Categorized | Mark Timmons

Kershaw is a Bum

Kershaw is a Bum

CLAYTON KERSHAW

The Past and The Present

He’s no ace.  He got bombed and gave up 3 runs in 6 innings at Colorado as he saw his ERA balloon to a lofty 2.08.  The man is obviously done.  Shot.  Give it up now!  Or not…  (for the uninitiated, I am kidding)

Really, I think Coors is always going to give Clayton trouble because of the lack of “bite” to his breaking ball, but you can’t win if your team can’t score.  Clayton didn’t have a dominant game, but he was pretty solid.  It was a quality start.  He only walked one and struck out eight.  The offense (or lack thereof) is a concern, even if it’s early.  After five games, we really know nothing.  After 50 games, we’ll have a pretty good idea and Jeff Pentland will either be a genius or looking for a new job.  I think the leash is short!

Tony Gwynn, Jr. is going to be hard to keep out of the lineup.  Maybe it will be a better lineup today with Casey Blake back.  On the other hand, it won’t if Donnie sits Barajas and Furcal…

FRANK MCCOURT

I don’t like to dwell on the Dodger Divorce, but so far this is shaping up about the way I thought it would.  I predicted nearly two months ago that Frank would re-do the deal with FOX and get the money he needed to settle with Jamie. Now, I won’t predict if Bud will allow it or not, and I won’t predict that Frank could beat MLB in the suit.  I will predict that if Bud does not allow the deal with FOX, Frank McCourt ABSOLUTELY WILL sue Bud Selig and MLB, and the causalities and collateral damage will be very high. This could open all the books of all the owners, and lo-and-behold: maybe they are just as decadent as McCourt.   Bud is mad at Frank, not because of all his spending – he is mad because the owners’ dirty little secret was made public.

If Frank presents it correctly, Bud will have a hard time turning it down, and like any legal case, the odds of winning are a crap-shoot.   But, if Bud is stupid enough to turn it down (and I believe he is), this will be bitter, protracted litigation that will make the Dodger Divorce look like a walk in the park.  Baseball is not nearly as healthy as Bud may think – in fact, unless some major changes are made, I see a big loss of interest in the game over the next five years. This could be another nail in MLB’s coffin.

 

 

About Mark Timmons

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

17 Responses to “Kershaw is a Bum”

  1. Voldomer says:

    I agree on Gwynn, and I think he’s going to have a big year. He looks very confident, and that liner he hit to LF would have been a double or better if CarGo were not the left fielder. Nor should Kershaw have any regrets about last night’s game.

    Gotta disagree on the TV contact, though. Selig CAN’T allow it. He can make a very legitimate case that 20 years is far too long and that it is impossible to predict the market rates or even the technologies for the second half of that deal. (Compare today’s media environment with that known–or even anticipated–in 1991!) Six or eight years is far more reasonable, but that probably would be enough to fund the divorce settlement.

    • Jae says:

      Voldomer,

      How can Bud make a case that 20 years is too long when he just approved the Texas Rangers TV deal with Fox for 20 years? That is the long and the short of it. The precedent has already been established by Mr. Selig. He’s have to use some other argument.

  2. Badger says:

    Kershaw got outpitched. It’s going to happen on occasion. Of course, this Dodger lineup isn’t nearly as scary as the Rockies.

    I think Bud is just as mad at himself for letting this loser in the door.

    The divorce is as ugly as I thought it would be. Frank signed an agreement, the same one all owners do, that says he will not sue MLB or the commissioner. Signed agreements won’t likely stop him though. He is a litigator, it is what he does, it is how he operates. There will be lawsuits. Bud, like most people, wants Frank gone, but, will Bud bend over? Stay tuned.

    The t.v. deal is bad for baseball and will ultimately be bad for the Dodgers. How do I know? Because it is what Fox wants. What it does is pay Jamie, (which is what most who have had divorce in California predicted) and allow Frankie Dimes to continue his inflated lifestyle. I think what most of the suits in MLB want is for the Dodgers to have their own cable network. I know it is what I want. It sure as hell isn’t what Fox wants, which is why they let this guy McCourt buy the team with no money – 10 years is a long time to be guaranteed t.v. rights, 30 years is ridiculous.

  3. Michael says:

    Never fear, Mighty Casey is on deck literally, and batting second as promised.
    On the bright side todays starter Hammels gives up more hits than innings pitched.

    If Bud turned down Frank on the last proposal[because it would have paid for the divorce], why would this be any different? If it gets into a pissing match, Bud wins. They don’t call it the good old boys club for nothin.

    • Mark_Timmons says:

      Michael,

      Bud turned down the first proposal which was for a loan. He can do that and has broad discretion in doing so. But, when Frank has a new deal with FOX that is not a loan, what precedent does Bud have to turn down a new deal nearly identical to the one given to another team?

      The fact that $3 Billion is involved makes it pretty difficult for Bud to say NO. If someone told you NO in the same situation, would you just walk away and say \”OK?\”

      The only way Bud can win is to invoke \”the best interests of baseball\” clause, but he would have to prove that. I don\’t care what Frank signed about not suing, you can still sue if you can prove negligence, conspiracy or discrimination, among other things.

      If Bud wants to get rid of Frank right now, he has a big problem.

  4. RogerCraig says:

    I’m not so sure there would be any winners. Bud might beat Frank, but a lot of dirt would be uncovered.

  5. Roger Dodger says:

    And Bud this thinking about closing down Tampa altogether. And another club — because of attendance.

    I sure would like to see a max and a bottom to team salaries. Like: high – $180 million — and low $60 million. I believe several teams are nearer $33 million for the season.

  6. Badger says:

    Salary cap. Good idea. Won’t happen. Union too strong.

    Blake is back. Batting second. My confidence level is, well, not so level.

    The difference makers on this team are Loney, Kemp and Ethier. They don’t hit, this team will have trouble scoring.

  7. Kevin says:

    Why would you hit Blake 2nd and X Paul 7th….shouldn’t they be swapped???

  8. Mark_Timmons says:

    Kevin,

    I concur!

  9. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    From what I’ve seen, the Texas deal with FOX is for $1.6 billion over 20 years, or $80 million per year. However, the deal was initially reported as being for 20 years and $3 billion, just like the Dodger deal. And while I would think the Dodgers could command substantially more than the Rangers, I wouldn’t bet on the final number just yet.

    I’m not sure this is about Bud deciding whether or not he will allow it. Bud still reports to the rest of the owners, who may insist that he accept it, if it is in fact for market value, and if a rejection would open Pandora’s box.

    McCourt is a lot of things, but stupid is not one of them. He knows he’s under a microscope, and couldn’t get away with not using the money for the team. He also knows the value of spending to bring in premium stars (e.g., Pujols) to enhance the product so as to push up attendance, ticket and concession prices. Bring in some star power, and naming rights to Dodger Stadium would likely hit the roof. The Mets have a 20 year deal with Citicorp. worth $400 million ($20 million per year). Couldn’t the Dodgers do as good or better?

    And while I would like for the Dodgers to own their own network, if it’s really $150 million per year, maybe it would afford the Dodgers the opportunity to enhance the product and build revenues in other ways. I don’t know of any team that does it, but why not a Dodger owned radio station? I’m sure such a venture could bring in a few bucks (and maybe more). And I’m sure there are plenty of ways to grow revenue that I haven’t thought of, but someone else has or will think of.

    And because the deal is good for FOX, doesn’t necessarily make it bad for the Dodgers or their fans. And no deal is going to be made with FOX until AFTER a settlement is reached with Jamie. And although Jamie is likely to come out with more than a few pennies in her pocketbook, it’s not likely to be for more than half the worth of the Dodgers minus the current debt. And as much as she hates Frank, she might actually love her children, and might not mind the having team ultimately pass on to her children.

    And like everything else Frank does, maybe Jamie’s deal involves a long term payout.

  10. Roger Dodger says:

    Missed 95 percent of the game on TV due to helping a friend. But I did notice that the game had several HRs — but not in the Dodgers favor.

    As any one saw or can see by the box score — Billingsley did not have a good day.

    85 pitches in 3 innings. Almost half balls. 6 runs, 5 earned.

    So for the first time this season, our #1 and #2 starters loose back to back.

    Giants are winning with the Cy Young guy out there.

    So the blue guys face another day off tomorrow. In 6 games they are back to .500. And, shout out twice so far this season.

    Now to S.D. and S.F.

    No excuses for Clayton or Chad — they will be facing pitching like they have so far — all season, especially in the N.L. West. It would be easy.

  11. Jim D says:

    Yankee Donnie baseball blew the Rockie game in the 9th by not pinch running for Barajas – a fatal error and one of many I am afraid, as Donnie’s “OJT” continues. This is a 500 team as it stands now. We can only hope for a big bat or 2 sometime during the season to make us competitors.

  12. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Jim,

    Maybe he should have put Gwynn in, but that can’t be completely put at Donnie’s door. Isn’t Trey Hillman supposed to suggest stuff like that as his bench coach? And putting Gwynn in to run wouldn’t have assured a victory. He represented on one run, and the Dodgers lost by two. Maybe putting in a runner changes the situation and the Dodgers score two or more, but maybe not. They also had enough other opportunities to score, and didn’t. This team is simply not hitting very well with runners on. Will it continue? Maybe, maybe not.

  13. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    Clayton and Chad don’t need any excuses. In a long season they’re both going to have some bad days, and occasionally even back to back. I would suggest, however, that Clayton wasn’t awful, and could easily have won if the Dodgers put up some runs. And it was Coors Field.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks


Leave a Reply

Mandatory Daily Dodger Reading