My two cents or maybe one cent view on recent events
In my recently posted comment on the post Jon Weisman wrote last night on DT, I said that I wondered if my lack of outrage or sense of perspective makes me less of a fan and more of a spectator.
I say this because while the inside baseball side of me really want the Dodgers to make good baseball decisions, I can also at least argue (if making a losing argument) on why they do the things that they do.
Phil and Eric (and others) rightly wonder why the Dodgers could not offer arbitration to Hudson and Wolf, outside of the risk (albeit small says the aforementioned others) of having to pay them 8 figures for a one-year deal (in 2 positions the Dodgers have said since the end of the season they needed to fill), it just doesn't make baseball sense not to offer arbtitration.
To counter that, I bring up a few thoughts.
One, Frank McCourt probably feels that his Front Office team hasn't been very lucky in the results of his recent signings. Being real cynical here, I even can believe he never thought he would pay as much as he ended paying last year to Randy Wolf and Orlando Hudson. The thought of a bottm floor of $10M a year for each of them probably was to much to bear especially given both players injury history.
Two, realistically no matter how much WAR or other statistical measurements say those two are worth, Randy Wolf and Orlando Hudson are not worth that much money for one seaon.
And three, I am pretty sure the Dodgers believe they can get 3 players, an infielder and two reclamation projects aka as starting pitchers for less than what Hudson and Wolf would have cost.
There already reports of agents checking out the market before next Monday to find out if their clients can make as much if they pass on arbitraiton.
If this was even 2 years ago, and the Dodgers were in the same situation, personnel and money-wise, I think they offer arbittration because those players would have refused it immediately. Or better yet, they would have been signed before the Dodgers had to decide.
For the record, I agree with Phil, Eric, Jon and everyone else that the Dodgers should have made those offers. But I cannot bring myself to get angry about it. And I do wonder if that makes me less of fan.
0 recs |
10 comments
|
Comments
You may just have the right disposition to be a fan in these times
I just don’t know if I have the stomach for it.
And I do wonder if that makes me less of fan.
I am hoping that that is a sign of more maturity or wisdom – because you’ve always struck me as having a goodly amount of both, which are two things I hope to accumulate more of – because I used to get far more upset about things like this as a younger man, but as I age I find myself trying to be more even keel. I’d like to believe I’m getting more mature and finally getting a smidgen of wisdom.
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
Thanks Dave
But I also think that I am fortunate to know the highs (even if I had no understanding of stat analysis in that glory time of 1977-1988). For the more recent fan, this off-season has been bitter and certainly I understand their frustrations.
even if I had no understanding of stat analysis in that glory time of 1977-1988
Don Sutton did, or least intuitively came to similar conclusions with regard to Smith vs. Garvey. :)
I count the glory time as starting in 1973, so I fully understand what you are saying and agree. And it was frustrating to be in the same division with the Big Red Machine and be shut out of the playoffs as the division runner up so many times – though we did have the ‘74 WS appearance to point back to in ’75-’76, and the ‘77-’78 ones until finally winning the whole thing in 1981. (I’m surprised more people don’t put an asterisk on 1981 due to the weird playoffs arranged because of the mid-season players’ strike.)
The commenter formerly known as El Lay Dave.
Craig
Jon has a way of making you feel introspective doesn’t he? Even though I write for a Dodger blog I can easily say I’m less of a fan then I was 35 years ago, but I’d be disappointed in myself as a person if I still behaved the way I used to at age 15 when it came to sports.
As to your points, they are all valid, the problem most Dodger fans seem to be having is that your points are only valid if you have the limited resources the Dodgers have. Sure Wolf or Hudson may be overpaid for one year, but in the business of baseball I’d consider yourself lucky if you only have to overpay for one year instead of having to lock yourself into a multi year deal with a less talented player.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
I think its the conventional baseball wisdom that is being disregarded here by the Dodgers. Just because Randy Wolf accepts arbitration doesn’t mean he goes to an arbitration board. Just because a player accepts arbitration that you have to keep him. Just because you don’t want to pay for the 4 possible draft picks doesn’t mean you just don’t pick up two guys with near certainty to decline.
If we’re going to build a team from the farm system, then we need as many bullets we can get from early round picks. If we’re building this team from free agency, then Wolf and Hudson can great complementary pieces. Instead, we’re acting like- I can’t even pretend we’re acting like a small market team since even the Twins, Rangers, and Rockies offered arbitration to their higher salaried players like Pavano, Ivan Rodiguez, and Marquis.
Bringing up the actions of the Rockies, Twins and Rangers seems misplaced, since I think all of those moves are stupid. Colorado will be rewarded here, because Marquis refused arbitration, but Marquis should have accepted and Colorado would be overpaying for a mediocre pitcher. Rodriguez makes no sense. He will certainly accept it. I really don’t understand that at all. That would be like the Dodgers offering arbitration to Jeff Kent last year. There is no sense in it. Pavano is a nice pitcher, but he’s even more of an injury concern than Wolf is. I think all three of those teams took foolish gambles.
by Michael White on Dec 4, 2009 8:03 AM PST up reply actions
if not being outraged makes you "less of a fan",
then that’d make people who scream “We want Sherrill!” when Jonathan Broxton walks one batter- and that batter happens to be a guy named Pujols- the biggest fans of the world. So we can throw that argument out the window.
Your approach- and Jon Weisman’s, for that matter- are probably healthier. Getting so worked up about things you can’t control do you no good- believe me, I know. Nevertheless, kind of like Cool Dudes, I can’t stomach what’s going on now. Hopefully, better days are ahead, because I don’t really want to give up following baseball, as I’ve done in the past when the nonsense outweighs the joy of it. Guess we’ll just have to see how it all turns out…

by 






















