Categorized | Mark Timmons

McCourt vs. McCourt

McCourt vs. McCourt


The Fool

The Fool

I was determined not going to comment on this whole stinking case.
I was just going to ignore it and hope it went away.  It’s not!
I am not a lawyer, but I am imminently qualified as one, and while I do not think anyone can predict what will happen, I will present you with the facts as I see them and what could possibly happen.


     Comes now this Blogger, Mark S. Timmons, proceeding pro se, and under the authority granted to me by myself, I do hereby swear and affirm, under the penalties for perjury that the following is a true and accurate representation of the facts of this case:

Statement of the Facts

  1. Frank McCourt (hereafter “Mac”) asserts that he is the sole owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers;
  2. Mac alleges that his wife Jamie McCourt (hereafter “the Fool), and himself agreed to split their martial assets at the time they purchased the Dodgers, with the Idiot receiving most of the marital assets (property, cars, paintings, et al), except for the Los Angeles Dodgers;
  3. Mac was then declared and listed as the sole owner of the Dodgers (the MLB Franchise is in his name alone);
  4. Mac  allegedly had all the appropriate documents signed by the Idiot, granting him full ownership of the Dodgers,  and there is an alleged paper trail that will show that to be so;
  5. The Fool is an accredited lawyer (is that an oxymoron?), and chose not to seek legal council even though she was advised to do so;
  6. Subsequent to this, Mac and the Fool contacted an estate-planning attorney who will allegedly testify that Mac intended for the Dodgers to be community property; and
  7. The Fool is seeking to be declared fifty percent (50%) owner of the Dodgers, with the idea of buying out Mac’s fifty percent (50%) interest.


The key witness in this case has to be the estate-planning attorney, who could conceivably saythat Mac intended for the Fool to own half the team.  Whether he will be allowed to testify is the key issue.  If he was hired by both Mac and the Idiot, or hired by Mac, it is likely that Mac will maintain that any communications with said attorney are privileged and therefor should not be allowed.   The Fool will also claim that she was not represented by legal council, and therefore, any agreement should be held null and void, and totally unenforceable.  That, in and of itself would not meet the requisite legal threshold of requiring that the agreement be declared null and void, in my opinion.  The Fool needs the testimony of the estate-planning attorney, but it is likely that his testimony could be disallowed.  If this is the defense against the agreement that the Fool chooses to utilize, in my opinion it shows her level of incompetence, because any competent attorney would seek council in such a situation. 

An attorney who represents himself (or herself) “has a fool for a client.”  So, if the Fool chooses this line of defense, she can win and be deemed a “Fool,” or lose and be deemed a Fool as well.  I will not predict if the Court will allow the estate-planning attorney to testify, but I am certain that Mac will do everything in his power to prevent it and the Fool will do everything in her power to have the testimony allowed.  On that key legal issue – the testimony of an estate-planning lawyer, hangs the future of the Dodgers. 

I do not look for any major changes in the Dodgers operation and I think that it is “business as usual” for the foreseeable future, but you never know when the Court and Attorneys are involved…  My first guess is that the estate-planner testimony will be disallowed, but that’s an issue that could be argued for days. 

P.S.  I am not biased, and anything I wrote should not lead you to believe that I am against the Fool and in favor of Mac!    ;)

About Mark Timmons

When you see the invisible, you can do the impossible!

79 Responses to “McCourt vs. McCourt”

  1. lawdog says:

    If the agreement is firmed up adequately, it probably will in itself, dissallow any modifications to it’s terms unless in writing. The exclusion of the oral arguments is what is known as the parole evidence rule. There are so many exceptions to it that I can’t recall at the moment, it’s conceivable Jamie might get around it–but I doubt it. The agreement dividing the property is undoubtedly worded tighter than a drum by Frank’s lawyer and if Jamie chose to represent herself she did have independent counsel. This isn’t like a criminal case where defendants in felonies have to be protected from themselves.

    The comments made by Frank could be taken any number of ways, but Jamie is probably going to have that agreement rammed down her throat even if the estate attorney says Frank waffled on his intent. Frank could just as easily meant that he wanted the Dodgers to become community property again, by gift, in the event of his death–or something along those line. I think Jamie will get screwed on this one. Again.

  2. A Shot of Haeger says:

    Was any of this english? My head hurts. Why can’t they just settle there differences in a spirited game of Scrabble? Win the get everything..lose you get nothing.

  3. Badger says:

    California’s divorce laws are pretty clear. Both McCourts, through their attorneys, have claimed ownership, setting the stage for a vigorous legal battle.

    Jamie’s law dog – Dennis Wasser – said last week that Jamie McCourt shares in the ownership of the team and that he is unaware of any document that would override California’s community property law, in which all assets accumulated during marriage are split 50-50 in the absence of a settlement.

    Moores had to sell the Padres when this came up a while back. I don’t see any other way if both want to keep the team. Somefin’ have to give, and these two egos don’t look like they are capable of giving in.

    Whoever wins the team will need partners to pay off the 50-50 settlement.

  4. Mark Timmons says:

    IF, the testimony of the estate-planning attorney is disallowed, Jamie has no standing to claimn ownership of the Dodgers.

  5. Ken says:

    I will watch with much interest as they deal with “transmutation”. Jamie may have to throw a lot of mud to prove fraud. This will be a long battle with many accusations. Will the MLB owners enjoy watching Jamie try to prove that Frank committed fraud?

    California Family Law Code:
    850. Subject to Sections 851 to 853, inclusive, married persons may
    by agreement or transfer, with or without consideration, do any of
    the following:
    (a) Transmute community property to separate property of either
    (b) Transmute separate property of either spouse to community
    (c) Transmute separate property of one spouse to separate property
    of the other spouse.

    851. A transmutation is subject to the laws governing fraudulent

    852. (a) A transmutation of real or personal property is not valid
    unless made in writing by an express declaration that is made, joined
    in, consented to, or accepted by the spouse whose interest in the
    property is adversely affected.
    (b) A transmutation of real property is not effective as to third
    parties without notice thereof unless recorded.
    (c) This section does not apply to a gift between the spouses of
    clothing, wearing apparel, jewelry, or other tangible articles of a
    personal nature that is used solely or principally by the spouse to
    whom the gift is made and that is not substantial in value taking
    into account the circumstances of the marriage.
    (d) Nothing in this section affects the law governing
    characterization of property in which separate property and community
    property are commingled or otherwise combined.
    (e) This section does not apply to or affect a transmutation of
    property made before January 1, 1985, and the law that would
    otherwise be applicable to that transmutation shall continue to

    Mark – You all need to understand that regardless of whether Jamie has legal ownership of the Dodgers she will attempt to prove that she has beneficial ownership in the value of the Dodgers that will
    require Frank to buy her out and if he can not then she will try to buy him out. Hopefully neither of them will be able to buy each other out and they will just go away. This will be a very long battle.

  6. Mark Timmons says:


    I understand all that. That’s why I say “business as usual” – It will be a long, dirty battle.

    … and you damn lawyers can argue if that really is the sun up there in the sky (maybe it’s a supernova, do you have proof?).

  7. Mark Timmons says:

    All I can say is that I have won 100% of MY cases. Unless you have a record that good….


    • DRomo says:

      Whoa Mark, I am hooked! What crime you were falsely accused of? The story sound so intriguing. I really mean it when I said “You have one book pre sold here!”

      When can we expect it out?

    • Kay in L.A. says:

      That is amazing, Mark. I did not know that about you. Consider me a fan.
      I’ll bet Bruce Willis, for one, would be interested in the movie.

  8. lawdog says:

    The thing is, when Frankie and Jamie entered into that agreement, the real property was worth a lot more and the Dog’s were worth less than they’re worth now. If the values in the properties as divided was close to 50-50 and the agreement purported to divide the community property of the parties at that time, since Jamie had independent counsel (namely herself) I think it is likely the judge will uphold the agreement and make her go live in her 8 homes that are depreciating like mad even as I type.

  9. Mark Timmons says:

    Good point, Lawdog.

    However, since you are a lawyer, we still have to kill you.


  10. A Shot of Haeger says:

    All this lawyer talk is making my brain cells explode…

    watch this instead

  11. Badger says:

    Seems to me the thing is, they were married when that property in Chavez Ravine was purchased. So what on the Dodger paperwork it says Frank is the owner? That was for MLB purposes. Anyone who has ever been divorced in California (and I have) knows that the law will make sure the woman gets her half. You lawyers in the group should know that.

    1) What is community property?
    California law defines community property as any asset acquired or income earned by a married person while living with his or her spouse. Separate property is defined as anything acquired by a spouse before the marriage, or during the marriage by gift, devise or bequest. The law requires that the community estate be divided equally if there is no written agreement to the contrary. This means that from the total fair market value of the community assets, the joint obligations of the parties are subtracted, yielding the net community estate. Unless agreed otherwise, each spouse must receive ½ of the net community estate.

    2) How is the community property to be divided?
    It should be understood that the law does not require an “in kind” division of the community property. All that the law requires is that the net value of the assets received by each spouse must be equal. Thus, it is not uncommon for one spouse to be awarded the family residence, with the other spouse receiving the family business and investment real estate. Since the total net value of the assets being received by each spouse is equal, such a division is proper.

    Ordinarily, it is not difficult to determine whether a particular asset is community or separate property. However, certain types of assets can pose unique problems in this regard.

    And something else we all know, lawyers from both sides will stretch this out into as many billable hours as is humanly possibly. If Wasser has a recorded paper that says Jamie gave sole ownership to Frankie, first of all I would surprised this woman would be that stupid, and secondly it had better be forthcoming very quickly. According to Wasser, no such paper exists and this will all be settled in court.

  12. DRomo says:

    I do agree with Mark here and it seems to me some legal “experts” do too. I can only hope it really is business as usual. Because if we lead the league in attendance and then don’t re-invest in the team this offseason I will be angry.

  13. Ken says:

    Transmutation is not just a word that describes what may have occurred bwtween Frank and Jamie it also may describe what is happening to Manny (Trans mutation)

  14. Badger says:

    Romey I don’t see how any re-investments in the team can take place. There will be the normal operating costs (maybe including current players) that will be taken care of, but until the assets are divided up, how can payroll be added? And the point of my concern is, these two weren’t exactly burning up the payroll since taking over the team. They have kept it right around where it was when the purchase, and in fact dropped it considerably this past year. Now, according to state law, they are required to divide their assets equally. So at this point, I don’t see that it matters which one of these silver spoon fed ninos popis aristocrata own the title, after asset division they are both going to be broker than they were before. And that being the case, they will need to take on partners to add any payroll whatsoever. She is asking for $321,000 spousal support! Good luck Frankie.

    This situation could hamstring the Dodgers not only next year, but a few years to come. It just might be better for all if they put the team up for sale now, get the money and go their seperate ways. With this dragging out for months, assets might be frozen until the courts decide what up. And we all know how long that could take.

  15. GoNzO says:

    I too hope that McCourts will also go away. Does anyone have the number for Eli Broad, Mark Cuban or that former scout/agent with the ChiSox?

    Oh and some tell Jamie she’s suppossed to be a high ranking baseball official, not Army official. You can barely see her since her camoflauge blends with the background.

    Lay off the orange sunless tan Jamie. EEEKKK. For those of you who say she is a ten how dare you…Maybe a 20….yarder!

  16. DRomo says:

    The sad thing is Frank got the shaft here. Say what you will about his finances, he has improved upon the product he bought from Fox. Since 2004 we have been in the playoffs 4 of 6 years and have advanced twice to the 2nd round. That is not great but it is something! Down the freeway Arte Moreno is a God for doing the same thing and he spends less money on his team!!

    We cried and moaned for Manny back and he paid him! We needed a better manager and he got Torre (some disagree with the choice) but that cost money. Alot of money for a manager!! Maybe it is inspite of him that the team has become a contender but the fact is the team is better now than it was then.

    So then his wife cheats on him and he is left over the barrell now facing having to sell the team! That is just the facts here as I see them.

  17. Badger says:

    Small correction Romey – Arte spends more on payroll than does McCourt and has for the last 3 years. And he has done so with less attendance. The Dodgers should be so lucky as to have an onwer like Arte Moreno.

    The team is better, I will grant you that. I am not so sure Frankie had a lot to do with it. He has been trying to do his best but I just think that with his background, and now this, he doesn’t have what it takes to be a first rate owner.

    And that is just how I see it.

  18. lawdog says:


    (Broxton’s Hard Day’s night or “I’ve got
    off speed stuff that’s bad, and that ain’t good!)

    It’s been a hard day’s night,
    And I’ve been pitchin’ for the Dogs.

    It’s been a hard day’s night
    And I got lit’ like I was raw.

    But throw a slider or two?
    You know they’ll hit that pitch too!

    It’s got me feelin’ so sad

    When I throw
    The fastball is never inside.

    When I throw
    My heater they hit right in stride!

    It’s been a hard days night
    And I’m pitchin’ like a dog

    It’s been a hard days night
    My four-seamer’s goin’ yard.

    But what on earth can I do
    Throw a change up or two?

    That hanger’s gettin long rides.
    It still be gettin’ long rides.

    Try pitchin’ Stairs inside,
    You know he’ll give it long rides.

  19. GoNzO says:

    Interesting tidbit from MLB traderumors

    Manny Ramirez Rumor Shot Down
    By Tim Dierkes [November 2, 2009 at 2:21pm CST]

    12:16pm: From Bob Keisser of the Long Beach Press-Telegram (hat tip to Diamond Leung):

    A baseball insider says the club has been contacted by an American League team that is interested in Manny Ramirez if the team will pay part of his $20 million salary for 2010. It’s a team that plays in a very mediocre division, has a few team officials familiar with Ramirez, and always needs a bump in notoriety.

    MLBTR has not referenced a rumor from Keisser in its four-year history, but let’s explore this one anyway.

    SI’s Jon Heyman wrote Wednesday that Manny “is planning to exercise” his $20MM player option. Manny hit well in 2009, but a 50-game PED suspension marred his season.

    As for Keisser’s clues, he appears to be referring to the AL Central. Did the Twins, Tigers, White Sox, Indians, or Royals express interest in Manny? Indians GM Mark Shapiro crossed paths with Ramirez. The Tigers’ David Chadd worked for the Red Sox when Manny was there. Do any of the other teams have officials familiar with the slugger? In general, do you buy this rumor?

    2:21pm: Dylan Hernandez of the L.A. Times says (via Twitter) that Dodgers GM Ned Colletti shot down the rumor below. By the way, Hernandez just joined Twitter, so get following!

  20. Mark Timmons says:


    McCourt has spent dramatically more than Moreno. It’ not just salaries, but stadium upgrades and Camelback Ranch, where McCourt spent $30 mil more than Reinsdorf.

    Law is not as simple as splitting the property 50/50, which is why this will be a protracted deal.

    Personally, at this juncture, I still don’t think this affects the Dodgers operations.

  21. GoNzO says:

    Also, here is an interesting website very interesting stuff.

  22. Badger says:

    “McCourt has spent dramatically more than Moreno. It’ not just salaries, but stadium upgrades and Camelback Ranch, where McCourt spent $30 mil more than Reinsdorf.”

    While what you say might in fact be true, it doesn’t change the fact that Arte spent more money on players than did McCourt. And he did it with less B.I.S. revenues. Arte has done many things right, including sign great players and drop beer and ticket prices. The only thing I can see he has done wrong is that silly name change thing.

    “Law is not as simple as splitting the property 50/50, which is why this will be a protracted deal.”

    Am I wrong to assume that you have never been divorced in California?

    “Personally, at this juncture, I still don’t think this affects the Dodgers operations.”

    At this juncture? What juncture is that? We haven’t seen any of the forthcoming fireworks. Did it have an effect on the team’s play in the Pillies series? Yeah, that’s the reason the team again folded like a ten high.

  23. Kay in L.A. says:

    I miss this guy:
    Loved watching him pitch when he was ours.
    Go Phillies, what a Series.

    Okay, back to your regularly scheduled gossipfest.

  24. Badger says:

    BTW, thanks to GoNzo for that informative Dodger Divorce update. I suggest everyone read it very carefully.

  25. lawdog says:

    How the McCourts came to own the Dodgers.

    (Or: Why this divorce is gonna be a beast to get through)

    The purchase of an asset the size of a major league baseball team is not nearly as simple as you or I buying our morning Diet Coke.* For that matter, it’s many, many times more complex than buying our houses or even our own businesses. Even among the cadre of super-wealthy folks, it’s just not that easy to drum up $421 million in cash. The McCourts didn’t simply hand the O’Malley family News Corp. a check drawn on the family’s WaMu account. The process behind financing this purchase is especially interesting in the McCourt case, and is particularly relevant for the upcoming battle for the Dodgers.

    *Yes, I’m one of those people who order a Diet Coke with their Supersized Value Meal. Deal with it.

    Now, I’ll warn you in advance: this stuff is neither easy nor particularly interesting for most folks. However, this sort of thing is my bag, baby, and I want to explore it. If at any point you’re not feeling it, the safety word is “Broxton.”* Say it, and you’ll be whisked off to the usual world of snarky posts about Jamie’s demands for a big-enough swimming pool. If you care to dive further down the rabbit hole, I think you’ll be pleased with how popular you are when office holiday party conversation turns to the McCourt divorce. You’ll be the envy of all your friends!

    *He was awesome this year, and he’s gonna be great for a while. I know he had a couple high-profile blowups, but we’re not talking about Brad Lidge here. This guy is a stud. Treat him as such.

    The McCourts amassed their considerable pre-Dodgers wealth primarily through the development of 24 acres of real estate in Frank’s native Boston. I use the term “development” very loosely, as the land is primarily used for surface parking lots. You know, the kind in or near downtown areas where it costs more to park than to buy your lunch. As you can imagine, these things are cash cows of investments in robust economic times, because they double-pop: as the land value increases, you can raise parking prices while growing equity in the property itself. This 24-acre parcel of real estate was the McCourts’ primary asset heading into the purchase of the Dodgers.

    The McCourts bought the Dodgers from the O’Malley family News Corp. in 2003 for $421 million. This sum was assembled through a series of financial instruments ranging from the mundane to the very complex. We’ll take it chunk by chunk until we’ve reached the purchase price.
    $150 million (Bank of America commercial loan). This piece is pretty straightforward. B of A loaned one or both McCourts $150 million and took a security interest in the club and its real estate. From the bank’s perspective, this was a fine deal, because the bank was significantly over-secured. This means that if everything went terribly wrong, there would still be enough value in the collateral to cover the loan.

    Current status: taken out. See below.

    $125 million (Fox Sports [News Corp.] two-year note) Fox, in a testament to how desperate it was to get out of the Dodgers, financed nearly half of the purchase price itself. In exchange for the $125 million short-term loan, The McCourt Company granted Fox a security interest in the 24 acres of Boston land. If McCourt defaulted on the terms of its note to Fox, Fox could take the Boston property.

    Current status: In February of 2006, Fox foreclosed on the property, taking possession in exchange for forgiving the $145 remaining on the note. Evidently, the revenue generated by the property wasn’t sufficient to cover the interest on the note. At or near the time of foreclosure, Fox discovered over $58 million in previously unreported obligations owed by the property. In further evidence of Fox’s determination to be done with the Dodgers and McCourt, Fox assumed that extra debt.

    $75 million (MLB revolving note) This piece is a fairly standard revolving line of credit from MLB’s fund for team owners. It is likely to require only interest payments.

    Current status: unknown.

    $40 million (Fox four-year note) This loan, another concession from Fox, was secured by McCourt personal assets. Presumably, this does not include the family residences, which were supposedly not offered as collateral in the Dodgers purchase.

    Current status: Taken out. See below.

    $31 million (Fox three-year convertible note) Like the last chunk, another Fox loan secured by McCourt personal assets.

    Current status: Taken out. See below.

    Under the terms of the agreement, Fox was also obligated to kick in rebates of $50 million over the first two years of the financing, effectively reducing the purchase price to $371 million.

    So, if you’re counting at home, the above adds up to $421 million in financing…for a $371 million purchase. That, friends, is a little scary. And there’s more. In May 2005, McCourt announced a new, $250 million 25-year note which took out B of A and what remained of the debt to Fox (after the foreclosure on the Boston property). This increased the debt load to $521 million on a $371 million purchase. This financing, known as a private placement, was provided by an unidentified group of institutional investors, such as pension funds and insurance companies. The terms of the loan–5.66% fixed for 25 years–are relatively favorable to McCourt. The collateral for this new loan was reportedly the 300 acres of real estate surrounding Dodger Stadium–not the club itself. Importantly, one of the provisions of the private placement was that control of the Dodgers would not change hands.

    In April 2009, Forbes estimated the value of the franchise (including surrounding land) as $722 million with a debt total a little shy of $420 million. Where does that $420 million come from? We don’t know the status of the $75 million debt to major league baseball. My guess is that the McCourts further leveraged the land around Dodger Stadium, bringing the private placement debt to at least $345 million.

    The McCourts’ equity in the Dodgers is likely somewhere in the $250-350 million range. Assuming Jamie’s $400 million estimate of the couple’s other assets is correct, that makes the couple’s net worth approximately $700 million, not quite the $1.2 billion suggested by Jamie. And is it that unreasonable to think that her $400 million “other assets” figure might have omitted debt, just as the $800 million Dodgers figure did? It’s entirely possible the couple’s net worth is much closer to $500 million–still a very healthy amount, but one that poses significant problems for either of the two to own the Dodgers without the other. We don’t know nearly enough about the McCourts’ other personal assets to draw any hard conclusions, but all of the significant residential assets are mortgaged or otherwise pledged in various financing facilities.

    And don’t forget that provision of the private placement that requires control of the Dodgers to stay the same. If the Dodgers are sold to a third party, that debt might not be able to travel with the team. Furthermore, depending on a judicial determination of whether the team is jointly owned by the McCourts or solely owned by Frank himself, the unidentified investors may be able to call the balance of their loan immediately.

    Conclusion: so what do we know?

    We know that the McCourts aren’t worth anything close to the $1.2 billion Jamie suggests. At most, the couple seems to have something approaching $750 million in total net worth ($400 million in “other assets plus ~$350 million in equity in the Dodgers). However, it is my guess, based on the loan balances due on the residences and their history of operating heavily-leveraged businesses, that the couple’s net worth is under $600 million.

    If the team is determined to be an asset of the marriage, either partner would have to become heavily leveraged to take the other out. If no agreement can be reached and the court orders the Dodgers to be sold to a third party, expect a bit of a discount on the purchase price, leaving both McCourts with even less.

    If the court upholds the asset-transfer agreement (or post-nup) purporting to transfer the Dodgers to Frank and the residences to Jamie, expect her to walk away with a net worth of well-under $100 million. Is it any wonder she wants a half-mil a month now?

    I started this post with the intent of better understanding the financial position of the McCourts. I think that, by accident, I have succeeded. I am certainly more confused now than I was two hours ago. The takeaway here is that unwinding this marriage is going to be messy, and we won’t run out of content any time soon. I feel I’ve done a poor job articulating what I’ve learned, so if you have any questions, feel free to hit me up in the comments or at

    What I really want to emphasize is that the McCourts aren’t worth as much as you think, and breaking up this marriage is going to cost them both dearly.
    Posted by Joshua Fisher at 2:28 PM 1 comments

  26. DRomo says:

    Badger I just disagree with you. Moreno bought a team that had just won it all, he has done nothing to improve that team. He paid Torii Hunter a bunch of money for a lot of years that is true, and while he may be great they will regret that contract in a few years. They have their fair share of bad ones too, Matthews, Jr and Fuentes for example. They will have a ton of key free agents this year & I’ll bet you he takes the cheap way out and doesn’t retain most of them.

    Sure he lowered beer prices and that leads to the drunken parking lot violence and changed the name of the team to alienate the OC base the team had for years when they were terrible, but what has he accomplished that McCourt has not?

    I have maintained for years that although the McCourts aren’t perfect they are paying for the sins of the Fox Regime. They have made their mistakes but remember what this team was when he bought them. Absent from contention for almost a decade!!

    And although the Angels have been successful in a small (4 team) division Arte Moreno is living off the Disney success. Remember Disney hired Scioscia they developed the base of the team that won, they were the owners of the Angels when they won. Moreno has done nothing, yet he parades around like a hero while the company men tell us how great he is (Mota’s kid, Rex The Bluntsmoking Dog, Gubiza, etc.)

  27. Mark Timmons says:


    You are right, I have never been divorced in Califiornia, but I understand Evidentiary Foundations better than most lawyers. Read this book and you will see why the legal system doesn’t work like we think it does:;jsessionid=394E2BB50ABC92BFACEC52E381234201.psc1705_lnstore_001?pageName=relatedProducts&core=&parent=&catId=24&prodId=42176

  28. Badger says:

    Spoken like a true Dodger fan Romey. The fact is, Arte is loved by Angel fans and in his first year as owner he was able to draw 750,000 more fans than they did during their W.S. year. That is doing something very right.

    Oh I am quite certain our legal system doesn’t work like we think it does Mark. Just like I am quite certain our political system doesn’t work like we think it does. But the fact of the matter is, when it comes to divorce, especially in California, the only winners are the lawyers. And the point that many don’t seem to get is that it is quite possible when this whole affiar is settled, neither of these Boston yahoos are going to have enough left to run the Dodgers the way they should be run. Whoever is left standing is going to need partners.

    I hope you are right and the post-nups are legit. Since I haven’t trusted these people from the very beginning, I am going to just take a wait and see approach.

  29. DRomo says:

    “Spoken like a true Dodger fan Romey. The fact is, Arte is loved by Angel fans and in his first year as owner he was able to draw 750,000 more fans than they did during their W.S. year. That is doing something very right.”

    I think they call that band wagon fans, Badger! Check the attendance for the Mighty Ducks err… Ducks of Anaheim. I am sure they improved too after they won the cup.I used to live in Orange County and I was there the year the Angels won it all, remember they were a Wild Card team, you could walk up and buy any ticket in the house. Orange County fans are fair weather fans. I know there are many Dodger fans the same way but the point is the spike in attendance had nothing to do with Arte, it had more to do with the Angels run the year year they won the series.

  30. Ken says:

    Jamie – Beta-carotene dietary excess?

    Mark – Is Aaron Miller injured?

  31. Badger says:

    Check the attendance for the ducks? Why in the world would I care about that?

    Moreno is a good owner. You are not an Angels fan. That’s fine. I am not either really. But those that are appreciate him there and Disney gone. I am from that area and I too remember going to that stadium and sitting up with the seagulls for next to nothing. My most vivid memories of that place are inexpensive tickets, cheap beer and Oscar Gamble’s afro with a tiny batting helmet sitting on top of it. Oh the good ol’ days.

  32. Blue Haze says:

    My best memory of The A are sitting in the stands with the cast of Taxi, watching Reggie Jackson. He hit the hardest basehit that I have ever personally witnessed. He hit a screamer right above the pitchers head, the pitcher literally did not even react until the ball was almost sailing over second base. Surprise I even saw that hit, I was very busy staring at Marilou Henner massive titties next to me. Yeah, Tony Danza is actually a very good, fun-loving guy, not to mention that he bought me and my friend about 8 beers a piece that day.

    That stadium used to be a complete hole to watch a game in, not been back since Disney or Arte days began.

    Nice analysis LDawg.

    Is anyone watching the WS? Have to admit I have seen maybe 2 or three at bats in the series. Just not interested in the Leastern teams, only thing worth seeing are the vile leastern fans.

  33. Mark Timmons says:


    The Dodgers shut down lefthahnder Aaron Miller as planned after three appearances in which the 2009 supplemental first-round pick yielded only one run in 4 1/3 innings. In his brief stint, the Baylor product drew raves from many in the scout section at his games. One scout in particular wondered aloud how Miller had gotten past the first round before being selected with the 36th overall pick.

    Also, righthander Kenley Jansen, a converted catcher, replaced him on the Javelinas roster. Jansen, a native of Curacao, made his pitching debut this season with high Class A Inland Empire and struck out 19 batters in 11 2/3 innings. The 22-year-old, who caught for the Dutch in the World Baseball Classic this spring, has a big, strong physique and possesses a fastball that reaches 96-97 mph.

  34. Bill Russell says:

    Wow, what have I missed in here? You would think the Dodgers were still playing with all this excitement going on. Peace brothers and sister. Don’t kill yourselfs over this McCourt thingymojig.

    • Ken says:

      Decafalon (n.): The grueling event of getting through the day consuming only things that are good for you.

  35. Badger says:

    Hey, this is the McCourt vs. McCourt thread. Isn’t that meant to be about the battle going on between them? This appears to be the ONLY Dodger news out there.

    Or am I missing something?

  36. DRomo says:,0,6153364.story

    Padilla is so upset with the Dodger divorce he shot himself?!?!

  37. Ken says:

    Padilla should hire a 24 hour security guard who has a Fuller understanding of how to holster a weapon.

  38. A Shot of Haeger says:

    Isn’t all of this just awesome? I mean all this lawyer stuff and your guys posts that read like a novel… I don’t understand any of it…. but all the drama and fighting, just great!!! I’m in the news business, so I love this stuff. It’s just so National Enquirer…

    As far as the Dodgers go….we’ll be fine. I’m sure at some point the McCourts will have to sell the team…. from the few things I think I understand of what you wrote, neither one can effectively run the team without the other, so eventually it’ll get sorted out.

    Go Dodgers!!!

  39. Brooklyn Dodger says:,0,5095602.story

    The article above confirms what I’ve been thinking about for a long time. Slowly but surely, the Dodgers farm system is drying up, due to a lack of investment in new talent, especially on the international front. Although there are some good prospects, the depth that we once had is no longer there. And it’s not because a lot of prospects moved up to the major leagues. That was a factor, but it certainly could have been mitigated by further investment in new talent. It hasn’t been done, and isn’t being done.

    And how long do you think we’re going to hold onto Logan White if he’s not given the resources he needs? I’m sure he can find greener pastures elsewhere.

    This team needs an owner with deep pockets who is willing to make a long term commitment to building an elite franchise. The ROI could be substantial for an owner with a vision, and the resources to make it a reality.

    • Kay in L.A. says:

      BD, I read that Ned Colletti will be scouting and recruiting in “Latin America,” so there is your international component.

  40. SpokaneBob says:

    I’ve always been a National League guy, but this year I am rooting for the Yankees…….mostly so the Phillie fans suffer.

    But as Blue pointed out my level of attention dropped dramatically when our team was eliminated.

    As soon as the Series is over… year begins.

    Blue, I saw Frank Howard hit a line drive about 10 feet over a Houston Colt 45′s pitcher that carried over the center field fence at Dodger Stadium.

    Dizzy Dean said the hardest hit ball off him went through his legs and was caught on the fly by the centerfielder. Back in the day the only games I could get on TV was the game of the week with Dizzy and Pee Wee.

  41. Kay in L.A. says:

    I cannot root for an AL team unless they are the Angels. Otherwise, I have always been National.

    Besides, some of our (ex)guys play for the Phils, most notably Werth and Park.

    I also have a very good friend who has 4 generations of Philadelphians in her family. They are having a blast.

    Paging Badger…. “This appears to be the ONLY Dodger news out there. Or am I missing something?” Click here:

    I can’t stop laughing….

  42. Badger says:

    The only time I would root for the Yankees is if they were playing the gints.

    I saw Howard to the same thing on a line drive into the second deck down the line at Dodger Stadium Bob. The ball hit empty seats and it sounded like a grenade went off out there. That was probably the hardest ball I have ever seen hit.

    Yeah I just saw that on another site Kay. Hilarious. He and Shooter have something in common. Note to anyone who picks up a loaded weapon: at point blank range they will hit what they are aiming at, so point it at yourself when the trigger is pulled if you dare. What a dope.

  43. DRomo says:

    I always root for the National League, unless it is the Giants, and I never root for the Angels. In 2002 I prayed for rain every day in Oct.

    Hey word on the street is Frank is flying to see Padilla in person to inquire if he is available for hire… wink wink!

  44. Bill Russell says:

    Romo, you are one of the funnyest posters alive, Padilla is so upset with the McCourts, he shot himself. Classic. I kinda feel the same way right about now.

  45. Bill Russell says:

    Who is Pete Rose betting on in tonights game? (Phillies) I think. Will the Lakers handle the Rockets tonight? Trevor is Houstons #1 option right now. Can you believe that? I guess he didn’t get much of a chance with Kobe running the show last year.

  46. Misunderstood says:

    Hey take care you all. Have a party Mark. I’m gone.

  47. Badger says:

    “This team needs an owner with deep pockets who is willing to make a long term commitment to building an elite franchise. The ROI could be substantial for an owner with a vision, and the resources to make it a reality.”

    Well said Brooklyn.

    Padilla didn’t actually shoot himself Bill. His bodyguard did it to him.

    “Apparently, Padilla was accidentally shot in the right leg by his bodyguard while at a shooting range about 22 miles southeast of Managua. It appears that the bodyguard was in the process of trying to fix a malfunctioning weapon when it discharged and struck Padilla in the right thigh.”

    Nice work bodyguard. Methinks that position just opened up.

  48. Brooklyn Dodger says:


    You said: “BD, I read that Ned Colletti will be scouting and recruiting in “Latin America,” so there is your international component.”

    Scouting is one thing, signing is another. As for the “recruiting” part, exactly what sort of prospects will those be? The annual July signing period for Latin American players has passed. Maybe the Dodgers could get lucky and sign a sleeper or two, but don’t think they’re going to spend the big dollars. And in case you’re unaware, it now takes BIG dollars to sign top Latin talent.

    Will he be “scouting and recruiting” outside Latin America? “International” doesn’t only include Latin America.

    The fact is, the Dodgers have not been replenishing their farm system with top international talent for several years. And domestically, in the 2007 draft they took Kyle Blair, a top rated RHP in the 5th round. Blair, considered a 1st round talent at the time, lasted into the 5th round because he was deemed difficult to sign. However, had the Dodgers been willing to offer him first round money, chances are he would have signed and not gone to college. I don’t know if Blair will ever see the major leagues, but it makes no sense for the Dodgers to have taken him if they were unwilling to pay him well over slot money. The least they could have done was use the pick to sign a player that would have signed.

    The Santana deal with Cleveland was just another example of McCourt seeking to save $2 million, when he could have kept Santana and had Casey Blake by simply agreeing to pick up the remaining $2 million on the latter’s contract. Santana was a highly rated professional prospect, yet the Dodgers thought it better to save an amount of money that was less than teams shell out in bonuses to unproven amateur draft picks.

    The pattern is clear. Coletti can go on all the “scouting and recruiting” trips he pleases, and they will mean nothing unless there is a tangible inverstment in new talent. The Dodgers still have some good prospects, but we all know that all of those prospects are unlikely to pan out. The shrinking pool of talent in the Dodgers system not only makes it more difficult to build meaningfully from within, but it also makes it next to impossible to acquire top tier talent, be it Cliff Lee or anyone else.

    Before we know it, the Dodgers farm system will back where it was prior to the arrival of Logan White in 2002. And unless he’s given the resources, Logan White himself may decide to move on to greener pastures.

  49. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Oh, for an edit/preview button.

    This: “The least they could have done was use the pick to SIGN a player that would have signed.”

    Should have been this: “The least they could have done was use the pick to DRAFT a player that would have signed.”

    We need an owner with deep pockets, and a true passion to win. News Corp. had deep pockets, and a passion for television ratings. McCourt (both of them) have empty pockets, and a passion to line their pockets (or pocketbook).

    I don’t have a clue as to how the “McCourt vs. McCourt” soap opera will play out. I do hope, however, that whatever happens, the Dodgers end up with a new owner who has both the resources and the vision to build the Dodgers into the Yankees of the West. I’m less concerned about this offseason than I am with the long term direction of this team.

  50. Badger says:

    Thank you again Brooklyn. Your words are music to my ears.

    These two were wrong from the beginning. Sell the team Frankenjamie.

  51. lawdog says:

    I don’t know if the rest of you have heard the breaking news: Dick Cheney is reported to have been at the shooting range with Vincente Padilla. It was Cheney’s gun which had discharged at the scene, not the bodyguard’s…

    Cheney is said to have been shooting at what he thought was a quail running up Padilla’s pant leg. Padilla’s comment on the matter was so inflammatory as to not be translatable… But if Cheney were ever to bat against Padilla in a major legue game he’d need the most sophisticated batting helmet ever designed to save his life.

  52. Badger says:

    Shooter and the Bodyguard. Coming to a range near you.

    And the Yankees are the champions of th…..zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

  53. DRomo says:

    Padilla shot by his body guard? I hear a Jamie McCourt joke here….

    Congrats to the Yankees, although I would have liked to see the Phils win it all to know we lost to the best. Oh well. Now the real depression sets in, NO BASEBALL!!!

    I have talked the wife into a Camelback Ranch family vacation. I hope to see you all there. We will be there with our little ones in tow. I can’t wait, my 3 yr old is already a big Dodger fan & I can’t wait to see if she can meet some of her favorite players.

  54. ThighKing says:

    I hope they get this buttoned up quickly. The mere thought that some of my season ticket fee will go to that gold digger is a bit hard to swallow. Why Frank let her anywhere past the bleachers is a true mystery. It’s obvious she doesn’t care for the club, other than the private jet and other posh perks, or she wouldn’t be airing the dirty laundry so publicly. It would be a shame to have Ms. Badseed take down the entire organization, but it happened in San Diego, and this situation is perfectly poised to follow similar suit.

    I am a 12 year season ticket holder and I doubt I will renew. I refuse to support this WT parade.

  55. Ken says:

    Bill James predicts Manny will have a great year in 2010. TRADE HIM!

  56. Bill Russell says:

    I guess you have to be a Yankee fan in order to appreciate the WS title in 2009. If you’re a baseball fan how can you look at this and say great job? How can you be a Yankee fan? To outsiders it only feels like a purchased title and something that wasn’t really earned. It’s got the same feeling of a rich kids parents buying him a Lexus or BMW for his 16th birthday and he’s got a dirty room. Baseball needs to be fixed but greed will always win out I’m afraid. The union would never allow the needed changes because it may affect the pockets of elite players and their agents. Who will the Yankees go after this off season? Matt Holliday would have to be on their radar. Boras has already got Matt saying he wants to play in NY. That can’t set well for St. Louis fans.
    Well the bright side is that if you’re a fan of Football or Basketball, you can still have some parity in you’re sport and teams can still feel like they’ve earned a championship when they win. You can’t really say that all the hard work has paid off for the Yankees can you? Yes they still had to play the games but if you sign the top 3 free agents in the off season and already have a great team, then you had better win the championship. As bad as I hate the Angels, it would have sure been nice to see them take out the Yankee’s. Way to go Yankee’s you have just bought yourselfs a Title. Way to spend your money.

  57. Badger says:

    I agree with most all of what you said there Bill. It is frustrating for all other franchises and fans. But, the Yankees ARE the rich kid on the block, and being rich is the American way. You got the money, you make the rules and the common be damned. Simple really. And the Yankees are the microcosm of the macrocosm. And it will stay that way until MLB recognizes and implements what all professional sports have realized keeps all fans hopeful every year – a salary cap. And like you said, good luck with that.

    Having said that, there is no reason why the Dodgers cannot compete with that paradigm. We just have the wrong owners to do it. And that has been made crystal clear in light of what is currently going on with them. I am sure FA’s would love to come to L.A. and the fans would likely support a $200 million payroll. Box seats would be out of reach of the regular guy and his family, but the forthcoming cable deal puts every Dodger fan at every game and there are enough rich folks in the area that would want to make the scene at Dodger Stadium to rub elbows with the best baseball players in the world. Just make sure the seats in the bleachers and up with the seagulls are available to the unwashed.

    So, we need a Stinebumper to step forward and grab the reins of this storied franchise before it’s too late for all of us older fans. Without the proper ownership in place, it could be, at best, second place finishes for the next decade.

  58. Ken says:

    So long Garland. Your ten mil will be spent on attorney’s fees.

  59. Ken says:

    I am waiting for the McCourt facts regrding who, individually or jointly, made the decisions to purchase all of the real estate properties and make the monumental upgrades. That is the person or persons who should not be an officer with decision making authority with the Dodgers. That person or persons is the one who is ruining the Dodgers by not spending appropriate amounts in the free agent market, acquiring older players (but not their salaries) for real propsects, and not spending appropriate amounts of money on the minor league system.

    My respect for the McCourts is melting faster than Velvetta cheese.

  60. Badger says:

    Speaking of cheesy:

    “Jamie McCourt, who was fired by her estranged husband last month, is asking for $467,634 in monthly support if she does not return to her job and $320,967 if she does.”,0,4012603.story

    And she looks so sweet in the picture up above.

    Hearings regarding ownership won’t start until next year.

    Oh goody.

    • Ken says:

      Velvetta was a favorite cold water bait of my grandfather’s for use in the Rockies t 8,000 and above. The cold really kept it together.

  61. lawdog says:

    Velvetta–the only “cheese” made without a drop of milk, is loaded with hydrogenated oil and comes with a guarantee to clog your arteries completely when used daily for 3 consecutive weeks.

    Velvetta is recommended for folks with great health insurance by 9 out of 10 practicing heart surgeons. For those considering suicide, Velvetta everyday will provide a way out without the guilt.

    Join the classy folks in Chico who regard Velvetta one of the “higher end” cheeses that goes perfectly with saltines and Gallo “red”.

  62. Ken says:

    “Frank McCourt is not living in either of the Holmby Hills homes, Fried said. He is living elsewhere in Los Angeles.”

    Do both Frankie and Jamie have special friends? The plot is thickening like Velvetta?

  63. Ken says:

    For how many days do we have to see that face?

    While real teams are trading players the Dodgers are just trading barbs.

  64. Blue Haze says:

    Cheeze Wiz rules! Velvetta under pressure, you gotta love that, Come On!

    Going to be doing a little hunting next week, up by you LDawg, actually out of Willows, but that is close enough. In my college days, had a few friends that went to Chico, stumbled around that little town a few times. I was actually at the Pioneer Days event when the guys first started making Sierra Nevada Beer, I believe they were part of a dorm or something back then. Probably 1981 or 82, so I was one of the the SN virgins. Can’t say I really care for that particular beer anymore, probably didn’t at the time either, but I was going for quantity at the time and didn’t seem to mind. There is some Chico trivia for ya, LDawg.

  65. lawdog says:

    Sierra Nevada on tap is much better than by the bottle. Either way, drink too much and you’ll have a paralyzing hangover the next day. I don’t miss the hangovers.

  66. Badger says:

    Here’s some more Chico trivia – I graduated and received my teaching credential from Chico State in the 70′s. My daughter also graduated from that fine institution. SN wasn’t there then. Probably a good thing, though the students did just fine on their own – and of course, with help from Madison Bear Garden. I was actually attending school when that place opened.

  67. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    HE’S BAAAAACK!!!!!!!!!

    I was hoping for a miracle, and that for whatever reason, Manny would decide not to exercise his option to remain.

    Now we have to hope that Manny is motivated to put up large numbers in his walk year, and uses the offseason to do whatever is necessary to get himself ready to play. And having a full spring training won’t hurt either.

    At least this allows Colletti to focus on other needs, such as pitching, 2B and the bench. And maybe the McCourt thing will really get ugly, and a new owner will arise from the ashes. At least I can dream.


Mandatory Daily Dodger Reading