OFFICIAL 2009 DODGERS OFFSEASON THREAD: (95-57) NL West Champs --- NLCS Chumps

[dland24]

Just to get this out of the way guys, I love talking baseball. Most off season threads are pretty dead, so I choose to respond in this one. So I hope you guysrealize by now that I am not trying to hate on your team or cause problems, but I just like talking about the ins and outs of baseball, and your thread seemsto be the most active. Ok.....

I cant believe Mike and I agree on something. I guess theres a first time for everything. But PMAC, I see where you are coming from, but I strongly disagree.
I understand the importance of having prospects and a strong minor league system, but I really think you need to spin some of them for pitchers. I cant helpbut feel that you are missing your window if you dont make moves now. Most of you guys disagree with me that the time is NOW, but i dont see why. Yes you haveyoung talent. But what happens when you need to sign these stud young players to longterm deals? Will you have all of those key young players in 3-4 years?Maybe, maybe not. Will you have Manny on your team in 3-4 years? No. Will Kershaw become the ace you all hope? Maybe, maybe not. But you DO have them all now,and with a piece or two more, you WOULD be a World Series team. In 3-4 years, if all the pieces fall into place, you MIGHT be a World Series team. Why wouldyou worry about maybe being great in the future when you KNOW you can be great NOW? Its hard to argue against the fact that with a piece or two more NOW, youwould be a World Series team. Yet you THINK you might be one in the future. Thats the point I am making. Sure the future LOOKS bright, but the present ISbright.

You never know what the future will hold. Injuries happen. Players get unhappy for random reasons. Other teams will have more money to throw around. ThingsHAPPEN. Disagree with me all you want, but your team is pretty stacked NOW. But as stacked as it is, its has some major holes. And until you fix those holes,you will continue to use the famous saying of the Brooklyn Dodgers. And who is to know if the future will really hold what you expect/hope it will.

 

[p mac one]

The Dodgers don't have any "major holes" first of all.

It's easy to make an argument and say any future prediction is a maybe. That's not really how it works. Front offices can't live for the moment atevery situation.

The notion that we have a stacked team and need to make some kind of move to ensure a WS title but won't have that same stacked team in 3 years doesn'tmake sense. The Dodgers should always be looking to make upgrades if possible, my point is that now is not the time to give away the whole farm to try and wina title in 2010. If there would be a time for this group, it's in 3 to 4 years.

For future reference, structuring your sentences like Jim Tracy gets you ignored in this thread. Is Dland a Giants fan? Why yes, I think he is. (all jokes

)

 

[Los Angeles]

Originally Posted by P MAC ONE

The Dodgers should always be looking to make upgrades if possible

Weren't you adamant on the Dodgers not making any moves because they had the best record last season?

No matter how good a team is, they should always try to make it better and they did by shoring up the pitching staff.

Maybe in your eyes the Dodgers don't have major holes, but something needs to be patched up after every NLCS blunder.

We've gotten killed with having no clear-cut ACE on the staff and our backend rotation is ... non-existent. I'm hoping Kershaw and Bills can step itup.

The Dodgers lack of power in the lineup needs to be addressed with whoever fills the void at second.

The bench would be an easy fix.

 

[mr jordan04]

more and more i keep thinking Ned Colleti is posting as PMac

http:// [h3][/h3]

[h3]Dodgers low on dough?[/h3]
3:50PM ET

[h5]Los Angeles Dodgers[/h5]
Top Email


Well, just one more reason to think the Dodgers are facing serious financial headaches. They were one of the teams not to attend a workout for Aroldis Chapman, reports ESPN The Mag's Jorge Arangure, who says the Dodgers consider Chapman "too expensive."

Odd? Well, consider that the Pirates and Marlins also made the trip.

The other day, ESPN The Magazine's Buster Olney wrote that the Dodgers' current financial freeze has them falling behind their rivals in the National League, particularly their divisional foes.

The club has some areas they'd certainly like to shore up -- second base and the starting rotation -- but their financial restraints prevented them from even offering arbitration to http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=4087Randy Wolf and http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=5029Orlando Hudson, suggesting the Dodgers will be bargain hunting in January.

Might it be a scenario that forces the team to revamp for future years by trading one or more of their arbitration-eligible players such as http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?playerId=6481Andre Ethier?

It's unknown how long or to what extent the current ownership situation will affect the roster, but a lot could happen this winter, and in so many different directions.

We've also checked in with Keith Law to survey the options for the Dodgers, as far as trading some core talent, such as outfielder Andre Ethier, who made $3.1 million in 2009 as a Super Two, and could double that this winter.

[h5]Keith Law[/h5]
Ethier's a sell-high commodity, but a tough sell for fans

"Ethier might be a good sell-high situation although I imagine LAD fans would riot. He's 27 and has already hit for more power than I expected him to show, but while there's no reason to expect another bump, the acquiring team would get a few peak years. It could be a situation where L.A. gets a few valuable young players that run cheaper in the present and are further away from free agency. But GM Ned Colletti has never made a deal like that and I think it would send the code that runs his central nervous system into an infinite loop."

http:// [h3][/h3]

[h3]Dodgers' frozen in inaction[/h3]
8:40AM ET

[h5]Los Angeles Dodgers[/h5]
Top Email


The McCourt divorce saga has called into question how effectively the Los Angeles Dodgers can function this offseason.

Another indication that the Dodgers are stuck in neutral comes in today's Los Angeles Times, which reported that Frank McCourt has accused his estranged wife of undermining the Dodgers' business operations.
As the winter meetings began, team president Dennis Mannion told the LA Times that there would be no immediate changes to the payroll.
ESPN The Magazine's Buster Olney wrote last week that the Dodgers were "frozen in inaction" at the recent winter meetings.

 

[Los Angeles]

 

[dland24]

Originally Posted by P MAC ONE

It's easy to make an argument and say any future prediction is a maybe. That's not really how it works. Front offices can't live for the moment at every situation.

You are absolutely right. Front offices cant live for the moment in every situation. But in a situation that has the best outfield in baseball, great younghitters up and down the order, arguably the best right handed hitter in the past 50 years in the last season as a Dodger, one of the best bullpens in baseball,and a suspect pitching staff, that IS the situation to live for the moment.

Originally Posted by P MAC ONE

The notion that we have a stacked team and need to make some kind of move to ensure a WS title but won't have that same stacked team in 3 years doesn't make sense. The Dodgers should always be looking to make upgrades if possible, my point is that now is not the time to give away the whole farm to try and win a title in 2010. If there would be a time for this group, it's in 3 to 4 years.

I just dont understand how you can say that the time for THIS group is 3 to 4 years from now. Where are you getting this notion? You being stacked now does NOTensure you will be in 3-4 years. Kemp, Loney, Ethier, Kershaw, Billingsley and Broxton will ALL need to have new contracts by then if you hope they will bepart of this 3-4 years from now team. You dont think these players might possibly be lured away by the deep pockets of the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Angels orsomeone else? I'm not saying they will for sure bolt....but they might. Manny will be gone. Furcal will be gone. Blake will be gone. And who knows iflittle random pieces of your team will still be there. Who knows if your bullpen will still be good. Who knows if someone will suffer a major injury by then. Irealize I am starting to repeat myself, but I cant understand what you dont understand about this point I am making.

So please break it down for me. As one baseball fan to another....teach me something. Why is my opinion of your team incorrect....?

 

[p mac one]

Weren't you adamant on the Dodgers not making any moves because they had the best record last season?
Never that. I said numerous times here that I wanted Halladay, I wanted Edwin Jackson, I still would love Brandon Phillips or Dan Uggla. My pointis that trying to say something like "The Dodgers have major holes to fill" was inaccurate at best.

Maybe in your eyes the Dodgers don't have major holes, but something needs to be patched up after every NLCS blunder.
The +%## do you mean in my eyes? The Dodgers have established starters at every position but 2B, and have the one rotation spot left to fill.(with the assumption that the 5th spot will be left open for competition between Troncoso, McDonald, Elbert, Haeger and possibly Stults.

We've gotten killed with having no clear-cut ACE on the staff and our backend rotation is ... non-existent. I'm hoping Kershaw and Bills can step it up.
Obviously everyone would want a "clear-cut ACE" (whatever that even means). I'd argue the only guy of that caliber available wasHalladay, and he isn't really an option because the owners are broke.

Hopefully we get a new owner who comes in and gets us King Felix.

The Dodgers lack of power in the lineup needs to be addressed with whoever fills the void at second.
Aside from Uggla, that's not really an option.

I've always said I want to see DeWitt get a shot.

 

[mr jordan04]

PMAC what are you studying at @ UA?

 

[p mac one]

You being stacked now does NOT ensure you will be in 3-4 years.
And it doesn't ensure that we won't. In 4 years, Kemp will be 29, Ethier will be 31, Loney will be 29, Martin will be 30, Billingsley willbe 29, Kershaw will be only 25. Baseball history shows that pretty much all players have their peak seasons from age 27 to 31

You dont think these players might possibly be lured away by the deep pockets of the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Angels or someone else? I'm not saying they will for sure bolt....but they might.
If we have the same ownership situation when they're in free agency then they will be gone for sure. If our owner then has a fluid cash flow,then that's a different story. It's all up in the air at this point though.

Manny will be gone. Furcal will be gone. Blake will be gone.
Furcal was trash for most of the year, and Dee Gordon will be as good if not better than he is.

The Dodgers will need to find production in LF and at 3B when those guys leave obviously.

And who knows if little random pieces of your team will still be there.Who knows if your bullpen will still be good. Who knows if someone will suffer a major injury by then. I realize I am starting to repeat myself, but I cant understand what you dont understand about this point I am making.
a whole bunch of "who knows" don't really mean anything.

 

[Los Angeles]

Originally Posted by P MAC ONE

Never that. I said numerous times here that I wanted Halladay, I wanted Edwin Jackson, I still would love Brandon Phillips or Dan Uggla. My point is that trying to say something like "The Dodgers have major holes to fill" was inaccurate at best.

I'm not talking about this off-season, I'm talking about when the Dodgers got out the gates like damn champs - you were sure on the Dodgers notbringing anyone along because they were the best team in baseball (at the time).

I don't wanna go digging for it, but I'm sure you recall this.

We can have Troncoso (

), McDonald (still ain't ready), Elbert(nah), Haegar (

) and Stults (career minor leaguer with occasional callups) compete for a spot in the rotation, but we'll be in the same position we were in last year ... tryna fill the roster with spot starts every 4-5th day.

I've always said I want to see DeWitt get a shot.
DeWitt would be great if this team were rebuilding, but they're not.

 

[p mac one]

Originally Posted by Mr Jordan04

PMAC what are you studying at @ UA?

Interdisciplinary Studies.

I have 3 different subject areas in my major. Business, Communication, and the 3rd area is a combination of Africana Studies, Poly Sci and English.

 

[dland24]

Originally Posted by P MAC ONE

You being stacked now does NOT ensure you will be in 3-4 years.

And it doesn't ensure that we won't. In 4 years, Kemp will be 29, Ethier will be 31, Loney will be 29, Martin will be 30, Billingsley will be 29, Kershaw will be only 25. Baseball history shows that pretty much all players have their peak seasons from age 27 to 31

You dont think these players might possibly be lured away by the deep pockets of the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Angels or someone else? I'm not saying they will for sure bolt....but they might.
If we have the same ownership situation when they're in free agency then they will be gone for sure. If our owner then has a fluid cash flow, then that's a different story. It's all up in the air at this point though.

Manny will be gone. Furcal will be gone. Blake will be gone.
Furcal was trash for most of the year, and Dee Gordon will be as good if not better than he is.

The Dodgers will need to find production in LF and at 3B when those guys leave obviously.

And who knows if little random pieces of your team will still be there.Who knows if your bullpen will still be good. Who knows if someone will suffer a major injury by then. I realize I am starting to repeat myself, but I cant understand what you dont understand about this point I am making.
a whole bunch of "who knows" don't really mean anything.





Seems like your comments about regarding your future (3-4 years from now seems pretty dependent on "if you have an owner with fluid cash flow."Doesnt seem much different than my "who knows." The only thing we know for certain is RIGHT NOW. And right now you have almost enough to win achampionship. Yet you are worried about 3-4 years from now. Mind boggling IMO. I think I'm done here.

 

[Los Angeles]

Feels like baseball is right around the corner

....but its not

 

[p mac one]

Originally Posted by dland24

Originally Posted by P MAC ONE

You being stacked now does NOT ensure you will be in 3-4 years.

And it doesn't ensure that we won't. In 4 years, Kemp will be 29, Ethier will be 31, Loney will be 29, Martin will be 30, Billingsley will be 29, Kershaw will be only 25. Baseball history shows that pretty much all players have their peak seasons from age 27 to 31

You dont think these players might possibly be lured away by the deep pockets of the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Angels or someone else? I'm not saying they will for sure bolt....but they might.

If we have the same ownership situation when they're in free agency then they will be gone for sure. If our owner then has a fluid cash flow, then that's a different story. It's all up in the air at this point though.

Manny will be gone. Furcal will be gone. Blake will be gone.
Furcal was trash for most of the year, and Dee Gordon will be as good if not better than he is.

The Dodgers will need to find production in LF and at 3B when those guys leave obviously.

And who knows if little random pieces of your team will still be there.Who knows if your bullpen will still be good. Who knows if someone will suffer a major injury by then. I realize I am starting to repeat myself, but I cant understand what you dont understand about this point I am making.
a whole bunch of "who knows" don't really mean anything.





Seems like your comments about regarding your future (3-4 years from now seems pretty dependent on "if you have an owner with fluid cash flow." Doesnt seem much different than my "who knows." The only thing we know for certain is RIGHT NOW. And right now you have almost enough to win a championship. Yet you are worried about 3-4 years from now. Mind boggling IMO. I think I'm done here.
Not at all.

I think the Dodgers are ready to win a championship now, I'm against selling the farm as if the window to win that championship will close soon. The windowjust opened last year.

 

[Los Angeles]

[h1]http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/12/red-sox-working-hard-for-adrian-gonzalez.html[/h1]

[h1]Red Sox "Working Hard" For Adrian Gonzalez[/h1]
By Tim Dierkes [December 16 at 11:36am CST]

11:36am: Interesting tweet from ESPN's Jorge Arangure Jr. - he has a source close to Gonzalez who believes the player will be traded to Boston within the next ten days.

Nooooo

 

[p mac one]

The Dodgers are in limbo until at least June 3. The trial to decide on the validity of the post-nup the McCourts signed begins May 24 and goes through June 3apparently.

Anybody familiar with divorce law, or know somebody who is? I have a couple of questions:
1. Even though Jamie signed a document saying Frank is the sole owner, wouldn't the fact that the team was bought with money that they both earned whilemarried make her entitled to part of the franchise?
2. If she's not entitled to the franchise, then wouldn't California law still make her entitled to half of their full net worth? And since the Dodgersare clearly more than 50% of that net worth, then Frank would have to either find investors or sell the team to pay her off, correct?

Basically what I'm trying to find out is if the post-nup is found to be 'valid,' how would Jamie get anywhere close to her 50%? Especially becauseso much of what she owns are homes that have dropped so much in value the past year.

If anybody has any insight, or knows anybody who does ... please pass it along.

 

[mr jordan04]

Originally Posted by bright nikes

[h1]http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/12/red-sox-working-hard-for-adrian-gonzalez.html[/h1]

[h1]Red Sox "Working Hard" For Adrian Gonzalez[/h1]
By Tim Dierkes [December 16 at 11:36am CST]

11:36am: Interesting tweet from ESPN's Jorge Arangure Jr. - he has a source close to Gonzalez who believes the player will be traded to Boston within the next ten days.

Nooooo

Yup, he's gone. I read that after them acquiring lackey they might be giving up bucholtz now and some prospects. It would take a lot of prospects for SD toreally trade him within our division. Althought I wanted him in dodger blue, at least we don't have to face him as much now. But he is a FA in 2 years ubelieve, so that's our only chance now

 

[p mac one]

Jamey Carroll. 2 years, $4 Mil.

!$*!!@% Ned, I hope the new owner fires you.

 

[Los Angeles]

Originally Posted by bright nikes

Jamey Carroll is deciding between multiple two-year offers, tweets Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports. He notes that the Angels, Dodgers, and A's have shown interest. Perhaps today's Craig Counsell signing will lead to a deal for Carroll.

I really hope we didn't offer Jamey a 2 year deal.

Well, damn.

I don't $$+++%@ get it, AT ALL.

 

[p mac one]

What's not to get?

Ned is an idiot.

He's made two good decisions in 4 years. Ethier and Manny. And a whole lot of people think he wasn't responsible for those moves.

 

[Los Angeles]

This surely solves the power hitter we've been needing at 2B, ain't nothing better than a total of 12 career HRs in his 7 seasons.

We might as well have kept Loretta.

 

[in yo nostril]

ned is like the mitch kupchak of the dodgers. a couple of good moves (gifts) overshadows all the garbage you have brought in.

 

[p mac one]

Blake DeWitt getting a shot

 

[Los Angeles]

LOL.

 

[mr jordan04]

matt kemp is having a charity basketball game sunday afternoon i believe