Skip to content

Dodgers reach six-year, $147 million deal with Zack Greinke

Dec 8, 2012, 8:24 PM EDT

greinke getty angels Getty Images

Dylan Hernandez of the Los Angeles Times reports that the Dodgers are “closing in on” a contract agreement with free agent starter Zack Greinke.

The deal will cover the next six years and carry a total value of $145 million if it indeed goes through.

Jon Heyman of CBS Sports reported on Thursday that Dodgers officials were “starting to seem slightly discouraged” because of a strong push by Texas’ front office and Greinke’s positive reaction to their sales pitch. But Heyman is now acknowledging that the script has been flipped and that it’s the Rangers who suddenly have a bad feeling about the course of the negotiations.

Greinke registered a 3.48 ERA, 1.20 WHIP and 200/54 K/BB ratio across 212 1/3 innings this past summer between the Brewers and Angels. The 29-year-old right-hander was at one point said to be seeking a seven-year contract worth more than $160 million, and it seems he’s going to come pretty close.

*********************

UPDATE, 8:26 PM: The Rangers “have been told” that Greinke is not signing with them, according to MLB.com’s T.R. Sullivan. Which means that an announcement from the Dodgers is likely imminent.

UPDATE, 8:57 PM: CBS Sports’ Jon Heyman reports that Greinke and the Dodgers are in agreement, and that the contract is only pending a physical. It’ll wind up as a six-year, $147 million pact, which represents the highest annual average committed to a pitcher in the history of Major League Baseball.

151 Comments (Feed for Comments)
  1. kvanhorn87 - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:13 PM

    If this happens, the Rangers must sign Hamilton back.

    • dickclydesdale - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:10 PM

      Consider your Rangers lucky. Greinke has a near 4.00 career ERA & is 30 yrs old. Dodgers just flushed $147 million down the toilet on a mediocre pitcher. J-Hamilton could have been in LeftField for the Dodgers for $75 million/3 yrs.

      • texassportsfan2 - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:13 PM

        Agree clydesdale. These huge contracts don’t pan out very often for Rangers (Ex: ARod)

      • thereisaparty - Dec 9, 2012 at 4:35 AM

        ARod out-earned his contract while on the Rangers. Somehow he was blamed for the ineptitude of his teammates and shipped out of town for no reason.

  2. phreakin - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:21 PM

    Agree with the Rangers signing Hamilton. I think their plan was to trade for Upton to get a younger and cheaper bat, but to also free up money for Greinke. If they don’t get him, they need to sign Hamilton ASAP. Especially since it looks like the Dbacks and them aren’t going to swing a deal. ESPECIALLY if its true the Rangers don’t wanna part with Olt as part of the deal.

  3. phreakin - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:22 PM

    Side note, it’s good to see the Dodgers trying to get massively better through trades and big FA signings. Like them or not, it’s good for baseball if the Dodgers are doing well. Same with Yankees and Red Sox.

    • proudlycanadian - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:30 PM

      There is a difference between spending a lot of money and spending wisely. That is much too much for a number 2 type starter. He has already had his career year and will not get any better than he was last year.

      • kingscourt25 - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:37 PM

        you talk about him as if he’s past his prime. he’s only 29.

      • proudlycanadian - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:41 PM

        He peaked when he won the Cy Young. He has not pitched that well since.

      • proudlycanadian - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:49 PM

        Greinke had an ERA of 2.16 in 2009. That was an outlier as it was the only year in which his ERA was below 3.35.

      • vallewho - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:02 PM

        All that money is gonna make him anxious.

      • thereisaparty - Dec 9, 2012 at 4:40 AM

        Mike Trout already produced a career year. He likely already hit his peak. So clearly we can just expect average output from him.

        Everyone is aware that Zack Greinke will most likely not match or improve upon his (historically awesome) 2009. This doesn’t change his true talent level.

      • phreakin - Dec 12, 2012 at 12:47 PM

        I agree it’s too much for him, but it still doesn’t mean they aren’t trying to get better through trades and FA. Something you couldn’t say about previous management.

    • nightman13 - Dec 9, 2012 at 12:31 PM

      I could not disagree any more with that statement. How is it good for the sport to have a handful of teams with more resources than everybody else always be on top?

      The NBA has that dynamic and it is a steaming pile of %$#@ league.

      • phreakin - Dec 12, 2012 at 12:46 PM

        The league has a handful of teams wanting to win that’s why. You have 1/3 of the league happy just getting their revenue sharing from the big market teams all the while maitaining a 30 million dollar payrolll and trading away anyone they have to pay market value to. IE Royals, Marlins, Brewers, Pirates, etc. And yes the Brewers. Watch Braun be traded too after they didn’t pay Chubby

      • nightman13 - Dec 14, 2012 at 12:34 PM

        You are insane to include the Brewers in that statement.

        The Brewers make every effort to field a competitive team but constantly get priced out of the market. The Brewers were trying to lock Prince up for years before he became a free agent, and they were offering Grienke a solid deal too before he got greedy.

        The Brewers have had 7 players sign elsewhere for over $600 million in the last several years.

        Also, do some research, Braun signed a team friendly deal through 2020 to stay in Milwaukee.

  4. illcomm - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:26 PM

    lol. grienke is the most overrated picther. 145 mil over 6 is just as bad as the werth n pujos deals.

  5. iamjimmyjack - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:33 PM

    As an Angel fan, Im happy he is out of the division. Thanks Zack….sorta

    • texassportsfan2 - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:14 PM

      As a Rangers fan, I am too.

  6. iamjimmyjack - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:33 PM

    Now I hope Josh Hamilton gives Texas the middle finger and they cant pull a trade for Upton. That would make my year.

    • texassportsfan2 - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:17 PM

      whats with all the hate on the rangers?

  7. brewcrewfan54 - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:43 PM

    I love baseball but sometimes I wonder why I even bother with it knowing how much of an uphill battle my team has to be competitive on a regular basis.

    • uwsptke - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:54 PM

      Exactly. We don’t have a prayer of hanging on to the talent we have unless you take big risks by buying out a couple free agency years before they even get to arbitration like Braun, Gallardo and Lucroy.

      Eh, at least I’ve still got the Packers.

      • nightman13 - Dec 9, 2012 at 12:33 PM

        I’m a Brewers and Lions fan. I have nothing.

    • nategearhart - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:42 PM

      Haven’t the Brewers had at least as many playoff appearances as the Dodgers the last decade or so?

      • brewcrewfan54 - Dec 9, 2012 at 12:22 AM

        Yes they have but like a small market team has to do, they’re purging the payroll this year. And the fact is they can’t afford to make any mistakes with big signings. The Sodgers, Yankees, red sox etc. can. I hate talking like this but sometimes its just hard to watch. We offerd Greinke 5 years $112 million and he said no. Think about it. Its ridiculous.

      • nategearhart - Dec 9, 2012 at 1:18 AM

        I feel ya, dude, I’m a big Royals fan myself. Maybe he just doesn’t like the cold?

      • brewcrewfan54 - Dec 9, 2012 at 1:53 AM

        Nate, We’re on the same page. It isn’t just Greinke though but yeah we’re on the same page.

    • SOBEIT - Dec 9, 2012 at 10:01 AM

      You don’t have to spend like NY or Bos and now LA. You can win and stay competitive every year with a middle of the road payroll. $90M-$120M. That’ why having a good farm is very important in this era and be wise in acquisitions. Last year for the Giants, low cost additions like Pagan and Scutaro paid off the most. With farm additions of Belt, Crawford, Sanchez to balance out earlier callups from Sandoval, Posey, Romo, etc….not to mention previous year smart low cost signings like Vogelsong, Blanco, Affeldt.

      Since 2000, half the winners were the top tier payrolls like NY(2), Bos(2), LAA, PHI…while the other half were won by mid-tier payrolls…SF (2), STL(2), AZ, FL, CHW.

      • Kleinz 57 - Dec 9, 2012 at 12:18 PM

        Thanks for pointing this out.

        Also thanks for the LOLZ at FLA being a mid-tier payroll team. Oh boy how that’s changed

      • brewcrewfan54 - Dec 9, 2012 at 4:35 PM

        I realize money doesn’t guarantee good results but when you have it its much easier to fix a mistake or an injury.

  8. tuberippin - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:44 PM

    Greinke isn’t worth that much, but someone was bound to give him over one hundred million so it’s a moot point that isn’t worth arguing about. This isn’t Washington jumping over other suitors to give Jayson Werth $40-50mil more than he was worth.

    Dodgers are going to have quite a formidable top of the rotation that could easily outpace the rest of the NL in that department. I hold out hope that Doc returns to form and Halladay-Hamels-Lee remains the best top-3 rotation members in the NL, but Kershaw-Greinke-Beckett isn’t too shabby on its own either. They have some depth now too, once Billingsley and Lilly return. They’d be better off, imo, if they chose to sign another quality arm for the back end of the rotation, someone with a little more stuff than an injured Billingsley or Lilly or aged Aaron Harang.

    • proudlycanadian - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:56 PM

      Kershaw is a number 1 starter. I agree with you that Greinke is only a number 2 starter. The Beckett we saw recently in Boston was a joke. You mentioned Billingsley’s injury. Lilly is long in the tooth. It might work, but do not be surprised if it doesn’t.

      • tuberippin - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:07 PM

        Beckett in Boston certainly was putrid, but Beckett in the confines of Dodger Stadium up against some weaker NL offenses like San Diego or San Francisco bodes well for him. If he bounces back, he’s a solid #3 guy with the potential to pitch like a #2 starter every now and then. If he keeps on sucking and gets heavier around the waist, then he makes for a solid #4 or 5 pitcher to round out your rotation.

        The latter scenario raises an issue though, because I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect Chad Billingsley coming off injury, nor a 37-year-old Ted Lilly, to post great numbers in the middle of your rotation. Both guys are better suited as #4 starters. Harang is a solid guy to round out the rotation with, but I don’t know how much longer he can work his magic act; he’s been outperforming his xFIP for two years running, and that xFIP in LA was close to 5.00 last season.

        For those reasons, I think that even if they lock down Greinke, the Dodgers still need to chase a middle-of-the-rotation guy like a Shaun Marcum. Rolling out what they have right now may not be sufficient to get past SF in the NL West…and most of the guys that are left in free agency that aren’t chasing ridiculous deals (looking at you, Anibal Sanchez and Kyle Lohse) are back-end starters (Villanueva, E.Jackson, Chris Young, Dempster, et al) and risky signings (Harden, Braden, et al), which they have an abundance of presently.

      • kingscourt25 - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:09 PM

        Beckett with the Dodgers was much better, though SSS. I wouldn’t be surprised if he went AJ Burnett on the NL next season.

      • thereisaparty - Dec 9, 2012 at 4:43 AM

        Yes, proudlycanadian, Greinke is a projected number #2 starter on the Dodgers. But for a majority of teams he would be a #1. Does this makes him any more or less valuable?

    • gibbyfan - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:22 PM

      With a payroll of well over 200 million it would be a difficult feat not to be formidible, at least on paper, dont you think?

    • iamjimmyjack - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:07 PM

      They are signing Hyun Jin Ryu from Korea before tommorow night if they can get him for a good deal.

  9. chukpark - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:47 PM

    Actually, the thing that makes this contract significantly smarter than the Pujols deal is that Greinke will only be 35 at the end of his contract whereas Pujols will be in his 40s.

  10. mrchainbluelightning - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:48 PM

    Why do people act like it’s their money being spent?

    Congrats Dodger fans, Greinke is excellent pitcher who is going to take a ton of pressure off a still young Kershaw.

    • manchestermiracle - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:34 PM

      Just curious: Where do you think the $147 million will come from? If they attend games (especially at Dodger Stadium) and/or pay for a premium TV channel and/or buy merchandise, to say nothing of supporting advertisers, then it is indeed their money being spent.

      • iamjimmyjack - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:11 PM

        The Dodgers owners (Guggenheim baseball) paid 2 billion to buy the Dodgers…they had money before ticket sales and merchandise revenue. The TV deal and revenue is a bonus on top of the 126 billion in assets they are worth.

      • mrchainbluelightning - Dec 9, 2012 at 12:31 AM

        LOL In a massively warped way you can talk yourself into being correct.

        You didn’t build that business yourself nonsense right? Any money anyone makes comes from other people. Brilliant, you work for Goldman Sachs?
        So I guess you SHOULD feel entitled to whine about how it is spent….

      • manchestermiracle - Dec 9, 2012 at 12:47 PM

        jimmy:
        It’s called an investment. I’m sure they were quite aware of the pending TV deal, as well as how the Dodgers historically perform financially, before they bought the team.

        mrchain:
        Was that response for me? I’m not sure how to respond, or even if a response is necessary. You’re right in that no business is ever built by itself. Without customers you quickly go bankrupt. Unless, of course, you run a highly-lucrative scam the rest of us know as Wall Street, where you can make incredibly risky “investments” knowing you pocket any and all profits while being backed up by your cronies in government (giving you billions of taxpayer dollars so you can still award yourself a “bonus”) should you fail.

    • nightman13 - Dec 9, 2012 at 12:36 PM

      Apparently you missed the article about television deals driving up cable bills. And the whole taxpayer funded stadium thing too. And tickets and merch and concessions and parking and pretty much everything in sports is our money.

      • mrchainbluelightning - Dec 9, 2012 at 12:49 PM

        And yet you don’t have a say in how it is spent?
        What a travesty! I think you should ask for YOUR money back.

        Again, it’s NOT YOUR MONEY
        It WAS SOME of your money that you unconditionally turned over to a business.

        Yes we get it, the economy is circular.

        Tell you what, You work for me, I just paid you your salary for the week. But that’s not your money, so I’m going to whine at you when you decide to spend it on moon-pies and penny-whistles. Hope you don’t mind but I feel entitled to do so since you never would have had that money if it wasn’t for me paying you.

        Lemme guess, you’re going to circle back right?

        Don’t like it? Don’t buy it
        But lose this idea that it’s anyone’s money other than who’s hands it’s in last.

      • nightman13 - Dec 11, 2012 at 11:30 AM

        You are an idiot

      • mrchainbluelightning - Dec 11, 2012 at 12:56 PM

        And you’re a entitled whining baby who thinks once you spend money it’s still somehow yours, giving you the justification to cry about how it’s new owner spends it.

        Again, Stop your crying about how much you have to spend to watch a game and either
        A: Stop watching
        B: Stop crying

        Sporting entertainment isn’t a god given right, it’s a business, and if you can’t afford it
        TOO BAD

        You’re a lil boy living in fantasy land. Stop replying to me days later with your lil boy tears and name calling.

      • nightman13 - Dec 14, 2012 at 12:31 PM

        Stop reading my replies then. It’s funny that you think you know anything about me from a comment on a message board.

        Idiot

      • mrchainbluelightning - Dec 14, 2012 at 12:41 PM

        You’re directly replying to me…. again

        “stop reading my replies (to you)” Think about just how STUPID a comment you just made.

        Absolutely Buffoonery
        Please keep replying with more GEMS like this so everyone can see what type of stupidity fills your lil boy brain

  11. mungman69 - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:52 PM

    Go get em, Dodgers.

  12. uyf1950 - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:53 PM

    That’s insane. Greinke’s a good pitcher but he’s not a great pitcher, yet the Dodgers are paying him like one. Six years and $145MM ($24.17MM per). If I’m Clayton Kershaw I tell the Dodgers to take that $11MM they signed me for for 2013 and shove it. Either we re-negotiate my contract right now or trade me.

    • Kevin S. - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:27 PM

      And if I’m the Dodgers, I remind Kershaw how MLB salary structure works for players with less than six years of service time and tell him he’s welcome to see how much the market will bear once he hits FA.

      • uyf1950 - Dec 9, 2012 at 5:05 AM

        My friend and if I’m Kershaw I remind the Dodgers that the crybaby Greinke demanded a trade from the Royals while he was still under contract to them (and got it) because he didn’t want to play for the Royals anymore.

    • tuberippin - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:35 PM

      If anything, this gives Kershaw more leverage….Zack Greinke and Clayton Kershaw are both represented by ESM (Excel Sports Management). Greinke signing a $147.5mil deal with the Dodgers and slotting behind Kershaw in the rotation will give Clayton’s agents a lot to work with, and considering the guy will be in the middle of his pitching prime (at least from a physical standpoint), that seems like plenty of impetus to get him a deal larger than CC Sabathia’s $161,000,000 deal.

      • uyf1950 - Dec 9, 2012 at 5:11 AM

        My friend I think you are missing how human nature works. No one and I mean no one is happy when someone who they work with and who performs the identical job as they do is paid over 2 times the salary they are making. Add into that the fact that Kershaw is the better pitcher and the difference is a whopping $13MM per year and I don’t care how much leverage there is 2 years down the road for him that ain’t sitting well with him.

  13. muskyhunter2542 - Dec 8, 2012 at 8:58 PM

    Baseball needs a salary cap… Will always be 2nd fiddle to the NFL

    • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:29 PM

      by what metric? And how does a salary cap solve the issue?

    • tuberippin - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:36 PM

      Totally dude. Everyone knows the best thing for sports is larger, more divisive, and more frequent labor stoppages like in the other professional sports leagues that have a salary cap. Seems to have worked really well for the NHL, NBA and NFL recently.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:49 PM

        And don’t forget, salary caps just transfer the flow of money from one pocket (players) to another (owners). If the league continues to make money hand over fist (which is what all the new TV deals seem to suggest), and the players only get a fixed amount of the pie, the excess has to go somewhere and it’s not the March of Dimes organization….

      • seeingwhatsticks - Dec 9, 2012 at 1:09 AM

        Actually that’s not true. When the cap is coupled with a floor, and both are tied to revenues, the result is a narrowing of the gap between the haves and the have nots. Anyone can win in baseball right now, which is good, but most teams have little hope and almost no chance to experience any kind of sustained success.

  14. drewshawforpresident - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:06 PM

    How is 6 years/145m a higher AAV than ARod’s 10 yr/275m deal?

    • WhyDoIActuallyCare - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:15 PM

      MLB Trade Rumors reports that its the biggest AAV for a right-handed pitcher. That’s probably what DJ meant…

      • tuberippin - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:38 PM

        Last time I checked, Roger Clemens’ pro-rated 2007 deal with the Yankees is still the highest AAV for any player, as well as any pitcher and subsequently any RHP, in baseball history. $28,000,000 AAV in 2007, which in 2011 dollars is about $30.2 million, which is about 2 or 3 million dollars more than the AAV on A-Rod’s deal that he got with the Yankees (when adjusted for inflation).

      • WhyDoIActuallyCare - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:42 PM

        The Yankees paid Clemens about $18mil in 2007, so his AAV was actually $18mil. Had they paid him for the whole year, then, yes, his AAV would have been $28mil.

  15. theaxmancometh - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:13 PM

    Had to beat CC’s avg annual value by $100k so he could get largest per year average for a pitcher in history. Does he have anxiety disorder or just a big ego? I liked having him in Milwaukee but there’s now way he can live up to this contract.

    • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:31 PM

      well, if he is the best pitcher in baseball he will live up to it and nothing more. Anything less than that and this is an overpay.

      That said, the Dodgers look awfully formidable right now.

      • proudlycanadian - Dec 9, 2012 at 8:23 AM

        Not really. They have a bunch of highly paid players, but the team is certainly not a lock to make the playoffs.

      • sabathiawouldbegoodattheeighthtoo - Dec 9, 2012 at 11:37 AM

        Well, let’s just say the upside is tremendous. While many of them have disappointed recently, those guys were given a lot of money for a reason. If half the team performs at their own peak levels, this team should cruise.

    • iamjimmyjack - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:13 PM

      in Dodger stadium, with that offense, yes he can. If he was in Arlington, I would agree with you.

    • simonfoster231171 - Dec 11, 2012 at 4:32 AM

      both, most likely …

  16. vanmorrissey - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:20 PM

    Two WS in the last 3 years by SF is what clinched this deal. Giants will have a good staff for a number of years and LA has to match up with them many a time, this was their alternative. Their push begins now.

  17. philly803 - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:30 PM

    Correct me if I’m wrong isn’t this the same guy who didn’t want to play in new york cuz he has anxiety issues? Isn’t playing in LA with a contract over 100 million just as bad if not worse?

    • nategearhart - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:43 PM

      You’re wrong.

    • jwbiii - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:32 PM

      He seemed ok in Anaheim. Is LA a more anxiety inducing environment?

  18. sawxalicious - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:31 PM

    BR’s most similar through age 28 –

    1.Alex Fernandez (956)
    2.Andy Benes (956)
    3.Bill Gullickson (950)
    4.John Smoltz (949)
    5.Ismael Valdez (947)
    6.Larry Christenson (946)
    7.Josh Beckett (946)
    8.Mark Gubicza (946)
    9.Ralph Terry (944)
    10.Bill Monbouquette (943)

    I’m just not seeing Greinke as being worth $24.5 million AAV. I think we have seen this before…Read: Zito, Barry…

    • spudchukar - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:34 PM

      Greinke’s no Monbouquette.

      • jwbiii - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:42 PM

        So you’re saying that, as far as we know, his father hasn’t gotten in a fight with a Tigers fan today?

      • spudchukar - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:46 PM

        As you should know, you mess with one Monbouquette, you get the whole gaggle.

    • thereisaparty - Dec 9, 2012 at 4:47 AM

      BR’s most-similar lists are absolutely worthless as predictive measures

  19. ireportyoudecide - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:38 PM

    Ramirez, Crawford, Gonzalez, Greinke. Just like that you can add 4 quality starters to a team just by spending money. More power to them it’s within the rules but I sure am glad the Dallas Cowboys can’t go out and sign 4 great starters just because they are willing to spend the most money. No skill required to pull of these moves, just money.

    • tuberippin - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:40 PM

      As though when the Dallas Cowboys traded for Roy Williams a few years back, it was all skill and no money.

      • ireportyoudecide - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:45 PM

        Not the same thing at all, with a salary cap that came out of what they could spend on players the next year. It’s not even close to the same thing.

    • koufaxmitzvah - Dec 9, 2012 at 8:33 AM

      The Dodgers didn’t sign Ramirez, Crawford, or Gonzalez on the free market. For the most part, those three cost the Dodgers 3 minor league pitchers, 2 minor league position players, and 1 James Loney.

  20. spudchukar - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:40 PM

    Gotta think 2 starters will be moved. Probably Lilly and Harang, but Billingsley is also a possibility. I doubt if Beckett could bring much at this point, and unless the Dodgers are willing to eat salary which is unlikely at this point.

    They still need help at 3B/SS depending where Ramirez ends up. Also, some help at catcher would be wise, but they are set everywhere else.

    • proudlycanadian - Dec 9, 2012 at 8:26 AM

      Moved to whom? Does anyone want them unless the Dodgers pay the tab?

      • spudchukar - Dec 9, 2012 at 10:00 AM

        I dunno, Twins, Royals, Mets, Indians, Mariners, Astros, or Cubs?

      • proudlycanadian - Dec 9, 2012 at 10:13 AM

        Some good choices there.

  21. bostonboy82 - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:42 PM

    The Dodgers should just buy the NHL.

    • aw2857 - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:07 PM

      Spot On BB82!

      Native Dodger fan here and can’t help but feel empty by this “Yankee-ization” transformation overtaking my team. Where’s the farm system products ( J. Robinson, D. Newcombe, R. Campanella, S. Alomar, J. Podres, S. Koufax, D. Drysdale, T. Davis, W. Davis, D. Sutton, R. Mondesi, M. Kemp, et., al., 5 ROY in 80’s) we’re so famous for?? If all it takes is doling out cash, where is the competitiveness in that? As hard as it is to say, I have much more admiration for SF and their ability to put a championship team together that’s in the bottom third in team payroll.

      Love baseball to no ends, but feel like the times are passing me by….

      • ezthinking - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:20 PM

        They’re paying because the farm system is dry. Thank McCourt for that.

      • koufaxmitzvah - Dec 9, 2012 at 8:37 AM

        It might make you feel better that the Giants weren’t in the bottom third of payroll last year. According to ESPN, the Giants came in at #7 with a payroll of $120+ million. Last year, the Dodgers came in at #13 with a payroll amounting to less than $94 million.

        http://espn.go.com/mlb/team/salaries/_/name/lad/los-angeles-dodgers

    • iamjimmyjack - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:16 PM

      no they are planning on buying the Chargers instead.

  22. ducksk - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:48 PM

    Goodness, the world has gone mad. Paying a man to pitch every 5 games for $24 million a year. 24 million!!!! Unbelievable. That’s a 1/4 of some teams payroll. Madness, pure madness! Yankees can’t buy a WSC and neither will the dodgers . Silly crazy $. Can’t blame Zachary, good for him. Bad for bball.

    • ireportyoudecide - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:53 PM

      You can’t buy a WS, but sure can increase your odds if you are willing to spend.

      • texassportsfan2 - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:16 PM

        example: yankees for past 10+ yrs

    • ezthinking - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:22 PM

      Has the world gone Mad!? Paying Tom Cruise $30 mil a film is just crazy! It will bring down the film industry!

      • proudlycanadian - Dec 9, 2012 at 8:32 AM

        It has. Have you enjoyed any Tom Cruise movies lately?

  23. sdelmonte - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:52 PM

    So for years, we heard that Zach wouldn’t play in NYC because he really didn’t want the headache of being in the mass media center. And yet he’s off to LA.

    It will be interesting to see how he deals. And if he’s really worth the money.

    • ireportyoudecide - Dec 8, 2012 at 9:54 PM

      I think playing for the Dodgers is completely different then playing for the Yankees and Red Sox. The pressure and expectations are just not the same.

    • ezthinking - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:23 PM

      Writers said Zach wouldn’t play in NY, not Zach.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Dec 9, 2012 at 7:28 PM

        sources close to friends of zack greinke’s favorite barista at the local starbucks said Zach wouldn’t play in NY, not Zach.

        Fixed that for you

  24. deadrabbit79 - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:05 PM

    I just dont get why some people are so high on Grienke. If he can get that much then how much are Verlander and King Felix worth?!?!

    • texassportsfan2 - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:35 PM

      A hell of alot more than Greinke!

    • philliesblow - Dec 8, 2012 at 11:20 PM

      30 million

    • thereisaparty - Dec 9, 2012 at 4:50 AM

      It really is crazy trying to understand how players get paid more than others. Free agency? Extenstions? Arbitration??? If only there were metrics to give us a better understanding of a player’s value in a given year …

  25. whitlockd - Dec 8, 2012 at 10:07 PM

    I am a baseball fan whose allegiance calls for me to root against the Dodgers. In the past, I’d see a deal like this and root for it to fail and hamstring the Dodgers financially. I can still root for it to fail on the field, but I don’t see it hamstringing them. Their payroll has ballooned to an absurd level in such a short time that it is truly shocking.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Red Sox shopping Lester and Lackey
Top 10 MLB Player Searches