clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Revenue-Neutral

New, comments

It has come to this. According to sources the Dodgers cannot add any more payroll.

Bill Shaikin of the LA Times report seems to validate what Peter Gammons said over the weekend. This is Shaikin's quote:

Colletti said he could have added to the Dodgers' payroll if necessary to complete the deal. However, a source familiar with negotiations said the Indians were told that the Dodgers needed any trade to be "revenue-neutral" -- in other words, McCourt would not increase the payroll.

This is what Peter Gammons had to say:

The reason the Indians were able to get Carlos Santana, a very high-level prospect, in the Casey Blake deal is that the Indians took on all of Blake's remaining $2 million salary. Several general managers around baseball wonder whether L.A. doesn't have cash flow problems.

Revenue - Neutral trades.
Yea baby, a whole new world has opened up where we can deal our youth for someone else's overpaid veteran and get the team to eat the contract by throwing in our extra's kids.
Santana - 2 Million
Lambo - 4.5 Million
McDonald - 2.75 Million
DeWitt - 3.8 Million
LaRoche - 7.5 Million
Hu - 2 Million
DeJesus - 3.75 Million
Kershaw - priceless

Next up will be companion trades where we will attach above prospects to Juan Pierre, Jason Schmidt, and A Jones to remove them from payroll so that Ned can  be free of the encumbrances of his previous free agent signing and the youth he would rather be playing elsewhere.