Categorized | Mark Timmons

When you’re ready to quit,

you’re a lot closer than you think!”

I live by that creed, and it could apply to these Dodgers….

But that is very unlikely!

This team is rapidly reaching a tipping point of no return.  The naysayers had it right!

The popular view is to blame Frank, and he does have to shoulder a share of the blame, but I still place a bigger share of the blame on Ned.

Ned signed Rafael Furcal, Casey Blake, Marcus Thames, Jay Gibbons, Hiroki Kuroda, Jon Garland, Tony Gwynn, Ted Lilly, Aaron Miles, Juan Castro, Rod Barajas, Dionaro Navarro, Juan Uribe and Jamey Carroll.  Jamey Carroll is a gem, but between the rest of the other players, none are difference makers.  Between those players and Jon Broxton (who isn’t worthy of $7 mil) Ned pays out $63 million this year.  Add in the $15 mil deferred to Manny, JP and AJ and the Dodgers have $78 million of their $120 million payroll tied up in a bunch of journeyman or aging stars.

I mean, who saw Raffy getting hurt when Ned signed him?  EVERYONE!  That’s who!

Do you think the 2011 Dodgers would be any worse with Jamey Carroll at SS and Russell Martin at C?  By the way, Martin could have been had for less than the Dodgers pay Broxton.  To be fair, I supported letting an injured Martin walk, but baseball insiders should have had better information than me.

Miles, Castro, Gwynn, Uribe, Barajas, Navarro and company really offer the Dodgers nothing.  I like Barajas as a backup, but AJ Ellis was there.  Ned has made some horrible decisions, not the least of which was the appointment of Stan Conte as trainer.  He’s a nice guy, but all the injuries tell me that the training staff is suspect.  What culpability do they have in this injury debacle?

Here’s the skinny:  If Frank somehow stays as owner (and it’s looking bleaker by the minute) , then Ned has to go.  If the Dodgers get new ownership, then Ned has to go.  The common denominator is NED HAS TO GO!

Who thinks the Dodgers would be much worse off with this lineup (and about $70 million to spend on two or three good players – imagine who the Dodgers could get for $70 mil):

  1. Carroll SS
  2. Martin  C
  3. Ethier  RF
  4. Kemp  CF
  5. Loney  1B
  6. Sands LF
  7. Mitchell  3B
  8. DeJesus  2B


  1. Kershaw
  2. Billingsley
  3. DeLaRosa
  4. Eveland
  5. Ely

That’s not a great lineup, but the  key is the $70 million that could have been added to that roster.  You could add 3 superstars and a few role-players.

$70 million!  Of the players Ned is paying that money, which ones do you really want?

By the way, last night’s game was almost as fun as watching paint dry!


About Mark Timmons

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

8 Responses to “When you’re ready to quit,”

  1. Brooklyn Dodger says:

    I’m sure that Ned shares a large part of the blame, because no doubt, he was responsible for some bad signings. But he also had to work under the restraints created by McCourt’s mismanagement of the team’s finances.

    Furcal and Blake were mistakes that only the blind couldn’t see. And I was skeptical about Lilly and Uribe, as were many others. Kuroda wasn’t a horrible sign, but somewhat expensive at $12 million (part of which was deferred into next year). But Marcus Thames and Jay Gibbons were a direct result of the Dodgers being unable to afford a Crawford/Werth type player, or even something in-between. Barajas at $3.25 million was ridiculous, and Navarro at $1 million was even more ridiculous given the presence of A.J. Ellis. As for Martin, I believe I read somewhere that he didn’t accept the Dodgers offer because it wasn’t guaranteed, whereas the Yankee deal was. Miles and Castro came aboard on minor league contracts, and maybe so for Gwynn. Miles, actually isn’t a bad utility infielder to have around, and probably doesn’t cost much.

    I don’t know what culpability Conte has in the “injury debacle”, but I have to believe he’s not without blame. I have already questioned the mentality of Dodgers players when it comes to reporting discomfort, the latest now being Garland, who apparently felt some pain in each of his last TWO starts. Maybe he reported it after the first of those starts, and was still allowed to pitch. If that’s the case, the blame is on Conte/Mattingly/Ned. If he didn’t report it until after the second start, then the blame is on the player and on management for not creating an environment that would insure that injuries were promptly reported.

    And finally, I think we’ve all read that there were questions raised about the condition of Garland’s shoulder during the offseason, and is probably part of why Garland didn’t receive any substantial offers elsewhere. But that didn’t stop Ned from signing him. But I wonder, if he had a larger budget, might not have Ned looked elsewhere? I don’t remember who else was available, so that’s something I can’t answer now.

    At this stage I think a new GM is advisable. But I don’t think that can happen until the ownership debacle reaches resolution. I don’t believe in quitting, but at the same time I don’t want the Dodgers to sacrifice their future by trading away top prospects for veterans, especially rentals. I’d prefer to hold onto Sands, RDLR, Gordon, etc., etc., etc., and use them along with Kemp, Ethier, Billingsley, Kershaw, etc., and some key free agents to build a championship team for next year. For that I believe we will need a new owner. I also believe the Dodgers would be best served as sellers at the trade deadline.

    Hope everyone enjoys the game today. I’m blacked out in NY due to the FOX regional broadcast.

    • Glass Was Half Full says:

      I believe Kevin Correia was available…..having a good start to 2011 with a bad team…well a better team than the Dodgers!

  2. youbetterthinkagain says:

    I agree that Ned has been something less than spectacular as GM. HOwever, BD makes a solid point, Ned has had his hands tied and has not been allowed to really go after the quality players this team needs, both bench and regular positions. You knew things were going backasswards with the multiple and ridiculous signings to play LF. It is never a good sign when you see a team fill a hole (LF in this case) with the expressed strategy that it will be a platoon situation. In fact, I am trying to recall ever hearing a team that starts out with a plan that is to platoon a position. Platooning is always a fall back option, never option #1 when you start looking for a replacement. So how much is Ned really responsible? Maybe not so much or maybe not at all.

    This team is a mess, shit flows downhill, and in this case, lands on the field of play.

    BTW, Kemp getting doubled off of second on a routine flyball is not even embarrassing, it isn’t even little league, that is T-ball quality shit. Kemp may stroke the ball but he is obviously a total meathead, makes you wonder if he even played little league, because baseball is definitely not his “first language”.

  3. Roger Dodger says:

    What you are saying is — this might be one of the lowest periods of time in the Dodger tradition that goes back to 1883 or 128 years.

    Quality of players, front office staff, public relations with the local fans – community at large – and fans around the world, etc. are at an all time low.

    Boycott of games, lack of interest, anger and more is all around in 2011.

  4. Badger says:

    These tea leaves were not that hard to read. I think the veteran signings were done in an effort to show season ticket holders that the Dodgers were still solvent and in it to win it. Most of the knowledgeable baseball fans saw what was happening and that Ned was in it to spin it. I said early and often that ELK had to perform at peak levels, 2 of them are doing ok, the support players all had to have career years, they are not, and that the team needed to come out of the gate hot, it did not. In general this is an easy team to game plan.

    When the house is cleaned, Ned will be swept out.

    • DodgerDude says:

      You knew the Dodgers would have 10 players on the DL and that is why you thought they would not do well?

      What if they were 100% healthy?

      Then what?

      • Badger says:

        First of all, no team is 100% healthy. Secondly, look at the history of Blake and Furcal. You think figuring they will spend time on the DL is a risky call? Third, look at the left field situation from day 1. Did you really believe that platoon had any chance of success? If so, you were dreaming. The bench? Very average. Pen? Iffy. SP, had a chance to be good, but Lilly AND Kuroda are past their prime. Look at Uribe’s numbers… I did and you know what I saw? a .250 hitter with a .300 OBP and past his prime. Loney? Most said dump him now. I was willing to give him a shot. He is wearing thin.

        I say again, not that difficult to predict mediocrity. In fact, all the early power rankings had this team middle of the pack – and that was WITH all the starters in there. I had them with 83 wins IF everybody stayed healthy. 83 looks like a stretch now.

  5. Jae says:

    I still think this team is capable of more than they have shown. With 10 players on the DL, what team can perform at a high level?

    It’s not all on the talent. The injuries are a bigger factor.


Leave a Reply

Mandatory Daily Dodger Reading