loss of Kent's bat. The guy may move like Strom Thurmond - and yes, I know he's dead, the point still stands - but he can still rake. Andy LaRoche (or A-Rod, in a best-case scenario) should be an immediate improvement both offensively and defensively over Nomar, despite the loss of periodic Mia Hamm promotional opportunities. Between Andre Ethier, Matt Kemp, Delwyn Young, the outfield should be overall greatly improved (assuming Kemp can transition to CF) over replacing two of those with Luis Gonzales and Pierre. And Loaiza was just a bad signing in the first place - with a ton of pitching coming up from AAA and AA and hopefully off the DL, finding a way to remove his salary would be a bonus no matter what.

But, this is just a pipe dream. It's never going to happen, and I'm just torturing myself wishing for it. So, we continue on south down the freeway. I'll leave you with this note, courtesy of Bob Timmermann's uber-informative Griddle: the Dodgers now have the 7th longest postseason series drought, having not won a playoff series since the '88 World Series. So. Much. Pain. Anyway, on to the other Los Angeles Metropolitan Area baseball team, this one with a much more recent playoff success (2005), and a much greater likelihood of ending up with Rodriguez: the Los Orange County Angels of Anafornia.

Now, the Angels are consistently mentioned as a major player in the "A-Rod Sweepstakes/Derby/Competition/Insert Tired Sportswriter Metaphor Here" nonsense. However, a Press-Entreprise story by Dan Weber from the beginning of June suggests otherwise, with Arte Moreno noted as being very hesitant to embrace the thought of signing Rodriguez. Bill Shaikin at the L.A. Times noted a couple of weeks ago that Moreno was continuing to suggest he would not sign A-Rod, telling the Times "I don't see a $20-million player on our team." Nevertheless, with Moreno's obvious desire to supplant the Dodgers as Los Angeles's marquee team in Q-Rating (success on the field obviously notwithstanding), pairing A-Rod with Vlad would go a long way towards that goal. He's a major media figure not only because of his on-field skillset, but also due to his ability to successfully market himself off the diamond as well.

Additionally, Rodriguez seems to meet the needs the Angels might have for a big hitter - he can play multiple positions (SS/3B/DH), and he has the ability to move well on the basepaths, an absolute must for this current run-run-run Angels offense (try and imagine Prince Fielder playing for the Angels as they are currently constructed). He plays good defense, and would provide significant protection for Vlad within that Angels lineup (Guerrero has led the AL in intentional walks the past three seasons for a reason). So is Arte's hesitancy real, or manufactured to try and suppress the potential price paid?

I have to think he really doesn't believe the Angels need an A-Rod to be successful. The Angels have had a lot of success in the draft over the past few seasons, and they continue to bring up excellent young players from their high-level minor league teams. Several of their better power-hitting young players also struggled with injuries this season, including Mike Napoli and Howie Kendrick. With a very solid, and generally young, pitching staff, Moreno might feel it more wise to find a replacement for Bartolo Colon and wait a season to see which of LAA's hitting prospects continue to improve, then attacking the 2008 free agent market.

Furthermore, downplaying the likelihood of signing A-Rod seems a very ineffective strategy to me, given his overall value, and the fact that everybody knows about it. Unless every MLB owner has agreed to refuse Boras's demands for anything above $20 million (hello, collusion!), A-Rod will be able to burn cash in a wood-fired stove for most of the next decade and still walk away with... Bad analogy. He's good. Everybody knows it. He'll get paid. Moving on.

So, I really don't think Alex Rodriguez will find himself anywhere around Southern California next season (unless the Padres are planning on unexpectedly opening up the checkbook). The Dodgers don't have the payroll space and lack the willingness to jettison overpaid veterans to somehow clear it up. The Angels don't seem to want to drop $200 million on one guy when they think they might have "The Next Big Thing" coming up from AAA somewhere already for a fraction of the cost.

Ah well. I guess Go Cubs, '08?

Argh Argh Argh (one for each loss)

[Yeah, I know I haven't posted in a long time. Hopefully this'll get me back on track. Unlike the Bruins. Le sigh.]

Seriously, UCLA needs to stop playing teams that haven't won a game, either in conference play or in general. Neither Utah nor Notre Dame had a victory before meeting the Bruins, while the Cougars pick up their first Pac-10 win.

UCLA is 4-0 this season against teams who can't be described as having zero wins (the fifth victory being the win at Stanford to start the season, when no teams had a win, and so doesn't count). They are 0-3 against teams with a 0 in one of the 'win' columns.

The good news is the remainder of their games are against teams with at least one victory both in-conference and in general. Let's hope the trend holds.