Category Archives: 2010 sucks so far

Why the Dodgers Are In Last Place

Posted on by 98 Replies

I was going to react to the lunacy of Ned Colletti calling out Matt Kemp, and then Chad had to go make a flow chart about it and render anything I had to say irrelevant. So instead, I thought I’d see how far down the list of reasons why the Dodgers are in last place ”Matt Kemp is a mediocre baserunner and outfielder” is. Hint: it’s not very high.

  1. Frank McCourt.
  2. Jamie McCourt.
  3. The club broke camp with not one but two Ortizes.
  4. Ramon Ortiz is still with the team despite a 6.39 ERA.
  5. Ramon Ortiz has been allowed to throw more innings than any reliever.
  6. Ten Dodgers have as many or more innings pitched than Jonathan Broxton, supposedly your relief ace.
  7. Broxton has thrown 38 pitches in the last 13 days, proving that Torre truly does not understand how to run a bullpen.
  8. Joe Torre is intent on sending Ramon Troncoso to his death.
  9. Eric Stults was sold to Japan for absolutely no good reason at all.
  10. The team has played just six home games so far.
  11. Randy Wolf and Orlando Hudson were allowed to walk in the offseason without so much as an arbitration offer.
  12. Vicente Padilla was the only signing for the pitching staff.
  13. Jamey Carroll was the biggest free agent acquisition of the winter.
  14. Jamey Carroll is your backup shortstop.
  15. Jamey Carroll has a .603 OPS with underwhelming defense.
  16. When just one starter (Padilla) went down, John Ely was the best you could do to replace him.
  17. Padilla, Manny, & Jeff Weaver all hit the DL on three consecutive days.
  18. Hong-Chih Kuo missed most of April with an arm injury and has pitched just 0.2 innings.
  19. Ronald Belisario couldn’t get himself to camp on time.
  20. George Sherrill was a disaster for nearly the entire month.
  21. Chad Billingsley has been consistently inconsistent.
  22. The pitching staff has the 5th-worst ERA in baseball.
  23. When the hitters hit, the pitchers fail – and vice versa.
  24. Charlie Haeger hasn’t lived up to expectations.
  25. Rick Honeycutt has nothing of value to offer a struggling staff.
  26. James Loney still has zero homers, and a .312 OBP.
  27. Rafael Furcal has missed time with a strained hamstring.
  28. Blake DeWitt has shown a good eye, but has just one extra base hit through the first month.
  29. DeWitt’s been a “work in progress”, to put it mildly, on defense.
  30. The entire defense has been atrocious, with the most errors and worst fielding percentage in baseball.
  31. Garret Anderson – hitting .135 – is supposedly your big bat off the bench, and no steps have been taken to replace him.
  32. Ronnie Belliard is your backup first baseman.
  33. Though he’s performed well, Casey Blake no longer has the power of the beard.
  34. Joe Torre is seemingly more interested in his horses than his baseball team.
  35. Half the team was forced to go to Asia for a money-making venture.
  36. The lack of home games means no Vin magic.
  37. Ned Colletti calls out his best player as being the biggest problem.
  38. Matt Kemp has shown indifferent defense and subpar baserunning.

And so on. But, Ned’s right. Your All-Star center fielder who’s leading the league in homers really is the biggest problem here.

There’s Still Some Good News Here

Posted on by 7 Replies

Sons of Steve Garvey has a link to an article by Jon Paul Morosi of Fox Sports complaining about the NL West’s offseason, mostly focusing on inactivity by the Dodgers (ooh, Jamey Carroll!) or baffling decisions by the Giants (Aubrey Huff, really?)

Morosi’s complaints about the moves (or lack thereof) from the Giants and Dodgers aren’t really off-base, but his closing argument really caught my eye:

The Dodgers will probably add another starting pitcher soon, but I doubt that they will be as good in 2010 as they were in 2009. As a result, the Giants have pulled even with their rival — something that would have been a great achievement one year ago. But at the end of an off-season that started with such optimism, it qualifies as a letdown.

I won’t pretend that the offseason hasn’t been basically a mess so far; it has, and I’ve often been the one leading the negativity train. Fine. But I also subscribe to Jon Weisman’s theory (see last paragraph) that the divorce isn’t going to have a huge impact on 2010. The real problems are going to come in the next few years when the young core all hits free agency at the same time and can’t be retained, and then when there’s no reinforcements coming thanks to an underfunded draft budget and ridiculous decisions to forego draft picks by not offering arbitration to Orlando Hudson and Randy Wolf.

But is it fair to say that the Dodgers won’t “be as good in 2010 as they were in 2009″? I don’t know that it is. I wouldn’t say they’re better than they were last year, as I sit here on January 16th, of course. That said, there’s a fair point to be made that they’re no worse than last year, either. Not getting a top starting pitcher (“ace”, if you must) may be enough to stop them from taking the next step to the World Series in 2010, but that has nothing to do with the divorce situation – as I’ve been saying for months, there just wasn’t an ace to be had. You can talk all you want about Roy Halladay and Cliff Lee being traded, but the fact is that the Dodgers did try for Halladay (who may not have waived his no-trade to come to a team that doesn’t train in Florida anyway) and it’s incredibly unlikely that the Phillies would have traded their best pitcher to their main rival for National League superiority.

Besides, since the Dodgers didn’t have an “ace” in 2009 either, it’s hard to say that the lack of one in 2010 makes them worse than last year. I mean, is it unfair to expect that there might be improvement in areas like…

The outfield. The Dodger outfield was arguably the best in the majors last year, so it may sound odd to expect 2010 to top it, but I think it’s fair to expect an even better performance. Does anyone not think that Matt Kemp is on the fast path to stardom? Let me put it this way: he could have the exact same year in 2010 as he did in 2009, and he’d be one of the most valuable center fielders in baseball, yet it would probably be seen as a failure by Dodger fans. That’s how confident we all are in him to keep improving as he enters his age-25 year.

Then, take Manny Ramirez. For all of the garbage you heard about him supposedly being useless after his return from suspension last season, he still put up a year that would have ranked him in the top 10 in OPS if he’d had enough at-bats to qualify. I still don’t buy the idea that he was terrible without the junk (check out my season review – I stand by the idea that he was injured) and going into a contract year, you have to figure he’ll have some extra motivation. Besides, even a slightly subpar Manny is still ten times better than Juan Pierre at his best, so not having Manny replaced by Pierre for 50 games is a huge win – without even considering the extra value guys like Jason Repko or Xavier Paul will add by being superior defensive replacements.

Andre Ethier is probably at his peak right now and I don’t think it’s fair to expect any more out of him than he’s already shown – but he’s also not even 28 yet, so there’s no reason to expect a huge decline over the next few years. 2009 Ethier + improved Kemp + more Manny – Pierre sucking up outs = better outfield.

The returning starting pitchers. Similar to Kemp, just about everyone thinks Clayton Kershaw is mere moments away from turning his unlimited potential into full-fledged production. Remember, he’s still not even 22, yet spent last year being the hardest pitcher in baseball to hit and was arguably the best pitcher in baseball for a two-month span. No question that he has room to improve, but that’s exactly the point – barring injury, his 2010 should be better than his 2009 (and may actually end the ‘ace’ talk for good, but that’s besides the point).

Don’t forget Hiroki Kuroda, who was very effective when healthy, but just wasn’t healthy enough. I realize he’s about to be 35, but you also have to think he’s not going to take another line drive to the head. If the time off has helped him heal, he’s likely to be more productive than in 2009.

Then you’ve got Chad Billingsley, who I’ve defended here ad nauseum. The fact that people are so willing to throw a guy this young who was an All-Star last season under the bus so quickly because of a few bad starts is mind-blowing to me.

I don’t deny that the back of the rotation is a mess, but it’s not unreasonable to think that all three of your main returning starters will be improved over last year.

The underwhelming trio of Russell Martin, James Loney, and Rafael Furcal. I actually don’t have much faith in Martin to rebound at all, and my fears that he’s the present-day Jason Kendall are starting to look all too real. Still, the bar here is not “can the Dodgers be better than 2009″, but “can they be at least as good”, and you have to figure that Martin couldn’t possibly be any worse than he already was, right? Right?

As for Loney, I actually have high hopes about his ability to improve in 2010 (you can read my full explanations on the futures of Martin and Loney in the upcoming 2010 Maple Street Press Dodgers Annual - much more on that to come). The problem with Loney is that he’s a below-average first baseman in a league that’s full of guys like Albert Pujols, Prince Fielder, and Adrian Gonzalez. That doesn’t make him a useless player, though, and it’s hard to believe that a former first-round pick with a career 112 OPS+ doesn’t have a little more to offer when he’s still just 25 and ended 2009 on a huge tear.

With Furcal, who the hell knows what you’re going to get from him. His 2009 was slightly below his career averages and he’s another year off back surgery, so there’s at least a chance he’ll rebound, but like Martin you don’t expect he’ll be any lousier than he was.

The young pitching. Some of the talented young Dodgers got their feet wet in the bigs in 2009, and it’s not unrealistic to expect them to play larger roles in 2010. Most people remember James McDonald’s huge failure as the #5 starter (as I said in our review pieces, he “was so bad – in 13.1 IP over 4 starts, allowed 13 ER and 14 BB against just 6 K – that he was out of the rotation by the end of the month and back in the minors by mid-May”), but don’t forget how good he was when he returned as a reliever – a 2.72 ERA with twice as many K as BB.

The same goes for Scott Elbert, who didn’t have a huge amount of success in 2009 but certainly showed flashes, enough to be included on the NLCS roster, and Charlie Haeger, who threw a few gems after finally getting a shot. I’m not saying all or any of them are locks to improve in 2010, just that the experience they got in 2009 could prove to be a valuable stepping stone.

The bullpen. Like the outfield, it may seem crazy to expect improvement from a unit that was already one of the best in the bigs last season, and it wouldn’t totally surprise me to see Ramon Troncoso fall apart (his peripherals last year don’t match his sparkling ERA). That said, barring an upcoming trade, George Sherrill will be in the ‘pen for the entire year. Forget whether or not you think giving up Josh Bell was worthwhile, and don’t be swayed by the homer he gave up in the NLCS; Sherrill was utterly dominant as a Dodger, and now you’ll have him for the whole year rather than just two months. That’s an improvement right there, plus there’s still young talent like Josh Lindblom and possibly guys like Elbert and McDonald, if they don’t start.

The bench. The bench in 2009 was, to put it mildy, horrible. You know your bench wasn’t good when the four main participants are all likely to be replaced the following season, partially because they combined for two homers all year. Yes, yes, I know, everyone thinks Juan Pierre saved the season. Jesus, even Michael Phelps didn’t get as much credit for two good weeks as Pierre seems to have received from his May burst. Anyway, as we said before, having Repko or Paul is going to help the outfield defense immensely.

Pierre wasn’t the only problem, though. While we love Mark Loretta for his game-winning hit in NLDS Game 2, let’s not let that one moment make us forget his season-long Mark Sweeney impression (.276 OBP’s are the stuff nightmares are made from). Say what you will about Jamey Carroll, but he looks to at least be better than Loretta.

It’s hard to accurately say that Juan Castro’s replacement will be better, simply because we don’t know who that’s going to be yet. But just re-read my post from November when I found out that there was actually competition for him and… well, it’s safe to say that the 2010 replacement will be an improvement.

Finally, there was Brad Ausmus as the backup catcher. Ausmus was fine, so I won’t say that A.J. Ellis or whomever it ends up being will be a huge improvement, but unless Martin gets hurt it’s not going to really matter either way.

—————————-

That’s six areas in which you could reasonably expect to see improvement in 2010. It’s not all roses, of course; you’re likely to see less production from Blake DeWitt at second base (though don’t forget that Orlando Hudson’s Gold Glove came more from reputation than production, and his offense was so bad in the second half that he lost his job). And of course, you still need to replace Randy Wolf, though I’d be surprised if the Dodgers didn’t end up landing at least one of the Ben Sheets/Erik Bedard/Joel Pineiro crew for that role.

It’s not going to be an easy year, plus you have to be wary of the future thanks to the divorce fallout. With the court battle looming, it might not even be a fun year. But to say that the Dodgers are going to be an appreciably worse team in 2010 than 2009? No, I don’t believe you can say that at all.

Anyone Want to Front Me $700 Million?

Posted on by 12 Replies

Because even though we all knew this divorce case was going to be messy, it’s already so far out of control that it might spin the planet right off its orbit. So what better solution than for me to drum up some investors and take over the club myself?

So… anyone know any billionaires looking to make a PR splash?

Where do I start here? Diamond Leung has a shot of Jamie’s monthly living requests. 6-4-2 has links to a possible 911 call by Jamie against Frank, Jamie’s possible new man – a former Dodger employee – and a great dig at her ridiculous claim to be “face of the Dodgers”. Plus, TMZ – and yes, I just linked to TMZ as though it were an actual news organization, so kill me now – has the details of Jamie’s demands. At least Jon @ Dodger Thoughts sees a possible silver lining to this nightmare:

Some fear the divorce proceeding will hamper the Dodgers’ offseason plans, and for good reason. On the other hand, isn’t this the time when you buy the kids a nice pony to take their mind off the ugliness?

This whole mess is so bad, that T.J. Simers’ latest column is nothing if not the voice of reason. T.J. Simers! As painful as it might be, let’s look at what Jamie actually wants here, from TMZ:

Here are the benefits Jamie is requesting:
- travel by private jet
- 5 star hotel accommodations
- travel expenses – Unlimited
- business dinners 5 nights per week
- business lunches 5 days per week
- parking spots at Dodger Stadium
- flowers in the office
- making Dodger Legends available for events without charge
- provision of Dodger autographed items as requested for use in business and charitable activities
- hair and makeup for Dodger events
- access to team doctors for McCourt family members
- access to the owner’s suite for Dodger home games and non-baseball events at the stadium
- Tickets to All-Star games and playoff games — even if the Dodgers aren’t playing
- a pass to all National League games

Then there’s this: Jamie lists her monthly living expenses at $488,928 — THAT’S PER MONTH!!!!!!!!
Of those expenses, $333,000 goes towards her residence and vacation homes.

I hate you. I hate you. I hate you. I hate you. You rich asshole. You’re spending nearly $500k per month, and you were mocking Dodger fans for wanting to get Manny instead of building parks for kids? And then there’s this - which just kills me – from Bill Shaikin’s story, in regards to Jamie’s claim that she didn’t understand the community property document she signed:

Marshall Grossman, an attorney for Frank McCourt, noted that Jamie McCourt has practiced law, including family law.

“Jamie McCourt saying she didn’t understand what she signed is like John Hancock saying he didn’t understand the Declaration of Independence when he signed it,” Grossman said.

*snicker*. I despise having to write about this, but it’s pretty clearly going to be a big story all offseason. As Jon says, they have “torched themselves in the Los Angeles community”, and this all brings me back to what I said in our open letter to them last week:

Don’t let your personal issues get in the way of the enjoyment of millions of Dodger fans around the world, because if – as seems likely – this devolves into a path of scorched earth and courtroom rhetoric that leads to the selling off of assets on the field and a string of losing seasons like in San Diego, you might still own the team, and you might have won in the eyes of the law, but you’ll still be a pariah in the eyes of Dodger fans everywhere.

Fix this quickly and privately, or sell the team. Now. You may be striving for the spotlight, but you’re not bigger than the Dodgers, and it’s your association with them that’s brought you fame – not vice versa.

I think I speak for a lot of Dodger fans right now when I say, we hate you both. (To be fair, Jamie a lot more.) Please sell. Please. Sell.

Let’s Talk About “Aces”

Posted on by 26 Replies

I’d hoped to wait a little longer to move past 2009 and get into the real offseason stuff, but since the drumbeats are already starting (okay, and work is really boring today, too) we might as well get out ahead of what is sure to be a defining issue of the winter:

OHMYGOD OHMYGOD OHMYGOD WE NEED AN ACE NOW NOW ACE ACE

Which is basically the impression I’m getting from the general public right now. As always, Bill Plaschke’s the one who starts the negativity train rolling:

For the Dodgers to fulfill that promise, the first bit of education must occur in the front office, which needs to realize something that everyone from here to Nicaragua now understands.

They need an ace, or they will continue to be NLCS jokers.

The fact that they had to start castoff Vicente Padilla in Wednesday’s critical game makes one sort of statement.

The fact that Padilla was a complete wreck, giving up six runs in three innings, just confirms that statement.

In this championship series, the Dodger starters were 0-3 with a 12.59 ERA, and even the best bullpen in baseball couldn’t save that.

The ERA statement is a little unfair – so much of that is due to Hiroki Kuroda’s disaster in Game 3, and he’d likely have started a game regardless -  but for once, Billy’s not completely wrong. The pitching wasn’t championship quality in this series, and I don’t think anyone disagrees that upgrades will need to be made in the starting rotation if the Dodgers are going to go any further next year.

acefrehleyHere’s the thing, though, as I learned while listening to some hilarious calls on KABC’s DodgerTalk after the game (and good lord, Josh Suchon, I have no idea how you have the patience to deal with some of the comments you get there). Most people don’t seem to understand just how difficult it is to acquire an “ace”. It’s not like you snap your fingers and one just appears,  and as we’ve been through so many times, the fact that Ned Colletti didn’t come up with one in July says much less about his ability as GM than it does about the ridiculous demands made by Toronto for Roy Halladay and Cleveland’s questionable decision to accept Philadelphia’s package for Cliff Lee.

There’s so few pitchers of that quality that even exist, and if you have one, you’re not giving him up. On the rare occasions that one does hit the market, you’re either going to be paying a crushing price in talent, an enormous free agent contract, or both.

So before we start an offseason filled with bleatings of “we need an ace! I don’t care what it costs!” let’s try to define just how possible that’s going to be.

1. What is an ace?

aceventuraHow do you define an “ace”? There’s all sorts of nebulous ideas out there you’ll hear, like “knows how to win”, and “playoff tested”, and “veteran toughness”. Those are all bullshit. How many times have you seen Zack Greinke, Tim Lincecum, Roy Halladay, and – until this year – Cliff Lee in the playoffs? Yet, you’d still consider them “aces”, right? No, we’re going to do this with stats.

Let’s go with two Baseball Prospectus measures on this – VORP, and SNLVAR, which is “Support Neutral Value Above Replacement”, i.e., taking out the variables of offense and defense to measure just a pitcher’s contributions. (Full explanation here.)

So how many “aces” were there in 2009? One per team? Well, when you get down to #30 on those lists, you get names like Ted Lilly and Kevin Millwood. Quality pitchers to be sure, but hardly anyone’s definition of an “ace”. Completely arbitrarily, the top 20 seems to be a more appropriate cutoff, just based on the names there. As it happens, 19 names make the top 20 on both the VORP and SNLVAR leaderboards, with Jered Weaver and Wandy Rodriguez making one and just missing the other. We’ll include them, give Johan Santana, Brandon Webb and Jake Peavy injury exemptions, and go with 24 total pitchers; quibble all you want about whether these guys are “aces”, this is just unquestionably who the top pitchers were in 2009 – plus those three.

2) Who are the 2009 aces, then?

zackgreinkeZack Greinke
Adam Wainwright
Felix Hernandez
Tim Lincecum
Roy Halladay
Chris Carpenter
Jair Jurrjens
Matt Cain
Cliff Lee
Javier Vazquez
Justin Verlander
Wandy Rodriguez
Dan Haren
Josh Johnson
Clayton Kershaw
CC Sabathia
Jon Lester
Randy Wolf
Ubaldo Jimenez
Edwin Jackson
Jered Weaver
Johan Santana
Jake Peavy
Brandon Webb

I’m sure a few things jump out at you from that list, like “there’s two Dodgers on it!!” (yep, we’ll get to that in a second) and “what about guys I know like Cole Hamels and Roy Oswalt and John Lackey?!” Well, I shouldn’t have to explain Hamels, who got kicked around by the Dodgers twice in the NLCS after a mediocre season, and Oswalt’s been declining for four straight years, down to just league-average in 2009. While Lackey’s a solid pitcher, ERA’s of 3.75 and 3.83 the last two years hardly have him beating down Cy Young’s door. If Cy Young had a door. And wasn’t dead.

3) Oooh! Aces!! I want them now! Gimme gimme gimme! The cost be damned!

So now that we’ve defined 24 “aces”, what are the chances of the Dodgers actually ending up with any of these guys? 

No chance in hell, teams won’t move them, at least this offseason division (13): Zack Greinke, Adam Wainwright, Edwin Jackson, Justin Verlander, Jon Lester, Jair Jurrjens, Cliff Lee, C.C. Sabathia, Chris Carpenter, Johan Santana, Jake Peavy, Wandy Rodriguez, Jered Weaver

No chance in hell, within the NL West division (5): Tim Lincecum, Matt Cain, Ubaldo Jimenez, Dan Haren, Brandon Webb

No chance in hell, hates the West Coast division (1): Javier Vazquez

Already Dodgers (2): Clayton Kershaw, Randy Wolf

Let’s not overlook that last point. While no one considers Wolf to be a top-level guy, by all measures he was one of the best pitchers in all of baseball in 2009. And Kershaw? Just leave the kid alone and let him be awesome. He’s done nothing but improve in his short career, dominating for much of 2009. You could make the case that he’s an “ace” right now – I did already, in July, pointing out that:

Look, what Kershaw is doing right now is simply unbelievable, as his 2.76 ERA is good for 11th in all of baseball. Forget his age for a moment, because the performances we’re seeing are outstanding no matter what year his was born. In the 9 starts since his 2.2 inning struggle on June 10, Kershaw’s pitched 56 2/3 innings… and given up all of five earned runs. That’s an ERA of 0.80, which would be awesome if it didn’t make the blood rush to my head hard enough to make me think I’m going to pass out. Really, you think there’s anyone in baseball that’s going to improve on that? There’s a pretty solid case to be made that Clayton Kershaw has been the best pitcher in baseball for the last two months, and that’s even with Mark Buehrle doing nothing but throwing perfect games lately (he gave up 8 ER in 3.1 IP four starts ago).

If a guy like that is our best pitcher in 2010, I think I’ll be more than okay with that. Still, the only thing better than one ace is two, so…

4) So there’s only three aces who may or may not be available?

Sure seems that way - Felix Hernandez, Josh Johnson, and Roy Halladay, and even they’re not for sure. Hernandez made it to the bigs even earlier than Kershaw, and was outstanding at age 23 this year (19-5, 2.49 ERA, 217 K), so the only reason he even might be on the market is because he’s only a year away from free agency and the Mariners might not think they can keep him. If they make him available – a big if – it’s going to cost an ungodly haul of prospects and at least $180m in contracts, because he’s that good.

joshjohnsonJohnson would be available for the same reason, as he’s in his arbitration years and the Marlins may not be able to afford him. He’s less of a sure thing than Hernandez if only because he had two years of arm troubles, but he came up huge this year (15-5, 3.23 ERA, 209 IP). However, he’s not free agent eligible until 2012 (I think), so the Fish might not feel pressure to move him just yet.

And then there’s Halladay, yet again. There’s no question that he’s on a Hall of Fame trajectory. But there is going to be a question about whether the new Toronto GM, Alex Anthopolos, is going to be as absurd in his requests as J.P. Ricciardi was. Either way, Halladay’s a free agent after 2010, so if you’re going to give up a boatload of prospects to get him, you’ll want to sign him – but how much are you going to want to give a guy who’ll be 34 in 2011 with over 2000 innings on that arm?

5) So you’re saying there’s no ace coming?

Well, I’m saying that there’s already an ace here in Clayton Kershaw, and I’m also saying that anyone who’s given up on Chad Billingsley is a fool. Don’t forget, the two aces everyone wanted to trade Billingsley for – Lee and Halladay – each ended up back in the minors after establishing themselves in the bigs. I’m not saying Billingsley needs to be farmed out, just that he’d hardly be the first young pitcher to struggle for a bit before regaining his game.

As I see it, there’s only those three top-tier guys that might be available. I think the cost for Hernandez would be prohibitive, and I don’t think the Marlins are ready to move Johnson. Now if the price for Halladay has dropped due to A) only getting him for 2010, rather than the ’09 playoff push as well, and B) a new boss in town who’s more reasonable, then I’d be interested in exploring that – as long as it doesn’t take Kershaw or Billingsley.

No one wants to improve the pitching staff more than me; you just can’t forget that there’s only so many guys like that out there. After all, they wouldn’t be “aces” if every team had a bunch, would they?

Frank And Jamie Headed For Divorce McCourt?

Posted on by 1 Reply

O.K., that is now our lamest title for an article, ever.  I know, I know… 

People DodgersSo, as I’m sure most of you have heard, according to the L.A. Times, the big story is that Frank and Jamie McCourt have now called it quits and have decided to separate.  While it’s generally sad to see any marriage end, for obvious reasons, that’s not really the concern here.  Rather, what’s the effects that this can have on the team?  Can the team survive this successfully or are we going to see another San Diego situation, where their owner, who alsoheaded for a divorce, pretty much slashed payroll and eventually traded the likes of Jake Peavy? 

Right now, it’s hard to say, and there’s certainly a variety of factors that play into it, which we just don’t know.  Though if they do indeed divorce, there’s definitely a chance that they would have to sell.  It’s certainly a situation that deserves to be closely monitored, as this situation can either (and hopefully) turn out well for the team or it could end up bad.  Very bad. 

On the other hand, we’re Dodgers fans, so what’s new?  Even during good years, there’s usually always that shot in the nuts (or as I call it: a “Holliday”) that has to happen.  But there’s still baseball to be played, and meaningful baseball at that, so let’s get it going, already! 

- Vin vinscully-face.jpg