Categorized | Mark Timmons

Change is Constant…

Change is Constant…

But one thing is the same:  At this time of the year all the pessimists are always predicting Gloom & Doom for the Dodgers, even though they have repeatedly been wrong about this.  And,  then they rag on me and say I am not realistic with my predictions.   This is no prediction: The Dodgers have made the playoffs, 4 out of the last 6 years and FLASH, we will make it again this year for the FIRST TIME EVER IN DODGER HISTORY – BROOKLYN or LOS ANGELES!

I am SOOOO Not Worthy!

Look at the most number of wins over the past 4 years in the NL (under Frank McCourt):

  1. Phils – 359
  2. Dodgers – 349
  3. Mets – 344
  4. Cards – 338

And yet, the McCourt-bashers still scream gloom and doom like a…, well never-mind!   Some are calling for a new owner, for the team that has the SECOND BEST RECORD INTHE NL OVER THE PAST 4 YEARS?  ARE THEY CRAZY?

For 5 years I have heard about how bad Frank McCourt is and YET, THE DODGERS HAVE THE SECOND BEST RECORD IN ALL OF THE NL THE PAST FOUR YEARS!  Think about what you are saying…  The only team with a better record has a team that is significantly older than ours. Our time is coming, but in order to justify your previous erroneous predictions about Frank McCourt, you continue to berate the Dodgers and predict that they will do poorly.  Shame, Shame, Shame!  I have been telling you how good the Dodgers can be for the past six years, but still you don’t believe.  Believe the Dodgers Record!  SCOREBOARD!

But, now however, don’t think for one minute that everything will be the same.  This is especially true with young players, as some players get better, some get worse, and just a few stay the same.  Typically, you will see changes from year-to-year in their second, third and fourth years and even beyond.  This is particularly true if a player was in his his early twenties when he arrived in the majors.  Look it up!

We can expect to see players like Ethier, Kemp and Loney get even better.  I expect Russ Martin and Chad Billingsley to step it back up.  Martin may never be as good a hitter as he once was, but I still think Billingsley can be an ACE, as can Kershaw.   And, if you are expecting James McDonald or Scott Elbert to be the same, THINK AGAIN!   Both of these guys have been learning, and will pitch in the majors for their third consecutive year (parts of).  I think you can expect a lot more out of them.  Haeger, Stultz and a dozen other player could step up as well. 

The Saints were 8-8 last year.  The Dodgers won 95 games last year and I guarantee you that this 2010 team will not lose willingly or easily…  It’s now part of their culture.

Watch and Learn!

The above was something that I was going to post tomorrow, since Rory posted today, but then Jon Weisman posted this  and I just had to respond and say “I TOLD YOU SO.”  The piece written by Weisman is a living testament as to why he is the best blogger in the business and why I am just a hack.  What an incredible piece of writing and what incredible content!  Here’s a few blurbs that will cause you to re-think everything you currently hold dear about Frank McCourt:

This team will live or die on its judgment – on the judgment of McCourt and the people he employs – rather than on McCourt’s finances. His bank account, despite what most people have concluded this offseason, is not destroying the team.

Miguel, you don’t need a “wise” oracle, because a “Weisman” just BLEW UP the McCourt Bashers theory!

Someone told me that no one believed Hudson would get $10 mil in arbitration, but here’s what Weisman says:

The second baseman’s signing last week of a one-year, $5 million contract with Minnesota might have vindicated the Dodgers’ decision on him, since Hudson could potentially have earned twice that amount in salary arbitration, based on the typical raise awarded to an arbitration-eligible player who earned $8 million the year before.

Again, I TOLD YOU SO!

He then addresses the Santana Issue:

If there was a moment that really seemed to call into question the Dodgers’ ability to commit to prospects, it was when the team traded Carlos Santana and Jonathan Meloan in mid-2008 for a three-month test run of Casey Blake. (Blake re-signed with the Dodgers as a free agent after the 2008 season.) It was widely reported, to the point that almost no doubt remained, that the Dodgers included Santana, a catcher who was having an explosive year in A ball, so that they wouldn’t have to pay approximately $2 million in Blake’s remaining ’08 salary.

However, a source within the Dodgers organization insisted that the following was true: The Indians were not going to trade Blake to the Dodgers unless they got Santana in the deal. His inclusion had nothing to do with money.

Again, I told you so! 

I urge you to read the rest and see if you can  continue to bash McCourt.

About Mark Timmons

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

55 Responses to “Change is Constant…”

  1. Rory says:

    Well, that was informative, I think. It certainly was encyclopedic in it’s volume. Weisman has access Mark, I think that is a major difference between him and you.

    McCourt finally speaks. Actually, and surprisingly, it is comforting for me to at last hear something from the Dodger owner. So much to analyze there – where to begin?

    I am still not sold on the ‘splanation for the Wolf and Hudson deal, but, am willing to accept it for now. Blake? I just don’t think he was worth it, but, that’s just a fans opinion.

    McCourt said in the interview that he had “no idea” about that aspect of the trade. Really? No idea?

    As for Camelback, it was logistically a good idea for years and finally somebody acted on it. They broke the ST record for attendance in the first year. Duh. Even in a year when many (some right here) said the Dodgers attendance would be way off, it was not and the Dodgers drew very well. And as for lack of t.v. revenue, where is the question about the “No cable” deal signed with Fox? It is my contention that had Frankie had enough money he could have bought the Dodgers without having to sign such a bonehead deal. I know there would be thousands of fans who would purchase Dodgers on cable if given the chance. I am one of them. And where is the relationship between owning Dodger Stadium and the surrounding 300 acres, and the cost of running this franchise? Shouldn’t the Dodgers, with access to Los Angeles, be able to afford a $120 million payroll? Shoot, they are barely in the top 10 in MLB? I find that more than just a little disturbing.

    “Maybe it will turn out that the money really is the issue for the McCourt ownership, whether it’s because Frank was dead wrong about what his resources are or dead wrong about the strength of his post-nuptial agreement with Jamie.”

    Yeah, maybe it will all right. I sure hope he survives this divorce with enough cash to follow his “trajectory”. I am quite certain Jamie, and her team of lawyers, has other ideas.

  2. Voldomer says:

    Mark, I generally agree with you that the sky is not falling in Dodgerdom. After the disastrous decision to dump Dan Evans and hire DePodesta, McCourt eventually and fortunately changed courses again. With Ned in charge, McCourt has spent a ton of money on free agents, many of whom did not pan out, but at least he rolled the dice. I guess we can’t blame him for feeling snake-bitten now, but the frustration is that the Dodgers seem one dominating starting pitcher away from getting over the hump and into the World Series, and for the second offseason in the row they have done nothing to remedy that.

    You make a good point that the team has had success by posting the season records, but we all know that ultimately that doesn’t matter in the long term. People want championships, and it hurts to see the team appear so close but not quite there. I hope the Dodgers don’t end up as this decade’s Bills or Braves (though at least the latter won the big one once).

  3. Mark Timmons says:

    Rory said:

    Weisman has access Mark, I think that is a major difference between him and you.

    Yeah that, and also the fact that he is a REAL writer!

    I read stuff like what Weisman writes and I realize he’s Major League and I’m High School.

    Dang, that guy is good!

    I couldn’t carry his jock…

  4. A Shot of Haeger says:

    Weisman is incredible

  5. Rory says:

    Weisman is a trained writer, I’ll give him that.

    But as an investigative reporter, I am not so sure. Yesterday I posted a article written by him in November of last year that suggested something completely different than the piece today.

    What is really going on with the Dodgers ownership? Nobody, including Weisman, appears to know.

    We have seen a number of reports on how leveraged the McCourt/Fox deal was back in 2004 and it included a no cable deal until the year 2013 – and that to me is very questionable. Why was this bidder approved by MLB for the Dodgers when he was turned down by the Red Sox, the Angels and the Tampa Bay Bucs? Something just wasn’t right about this guy. He allegedly had intentions of moving the Dodgers and developing the incredible land Dodger Stadium sits on, but got a sweet low interest loan on $250 million to pay off his debt to Fox while agreeing to keep the team where it is. Why this guy? A man who made his fortune on leveraging OPM? Why not somebody who had the money in place and wasn’t one divorce away from bankruptcy? Here, read this:

    “He’s the king of leverage; he’s brilliant with other people’s money,” said a Boston city hall veteran who has clashed with McCourt, acknowledging the businessman’s financial acumen. “Now he owns a baseball team in Los Angeles and 300 acres of land in California. You have to respect that.”

    http://articles.latimes.com/2006/feb/19/sports/sp-mccourt19

    I still have many unanswered questions about this guy. I am not a reporter, but if I was, I would ask this dude the hard questions.

  6. Jon Weisman says:

    Thanks for the nice words, Mark.

    Rory, those are good questions, but they sound more like questions for Bud Selig than McCourt.

  7. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Yes, the Dodgers have had success on the field since McCourt took over as owner. But most of the talent responsible for that success was acquired prior to McCourt’s ownership. Specifically, the bringing on board of Logan White by Dan Evans is what turned the Dodgers farm system around from one of the worst to one of the best. Loney, Kemp, Martin, Billingsley, and Broxton were all in the Dodger farm system before McCourt arrived. Other players either on the Dodgers or knocking on the door were acquisitions overseen by Logan White (Kershaw, Elbert, McDonald, DeWitt, etc.). Actually, McDonald was signed prior to McCourt in 2002).

    And while players like Ehtier, Manny and Blake were acquired since McCourt took ownership, it’s still the case that the core of this team consists to a large degree of pre-McCourt players. And, yes, it’s disturbing that the Dodgers have cut back on their investment in the draft and on international talent. If that’s the case, it’s something that will come back to bite us in the years to come. The young core of current players makes reliance on the farm system less critical that it would be if we had predominently older players. But some of our older players (Blake and Manny come to mind) will have to be replaced in the coming years, and that’s when we could see the unhappy results of our dis-investment in the future. And as we all know, even with its young core, this team still has holes, some of which could conceivably be filled by veterans that we would be able to acquire if we had the prospects to deal.

    Whether Santana was dealt to save $2 million or not really isn’t the issue. That a prospect of his stature was traded at all for a less than stellar Casey Blake is really the issue. Blake fills a current need, but so could a number of other established players that probably could have been acquired. Maybe even DeWitt could fill his shoes, with another acquisition stepping in at 2B.

    Perhaps Coletti is telling the truth that the Dodgers will step up their investment on the international front. If true, we should begin to see signs of it this coming July during the international signing period. Until then, I’ll reserve judgment. And I wonder, without a new deep pocketed owner willing to spend, whether or not the Dodgers will step up next winter, when there will reportedly be a strong free agent class (will Manny be replaced by the likes of Jayson Werth or Carl Crawford?).

    As for Weisman, I’m not sure I would want to carry his jock, but I know for sure I can’t carry his pen.

    • steevo17 says:

      ditto 100%…could not have said it any better Dodger. re:Carl Crawford…he will be the true test on whether or not the Dodgers will be taken seriously the next off-season (provided of course that the Rays don’t sign him prior), I for one feel he is the missing piece to get over the hump. Can you imagine an outfield of Crawford, Kemp and Ethier for the next several years? mmmmmmmmm

  8. Rory says:

    Well said Brooklyn. The pieces were in place for success. And the slugger we lacked, Manny Ramirez, was practically given to us.

    And yes…. why Blake at the cost of millions and one of our blue chips? We could have had .270 with sub .800 OPS from a lot of guys that would not have cost us that.

    Jon, I thought you would be reading this. It’s easy for me to sit on my butt here and say I would ask the hard questions, but I am quite sure after a couple of queries about his changing course, his impending screwing, why he got turned down by 3 other pro franchises, why the scouting cuts, and how he would do without OPM I would be Simered right out the door. You are the writer, and a darn good one. I am just a fan with a lot of questions. Maybe while you are asking questions of all the people you have access to, a real answer will present itself. But as long as you are here, what is your take on this divorce. Am I wrong in assuming the courts will award half of everything to Jamie?

  9. Mark Timmons says:

    I’ll answer that beause I’m more of a lawyer than Jon.

    Yes, you are wrong!

    OK, next…

  10. ken says:

    The post nuptial agreement may be hard to crack in a court of law but the Family Law court is a court of equity. If the post nuptial agreement was actually executed for asset protection purposes for the protection of the marital estate or an attempt to defraud the creditors of the marital estate, then you can bet that the family law judge will bend the law to achieve their sense of equity and award significant value to Jamie’s portion of the marital estate regardless of legal ownership.

    The Dodger budget is either directly or indirectly limited by the loan document loan covenants that do and have existed for many years. These covenants also limit the profit distributions to Frank and his ability to pay spousal support to Jamie. It is not uncommon for a business to have its financial activities limited by loan covenants when the business is highly leveraged. Regardless of whether the divorce limits any operational decision, there are other appropriate limitations from other sources.

    I believe that John accurately reported every word that was said but I do not believe that every word spoken was completely accurate. A half truth is a whole lie.

  11. Rory says:

    Yes, you are wrong!

    OK, next

    Damn. And I thought maybe I was on to something.

    You crack me up my friend.

    And what Ken just said.

  12. Roger Dodger says:

    Interesting posts the last couple of days. As many “points” were made, I wanted to post some thoughts, but time has not been in my control. But let me say this — responses to the continuing Dodger situation/s —- maybe we cannot have a pat answers. Not a complete “right” nor a complete “wrong” answer.

    Some of you keep searching for that response or truth. Mark is one in that camp. Wanting and waving facts and “see this and see that.”

    Sports and politics have one key thing in common. And that is — many decisions are made in the back room. Reasons keep changing. Severeal sets of books and records are kept, and some have inside information to some of it but sometimes kept from other parts of it.

    After, what, 47 years, we still do not really understand what happened in Dallas when Kennedy was killed. Who really pulled the triger, who was or what was behind it?? A commission spend years, more and more books, movies, specials — and many people have different “ideas.”

    Another: did Bush win both elections or was there back room dealings?? Again, different answers.

    McCourt and the Dodgers, what, who, why, how and almost any subject will have some different views different banks of information.

    When a deep feeling fan has their motor on, and bends this way or that way — they have “their theory.” Yes, maybe they do not have all of the facts that another has — but they have an opinion. And we must respect opinions. But some want to cut into their world with — facts. Okay, but you know, there just might be other shoes to drop later on. Oh, we did not know that, new information, wrong information, cloudly information.

    Leading baseball is one thing, playing it is another . . . but being a fan is susposed to be fun. Calling the umpires “blind” or “stupid” or “always against our guys” — is part of the game. Hating one team and calling them “no good,” but knowing deep inside they are better — is part of the game.

    If one fans says McCourt is stupid and they want another owner — does not need a lecture on how good McCourt really is or could be. Just let it be.

    We are all fans — baseball is supposed to be fun and a great chance not to have to worry about some comet crashing into the earth and stoping life as we know it.

  13. Mark Timmons says:

    Rory,

    You asked “Am I wrong in assuming the courts will award half of everything to Jamie?”

    All I said you are wrong in assuming that Jamie will get half. She may, she may not or she may get something in-beteween. Ken would know a lot more about divorce law in California, but I have a good sense of judgement is cases like this – California law I know little about, except what I read from Nolo Press.

    What I do know, is that a successful attorney has to get their evidence admitted. Can Jamie get any evidence admitted to refute Franks claims and can Frank get any additional evidence admitted to support his claims. Therein lies the case.

  14. Mark Timmons says:

    I am also banking on the fact that Jamie may not want to tamper too much with her son’s inheritances. Maybe I am way off on that one…

  15. Rory says:

    Even if it’s a 70-30 split, which I doubt for all the reasons ken stated (and my own experience in California divorce law) what is he going to pay her with?

    I believe most of their assets are tied up in real estate holdings, with the Dodgers being the lions share of that. If he gets the Dodgers, valued at about $700 million, throw in another hundred million in other assets, how does he come up with the $240 million to pay off Jamie?

  16. Bill Russell says:

    I’m going to be at Camelback March 20th, 21st and 22nd. Hope to see some of you out there. Wow, we have all the big dogs chatting today. Some good subjects the last few days.
    Who’s the favorite to win the #5 spot in the rotation this year? Maybe Ken can post the odds or write a song about it. Will the Dodgers have any interest in Wang? or too Schmidt like. I’ve gotten to busy the last few days to contribute in here but I again hope to some day. Peace

  17. kensai says:

    I know Jon believes we have a competitive team, i’m now on record saying the Dodgers should be competitive and end up around 90 wins, MSTI hasn’t been doom and gloom, and TBLA has been positive as well.

    So Mark, where do you see your peers being negative about the Dodgers chances in 2010? Is this something in your comments? I know most fans outside of bloggers are a bit down on the team, which is exactly why I think most of us have been quite positive.

    I can’t say I agree that McCourt is a good owner simply because the Dodgers have won under him. I mean, the main cogs behind the current success were already installed before McCourt took over.

  18. Rory says:

    I don’t see anyone being negative about the team. All of us believe we will have a very competitive team on the field, and if all the guys have good years, obviously we will be in it. As I have said many times, I think the West is improving and it will be much more difficult to win 95 games, especially after losing two of our best players and not replacing them. That seems like a no brainer to me, but, I have lived in a cloud for years now, so, maybe I am missing something.

    My main problem is where the owner finds himself – underfunded and in divorce court. He has a team of lawyers barking at his door and having been through that myself, I just don’t see how he can focus on the team. It is still my belief that the Dodgers should be owned by an individual (no more corporate ownership please) who is enormously rich and globally powerful. I am talking Bill Gates wealth. These are the Dodgers, not the Royals. I want a cable deal, 4 million in attendance and sponsors lining up to associate themselves with the Blue. I want the Dodgers to be favorites for the World Series every year, and it could be done with a Slimebumper type owner.

    I also want universal health care, a push toward green energy, world peace and to be able to hit my drive 300 yards and have it land in the fairway. I got a lot of wants. But I digress.

    I suppose we will go around about this stuff until the divorce is actually settled, but the lawyers I talk to (my son-in-law, a huge Dodger fan is one of them) including the guys in here, don’t paint a very rosy picture for Frankie. I still say it is important for the Dodgers to come out of the gate quickly to fill up the seats. This year’s revenue stream is more important than ever for Dodger ownership.

  19. Roger Dodger says:

    Rory, it would be much less painful if you just became a Yankee fan. Then most of your wishes and dreams would come true.

    To echo your remarks — I think most Dodger fans, knowing that we have a great and outstanding core of young to maturing players — expected ownership to add to that where the needs were to round out to make a great team.

    Instead, signing a number of over the hill, never truly made it players, and hope that some 5th starter would come out of somewhere — isn’t the answer we were looking for.

    So we play with the hand we were dealt.

  20. Rory says:

    Roger the point is, the Yankees have an owner that knows how to MAKE money. Ours seems to be a guy who knows how to use OPM. Big difference, when OPM is very tight right now. The Dodgers are in the second biggest market in the country and take a back seat to no team when it comes to b.i.s. numbers. The McCourts have done a lot of positive things for the franchise but most of it was cosmetic in nature. The park looks beautiful, the P.R. programs within the community seem to be working, but the nuts and bolts of putting the best players on the field, through scouting and signing and trading and developing AND THEN broadcasting to the millions of fans (generating more $$$) seem to be lacking.

    It is my opnion that no team should do better on the Pacific Rim than us, and no team should do better in Mexico, the Caribbean and South America than the Dodgers. We clearly have the strongest most vigorously supportive Latino fan base as well as an Asian market that should be second to none. We should be leading the way in recruiting players from out of country. And clearly we are not.

    If this thing is done correctly, we draw close to 4 million every year and have a cable deal in place that brings the Dodgers to every fans living room every night.

    I have a vision. And my vision is getting clouded up by a guy who claims in court that he only has $160,000 in his bank account. Yoiks. That isn’t even enough to register Republican. (joke)

    Yes, we play the hand we are dealt. And that hand only has a couple of dollars in it, and it is handing those dollars to a team of lawyers.

  21. Roger Dodger says:

    You are my hero.

  22. DRomo says:

    Wang is throwing for Ned and Logan White today. Ned is about to do an interview on XM Radio. He is late for the call in leading speculation that the workout is happenning or has happened already. I see the Dodgers as the favorite if they offer anything close to a fair deal!

  23. Mark Timmons says:

    Kensai said:

    So Mark, where do you see your peers being negative about the Dodgers chances in 2010? Is this something in your comments? I know most fans outside of bloggers are a bit down on the team, which is exactly why I think most of us have been quite positive.
    Kensai,

    Since you are the second best Dodger blogger on the planet (next to King Weisman). I will answer your question. ;)

    It’s not the bloggers – it’s the fans. I know you think the Dodgers will do well this year. Like me, you’d like to see some more additions, but not just for addition’s sake. We need quality.

    Rory,

    You are comparing apples to pineapples when you compare McCourt and The Boss. George bought the Yankees 37 years ago for $10 million dollars and the City built his stadium again (and again). He has a cable deal (which McCourt will have soon enough), that is the best in baseball. But, don’t forget, this owner went 13 years without winning a division championship between 1980 and 1994. You are comparing a guy who has built a team and a machine over 37 years to a guy who has been doing it 6 years.

    In 1962, George lost millions of dollars with the Cleveland Pipers, and it took him 5 years to pay of his debt. George made money with American Shipbuilding Company (which his father started), but in 1973, when he bought the Yanks, I doubt he was any better financilly than Frank McCourt.

    The owner you are looking for doesn’t exist. George Steinbrenner became what he now is over time. Give Frank some time.

  24. DRomo says:

    Now we are out on Wang? Jon Heyman says so. I wonder whats up with that? Why would we schedule a workout and then cancel and pull out all together? I don’t know what to believe. FYI: Ned cancelled his interview with XM as well.

    Anybody else have a thought on this?

  25. Mark Timmons says:

    Believe nothing, until it happens or not!

  26. Erik says:

    Until he signs I don’t believe any of this. It seems they are trying to create a demand for him that’s not there. If the dodgers are interested they should stand pat. If he ad to choose Nats or us I think we know his choice. Seems odd to cancel interview.

  27. lawdog says:

    Perfectly is a bottom feeder who doesn’t give a damn about the Dodgers except to the extent that he can exploit them as a cash cow to continue his disgusting life style.

    Regarding the upcoming division of property, I did handle many family law cases early in my legal career, albeit that is now ancient history. If someone was in Jamie’s shoes and the judge was forced to ram an unfair agreement down her throat, they usually would bend over backwards when it came to spousal support to bring the division back to something that was closer to being fair. If Perfectly wins on the agreement, he’s most likely going to be whacked with a huge spousal support award that will probably continue to make it impossible to run the team anywhere but down hill, like he’s doing now.

    The Dogs will be in decline, and not win a title, until Perfectly Cheap sells the team to someone who is flush and is willing to spend the money to bring us a winner–and won’t try to patch the team with geezers as stop gaps because they are cheap.

  28. steevo17 says:

    The Dodgers are making the correct decision to back off from Wang right now…this is classic Colletti. For a pitcher who won’t be ready til halfway into the season I think we can take the wait and see approach here. All indication is Wang is interested in reuniting with Torre so maybe he will also take the same approach, although reports are he will try to sign somewhere in the next 10 days.

    It is so great to see such an accomplished writer like Weisman here, I’m really feeling like the site is more recognized now…used to be a tight little group here before. Mark, Badger, BDodger, DRomo, BRussell and Lawdog are the graybeards here and I completely defer to all of you. Just want to say thanks to all you guys. Its great to be around such obviously loyal Dodger fans.

  29. lawdog says:

    Don’t let the gruff manner of some of us old geezers here inhibit your posting style Steevo! Everyone’s opinion is important, if they be true Dodger fans and post about something they have observed or know something about. Rude personal attacks are not looked upon with kindness by the management, but then, that’s as it should be. Just be courteous and say whatever you want.

    Everyone would be either constantly drunk or contemplating suicide If I was the only poster here. I still believe I’m just being realistic and seeing things as they are, but most see me as a cynical old bastard that has a prejudice against filthy rich people.

    Truth is, I don’t care if an owner is filthy rich as long as they spend their jack on building the Dogs into a winner. I don’t think that is happening here in LA anymore.

  30. lawdog says:

    The Dodgers are wise to back off giving Wang a huge Jason Schmidt contract if he can only throw off level ground right now and their scouts don’t think he’ll be able to test the shoulder until late May at the latest. Wang will sign if he’s offered big bucks–just like Schmidt did. He’d be a fool not to follow the money after major shoulder surgery on his throwing arm.

  31. lawdog says:

    Oops. That’s late May at the earliest. Not latest.

  32. Erik says:

    After reading that I also am glad we backed off. Hope McDonald and crew are ready to compete for 5th spot.

  33. lawdog says:

    Chuck Haeger is our 5th starter!

  34. DRomo says:

    Thanks for the shout out there Steevo. It is cool to see new names in here. It wasn’t very long ago I was the new name on this blog. It is good to get new opinions and have some spirited debates. The fellas here have treated me good, I hope you enjoy it as much as we do. In the end it is like a little community that Mark has created.

    Just for the sake of arguement here:

    I have to wonder why Logan White thought Wang was worth another workout and asked Ned to come along? Maybe it was at Wangs request? I know Wangs first choice was the Dodgers. I was told by someone that Joe Torre, a chance to compete in Oct., the Taiwan games,& a major market were all reasons he wanted to be in LA. It is very curious. The thing I would like to know is what is Wangs offer from Washington? He made $5 million last year. So being that he is going to be back midseason (give or take) say we prorate that (2.5 million) isn’t that a worth while gamble? I would even say Wang would take a paycut and accept less than last years salary, to establish his worth again. Prorate a lesser salary and we are talking a pretty modest price for a guy that was dominate just 2 years ago. He is a sinker ball pitcher so it isn’t like he has to have a high 90s fastball anymore?

    Look at it this way Pedro signed a similar deal with the Phillies last year as a mid season “gamble” for Philly and it paid off. Why not take a $2 million +/- gamble? If it pays it pays BIG.

    Unless we hear that his workouts were very shaky. In which case why would White ask to take another look with Ned? Or do we have something else brewing? Jarrod Washburn, anyone? He is better than Randy Wolf? I’m just saying…

    • steevo17 says:

      Well thank you for the welcome mat Romo and Lawdog (not that it matters but…I’ve been an occasional poster here for about 1 1/2 years) and I always appreciate any different point of view from mine. I have been known to change my mind once in a while, so the more opinions and sources of information I can get the better for me.

  35. lawdog says:

    If we could get Wang for that it would be worth it. Can we sign him for that little? Probably not. Some team will take a real risk and sign him to a 2 year 15 million dollar deal and figure that since he is a sinkerballer, the risk is worth it. I don’t think McCheap can afford to risk even $2 million in his present economic condition.

    Tis true, tis pity. And pity tis, tis true.

    What McCheap does speaks so loudly I can’t hear a word that he says.

  36. McCHEAPNE$$ says:

    HAHAHA DAN EVANS BUILT THIS TEAM NOT THE GUY THAT GAVE YOU SOME FREE TICKETS IN THE WINTER MEETINGS AND NOW IN LOVE WITH…

  37. DRomo says:

    McCheap you have no idea what you are talking about. What Dan Evans built was dismantled by DePodesta. Gone were Shawn Green and LoDuca Roberts etc. In came JD Drew, Kent, Hee Sop Choi, and Jason Phillips, etc. There is virtually no connections to Dan Evans on the field. I would argue the DePodesta era is out as well. Whatever your issues are with Mark have a accurate take thats all I ask. I thought we were better than that here.

    “You are entitled to your own opinion , you are not entitled to your own facts”

  38. lawdog says:

    “You are entitled to your own opinion , you are not entitled to your own facts”

    Great quote Dromo. Was it Rachel or Keith who used that last night on MSNBC when referring to the GOP?

  39. Mark Timmons says:

    McCHEAPNE$$,

    Save your breath…You’ll need it to blow up your date!

  40. Erik says:

    If Wang could be had for less than 5 he may be worth the gamble. But nothing higher or long term.

  41. DRomo says:

    HAHA Lawdog, They both ran it over and over but the President used that quote yesterday. It was actually Sen. Moynihan that used it a few years ago. I couldn’t help but be reminded of it with MCHEAPNESS’s weak take.

    This is my frustration as a Dodger fan. I hear misdirected hostility towards the McCourts all the time. They have done plenty to be frustrated over but the least we can do is not blame them for the stuff they haven’t done. This is why I say they are paying for the sins of the Fox Era. I have said that over and over. I have turned into a McCourt defender not because I think they are perfect but because they aren’t nearly as bad as people even the media makes them out to be.

    I don’t mind the arguement or difference of opion. But base your opinion on facts. Back up your claims and think for yourself. When it comes to the Dodgers and Politics.

    Ignorance is contagious. And that is how we ended up with the Tea Parties. LOL, I couldn’t resist!

    “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes”- Mark Twain

  42. lawdog says:

    A public servant? Isn’t he the guy who brings the graft money to the politicians? (Twain said that too, probably the same day.)

  43. Roger Dodger says:

    When will the Dodgers sign Johnny Damon? Then come, June, trade Manny.

  44. Bill Russell says:

    Glad to see Steveo back in the room. He must have some time off from his filming of the Wild Boyz/Jackass episodes. Great stuff by the way.
    I hate to say this because I am one of Willie Mays biggest fans. BUT- Why is his over the shoulder catch always referred to as one of the greatest catches of alltime? I think it wouldn’t even rank in my top 100. He didn’t have to stretch out for the ball or time a jump to make the catch. Maybe during it’s era in the 50′s it was one of the greatest catches.
    I felt sorry for Bob Costas trying to interview old Willie on MLB network last night. Bob couldn’t get Willie to answer some of his questions and focus on the subject he was trying to talk about. Willie just rambled most of the time but I loved it anyway. Poor Willies eyes are pretty messed up and was contantly watering up. He had to continue dabbing his eyes with a hanky. My heart goes out to him for everything he had to put up with during his playing days. I wish he would have been treated just like everyone else. I always rooted for him to out slug Hank for the homerun title even knowing that his playing conditions were much worst then Hanks and that he had missed two years of playing time during his military service. Even if he was a Giant I still loved him.
    Willie stated that he had to do this interview with Bob because Bob had always been fair with him and he knew Bob needed the help getting his new career going with MLB NETWORK. Bob held back a laugh. I would stand in line for 4 hours just to talk with Willie for 1 minute.

  45. Roger Dodger says:

    Billy – I think you hit it about the catch. Baseball gloves were much smaller in those days. Players even left them on the field, when they went to bat.

    Most of the outfield walls were cement or metal. No soft board with padding like today.

    The fields were not perfect or flat. Grass was uneven. Not like today.

    I saw that catch live on TV then, I was like 13 years old. It was one of the best catches up to that point in baseball history. And at a key time.

    As to his interview. I saw part of it last night. I do not know about the physical health of Willie now, but I suppose he has some processing issues to deal with. I know I do, and I am 68. I hand it to him to do the interview, because we can take any “stuff” he offers and file it with the earlier interviews and have a more complete file to help honor and appreciate him. I guess I did not hear the questions he might not have responded like some were looking for, but there might have been (or are) some things he might not have wanted to say . . .

  46. DRomo says:

    I agree with BRuss. Willie Mays made a really good catch…NOT GREAT. I can name many more that were better. Jim Edmonds made the same catch laying out , Ron Swoboda in the 69 series made a huge catch , Sandy Amoros in the 1955 world series robbing Yogi Berra of extra bases. What about Endy Chavez against the Cardinals robbing Scott Rolen of a homerun and then doubling off the runner from 1B! That was way bigger and more athletic.

    I never saw Mays play I am too young but regardless of the glove or the field his over the shoulder catch is only great because of his reputation. Many players who played against and with him say that catch was not his best only the one that got more attention. He wore a hat that was too big so it would fall off giving the illusion he was running faster. He was a showman. I respect that.

  47. Rory says:

    I met Willie Mays at a golf tournament and I will just say this about him, his social skills need some work.

    That catch was a good one but I have seen better catches in softball tournaments for years. The center field fence at the Polo Grounds was 483′ away so he didn’t have to worry about crashing into it. No player in the history of that park ever hit that fence on the fly, so Mays could just run full speed until he caught the ball. Good catch, not a great catch.

    Johnny Damon? No. We will sign nobody who makes a lot of money. Our team is pretty much set and our 5th starter will come from the stable of potentials that we have had since the announcement we would not re-sign Wolf was made. If we sign anybody it will be a low dollar signing, maybe minor league contract.

    Romey I think plenty of facts have been presented here, but honestly we won’t know how badly Frankie has been hurt until this divorce has cleared the books. Like the lawyers here have tried to explain, division of property is a complicated issue in California. These two people have been married for 30 years, the courts will recognize that and the post-nup giving Frank everything and Jamie a couple of houses will most likely be nuetralized. Jamie is getting her share of the wealth, and I still have no answer as to how Frankie is going to pay her off. As I mentioned to Miguel the other day, take a look at what John Moores had to do. Everything was going well for the Padres until his divorce happened. It’s all right there to look at. Why is McCourt’s situation any different than Moores? I will listen to anyone who can tell me how this will play out differently.

    I don’t doubt that McCourt’s intentions have been good all along. I believe he really wanted to be a good owner. He didn’t really know how to go about it at first, but as I mentioned in a post a while back, I think he was just beginning to get the hang of it. As everyone knows, he was leveraged very highly coming in, and had to bend over on that cable deal with Fox, but it looked like things were coming together for he and his CEO wife Jamie. And now, they split, and dividing the only asset they have worth anything – the Los Angeles Dodgers – is going to be a dicey and complicated issue. It’s going to hurt a lot of people.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. [...] View full post on LADodgerTalk.com – Get Your Daily Dodger Juice, Dodger News and Dodger Rumors [...]


Mandatory Daily Dodger Reading