Dodgers Value Important Portables; Fans Need Potent Potables
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 7:16 AM PST
in News
214 comments
I have read and re-read Bill Shaikin's interview with Dodger President Dennis Mannion in the LA Times many times, trying to wrap my head around it. Every time I see the words, I get angry. Angry that the Dodgers have a man in Mannion running the baseball operations who doesn't seem to have a clue how teams are built.
On potentially receiving draft picks for offering Randy Wolf and/or Orlando Hudson arbitration:
And is it worth a premium draft pick? That's also showing bizarre behavior, in my opinion, in terms of teams bidding against themselves for draft picks. That's been going on for a while on the amateur side of the business. But it's happening now on the international side, with guys you don't know anything about.
It's strange to me to see teams operate in a way where they bid against themselves for unknown talent, and at the same time, you have this plethora of guys in the system that maybe are not developing appropriately, i.e. a (Ronald) Belisario. That's interesting stuff to me. I think it's really fascinating. It's probably the upside of having very tough economic times.
Matt Kemp, Clayton Kershaw, Jonathan Broxton, Chad Bilingsley, James Loney, Russell Martin, Hong-Chih Kuo, and Ramon Troncoso, just to name a few, were all acquired by the Dodgers as amateurs. Young talent is the driving force behind a Dodger team that has reached two straight National League Championship Series. But Mannion -- who runs the baseball operations for the team, by the way -- doesn't see their value.
Mannion uses a diversion tactic here. Draft picks are a crap shoot, he says, but hey, look over here. Remember when we signed Ronald Belisario out of nowhere? Look, something shiny. Look over here instead!
My advice to Mannion, in order to deal with the problem of "guys you don't know anything about," is this: That's what scouts are for. You have Logan White. Use him.
Shaikin then asked about the concern over the cost of extra draft picks (Shaikin's question is in bold):
Since Wolf probably would have signed a long-term contract somewhere else even if the Dodgers had offered him arbitration, how worried were you about the millions it might cost to sign the draft picks you would have gotten in return?
You're dealing with a very fluid situation. Those millions that are potentially in play, they can manifest themselves where the opportunity is. If the opportunity is in buying more portable concession stands, then that's what you do. If the opportunity is buying some international talent that you have a very good handle on, that's what you do. In this particular world, you're making those assessments on a daily basis.
I like being able to have more opportunities to buy a hefeweizen and a Dodger Dog as much as the next guy, but I'd rather have a few more draft picks. Mannion uses another diversion tactic here: he was asked about draft picks, and answered about a choice between stadium upgrades and amateur international talent. Mannion's "portable concession stands" rings as hollow as Jamie McCourt's "50 Little League fields" comments last season.
I don't know how many times we've talked about this since the season ended, but the Dodgers will be good in 2010. There is too much talent still around to think otherwise. But investing in player development isn't a one-time event. I just hope the Dodgers figure it out before the cupboard runs dry.
0 recs |
214 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
You’re dealing with a very fluid situation. Those millions that are potentially in play, they can manifest themselves where the opportunity is. If the opportunity is in buying more portable concession stands, then that’s what you do. If the opportunity is buying some international talent that you have a very good handle on, that’s what you do. In this particular world, you’re making those assessments on a daily basis.
I literally have no idea what Mannion is talking about here. This quote sounds like a a 16 year old who was just made the president of his father’s multi-million dollar business. Just saying a bunch of flash words (fluid, manfiest, in play) and hope the interviewer doesn’t press you on it.
“Mr. Madison, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it.”
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 7:46 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Thank you for turning my scowl into a laugh
McCourt deserves to go bankrupt for hiring people like this. Competition sorts out the weak minds from the strong, and it’s a shame Dodger management has become the former.
I'm glad you made this comment
When I read the quote in the article up top I had to stop and question my comprehension skills. For a while there I was thinking I had some form of pre-Alzheimer’s preventing me from making sense of that particular passage.
Nice quote!
Sums that response up perfectly
Oops
Meant that as a reply to mwhite06’s Billy Madison reference
by CarolinaDodger on Dec 23, 2009 7:47 AM PST up reply actions
This line really stood out to me...
For now, according to the source, Commissioner Bud Selig considers the Dodgers no different from many other clubs that have limited spending during these uncertain economic times.
Doesn’t Selig know that unlike those other teams, the Dodgers are the MLB leaders in attendance? We have limited spending because we have an insolvent owner saddled with debt and a divorce and more debt. Not because of these “uncertain economic times”. Its as if Selig is happy that the Dodgers are turning into the Royals.
Is it really relevant (from Selig’s point of view) why the Dodgers are strapped for cash?
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 8:17 AM PST up reply actions
Well as the league commissioner, isn’t he responsible for ensuring that the owners act in the best interest of the team and the league?
Good point. But isn’t it plausible that the two interests you mention don’t necessarily align? And if so, wouldn’t Selig’s untimate responsiblity be to the league as a whole, not the individual team?
Just a hypothetical really, but I can see how things that are in the best interest of the individual team are not in the best interest of the league. I’m a Dodger fan, so I want the team to boast the best team in baseball, but if the Dodgers are contributing revenue (from the high attendance figures which I believe are shared) and do it by keeping the payroll low and thus not contributing to salary inflation, what has negatively impacted MLB as a whole?
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 8:27 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
This is the most reasonable and objective comment I have seen on TBLA regarding Selig and the Dodgers in quite sometime. We all love the Dodgers here and are prone to seeing things from a Dodger-centric perspective. Kudos to you MWhite for seeing the big picture.
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 8:39 AM PST up reply actions
Would this be a valid point for other big market teams? Would artificially weakening the Yankees, Mets and Red Sox actually help MLB? While it might provide parity, I don’t think baseball is improved by weakening the flagship franchises. There are much more efficient methods of creating parity than the mess the Dodgers have right now.
I’m not sure I agree with that. I’ve heard that argument before (mostly on Sports Center by Peter Gammons talking about how great it is to make the Yankees and Red Sox as good as possible) but I’m not sure I buy it. The NFL is the king of parity and their popularity is sky high. NBA has the least parity and its popularity is the lowest, MLB is in the middle.
Admittedly, that is an incredibly simplistic approach on my part, but I do think parity is a good thing. I don’t see why having dominant “flagship franchises” is good for baseball. People (to me) seem to get more excited when the Rays and Tigers make it to the World Series after years of being at the bottom of the barrel. People like the underdogs.
And by the way, the Dodgers haven’t been weakened yet. The well capitalized Fox ownership never went to the NLCS two years in a row. I could see Selig taking a position where he won’t act on a problem until there is one, and considering a divorce is in the works, the team could be sold before there is an actual problem.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 8:53 AM PST up reply actions
I’m not arguing that parity isn’t a worthwhile goal. I have mixed feelings as whether baseball should strive for it. But if parity is a goal, the Dodgers should not be the model for how to achieve it. Baseball should want all its owners to make wise business decisions and maintain financial stability.
Selig likely is hoping the Dodgers’ mess doesn’t become a major story outside of LA so it makes sense for him to minimize the problem when talking to the press. I agree that selling the team before the on-field quality declines drastically would be in his and MLB’s best interests and is likely to happen.
Just want to say that this was a great and thoughtful exchange.
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Dec 23, 2009 9:42 AM PST up reply actions
I don’t think Selig is hoping for parity. But expecting Selig to throw the Dodgers a life-preserver just because the team is making poor baseball decisions (based on finances) is akin to waiting for Godot to arrive…
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 8:54 AM PST up reply actions
Selig wants weak owners
that he can control. He also left-coaster minded and would never want to see the Dodgers have an owner that would keep up in spending with the Mets/Yanks/Soxs.
Isn't McCourt from Milwaukee?
That doesn’t seem to me to be a left-coaster.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 8:53 AM PST up reply actions
Whoops. I meant Selig is from Milwaukee
Sorry.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 8:54 AM PST up reply actions
I'm confused...
If Selig were left-coast minded, wouldn’t he be favoring the Dodgers to succeed? A quick check of the map below confirms that California is on the left side of the United States, whereas the Yankees, Mets and Red Sox would all be based out of towns on the right side of the map
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 9:18 AM PST up reply actions
I must have missed Selig’s involvement in making the Mets such a successful franchise.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 9:20 AM PST up reply actions
As I recall
Selig and Peter O’Mally did not get along, but I’d have to dig for the stories that brought that to my attention. Selig may be from the heartland of America but he certainly acts like a man who was destined to work in DC. The man has snakeskin oil oozing from his pores, probably from his car leasing days. Once upon a time I’m sure he was a good man who worked hard to bring baseball back to the Wisconsin but after numerous shedding of skins and feeding on crickets the brain has turned into a full time baseball lobbyist who sheds favors right and left to those who grease his goals the right way.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
probably from his car leasing days.
Do you think Kevin Malone used Selig as a reference to get his job at Valencia Mercedes?
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 9:40 AM PST up reply actions
McCourt's father was involved in the ownership of the Milwaukee Braves
by 68elcamino427 on Dec 23, 2009 2:45 PM PST up reply actions
Really
Now that would shed some light on this subject wouldn’t it. Do I have to search for the info or do you have it handy?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Wow
I’m with Phil, that’s really interesting news.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 2:49 PM PST up reply actions
Close
It was is grandfather, and it was the Boston Braves.
Francis McCourt helped start the Jimmy Fund
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 2:58 PM PST up reply actions
But if it was the Boston Braves then
a good chance that Selig did not know his Grandfather unless me maintained some level of ownership when they moved to Wisconsin.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Every reference I found to Francis McCourt linked him only to Boston. I guess he had a small stake with majority owner Lou Perlini. Perlini did eventually move the club to Milwaukee, but I can’t find anything connecting Francis to the Milwaukee Brewers.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 3:38 PM PST up reply actions
Thanks SB Nation
this whole “McBroke” conversation has been the best gift* that the internet could give us,
on an otherwise ‘dead week’ in Baseball ….
- highly entertaining! *
From Wiki - Frand McCourt - Executive
>>Family history of sports ownership<<
>>Frank McCourt’s grandfather was part owner of the Boston Braves along with Lou Perini and others<<
Perini sold the Braves in1961
For some reason I recall a part of a write up in the Times when McCourt first came to LA that gave a description of Frank as a young boy roaming County Stadium. Wish I could get that particular artical.
by 68elcamino427 on Dec 23, 2009 4:18 PM PST up reply actions
Selig wants weak owners
I disagree with this 1,000%. I would believe that Peter Angelos, John Henry, Jerry Reinsdorf, Mike Ilitch, Artie Moreno, Fred Wilpon, George Steinbrenner, the late Ted Rogers, Tom Hicks, David Montgomery, Bill Neukom, Bill DeWitt Jr, and the fine folks who gave you Super Mario Brothers would disagree 1,000% with that statement as well.
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 9:03 AM PST up reply actions
Devil's advocate.
Eli Broad and Mark Cuban might agree though.
Has Selig ever intentionally blocked Eli Broad or Mark Cuban from entering MLB ownership?
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 9:10 AM PST up reply actions
Yes
Maybe in not so many direct words though:
Cuban’s bid to buy the team from owner Sam Zell? According to the Chicago Sun-Times, the Internet billionaire and owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks won’t even make the final cut if commissioner Bud Selig and Major League Baseball owners have their way.
“There’s no way Bud and the owners are going to let that happen,” a baseball source told the Chicago Sun-Times earlier this week. "Zero chance.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 9:15 AM PST up reply actions
Wasn’t Mark Cuban invited back by MLB to a second round of bidding for the Cubs in July 2008? Isn’t it possible that Cuban just got outbid for the franchise?
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 9:22 AM PST up reply actions
And I don’t think the problem with Cuban was that he had too much money. It probably had more to do with the fact that he acts like an asshole.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 9:24 AM PST up reply actions
Correct. And I have yet to hear an example of Selig looking for weak owners who would be subject to his manipulation.
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 9:27 AM PST up reply actions
I'm not totally convinced Selig is looking for weak owners
but it is interesting when certain people or groups get “fast-tracked” while other individual’s or groups seem to get really scrutinized and questioned.
favors beget favors
it is the way of the world and always will be
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Possibly, but it’s also Cuban backed out because he knew he wasn’t going to get chosen anyway.
John Henry wasn’t the highest bidder for the Red Sox. The highest bid doesn’t always win.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 9:33 AM PST up reply actions
Agreed.
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 9:37 AM PST up reply actions
No
But he certainly wasn’t advocating for either of those guys or making their paths to ownership any easier like he was for the guy from the Expos that bought the Marlins
I'm switching to "Yes"
after reading Eric’s reply that popped up as I posted mine.
Yes
He in fact should care why any team is having financial problems, it his job as the CEO of baseball.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Exactly
which is why that line jumped out at me, because anyone with a functioning brain can see that the Dodgers’ spending issues are a direct result of ownership problems and have very little to do with the uncertain economic times that are challenging teams like the Pirates, Royals, Reds, etc. Lumping the Dodgers in with the other teams with limited spending is total BS
Of course its BS
But its still irrelevant. It’s not like Selig can shame McCourt into spending money he doesn’t have. What is gained from calling out Frank? He can’t seize the team (or maybe he can, I really have no idea.)
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 8:29 AM PST up reply actions
I believe he could shame (or possibly force) McCourt into expediting the sale of the team. As many have pointed out here at TBLA, next season, the Dodgers will still have a good product on the field next season. However, I do not think it would be responsible or prudent to the league to allow one of the great and attendance leading franchises to continue this descent to a point where the team is in total disarray for years to come.
continue this descent?
The Dodgers improved from 2008 to 2009.
They won 95 games. I don’t think Selig considers the Dodgers to be a high priority problem, or even a problem at all.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 8:55 AM PST up reply actions
And he probably never will
The Dodgers, even when they aren’t that good, always have huge attendance numbers and generate a lot of revenue. Selig and MLB are perfectly content to let LA field a AAA team as long as people keep showing up and tuning in.
Selig and MLB are perfectly content to let LA field a AAA team as long as people keep showing up and tuning in.
Matt Kemp, Jonathon Broxton, Andre Ethier, Clayton Kershaw and others would probably disagree with your assesment of their skill level.
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 9:08 AM PST up reply actions
I'm not calling the current team a AAA team
I’m just saying that if the Dodgers were unable to keep any of their talent in the future, MLB wouldn’t care who they threw out there as long as people continue to pay to see the team.
MLB wouldn’t care who they threw out there as long as people continue to pay to see the team.
This I can totally agree with
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 9:23 AM PST up reply actions
I think that is naive
to think Selig does not consider the Dodgers a problem. Selig hates bad PR and the Dodger Divorce is nothing but bad PR for baseball. Selig has many things to worry about. For one if the Divorce goes Jamey’s way and they have to sell the team, what if no big spender shows up to buy the team? That could be embarrassing, they have a certain value they want to show their franchises are worth and the Dodgers are a diamond among the franchises but that does not mean someone that Selig would consider a viable owner is going to step up to the plate. What if it is true the Dodgers have a negative cash flow even if they draw 4,000,000 customers a year? I think Selig has plenty to think about regarding the Dodgers. Try selling a team that doesn’t even own the TV rights at a huge premium over what the previous owner paid for it. Try selling a team that has more debt then when the team as last purchased. Just saying I doubt very much if the commissioner’s office is not keeping a very tight eye on what is happening here.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Im not saying they didn't improve from 2008 to 2009
And its not out of the realm of possibility that they could improve in 2010 from 2009 (although unlikely at this point).
However, if the team continues to be operated like it has with little regard for draft picks, no international or draft pick spending, selling off top prospects and not locking up the young core, then this team will be on a clear descent in 2011, 2012, etc. and it easily could begin as early as next season.
What percent
of team revenue comes from attendance vs tv contracts for teams like the Yankees? And what kind of revenue are the Dodgers missing out on due to not having control over local tv rights/revenue?
vr, Xei
Mannion sort of sounds like your boss giving you the runaround when you ask for a raise. They give you the song and dance and say alot of words that mean nothing. Bottom line were screwed.Mannion thinks Dodger fans must be idiots. Dodgers should always be in the top 5 in payroll and we are quickly settling in the middle of the pack after being 11th last year.
by frustrated dodger on Dec 23, 2009 8:14 AM PST reply actions
Very much so
the doublespeak that MWhite alluded to was condescending. This was the worse interview I’ve ever read by a top Dodger official. When you have things to hide use this kind of language hoping to mask the problems.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
It is going to be easy
to look at this interview and focus on the absurd potable comment but the reality is that was just a throw away line which has comic interest but not much else.
Eric has met Mannion and has stated he felt he was an intelligent person. I’d like to say you don’t get to Mannions position without being on the ball, except Dilbert and our own real life experiences have taught us that you can very much be clueless and still climb the corporate ladder. Still I’d like to give Mannion the benefit of the doubt here. He simply may have gotten flustered when he was unable to defend the undefendable and started reaching for straws that collapsed under the weight of his doublespeak. The man is probably not ignorant, he’s simply the man who is trying to keep the dike from bursting and he doesn’t have much to work with. I hate doublespeak but that doesn’t mean the person who uses it is incompetent at his job.
So to me the scary part of the interview is not Mannion but that someone who is probably very intelligent can’t even find a way articulate to Dodger fans that we shouldn’t be worried, because he knows we should be and tried to hide behind a wall of inane words.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
On a complete different note
are they teaching Plascheism in journalism schools? I found this article written about my friend Jay Stallings and was struck by the one line writing style.
http://oldsite.the-signal.com/?module=displaystory&story_id=50581&format=html
I don’t read many papers today but is this becoming normal? Or did he write the whole thing via twitter one line at a time?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
This better not be a trend
I refuse to be informed of anything if it requires reading Plaschke-style writing.
It probably looks less ridiculous in newpaper column width, but it is pretty bad. Fact-checking is a thing of the past also, apparently.
The 64-box checkered chess board appears to be as much a part of his family’s blood as his 42-chromosome genetic code.
Human beings normally have 46 chromosomes. 42 is from Hitchiker’s Guide.
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
As is the Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster.
Best drink in the universe.
I’m sorry, what were we talking about?
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Dec 23, 2009 6:37 PM PST up reply actions
more fact-checking errors:
“‘Searching For Bobbie Fischer’”
It’s Bobby. Bobby Fischer.
Bobbie Fischer is a 72-year-old friend of my bubbe. Not really, but you know.
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Dec 23, 2009 6:39 PM PST up reply actions
Which is to bad
because Jay Stallings might be one of the best human beings I’ve ever met.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Well, we did last year
and I wouldn’t be surprised if it went down the same way again. Signing a type A who’s market value has been suppressed as teams have been unwilling to part with their #1 pick.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 9:43 AM PST up reply actions
There are Only Three Type A Guys Left
We aren’t signing Bay, Holliday, or Valverde. So, no, we won’t be losing any draft picks.
by CanuckDodger on Dec 23, 2009 9:48 AM PST up reply actions
Assuming of course the Dodgers participate in the “bizarre behavior”of “bidding against themselves” for the services of said picks. :)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 9:51 AM PST up reply actions
They just won't sign whoever they draft
after the young man scoffs at having his signing bonus differed over the next ten years with no interest.
We signed Gould
so there must still be gold in them thar vaults. Have to admit when they signed Gould I thought I may have wrong about the whole cash strapped theory I’d been expounding.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Have to say
from the whole interview I still want to know about this item.
- Didn’t re-invest $19 million from the Jason Schmidt insurance payment and the Manny Ramirez suspension into baseball operations
That intrigues the hell out of me.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
If it didn’t go to baseball operations, and McCourt has a cap on his income intake, then I would assume it went toward debt service and/or stadium development plans.
McCourt
has a cap on his salary right? Not on the disbursments of “profit” as owner of the company or am I off here?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 10:03 AM PST up reply actions
Just from personal experience, if McCourt has the sort of debt levels we think, the Lenders would certainly put strict restrictions on salaries, bonuses and dividends.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
So Eric
help me out, how much of the 19 Million was insurance money? And is the guy still employed who underwrote an insurance policy for Schmidt after seeing the reports? I notice the guy who did the signing is still employed and he only cost his employer 45 Million – insurance payment so maybe the underwrite is also still working.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 10:01 AM PST up reply actions
I think Shaikin was a little too cute with the numbers here
It seems like he counted all of Manny’s “savings” as coming this year.
The Dodgers saved $6.83m in salary thanks to Manny’s 50-game suspension, but only $2.73m was in 2009.
Schmidt’s insurance payout was thus somewhere in between $12-16 million. We have known about that for a year though, although not the exact amount or whether the Dodgers received the money (there was litigation).
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 10:07 AM PST up reply actions
The upside of not having money to spend
is that we aren’t offering $12m over two years for Mark DeRosa, like the Giants are.
That said, he would help their offense.
The offseason has been littered with examples of why being broke isn't the worst thing that could happen
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 10:10 AM PST up reply actions
Ditto that
DeRosa is a very good example of a player who could easily crater.
From The Baseball Forecaster:
Familiar story: player doubles HR total (‘08 vs ’07); player likes hitting HR and abandons plate patience; HRs stay, other skills nosedive. At 35, needs to pick one path. ’07 or ’09 worth similar R$, but ’08 won’t recur.
You’d think he’d help but Uribe was actually very effective last season so DeRosa will be lucky to even match Uribe’s production.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 10:17 AM PST up reply actions
uribe was probably the best
minor league signing of last offseason..
he was probably there 2nd best offensive player..
by matthewmafa on Dec 23, 2009 10:27 AM PST up reply actions
and he did this
very quietly. You hear everyone loving DeRosa but Uribe was much better in 2009 and just as versatile. Truth be told I’d much rather have spent money on Uribe then Carroll, but evidently we not only have to find players we can afford but players who are able to defer.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 10:32 AM PST up reply actions
Honestly, if the Dodgers had done nothing to this point except offer Wolf and Hudson arbitration – if they had gotten those draft picks as compensation, made no roster additions and were just waiting out the market to sign a No. 4 starter at a good price, I don’t think many of us would have complained, right?
Jon, the sensible people among us wouldn't have complained...
….but the Dodgers.com crowd and some of the people whining at Dodger Thoughts right now? They would be complaining for sure.
by CanuckDodger on Dec 23, 2009 10:20 AM PST up reply actions
Yes,
but there’s an easy response to that group, because the approach would have been no different than what happened a year ago when we picked up Wolf and Hudson in the first place.
No complaints here
Other then those items you mentioned I have no complaints about this winter at all until we signed Carroll. I’d rather we didn’t sign anyone until February.
That said I would have loved to have traded what the Mariners traded for Cliff Lee but I don’t see the Phillies trading with us. I also would have loved to have seen us move Sherrill for Harang and take on the difference in salary.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 10:21 AM PST up reply actions
I agree. I don’t think anyone (at least on here) would be complaining about the lack of FA signings. However, now that we all know how financially hamstrung the team is, there still might be complaints that we likely cannot execute any trades that would be beneficial to the team because we cannot take on any salary i.e. the Harang idea.
Also with Pierre, I’m not complaining about that trade at all, but perhaps if we could have taken back some salary, we could have gotten a decent MLB starter in return (as was hinted in some of those three way trade rumors we saw)
Well, I don't know.
Seeing LA refuse to get in on Lackey, on Chapman (rumored)… and to watch the Phillies go after Doc and LA not go after a pitcher of his quality… well, I think people would have complained. Right or not, they would be pessimistic.
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Dec 23, 2009 10:21 AM PST up reply actions
Maybe
but the argument in LA could easily be that if the Angels didn’t want Lackey at that price why should the Dodgers. Have the Angels let anyone go who has haunted them. They made the right move on Glaus and Frankie.
Anyone I haven’t seen one free agent deal I’d like to have been in on.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 10:23 AM PST up reply actions
I don't disagree.
My point is that many Dodgers fans feel that the ‘08 and ’09 Dodgers were very good teams that were one piece away from the World Series. To watch them tread water — especially when ’10 might be the last competitive Dodger team for a few years — well, I can’t blame anyone who finds that frutstrating.
That doesn’t mean that I would have offered more for Lackey. It means that I have some sympathy for people who want to see this Dodger core take the next step and are frustrated to see the competition get better.
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Dec 23, 2009 10:28 AM PST up reply actions
even if they offered just wolf arbitritation..
hudson not as much..
by matthewmafa on Dec 23, 2009 10:27 AM PST up reply actions
Agree with Jon 100%. I would have been totally content with that scenario, especially considering the lack of impact players available on the free agent market this offseason.
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 10:29 AM PST up reply actions
Keeping me sane
Every time I think about how absurd the Mannion/draft picks thing is, I think “welp, at least we’re not the Giants.”
And then I cry a little.
by the big grabowski on Dec 23, 2009 10:12 AM PST up reply actions
You mean the Giants
who have been making huge investments in latin players only to find them murdering people?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 10:18 AM PST up reply actions
You See, This Is Why We Don't Pay Much For Latin Talent
Their hot-bloodedness makes them a risky investment.
by CanuckDodger on Dec 23, 2009 10:22 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Heh
when you can’t choose the right guy between WIlton and Vlady you might as well pass anyway.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 10:24 AM PST up reply actions
Schadenfreude
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 10:33 AM PST up reply actions
Re: Schadenfreude
n. Pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others.
[German : Schaden, damage (from Middle High German schade , from Old High German scado) + Freude, joy (from Middle High German vreude , from Old High German frewida , from frō, happy).]
Try IT! It`s HIGHLY underrated by those who either wont ……. or cant
MERRY X-MAS !!!!
The worst part of the timing of the Mannion interview
was that it completely swept the amazing Raul Mondesi article under the rug.
My absolute favorite part of the article, about the now-in-politics Mondesi, was this blurb about El Cañon and his mayoral running mate Jose Rijo (yes, that one):
Three years ago, they were both hit with heavy fines for rigging illegal connections to their homes that allowed them to use electricity without paying for it
Awesome
Incredible
the wealthiest people on the island and they still saw fit to cheat.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 11:07 AM PST up reply actions
If you ever wanted to see what a GM's big board look like
here is Ed Wade’s office, courtesy of Alyson Footer of MLB.com:
It looks like that is just a list of 40-man rosters for each team, broken into pitchers, catchers, infielders, and outfielders. I can’t tell what the bottom group is though. I would love to know what the colors represent (this is Ed Wade’s office, remember, so I’m guessing middle relievers get some ultra-special distinction).
Its not like taking a picture
And getting people’s cell phone numbers
by bhsportsguy on Dec 23, 2009 11:40 AM PST up reply actions
Who knows what Manion Knows
It’s all politic at this point. Business. The Dodgers will be really good next year, and we will have fun rooting for them. As has been pointed out, 2011 will be the year. In 2011 we will know what Manion knows.
Apologies in advance fro the Rumsfeldian nature of my post.
by Lex-In-The-Dena on Dec 23, 2009 11:43 AM PST reply actions
You can get a long look at Colletti's board
In the “Day in the Life” video I linked to at DT earlier this week
All this time I thought that would be Colletti doing Beatles karaoke. :)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 11:48 AM PST up reply actions
The big picture
“Average fan” – was bothered more by Jamie McCourt’s pie in the sky declaration about her needs in her court filings than the roster moves/non-moves this off-season.
I think had Jamie McCourt’s team had to do it all over again, they would have either asked to seal the filings (probably would have lost that motion) or just given general figures with a promise to update to specifics as the case moved on.
Because without her peek into the lifestyle of the rich and famous dodger owners (or at least her claims about their lifestyle), the comments about what the McCourts take out ot the Dodgers would have been lessened by a factor of 10.
The Dodgers could battle not offering arbitration to Wolf/Hudson if the questions were only from a baseball perspective, they might lose that arguement but they could make it. However with the pretense of the divorce and the McCourt’s lifestyle in the air, it becomes more like Rashomon, everyone having different takes of the same series of events..
Your Kurosawa reference trumps my Samuel Beckett reference earlier in this thread. Well played, BH, well played!
2009-10 Kings Hockey: Delivering Milk Steaks from the Meat Train at an arena near you!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Dec 23, 2009 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
Buster Olney
Dennis Mannion says the McCourt divorce proceeding has not impacted the team’s moves this winter in this Q-and-A with Bill Shaikin.
This statement reminds me of this famous movie scene.
I find it offensive
that Mannion expects us to believe this, and then says when making money decisions he has to consider if it is more prudent to buy mobile concession stands or international talent.
Vicente Padilla is seeking a two-year deal in the $15 million range, according to Lyle Spencer of MLB.com.
It would effectively be the same deal that Jason Marquis signed with the Nationals this week, however Padilla is hoping for some additional incentives that could push his annual salary to $9 or $10 million.
You can't blame him can you?
when he sees what Penny and Marquis got, he has to figure he’s worth the same. Neither one of those guys shut down the Cardinals and Phillies in the playoffs.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
I wouldn’t say he shut down the Phillies.
by Julio Nievas on Dec 23, 2009 12:29 PM PST up reply actions
Then you
missed game two of the playoffs. You know, the one we won.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
by Phil Gurnee on Dec 23, 2009 12:32 PM PST up reply actions
Still
he pitched the best game of the playoffs for the Dodgers and it was against the Phillies. You can nit pick about the fact he didn’t do it for two games but for one game each he shut down the two best teams in the most important arena while Penny and Marquis were sitting on there ass. He has every right to think he’s better then those bums.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
I don't blame anyone for trying to get paid
I just happen to think he’s out of his mind thinking he’ll get that type of money. How many of these 7.5-9 mill per year contracts for mediocre pitchers can there be?
jorgearangure
colleague Enrique Rojas reports Rodney signs 2-year $11m deal with #angels. http://bit.ly/59JPmx
Ben Badler
(3:05 PM)
Jon Link is a solid reliever who should help the Dodgers’ bullpen as early as 2010. John Ely is more of a fringy 5th starter/longman with an excellent changeup but a fringy fastball, a below-average breaking ball and a good amount of effort in his delivery.
Mike (Mission Viejo, CA)
Can you tell us about the prospects the Dodgers received for Pierre? Thanks
I wonder if we can use Ely as a tradebait over McDonald or Elbert since Ely seemingly had high standing as a White Sox prospect.
Although I guess, now that he’s a Dodgers prospect he is a fringe starter. When he was the Sox 8th prospect a couple months ago, I read something calling him a middle of the rotation guy.
If Harang is not coming, why not just give the remaining jobs to J-Mac, Stults, Elbert, Lindblom, Ely etc….
Who else on the Market would be better?
The only possibility I can think if is one of the Pirate Lefties, and they would not be worth a prospect.
by Lex-In-The-Dena on Dec 23, 2009 1:10 PM PST reply actions
Ya, I like Maholm too
But I don’t really think he’s on the market….
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions
I would sign Garland
to something like a $5-6m deal (if possible) just because he’s pretty much a lock for 190-200 IP at league average-ish pitching.
I have a lot of confidence in Elbert and McDonald specifically, but I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect to go into the season with those two as the 4-5, just because I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect them to pitch 180+ innings. Especially with the injury-prone Kuroda as the #3.
2009 IP totals for the back end of our rotation:
McDonald – 121.2 (incl winter league)
Elbert – 115.2
Lindblom – 96.1
Haeger – 163.2
Stults – 121.1
Ely – 156.1
Now, part of the low IP totals for the top 3 were because the Dodgers shifted them to the bullpen for need, but the fact still remains that their IP totals are all low, and don’t lend themselves to believing they can pitch 180+ innings. Ely has a ton of innings, but I’m not ready to slot him into a rotation slot.
I suppose Stults and/or Haeger might work, but they won’t likely be as good as Garland.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 1:34 PM PST up reply actions
My pseudo-plan
Sign a Garland-y type as #4 SP
Let Elbert, J-Mac, Stults, and Haeger fight it out for #5 spot. Loser of J-Mac/Elbert starts in AAA, along with Lindblom and Ely. Stults and Haeger have to be put on waivers if they don’t make the cut, so they are either gone or might re-sign a minor league deal
Letting J-Mac/Elbert, Lindblom, and Ely start all year allows them to build up innings so, if they are needed either in 2010 or 2011, they are more ready to step in as a starter, so we don’t run into this problem of need next offseason.
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 1:42 PM PST up reply actions
In your plan
is Garland doing the 3/2/1 plan or the 4/2 plan or 1/5 plan? I’m quite sickened and fascinated about who the Dodgers can get to take the deferred contracts, because I think we can agree that whoever it is, is not getting six million in 2010.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Xiefrank
has started to turn you to the dark side. Resist
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Let me clarify and say that they would not be worth good prospects.
by Lex-In-The-Dena on Dec 23, 2009 1:14 PM PST reply actions
Good points Eric. I finally had a chance to read the article at lunch and two things really stuck with me. First off, the guy answered most of the questions with such a random collection of bullshit words that he never really answered most of them. I am going to throw the sports page on my lawn when I get home tonight and watch it grow a foot by Sunday.
Secondly, he took a nasty swipe at the Angels:
It’s a factor for every team. Gold Glovers who lead off? They go. Career leaders in home runs for a franchise? They go. Star pitchers for a franchise? They go, and then they go get somebody. Or, a first baseman they let go and he goes and wins the World Series for the Yankees? You have to do what you have to do if you’re a well-run operation. Teams that are well-oiled, well-run operations make very hard decisions, and sometimes it requires you to have restraint in how and when and where you spend your dollars.
Frankly, I don’t really care that someone swipes at the Angels because, other than living relatively close to Anaheim Stadium and one of my best friends working for them, I really don’t give a shit about them when it comes to the Dodgers. And I guess that’s my point. For years (hell, forever), the Angels and, more disgustingly, their fans (many of whom I consider “friends”) have had this huge inferiority complex when it comes to the Dodgers. It’s like a younger sibling who will never, ever, EVER come close to matching the brilliance of their older brother but who have to do everything possible to try. Conversely, the Dodgers, and their fans, couldn’t give two shits what the Angels do or don’t do. We just don’t give a fuck. But Mannion had to go out of his way to use them as an example, citing 4 specific player transactions in the last two offseasons.
I’ve talked to my friend who works for the Angels recently (via email). It’s a sad day in my life when they don’t give a shit about what the Dodgers do and the Dodgers are scared to death of what their little brother is doing.
Then there are those of us
who aren’t jealous of their siblings and can enjoy their success without worrying about it makes us look.
I’m not sure it was a swipe at the Angels. It sounded like he was saying players come and go but a will run organization (the Angels) do what they have to do. Then again it was a bit incoherent, so maybe I’m just wrong. Anyway this LA fan enjoys all our teams and doesn’t really care if the fans are jerks because every team including the one I root for the most have jerks for fans.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
My interpretation was the same as yours. I actually thought it was a compliment to the Angels since they manage to stay competitive whilst their players walk…
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 1:44 PM PST up reply actions
Manion’s answers are really sloppy. The McCourt regime has always been bad when it comes to PR, and that’s obviously not changing. I’m just not sure if their is anyhting worth analyzing here. I think what most people have deduced has come from a more reliable place than anything anyone from the front office is going to say.
by Lex-In-The-Dena on Dec 23, 2009 1:24 PM PST reply actions
So apparently Coco Crisp is worth more than Juan Pierre (at least according to the A's)?
Signing for between $4 – $5 MM with the A’s.
ChiSox getting Pierre for $3 MM this year
Ummmm...
…Pierre was a trade and the Dodgers are getting some prospects. Hard to compare the two numbers when one is a trade w/prospects and cash eating involved and the other is a FA signing.
by KellyStephen on Dec 23, 2009 1:30 PM PST up reply actions
That said
I’d much rather have Crisp. He’s a plus defender, with a little more pop and on base skills.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
And he can avoid wild haymaker punches when he charges the mound.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 1:45 PM PST up reply actions
And he has the coolest name
in baseball. I can remember one summer when I was working from home I got the MLB TV package and it seemed every time my wife would drop in to watch a game, Coco would be up. She hated the fact he went by Coco. Woman get weirded out by the strangest things.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Only problem
Crisp is from Desert Hot Springs, aka DHS, the armpit of the Coachella Valley :)
by Eric Stephen on Dec 23, 2009 1:49 PM PST up reply actions
What were her feelings on Mlle Chanel
and Sid Caesar’s wife?
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Dec 23, 2009 1:51 PM PST up reply actions
I wouldn't be surprised
if she found Coco an unacceptable name for a man but entirely acceptable for a woman. That could be enough to get someone worked up.
Plus the wrist
but I think Beane has a competent medical staff. Oh wait, is that Chavez calling?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Phillies agreed to terms with a mystery reliever according to MLBTR
They are speculating its either Mike MacDougal or our old friend Denys Baez
For Clips fans
via Ramona Shelburne of ESPN LA:
Just got an e-mail that Blake Griffin has been cleared to run on an anti-gravity treadmill. Dang, can I get one of those?
Yup
the MRI came back clean, he’s cleared to work out and we are expecting 1/15 to be the game back.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
My new fear is that the arbitration eligible players get tired of not getting a lockup offer and decide to say fuck this broke jerk and walk at the end of their arb years. But I think they will have to sell before then.
Unless the entire free agency era changes its stripes overnight, the players will take the best offer, wherever it comes from and almost with no regard for who the owner is.
You say "of course"
But the point is, there’s no reason to have that fear that they wouldn’t take the Dodgers’ money.
You can fear the Dodgers won’t make an offer, but you don’t need to fear that if they do make an offer, it will be ignored.
I would not take it against another offer. Dodger money is likely to be deferred.
Making it worth less in the long run. I would like them to make an offer on all worthy players after 2010 season.
You're conflating two issues.
Will a Kemp or Kershaw a Dodger offer if it’s worse than what other teams are offering? No.
Will they take a Dodger offer if it’s better? Yes.
I am just responding to you saying, “I do not want a situation where they never want to even hear an offer from the Dodgers.” That will never happen.
Only players afraid of their abilities would let anyone buy them out of their free agent years. The arbitration process always gives them more money. Russ Martin sucked and he’s still going to pull in 6 Million this year. Kendall was the worse offensive catcher in baseball and he still got a decent two year from the Royals.
Most players probably couldn’t even five owners in the game of baseball and possibly not even their own.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
It’s not just ability. A pitcher could blow his arm out tomorrow. The arbitration process does nothing for him then. It’s insurance against injuries as well.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 2:53 PM PST up reply actions
True
but I’m not including pitchers in my comment. I did fail to mention that. If I’m a pitcher I do give away millions for the safety net.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Your boy Randolf
is as polarizing to Clipper fans as Juan Pierre was to Dodger fans, except you are on the Pierre side:) How does that feel?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
No way. In that debate, Randolph is Manny and Marcus Camby is Pierre. Randolph is a statisticians dream (look at the PER) while Camby is all about the intangibles (hustle, grit, veterannyness.)
But ya, last week when Pierre was traded, I tried not to argue too much with the guys who liked Pierre. I remember what it was like when everybody was throwing a party when Randolph was moved.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 3:01 PM PST up reply actions
Basically
But that was never going to happen. I think this is how it all went down. I think the Clippers (Dunleavy) liked Randolph but believed Randolph and Kaman couldn’t play together (which is now looking rediculous since Randolph is playing beautifully with Gasol.) I think the plan was to move Kaman. Then the Clippers hit the lotto and Dunleavy truly believes in Griffin so he wants to clear the way for Griffin. Camby is a nice player, particularly providing depth at the 4 and the 5, so he was going to stay. Kaman or Randolph were going to be moved.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 3:08 PM PST up reply actions
Well, Randolph
But I would have kept both and moved Camby. But ya, I think Randolph is the better player.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 3:16 PM PST up reply actions
Except Randolph is the ballhog that can’t play Defense while Camby is considered one of the better defensive centers for years.
Nonsense
I don’t believe any of that for a second. Randolph is a better on the ball defender then Camby is, Randolph is currently making Gasol better in Memphis (and there are plenty of other scorers on that team) and Camby is completely inept on the offensive end.
Camby being considered a better defensive center is part of the problem. His reputation says that, but 1) he is playing PF not center and 2) he’s simply not as good as his reputation.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 3:05 PM PST up reply actions
It doesn't
But I watch them both play defense. I know that Camby is completely overrated as I watch him migrate to the box to get his SportsCenter swats and leave his man wide open for a jumper. This happens approximately 6 or 7 times a night.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 3:15 PM PST up reply actions
Even say it is like Zach
I don’t think that’s true, but for argument’s sake, let’s say both would have a hard time guarding the Gallinari’s and Rashard Lewis’s of the world ( they are tough matchups.) Do you think there is any chance Lewis or Gallinari could stop Randolph on the other end? Randolph would abuse those guys in the post, while Camby provides no offensive game whatsoever. Teams can play these stretch 4’s without fear that Camby will make them pay. Randolph will throw down 30+ points and get them in foul trouble.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 3:22 PM PST up reply actions
Randolph also thought he was a 3 point shooter and would take some of the stupidest shots possible. A career 28.7% 3 point shooter, yet he attempted at least 2 per game with the clippers.
Now eFG% is something that is measure in PER and despite his ill-advised shots he still puts up monster numbers. And if you are going to use his 3 point shot attempt stats from his time with the Clippers you might want to use his 3 point % numbers with the Clippers as well. You know, apples to apples. Last season it was 34.2%. Still not good, but better than Baron who shot 30.2% and a staggering 5 (!) per game.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 3:32 PM PST up reply actions
Also, if you’re claiming that there would be enough shots for Kamen, Griffin, Gordon, Baron, Thorton, and Randolph, I can’t see that. Even if he’s playing well in Mephis, that team is what, Randolph, Gasol, and Mayo?
Rudy Gay waves hello. That Memphis team is loaded with scorers.
And if Baron and Thornton don’t take as many shots, I’m cool with that.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 3:33 PM PST up reply actions
But that is not happening and you know that. Personally, I want to see as many shots from Gordon and Griffin when he eventually plays. If that means trading away Randolph to find those shots, that’s great.
Why would you want Griffin to take a lot of shots
he has no game outside of the post. He’s going to be getting all his points this year on hustle plays and athleticism not because he’s a shooter.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
They’re both play the PF position, especially with Kamen around. I’m saying that this probably wants Griffin and Randolph playing the same way, AKA getting the ‘hustle’ points.
Griffin will get hustle points and hustle points only because he has no other game. He doesn’t have the post moves, jump shot, or free throw shooting ability Randolph has. Yes, Griffin is more athletic than Randolph, but Randolph can do more offensively. Kaman and Randolph would play together the exact same way Randolph and Gasol do it. Both can line up either on the block or the top of the key (because they both have post moves and a jump shot) and both can pass out of the double team. Griffin getting hustle points is definitely better than Camby getting no points, but he will need to develop an inside game at some point….
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 3:50 PM PST up reply actions
simmons article today on what he would d owith each team
clips included
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/091223&sportCat=nba
Baron has adjusted his game alot this year
and its paying dividends. He’s focused on distributing the ball and not being a chucker. His game is a lot better than last year.
I don’t think Thornton wants to be a chucker. He’s another guy who has adjusted his game this year. He is slashing more and finishing at the rim. With another bona fide post scorer in Randolph, EJ would get more open looks from the outside, and Thornton would get more oppurtunities driving to the rim.
Gordon is not a volume scorer yet. His game is built for “catch and shoot” and points in transition. He occasionally beats his man off the dribble, but he’s still young and he loses the ball or doesn’t finish strong enough expecting a foul call. These are skills he will develop, but he’s not there yet.
by Michael White on Dec 23, 2009 3:41 PM PST up reply actions
For the record
I was a huge Randolf fan when we got him. I thought he had the softest shot in basketball and didn’t deserve his BBall reputation. However after the stupid DUI I was ready to move him. Players making millions and getting drunk I have no problem with, players making millions and not paying for someone to drive them when they are partying I have a big problem with. So when he was traded I shed not a tear.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Christ…i went to a Dodger blog and a Clipper blog broke out! :)
by KellyStephen on Dec 23, 2009 7:14 PM PST up reply actions
… says the commenter with the Southern Cal logo as his avatar …
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
by David Young on Dec 26, 2009 12:55 AM PST up reply actions
I’m still amazed that Longoria was so worried about his future he signed a deal giving away bazillions. He’s not a pitcher, how many infielders have catastrophic injuries in the early 20’s?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Longoria should have been able to find insurance
I know it’s hard to get insurance against injuries, but it seems Longoria should have been able to find somebody who was willing to write a policy.
(Wild idea of the week: The player’s union should buy injury insurance for all the players. It would increase the number of long-term deals that their members get. It would stop young guys from signing away their futures in exchange for security, which would increase the comps for arbitration cases. & etc.)
Pau Gasol's extension wtih the Lakers
per Mark Stein of ESPN:
2011-12: $18,714,150
2012-13: $19,000,000
2013-14: $19,285,850
Three years, $57m. He also has a trade kicker.
Here’s a question for you to ponder through the next few days…who will be the next Dodger to make as much as $19 million over any consecutive two-year period? My guess is Ethier.
Wow
Insane 3-year contract for Pau, good for him!
by Julio Nievas on Dec 23, 2009 4:59 PM PST up reply actions
Am I the only one
wondering why they didn’t take $850 from year 3 and put it one year 1?
Crazy Comparing Lakers and Dodgers
Lakers are locking up their young team through their prime and Kobe while he’s Kobe that just about guarantees that they will be a Championship contender through 2012.
Dodgers are looking for capital to find portable hot dog stands.
I guess that’s the difference between having a guy run the team that has a PhD in chemistry vs. a dipshit.
MERRY XMAS!
From Ken Gurnick's new inbox, re Halladay
Did Dodgers pursue Halladay?
(A: Yes, it seems.)
Maybe the Blue Jays just liked the Dodgers’ prospects better. Not that it mattered. Ultimately, Halladay’s destination wasn’t determined by the Blue Jays or the Phillies. It was determined by Halladay, who demonstrated how powerful a no-trade clause is for a premier player. Halladay told Toronto he wouldn’t accept a trade to any West Coast club that conducts Spring Training in Arizona
There's no need to fear, Underdog is here! / Broncos/Dodgers fan in Niners/Raiders/Giants country, and damned proud of it.
Well
It’s nice to know that Ned asked. Considering that Halladay left so much money on the table in signing with Philadelphia, I completely buy the story that he rejected the Dodgers for the very reasons Gurnick indicates.
I will note that the anger we’ve seen in the last 24 hours or so would be nothing if Ned had traded Kershaw.
The Ultimate Ned's Kind of Guy
by Humma Kavula on Dec 23, 2009 6:36 PM PST up reply actions
Eric Nice coverage of the Mannion piece by Bill.
Talk about revealing. Mannion thinks we are all marks in a midway. Neither Wolf or Hudson (after the way Torre treated him) would of accepted arbitration. Wolfs last chance for a multi-year contract. The compensation picks are like currency you can spend them in transactions before the draft. The Dodgers were afraid one of them might accept arbitration.
The economy is one thing Eric but as you mentioned this behavior started before last September 17, 2008. Buy a business and sell off its assets and then sell the team. The divorce just made what they were doing visible.
Mannion was really excited over the portable beer stations. Telling us that they don’t have a budget for payroll so they can quickly move to make portable stands. lol
Peter O’Malley acted just like his father who was the real commissioner of baseball. Bud really resented Peter having as much influence as he did.
Keep up the good work Eric and thanks to the posters who keep me up to date and sharp.
ken gurnick of MLB.com
The club is uneasy about Blake DeWitt as their everyday second baseman because of his lackluster defense. If DeWitt’s offense were on par with the likes of Andre Ethier and Matt Kemp, Jamey Carroll would likely be slotted on the bench rather than split time with the 24-year-old.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on True Blue LA
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
NL West Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
San Diego
|
76 | 59 | .562 | 0 | Lost 10 |
|
San Francisco
|
76 | 61 | .554 | 1 | Won 2 |
|
Colorado
|
72 | 64 | .529 | 4.5 | Won 3 |
|
Los Angeles
|
69 | 68 | .503 | 8 | Lost 2 |
|
Arizona
|
56 | 81 | .408 | 21 | Lost 2 |
(updated 9.5.2010 at 7:48 PM PDT)
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Rangers fall after Young gets touchy feely with third base coach
- Tony La Russa vs. Colby Rasmus: Who ya throwing overboard?
- Marlins say they won't honor Bobby Cox during today's game
- We're Going Streaking! Paul Konerko assures us he's not done
- Rejected! Cardinals fan throws back Brandon Phillips' foul ball
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
