Scouting for Talent Not Good Enough

If you ran a baseball team, which would you rather have: talent, character or chemistry?

I was thinking about this Tuesday, as ballclubs--including the Dodgers and Angels--froze 15 players apiece, to keep the mitts of those Arizona and Tampa Bay expansion clubs off them.

After what the Florida Marlins did, I have a weird feeling that the 1998 World Series could be between the Arizona and Tampa Bay clubs. (It would draw a Nielsen rating of .00001, putting it just ahead of most shows on the WB and Paramount networks.)

Last season, there was a lot of discussion about talent vs. character vs. chemistry.

To review:

I. TALENT--Talent can be bought. The final four teams--Florida, Cleveland, Atlanta and Baltimore--had four of baseball’s five highest payrolls, the other belonging to the Yankees.

Rebuttal: I would put the Dodger talent up there with the Marlins’. Furthermore, good baseball was played by Montreal and Pittsburgh, teams without big payrolls.

II. CHARACTER--A team with character can click. No better example exists than the 1988 Dodgers. It was also demonstrated by Toronto and Minnesota, which won two World Series championships each between 1987 and 1993. A single player can make a difference (e.g., Eric Davis’ boost to the Orioles, or Tony Phillips’ blow to the Angels).

Rebuttal: Jim Leyland’s contention is that “character is overrated,” inasmuch as the Yankees and Braves, in the Marlin manager’s eyes, had character galore, but did not return to the World Series.

III. CHEMISTRY--Chemistry is a mixture of talent and character. You must put the right elements together. Young and old, or a personality mix, or an ethnic mix, or something that comes together by accident. (Some said L.A. lacked spirit and esprit de corps, which San Francisco did not.)

Rebuttal: Several Dodgers--and many fans--disagreed with catcher Mike Piazza’s observations about Dodger chemistry, that it wasn’t easy for such a mixed bag of personalities to blend as a team. (I particularly liked: “What are we supposed to do, go out on a picnic?”)

I mention all this for a reason.

One is that the Dodgers--like their opponents in both leagues--must figure out how to become the best of 30 teams. Remember, there are 30, not 28, teams now, and expansionists don’t roll over and play dead. Even the worst team in baseball history, the ’62 Mets, needed only seven years to win a World Series.

Where character is concerned, some Dodgers feel all that rah-rah is a bunch of bunk. I remember how foolish they thought the Giants acted while jumping up and down after a big win over the Dodgers late in the season, and how a Dodger or two said, “We won’t forget that.”

They should listen to veteran Darren Daulton of the Marlins, who remarked after a series with the Braves, “To win the World Series, you have to play with a lot of emotion, and [the Braves] don’t have it. I also don’t think it’s right for them to keep ridiculing other teams for having it.”

I have heard it said that some Dodgers think the team’s three biggest stars are arrogant and self-possessed, and that one was benched at least once--explained away later that he was simply getting a day off--because of the late hours he keeps at nightclubs. Is this, if true, a lack of character, a lack of dedication? I don’t know. Maybe.

Where talent is concerned, the Dodgers do have a heck of a call to make. Eric Karros is a proven. Paul Konerko is a prospect. If I had as many holes to fill--center field, shortstop, maybe left field, bullpen closer--as the Dodgers, I would gamble on Konerko at first base, the very way they once gambled on Karros. It isn’t personal; it’s business. And it is extremely risky.

Having read that the Dodgers are interested in Baltimore center fielder Brady Anderson, I think, “Wow, perfect.” But I thought this with Delino DeShields, and look how that turned out. (If DeShields had played second base here the way he played it for Montreal and St. Louis, I doubt the Dodgers would have regretted parting with Pedro Martinez, as they do now.)

In theory, Kenny Lofton likewise seems a perfect fit for Dodger Stadium in center field. Yet a couple of Braves said, off the record, that they disliked Lofton’s moods and me-first attitude. So did a few Indians after he left that team. Funny, they didn’t mind when Kenny was in the 1995 World Series, or when he was the National League’s player of the month for April 1997.

I wonder who will bat leadoff here in April 1998. I would like it to be someone with Anderson’s power or Lofton’s speed, and someone appreciated by Dodger teammates and Dodger fans for more than only his talent.