Examining the Bums' Finances
The Dodgers' fantastic lineup and decent staff are starting to get very expensive.
The Dodgers payroll currently sits at $110M, and it might have to go higher.
Their current commitments for next year are at $64M. Kemp, Loney, Billingsley, and Kuo all hit arbitration for the first time this offseason. I'm betting Kemp and Billingsley get at least $15M combined (which is conservative; it's a lot less than half their $41.7M value), bringing the payroll to $85M. Let's say Loney gets $5M (slightly under his $6.2M value), and Kuo gets $1M given he's only thrown 30 innings in relief this year. Now we're up to $86M.
Martin, Ethier, and Broxton are going to hit arb for the second time, and they're making $3.9M, $3.1M, and $1.8M respectively. Staying conservative, we'll say that Martin doesn't deserve a raise with the way he played this year, so let's keep him at $4M despite his $9.6M value. Ethier, however, has $11.8M of value and led the team in HR and RBIZZZ, so let's give him $6M. Broxton's also getting a raise from the fairly low $1.8M he earned this year; how about $4M for the All-Star closer? We're sitting at $96M right now in that case.
Sherrill's hitting arb for the third time, and coming off a $2.75M contract. He's worth more than $3M, but we'll give him that anyway. $99M at this point.
Let's add the buyout: Will Ohman for $0.2M ($2.2M option also not happening), but that's negligible so we can ignore it.
Assuming the payroll sits at $110M, the Bums have $11M to play with. Resigning Randy Wolf is going to be a challenge after the year he had; let's say they get it done for a slight raise to $6M (likely on a multi-year deal). That gives us a rotation of Billingsley, Kershaw, Wolf, and Kuroda. Gotta find a #5 starter on the cheap, or bring someone up from the farm, because they can't/won't exercise Padilla's $12M option or Garland's $10M option. And they're going to need a 2B (Hudson and Belisario both FA's), a backup C (Ausmus a FA), some utility players (Loretta and Mientkiewicz both FA's), and a bullpen arm or two (Mota is a FA). And you gotta wonder if $3M is going to be enough to find all that (it won't). Let's say they raise the payroll to $120M, which would be the highest payroll in Dodgers history. Is $15M enough for a #5 starter, a 2B, two utility IFs, a backup C, and a bullpen arm? Probably. But that also means they have zero flexibility next year after another round of arb raises for the core, and they can't realistically add payroll for midseason acquisitions.
So they'll obviously compete in 2010, even with question marks for half their rotation and most of their 'pen, because that lineup is so badass. But as Kemp, Loney, Martin, Ethier, Kershaw, Broxton, and Billingsley get more expensive, and the very weak Dodgers' farm system can't replace them, I see an era of failure in Los Angeles approaching. And you've got to wonder what happens if Kemp or Ethier goes does with an injury; can the Bums replace that player with anyone decent (Pierre? Really? Yeah, he's totally going to repeat what he did this year)? And how will that affect them against the suddenly decent Giants and Rockies?
*Side note: I don't understand why everyone in La-La Land loves Colletti so much. He's had a plethora of bad FA signings, the Dodgers farm system is crap, their rotation is crap, and their good offensive players are about to get expensive. He's Brian Sabean with a little extra payroll flexibility (which makes sense given Colletti's pedigree before he came to the Dodgers). Given their payroll is already at $110M for the season, I don't see how much they can realistically add, and they're going to need to add or get rid of some of their stars.
This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.
0 recs |
64 comments
Comments
…and Ren said it with authority.
You can't solve your problems with the same level of thinking that created the problems - Albert Einstein to Brian Sabean
by bgunn on Oct 12, 2009 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
(and then I serious'd)
Too lazy to look it up, but I believe that it was soulless human-computer hybrid Paul DePodesta who drafted and developed all those good young dudes, amirite?
DePo as the ant gathering up grain for the winter, Coletti as the grasshopped looting the stores to PARTY NOW. Take that, Bill Plaschke.
by SnowLeopard on Oct 10, 2009 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I touched it, but only to prove it was worse than people thought. I think that’s a noble sacrifice.
Regarding Colletti vs. DePodesta:
Colletti drafted:
Kershaw
Ethier (acquired from A’s, not drafted by LA)
DePodesta drafted:
No one
Dan Evans drafted:
Kemp
Billingsley
Loney
Martin
Granted, DePodesta was GM for only two drafts (2004 and 2005) while Evans and Colletti have 3 and 4 respectively. But I wouldn’t say DePodesta’s history was great, just a hell of a lot better than Colletti’s. And Evans looked like the best of them all.
by quincy0191 on Oct 10, 2009 10:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you
for diving into the sewage pit for the team, and for the 411
by SnowLeopard on Oct 10, 2009 11:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Logan White
Not Colletti or DePo.
Proud father of Juan Carlos Perez. Think Albert Pujols at a position to be determined.
by marcello on Oct 11, 2009 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
DePodesta traded for Ethier, not Colletti.
HA HA HA LOOK AT ME I'M ALL HAPPY AND STUFF NO REALLY CAN WE STOP WITH THE COOKYMAN IS SAD JOKES?
:-) :-) :-)
by Cookyman on Oct 11, 2009 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No wait, maybe you’re right.
HA HA HA LOOK AT ME I'M ALL HAPPY AND STUFF NO REALLY CAN WE STOP WITH THE COOKYMAN IS SAD JOKES?
:-) :-) :-)
by Cookyman on Oct 11, 2009 6:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
1-move wonder
ManRam trade.
Otherwise, he’s sucked.
by dregarx on Oct 10, 2009 10:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I can cya by saying he’s sucked in the aggregate.
Yes! No disputing now…
by dregarx on Oct 10, 2009 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh I think you gotta admit the Ethier trade has looked pretty good.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
by Roger on Oct 11, 2009 6:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You know in general he’s been the Dodgers GM for 4 seasons. They’ve all been winning years. They’ve been in the playoffs 3 of the 4. They’ve been in the league championship series 2 of the 4. Prior to his hiring, the team had been to the playoffs 3 times in the previous 17 years, winning only one postseason game in that time. The team is pretty well situated for the near term future with a very good core group of players under control for the next 3 years or so.
A GM is responsible for the product on the field, and Coletti’s product has been, so far, successful, and unlike the the poster, it’s difficult for me to see that changing in the next few years. I know he’s made some head scratching moves and some outright bombs, and I frankly wouldn’t want him in charge of the Giants, but his job is to put success on the field and the record says he done that. By what definition of success is this record one that “sucks in the aggregate”?
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
by Roger on Oct 11, 2009 7:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Colletti’s been hugely bolstered by the Dan Evans years and the results of those drafts; the Dodgers are successful now because all their top minor league talent graduated and is successful, and Colletti made two great moves in acquiring Ramirez and Ethier. Other than that, he’s been almost an unmitigated failure; the Schmidt, Pierre, Jones, Furcal (2nd), and Garciaparra (2nd) signings were all God-awful decisions. Past Ramirez and Ethier, his best acquisition was probably Casey Blake, then Greg Maddux (the first time) then George Sherrill, then pretty much no one. Five good trades, a few decent signings (Ramirez, Hudson, Blake, Wolf), and one good draft pick (Kershaw) is not a great pedigree after four years as GM. I think the Dodgers success has come from luck, extra payroll, and from previous GMs, particularly Evans (he drafted half the young stars on the team: Kemp, Billingsley, Loney, Martin, Broxton). And their pitching staff was far better than anyone expected this year, a feat they should not count on repeating, because Wolf is not that good and their bullpen is not that good. Having an extra $20-30M to play with helps; the Giants couldn’t have eaten Andruw Jones’ contract and still had enough to sign Manny Ramirez, who is rather important to that team.
by quincy0191 on Oct 11, 2009 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, yeah, yeah, and the alarm clock didn’t go off, and the car ran out of gas and the dog ate the homework etc etc etc.
First off, I would be willing to bet that there’s never been a successful GM who didn’t benefit from draft choices by their predecessor and/or predecessors. Second, you’re overstating (by a lot) the value of some of the guys you name.
Looking at Fangraphs, here’s the most valuable players on the Dodgers this year:
Kemp (drafted by Evans) $22.8 mil
Blake (traded for by Colletti and resigned by Colletti) $19.2mil
Rafael Furcal (Colletti) $14.8 mil
Hudson (Colletti) $12.9 mil
Ethier (Colletti) $11.8 mil
Ramirez (Coletti) $11.6 mil
Martin (Evans) $9.6 mil
Pierre (Coletti) $8.2 mil
Loney (Evans) $6.2 mil
Bellard (Colletti)
As for pitchers, the top 4 this year were obviously Kershaw, Billingsly, Wolf, Broxton (2 in the system when Ned arrived, one drafted under him, one signed) and then, the true strength of the team, the long bullpen which is a mix and match of UDFA, who came up through the system (Troncoso, Kuo) and guys acquired from elsewhere (Belisario, Moto, Sherrill, Weaver). Obviously their ability to get through this post-season will rest to a certain degree on some last minute pick ups (Padilla, Garland) since Billingsly has become almost completely unreliable.
To suggest this team is on some kind of long-con auto pilot, the natural and inevitable result of events set in motion 7 or 8 years ago is farcical, it’s just a grinding axe, and as is almost almost true of grinding axes, it doesn’t grind particularly sharp.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
by Roger on Oct 12, 2009 7:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There’s no doubt that the Dodgers have got a lot of help from players acquired by Colletti this year. The advantage that he’s had though is that base of quality players who’ve cost so little.
That’s meant that he’s had ridiculous sums of money to spend on his acquisitions and so it’s no surprise that he’s managed to find quality production. If we look at the 6 players he’s acquired on that list you made, they’ve cost $60M in total. If you were to add on the Schmidt and Jones costs (which have earned them nothing in terms of wins) then you reach over $90 million. In other words he’s spend more than our entire payroll for the production of those 6 players (as well as a top 10 overall prospect and multiple 1st round draft picks).
So it’s not simply the performances of the players acquired by previous regimes, it’s the incredible financial flexibility they’ve given him. That’s not to say he’s not made some good moves, he certainly has, but it’s understandable that people are skeptical as to his ability.
Proud parent of Waldis Joaquin!
by GiantFan on Oct 12, 2009 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m skeptical, as noted above. But skeptical isn’t “sucked” or “unmitigated failure” or “disastrous.” Those are all terms and phrases that denote absolute certainty, not skepticism or doubt.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
by Roger on Oct 12, 2009 9:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
True, i don’t think it’s fair to say that he’s sucked or been an unmitigated failure, i guess there’s a rush to paint things as black or white. I’d say that he’s below average but probably not the worst GM.
Proud parent of Waldis Joaquin!
by GiantFan on Oct 12, 2009 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
net benefit/net detriment to the roster based off of the situation he had upon entry and the situation he has now
by dregarx on Oct 12, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Strictly speaking as a fan of the game, that number 27 is the best CF in the game right now, and he’s getting better fast. He’s one of those guy’s that you could see too, with 100% certainty, barring injury, developing. I didn’t think Ethier would be this good, but then I didn’t think Martin would drop off so quickly, and maybe he’ll rebound, but he didn’t look the same this year. And what’s up with DeWitt? Are they over him?
Matt Cain: throwing complete game shutouts since 06'. No big deal.
by cain1rstballothof on Oct 10, 2009 11:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think Broxton will get more than $4 million. The speculation around here is that Brian Wilson will get 5 million in his first arb year, so I would think Broxton would get signifcantly more in his 2nd. I’d go around 6.5 to 7 million for him.
If God had intended us not to rosterbate, he would've made our arms shorter.
by Mike Hawk on Oct 10, 2009 11:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I tried to keep it relatively conservative, and I don’t think he’ll make $7M because I believe that would make him one of the highest paid closers in the game (alongside Rivera and K-Rod) and he’s only up for arb 2. But like I said, I tried to err on the side of less money, which makes this situation all the more hilarious when you consider they may not even have $15M to spend on their various needs.
by quincy0191 on Oct 11, 2009 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your Are Actually Much Closer to Reality On Broxton With $4M
by giantsrainman on Oct 11, 2009 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Comp To Use Here Is Jonathan Papelbon's $6.25M
Broxton shoucl expect 70-80% of this while our Brian Wilson should expect 50-60% of this.
by giantsrainman on Oct 11, 2009 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No Way Arbitration Awards To Kemp And Billingsly Totaling $15M+ Is Conservative.
Your are over estimating by at least $3M and maybe by $5M. Find me any comparable first year arbitration players that got awards in this neighborhood that are not elite. These are indeed very good players that may someday join the elite ranks but neither is there yet and they will not be paided as such.
by giantsrainman on Oct 10, 2009 11:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Kemp is not elite?
News to me.
Proud father of Juan Carlos Perez. Think Albert Pujols at a position to be determined.
by marcello on Oct 11, 2009 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kemp is definitely Elite as they get at his position. I’d like to know whom he considers to be so at CF. Because Kemp is CF right now.
Matt Cain: throwing complete game shutouts since 06'. No big deal.
by cain1rstballothof on Oct 11, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kemp Is Not likely To Get Much More In His First Year Of Arbitration Then Either Got In His Last Year.
The Arbitration Process like the Ellis Ranking Process makes no distinction between CF and other outfielders or 1B and DHs for that matter.
by giantsrainman on Oct 11, 2009 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Kemp is not Elite, then who is rainman? I"m very curious.
Matt Cain: throwing complete game shutouts since 06'. No big deal.
by cain1rstballothof on Oct 11, 2009 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kemp>Ethier by far. Kemp was behind Ethier in very few categories. 31 HR to 26 HR, 42 2B to 25 2B, 72 BB to 52 BB, and 106 RBI to 101 RBI (which meant that Ethier had a slightly higher OPS, .869 to .842). AVG, SB, 3B, 1B, R, UZR (-14.6 to 0.2) all go to Kemp, and in WAR and RAR Kemp is nearly double Ethier (50.1 to 26.1 and 5.1 to 2.6), which essentially means Kemp is about twice as valuable as Ethier. He’s was worth $22.8M last year, making him the best CF in the game. If he gets paid a fraction of that he’ll make double what Ethier got, and he deserves it.
by quincy0191 on Oct 11, 2009 9:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Arbitration Process Doesn't Give A Shit About WAR And Cares Little About Defense.
I do agree that the arbitration process is likely to give Kemp more (but not much more) then the $3.1M Either got last year. I would expect Kemp to get closer to $4M then $3M but nowhere near whatever imaginary portion of $15M the author of this fanpost had in mind.
Swithing gears for a minute to Billingsley, last year King Felix got $3.9M in his first year of arbitration and I do not expect Billingsley to do as well. I would say that Chad can expect something closer to $3M then to $4M.
Bopttom line these two combined as first year arbitration eligable players should cost the Dodgers right around $7M.
by giantsrainman on Oct 11, 2009 9:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know the arb process doesn’t care about WAR, but I’m sure they care about defense; no one in the NL is going to try and sign Jim Thome because he would just be a glorified pinch-hitter. Despite the staggering incompetence of many FO personnel, they do understand that great defenders are worth more than bad defenders.
But Kemp’s been great for several years now, and certainly far more valuable than Ethier. If he gets $4M, he’s going to know he’s getting ripped off, and he’ll go to arb hearing like Ryan Howard.
As for Billingsley, he may be coming off the worst year of his career, but through 2008 Hernandez was actually a worse pitcher than Billingsley through 2009 (3.79 ERA vs. 3.45 ERA, 65 HR vs. 53 HR, 304 RA vs. 269 RA, although 216 BB vs. 288 BB and 593 K vs. 580 K). Hernandez had slightly better K/9 and BB/9, but Billingsley was the more effective pitcher overall, considering both ER and R. Given that the Dodgers are expected to contend in 2010, unlike the M’s, and Billingsley is the ace of the staff (like Hernandez) I don’t see it as unreasonable that Billingsley gets $5-6M. Putting Kemp at $9-10M is also reasonable (look at Ryan Howard), which brings us right to $14-16M for the pair.
by quincy0191 on Oct 11, 2009 10:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ellis Rankings Is What Effects Arbitration Awards The Most
Believe it or not Either is ranked higher then Kemp with his 87.216 to Kemp’s 81.237.
by giantsrainman on Oct 11, 2009 10:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Your High Ball Numbers Are Laughable.
How much can i sucker you into betting on these foolish predictions.
by giantsrainman on Oct 11, 2009 10:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Still waiting.
Matt Cain: throwing complete game shutouts since 06'. No big deal.
by cain1rstballothof on Oct 11, 2009 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You Didn’t Capitalize the “L” in Like
I R 5
by say hey nation on Oct 12, 2009 6:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said, their value according to Fangraphs is $41.7M. Signing them both for $15M would be a huge bargain; Kemp alone could easily make that on the FA market. Like cain1rstballothof said, Kemp is CF right now; there’s no one better.
by quincy0191 on Oct 11, 2009 1:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
FA Value Has Little To Do With Arbitration Awards.
What matters is what comparable players got in the same year of arbitration.
by giantsrainman on Oct 10, 2009 11:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Wrong
Arbitration usually falls in line with FA value. Obviously at a discount, but there’s a pretty clear correlation.
Proud father of Juan Carlos Perez. Think Albert Pujols at a position to be determined.
by marcello on Oct 11, 2009 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, Their Is Correlation, But Not Causation.
The Arbitration process does not care what simular players make in free agency it only cares what simular players make in arbitration.
by giantsrainman on Oct 11, 2009 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure how there could be causation between arbitration and FA value...
Aaron King is still my homeboy... iffy mechanics and all
McFAQ for all you newcomers out there.
GET THAT VORP AND WHIP SH!T OUTTA HERE!!!
by baetown415 on Oct 11, 2009 3:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think what he means is that just because there is a correlation between FA value and arb compensation, that doesn’t mean that FA value influences arb compensation, which is true. But it sure as hell implies a correlation, and you’d be a fool not to believe that a player’s perceived value on the open market determines his arbitration salary, because it definitely, without a doubt, does. Look at Ryan Howard: he won a record $10M arbitration settlement in 2008, coming off a year where he was worth 4.3 WAR, compared to Kemp’s 5.1 WAR, because he was recognized as a great player who deserved that much. Howard got paid that much because he went to an arbitration hearing to make sure he got paid; there’s no reason to expect Kemp won’t do that, and Kemp is at least as good as Howard, playing a tougher position (it’s pretty easy to find great hitters at 1B, not so much in CF, look at Rowand).
So yes, there is a correlation and causation between FA value and arbitration awards (as evidenced by Howard’s case). Arbitration salaries are not as high as FA salaries (if they were Kemp would be making at least $15M by himself), but there is no reason not to suspect Kemp will make at LEAST $8-9M next year.
by quincy0191 on Oct 11, 2009 9:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The MVP Won Howard His Arbitration Award.
As I stated above the arbitration process does not give a shit about WAR and Defense in particular. This is likely to start changing as more and more teams start to value defense but it is very unlikely to have any effect on 2010 arbitration awards..
by giantsrainman on Oct 11, 2009 9:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are really off base here. The MVP didn’t win him his reward. What won was the fact that the Phillies submitted a very unrealistic number. The arbitrator was forced to choose Howard’s number.
Remember, the way it works is that both sides submit a number. The arbitrator chooses one of them. THe arbitrator’s only judgement is which figure is more realistic.
Why isn't Sabean held accountable for leading the Giants into many years of mediocrity???
by oldrips on Oct 12, 2009 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The MVP IsWhat Got Him In The $7-10M Range To Begin With.
Without it he would of been in the $5-8M range with the same stats.
by giantsrainman on Oct 12, 2009 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry there, GRM, but you have no idea what you’re talking about. Howard submitted the $10M figure that he got. The Phillies offered $7M and were rejected by the arbitrator. Why? Perhaps you should read this:
Why Howard won
The Phillies — and the folks at MLB who “advise” clubs on salary-arbitration filings — thought they were going to nail this case because no player with two-plus years’ service time had ever made anywhere close to $10 million.
Matter of fact, Howard was asking for more than twice the $4.5-million salary the previous record-holder, Justin Morneau, had earned in this service class.
So by comparison to Morneau, the Phillies’ offer of $7 million actually might have seemed generous. Not by coincidence, that offer happened to be exactly as much as Albert Pujols collected in his first year of arbitration eligibility in 2004.
The problem was, the arbitrators didn’t buy the comparisons to either Morneau or Pujols. Turned out, the guy they were looking at was Miguel Cabrera.
Apparently, the panel tossed Pujols out of the argument because his salary wasn’t determined by the arbitration process. It was the first year of his long-term, seven-year, $100-million contract.
And the arbitrators ostensibly decided Morneau wasn’t a comparable enough player because Howard has outproduced not just Morneau, but just about everyone else in the sport since he arrived in the big leagues.
So that left Cabrera. And it appears the panel couldn’t justify giving Howard less than the $7.4 million Cabrera cashed when he won his arbitration case against the Marlins last year.
“I really think that if the Phillies had filed above Cabrera’s number, that would have made a major difference,” said one baseball man familiar with the case. “At least at that number, even if he’d lost, the arbitrators could have said it’s the largest award ever.”
But in the end, this case didn’t turn out to be about service time — the factor that determines most arbitration awards. It was about the fact that Ryan Howard is a historic player. A really historic player. There’s only player in history who compares to this man. And it isn’t Pujols, Cabrera or anyone else of this generation.
For the rest of the article: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/spring2008/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=3257829
Why isn't Sabean held accountable for leading the Giants into many years of mediocrity???
by oldrips on Oct 14, 2009 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think your post is wishful thinking. They’re a big market team and one of the first choices of free agents. They’ll expand payroll if they need to, and if McCourt eventually gets priced out, he’ll sell the team to some other rich Hollywood idiot. As for Colletti, he can keep making mistakes, because that franchise is willing to spend the money to overcome his errors. They don’t mind buying out an Andrew Jones, or paying a Juan Pierre all that money to sit on the bench. They’re trying to win. Maybe Neukom should try the same.
No Edgar, it's not your fault, it's the fault of the idiot that plays you
by rxmeister on Oct 11, 2009 5:30 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
BORK! WILL GET US THERE!
- Bow Tie’s brain.
Who’s brain did you bring me?
Brain SabeanOranother.
by daveinexile on Oct 11, 2009 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think at some point it matters. The Dodgers’ highest payroll was $118M in 2008, and there’s no reason to expect that McCourt could or would go much higher than that; if he does, that’s going to put him in the top 3 teams in baseball. Even if he does expand payroll significantly, he can’t keep it up for too long.
by quincy0191 on Oct 11, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’s Brian Sabean with a little extra payroll flexibility
I agree. But, it’s funny , that’s exactly how I have described Theo Epstein in the past (except a LOT more payroll).
BLING BLING
by cybermaldonado on Oct 11, 2009 9:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Theo Epstein and Brian Sabean have nothing in common, except they are both GMs of baseball teams.
Proud father of Juan Carlos Perez. Think Albert Pujols at a position to be determined.
by marcello on Oct 11, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey I have to go with this little factiod. Epstein knows the value of the NONOUT in baseball and tries to get players accordingly. Sabean not so much.
Who’s brain did you bring me?
Brain SabeanOranother.
by daveinexile on Oct 11, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Epstein took a Sabean type approach last offseason though, and it really enabled the Yankees to pass them by. While the Yankees went straight for the elite free agents, he signed a bunch of injured veterans, hoping they would get healthy. Players like John Smoltz, Brad Penny, Rocco Baldelli, and Saito. Of course, I’m sure if Epstein had his choice he would have went for the big guys, perhaps he was hamstrung by the owners.
No Edgar, it's not your fault, it's the fault of the idiot that plays you
by rxmeister on Oct 11, 2009 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The big money free agents didn’t really fit the needs of the Red Sox like they did the Yankees. Instead, they bought a bunch of 1 year lotto tickets, which is fine when you have that type of payroll.
Proud father of Juan Carlos Perez. Think Albert Pujols at a position to be determined.
by marcello on Oct 11, 2009 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for realizing I am not trying to say Epstein is perfect. But seriously the only GM that seems to value players that swing the bat more and careless for nonhit generated OBP then Sabean is in KC. That should say all that needs saying.
Who’s brain did you bring me?
Brain SabeanOranother.
by daveinexile on Oct 11, 2009 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1, -1
I think you’re right that the Fodgers have money problems. Just look how they couldn’t take on any salary at the trade deadline and in August this year, even though they needed at least another starting pitcher very badly. I think that those people that assume that McCourt will increase the payroll much above this year’s mark haven’t been paying attention to the economy and the drop in revenues by all teams. Now, if they win the WS this year then he might splurge and raise it above $100M in a last-ditch effort to win again while they still have Manny and control of their good young players.
You are definitely wrong about Vicente Padilla. The Rangers released him outright, and he didn’t get claimed by any team, so he was an unrestricted FA before the Fodgers signed him (just as Brad Penny was for us). Once he became a FA, his contract with the Rangers was no longer valid (in the sense that no base salary, option years, or incentives still applied to any other team signing him). Of course, the Rangers are still on the hook to pay him every bit of the guaranteed money they still owe him on his contract, as well as any amount that they would have owed him to buy out any option years on his old contract. As soon as this season is over, Padilla will again be an unrestricted FA and any team can sign him to any deal without regard to any past contract.
"There ain’t much to being a ballplayer, if you’re a ballplayer." - Honus Wagner
by Fla-Giant on Oct 11, 2009 7:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Dodgers approx 20 million more payroll than gmen
Bums, unless the money they get is squandered, should have tons of bucks coming in, and even moreso if they go deep into the playoffs. 20 million more payroll is essentially the difference between the teams and they were able to get about 7 more wins for and additonal 20 million. NOT that many wins for 20 million compared to what the Marlins seem to be able to do for 20 million. Zito can get about 10 wins for 18 million. I expect Kershaw and Billingly to get better. With all that being said, it would be nice for the giants to go forward into an era of baseball domination.
by bradleybear on Oct 11, 2009 9:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ll edit the post; I wasn’t sure how that worked and I guessed wrong. Still, it’s only $1.75M, which is chump change in the big picture.
by quincy0191 on Oct 11, 2009 10:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you...
You brightened my day
Brian Sabean is akin to a treatable form of cancer... just get rid of it before it kills you
by milesntrane on Oct 12, 2009 8:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 




















