Dodgers' Playoff Share Is $102,620
Not a bad bonus, especially for the young guys making near the minimum. Full playoff shares for the Dodgers came to $102,620. The playoff shares are determined from the players' pool, comprised of 60% of the gate receipts from the first three games of each LDS, and the first four games of each LCS and the World Series.
World Series winners get 36% of the pool, followed by 24% for the World Series runner up. Each league championship series loser gets 12%, which is where the Dodgers finished for the second straight year. Each division series loser gets 3%, and each non-wild card second place finisher gets 1%.
The players on each team are free to distribute the money as they see fit. Full shares for the Angels came out to $138,039. Since they got the same total amount as the Dodgers, that means the Angels awarded fewer shares than the Dodgers. However, the Angels did award a full playoff share to the estate of Nick Adehart.
Email
PrintComments
Total playoff pool was $59.1 million, so the Dodgers’ portion was 12%, or $7.09 million. If each share was $102,620, that’s roughly 69 shares. Usually there are some partial shares and small cash awards, but anyway you cut it it seems like the Dodgers’ split their playoff cash up among a ton of people.
For instance, there were only 47 players who played with the team this year. Throw in Delwyn Young, and that’s 48. That still leaves a lot of full shares to be had. I’m guessing some shares went to the clubhouse guys, and other employees. Given that the players vote on this, that is a classy move by the Dodger players.
I think in the past
Clubhouse guys, traveling secretary, ball “boys” get part of the pie. It is not such a big deal for the Mannys of the world but for someone like Charlie Haegar, (or Kemp, Bills, and Kershaw), its a nice bit of change. I am sure DeWitt got a full share, if just for the aggravation of flying back and forth.
Dodgers voted to award 59 full shares, per the LA Times, at $102,619.91 each. That only accounts for about $6.05 million, leaving just over $1 million for cash awards and partial shares.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 4:04 PM PST up reply actions
From BizofBaseball, the Dodgers awarded 10 partial shares and 4 cash awards.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 4:15 PM PST up reply actions
Question about Orlando Hudson
Would the Dodgers, if they offer arbitration to O-Dog, have to offer at least 80 percent from his base salary or total salary?
Does the 80% rule apply to free agents?
Nope
the 80% rule only applies to pre-FA arb guys
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 2:51 PM PST up reply actions
Okay, so Dodgers could offer anything they want?
by Julio Nievas on Nov 30, 2009 2:59 PM PST up reply actions
Offer needs to be within reason, on both ends
If they go to arbitration, both sides submit one salary each. Each side argues their case in front of a 3-person panel, and the arbitrators pick one or the other.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 3:01 PM PST up reply actions
What if the Dodgers REALLY don’t want Hudson, but take a chance on getting picks. Can he just be cut in March without having to pay his full salary?
Sorry if this was asked already. These rules are confusing sometimes.
They can cut him, and pay only 25% of his salary, but Hudson would likely file a grievance that it was not a baseball-related decision. Hudson would likely stand a 99% chance of winning that grievance too.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 3:34 PM PST up reply actions
Gurnick says management likes Elbert in the rotation
Specifically, that he has a chance to win a spot.
From his “Inbox” column.
Exciting
Mwhite06 was right. Having won minor pitcher of the year for the Dodgers must mean something with management.
by Julio Nievas on Nov 30, 2009 3:00 PM PST up reply actions
i hope
he wins the 5 spot.. and mcdonald the 4 and kershaw bills 1 and 2 with kuroda 3…
I like it
homegrown rotation (except for Kuroda.)
That’s a fun group to root for.
by Michael White on Nov 30, 2009 3:23 PM PST up reply actions
I would love that. I would come to the ballpark specifically to see those guys make starts. I think they’ll probably sign a veteran or two though, and have Elbert as #5 and McDonald as #6.
I think many
were saying the same thing about McDonald last year at this time. Come May I doubt anyone was going to the ballpark to watch him start.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
I just don't see two "rookies" starting right off in the rotation
It goes against both Torre and Ned’s comfort zones.
Who is the second rookie?
I guess you are counting McDonald, but he’s not really a rookie, right? If nothing else, I firmly believe Torre is in JMac’s corner.
by Michael White on Nov 30, 2009 3:36 PM PST up reply actions
Agreed
If they open with McDonald and Elbert in the rotation, who is the #6 starter? One, or two, SP will be signed for sure.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
That's What NRI's Are For...
The Eric Miltons and Jeff Weavers. The vets who fail to get major league deals and end up having to take minor league deals with invites to the big team’s spring training.
by CanuckDodger on Nov 30, 2009 4:16 PM PST up reply actions
We all know that’s not Colletti’s MO though. He may still sign a few NRIs to see what sticks, but I’m fairly confident that barring injury the season will not open with both McDonald and Elbert in the starting rotation.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 4:23 PM PST up reply actions
I'd say no chance in hell
that would be the plan. Only spring training injuries would change things. Ned is what he is and that is not going to change. That rotation would be a disaster waiting to happen. Counting on a guy who was left crying in the dugout after his last major league start, a wild ass lefty, a broken Japanese pitcher, a five inning dubious ace, and the best pitcher probably regressing.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
I'm confused
Adam Morrison = good crying
James McDonald = bad crying?
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 4:33 PM PST up reply actions
Shouldn't be confused
McDonald cried because he sucked, Morrison cried because he ended his career by his team blowing his last chance to get to the final four. One man gave it his all only to fall short, they other simply couldn’t pitch during a routine April baseball game.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Their careers post crying have went in opposite directions. That’s what I’m concerned with.
Yes, there are still questions regarding McDonald as a starter, but I don’t expect him to succumb to a puddle of his own tears on the mound when given another shot.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 4:37 PM PST up reply actions
Neither do I
but when making flippant comments about the rotation that is what I’ll use until he gives me something better to use, like a good major league start, something he has yet to do.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Just curious what you mean by opposite directions
Is McDonald doing better by being a setup man for Division winner compared to Morrison being a setup man for World ChampionShip Team after getting a sweet rookie contract because of where he was drafted?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Regardless of money, I’m saying Morrison’s NBA future is non-existant, whereas McDonald has a much better shot to contribute and actually have a good career.
Post cry, McDonald had a 2.77 ERA and struck out 8.88 batters per nine.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 4:48 PM PST up reply actions
As a setup man
he has proven to be effective. He still has to prove he can start and it would appear he has many doubters besides myself.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
I have yet to give up the ghost
that Adam Morrison will not someday make a NBA contribution.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Oh Please
Greg Miller is way beyond Wild Ass Lefty, Elbert is right about right. He can be a successful wild ass lefty just ask Sudden Sam McDowell but until he can throw strikes with any consistency that is what I’ll call him. Doesn’t mean I expect him to fail. Kershaw is not exactly Mr. Strike.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Nah
Elbert hasn’t exactly been given a chance to show what he can do. If you’re still calling him that after watching him start in the majors, then fine. But right now, it’s just a small sample size.
I guess my point is that I don’t like the negative ring it has. This guy will be GREAT. That’s why so many voters think he’s a top 5 prospect.
I'd say the chances of Elbert being great
as a starter is less then 10%. If you don’t like the sound of the wording then don’t use it but don’t tell me not to use it, not when he averages 4.8 walks per nine innings throughout his minor league career.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Now that
was a wild ass lefty. For you Silver Widow I will never use the term Wild Ass Lefty to define Scott Elbert.
I bet Rick Ankiel takes up ptiching again once he’s done as a hitter.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
If Phil has to give up “wild ass lefty,” you have to give up “elite.” :)
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 4:57 PM PST up reply actions
55 MLB lefty relievers threw 19 innings in 2009.
Elbert walked 3.2 batters per 9, which ranked 18th among LH relievers
His 9.61 K/9 was 7th (just ahead of Kuo’s 9.60)
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 4:49 PM PST up reply actions
Going back 2 years
Elbert has thrown just 25.2 IP in the majors.
In 2008-2009, there were 74 lefty relievers to throw at least 25 IP.
Elbert ranked 41st with 3.86 BB/9, and 7th with 10.17 K/9.
Small sample size for both, obviously.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 4:52 PM PST up reply actions
Why are you using
such a small sample size to prove your point? I’m using his minor league numbers. Why are we even looking at his major league numbers when the innings pitched are so small?
At least look at his 2009 AAA numbers which showed excellent progress. If he keeps up that progress I’ll be impressed but I couldn’t care less what he’s done in the majors right now since we are talking about using him in the rotation and all of those numbers were accomplished as a relief pitcher. They are not the same job and shouldn’t be confused with such.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
I was getting to those
Just trying to point out he hasn’t been that bad.
And he improved his walk rate in 2009 after the jump to AAA, too (4.3 to 3.7 BB/9), and this was all as a starter.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 4:55 PM PST up reply actions
Yes
Excellent progress, something to hang our hat on. Remember I’m the guy who had him as the number one prospect at mid-season. Just because everyone doesn’t like the term wild ass lefy doesn’t mean I don’t think Elbert is going to be good. I’m just not convinced it will be in the rotation. For me if he fails in the rotation he’ll just become Billy Wagner. While I think he only has a small chance of being a great starter I think he has an excellent chance of being an excellent relief pitcher.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Kershaw Is a Wild Ass Lefty...
…Billingsley is a Wild Ass Righty. The Dodgers don’t produce control pitchers. Who cares as long as they have the “stuff” to compensate?
by CanuckDodger on Nov 30, 2009 5:00 PM PST up reply actions
Both
Kershaw and Billingsley would be better served by not being so wild assed don’t you think?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Unless of course
you like your starters to throw 110 pitches every five innings.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Kershaw and Billingsley...
…would benefit from being absolutely perfect. They’re not, and I can live with that. I don’t expect Elbert to be either, and it is unfair to hold Elbert to a standard they won’t even hold Billingsley and Kershaw to.
by CanuckDodger on Nov 30, 2009 5:07 PM PST up reply actions
I really don't understand your rational
because we already have two pitchers who have control problems it is okay if everyone else also has them? I guess so if they can actually pitch as well as Kershaw and Billingsley but that seem to be a big leap in confidence.
Plus I fully expect the above mentioned pitchers to get better command because if they don’t we will once again have the most used bullpen in baseball. You may think different but I don’t think that is a good thing.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Here's The Thing...
…if you, or somebody else, had made the argument that Bilingsley and Kershaw can’t be counted on as “innings eaters” so we need a Jon Garland or two to compensate for them(in short, we already have two starters like Elbert so we can’t afford to have Elbert too), I understand that and would even concede, “Okay, you have a point.” Not that I would agree with it, but I would admit there is SOME merit to that concern. But that argument hasn’t been made, I don’t believe you want even ONE Jon Garland let alone two, and with our budget being extremely limited I really don’t see us even being able to afford one reliable innings eater so forget about two. Thus given our circumstances, I am in favor of embracing the risky option of going home-grown and taking the chance that we may be short on innings from the rotation once again. As 2009 proven, that is a situation that can be managed. And at least with Elbert and McDonald there is upside to go along with the risk. If that means we have to have EIGHT relievers in the bullpen for the 2010 season, well, then we will just have to go with a short bench. It is a sacrifice and every team sacrifices somewhere. And it is not like the extra bench spot would have gone to anybody who can hit anyway, given the Dodgers’ penchant for Sweeneys and Castros and Lorettas.
by CanuckDodger on Nov 30, 2009 6:47 PM PST up reply actions
When you put it that way
I’ll concede your point. I would also rather have McDonald/Haeger/Elbert/Lindblom get a shot then just bring in someone like Marquis or Garland. However I’d be filling AAA with plenty of options to take some of those innings off the young arms. I’m always concerned with pitchers who have never been in a major league rotation, starting in the rotation and being effective all year.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
I'm Saying What SHOULD Be...
….I think that’s what we were talking about. We all KNOW Elbert and McDonald aren’t going to be in the rotation to start the season.
Who knows with injuries, Kuroda is not exactly Mr. Ripken. No one expected DeWitt to be the starting 3rd baseman in 2008. Injuries can make any bizarre scenario plausible.
However I can’t even imagine how thin the rotation would be if they were picked to start in the rotation. If the depth only includes the Miltons/Weavers of the world for two pitchers who didn’t have a lot of mileage on their arms this past season we would be in a world of hurt by August.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Back on thread
I think it is great they voted so many shares. Wonder if front office types like Josh Rawitch got a share. That would probably double his salary.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Yeah
I think it has to be some of those guys. Probably Mitch Poole and the clubhouse attendants, guys like that. Maybe even Mark Rogoff or Drew Merle, too, although Mark probably had more interaction with the players than did Drew.
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 5:10 PM PST up reply actions
Training staff, advance scouts, clubhouse guys, bat boys, traveling secretary
I think those who interact with the players on a daily basis are the ones who will get the money, I doubt the front office see much of it.
Don’t forget Junior Seau, batboy for a day :)
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 6:56 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
I'm a sucker for these Rock n Roll
HOF shows. If Mick can still strut I might have a few more good years left after all. I’m simply amazed Patti Smith is still alive.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
HBOE
Only caught the last two hours, being HBO I expect we will have plenty of options to catch all four hours.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
He's a little guy
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Nov 30, 2009 10:05 PM PST up reply actions
Nope
He has been on the small side for a long time. From SI, all the way back in 1984:
What’s held back Guerrero, some Dodgers feel, is lackadaisical play. On July 17 Lasorda reportedly blasted unnamed, highly paid Dodgers for not giving it their all. Badly shaken, Guerrero sat down that night, citing a knee injury. He did appear as a pinch hitter, striking out, and did the same the following night, extending his hitless streak to 14 at bats. When he learned the L.A. papers had raked him over the coals, Guerrero threatened 118-pound L.A. Herald Examiner reporter Ken (Mouse) Gurnick, saying, “I’m going to kick your [bleeping] ass.” Instead, Guerrero kicked up his heels: He went 2 for 4, stole a base and scored twice in Hershiser’s win.
I love the exact weight there :)
by Eric Stephen on Nov 30, 2009 11:03 PM PST up reply actions
Stuff I want to happen at the Winter Meetings
*Dodgers sign a high risk/high reward pitcher to an incentive laden, 1 yr deal. (Erik Bedard)
*Dodgers trade Juan Pierre and cash to unknown team for 4th/5th starter type. This gives guys like Xavier Paul and Trayvon Robinson clear paths to the L.A. outfield in 2010.
*Dodgers non-tender Jason Repko
*Dodgers sign Matt Kemp to 6-year extension (wishful thinking, I know)
*Dodgers decide to use internal depth to fill 2B.
Kershaw
Billingsley
Bedard
Kuroda
Elbert
Furcal
Kemp
Ethier
Manny
Loney
Blake
2B (DeWitt/Hu)
Martin
Have to agree with every single action
except I’d like a little more at 2nd base then DeWitt/Hu.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
I love it
And seems like it should all be doable even with severe financial constraints. Except for maybe the Kemp extension.
I’d love for the Dodgers to only spend money this offseason on Bedard, then if any more money is available, use it for locking up their younger players in this order: Bills, Kemp, Either, Martin, Kershaw, Broxton.
The reason for Bills and Martin to be higher than a lot would have them is that I think they are good buy low candidates. Bills could get a lot more expensive if he has a good year. Martin is a lot more of a gamble, but I don’t really see any better options in the near future. Plus we might be able to get him really cheap right now. Kershaw would be higher, but we have him under control for a while so not as urgent.
by CarolinaDodger on Dec 1, 2009 5:59 AM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- U.S. senator cries foul over Nationals plans to take back park from Phillies fans
- Photo: Comerica Park readies itself for Hockeytown
- Podcast: Dirk Hayhurst talks about Italy, the reality of the big leagues and his new book
- Dennis ‘Oil Can’ Boyd claims he used cocaine before a majority of his games
- Does Billy Beane’s contract extension signal an optimistic dawn for Oakland fans?
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
