Comments on: Dodgers “50-50″ between Fox Sports and Time Warner for new television deal

By: koufaxmitzvah

koufaxmitzvah — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 14:19:03 +0000

No, Cosanostra. You are wrong.

The free agent market was driven by the people signed those players. Therefore, Boston felt that both Becket and Crawford would be worth their $17 million this year, and Florida felt that Ramirez would be worth his $15 million. The Dodgers, on the other hand, felt that Ramirez + contract was worth Nate Eovaldi and Gonzalez, Crawford, Beckett + contracts were worth 4 minor leaguers and James Loney but only if Nick Punto was part of the deal.

That’s not the same thing. If those players are paid too much, you t hank Florida and Boston. They drove the marketplace for those guys. The Dodgers are there to sop it up. That’s quite evident, and I’m stunned when core HBTers can’t differentiate between the two.

By: koufaxmitzvah

koufaxmitzvah — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 14:11:27 +0000

Paper: I agree the names on the back of the jersey don’t automatically equate success. Ramirez is going to be a test, and Crawford is a bit of a gamble. Gonzalez, however, will be just as good if not better than his time in Boston simply by playing in a stadium and location that he is much more familiar with, in a division in which he thrived, and surrounded by a lineup that is much more formidable than his Padres days. And, yes, I think that is worth 2 top minor league pitchers + 2 minor league position players + 1 James Loney.

I don’t think you’re crazy thinking it won’t necessarily work out, but I would rather take the wait and see approach than dumping on them all off-season.

By: koufaxmitzvah

koufaxmitzvah — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 14:05:01 +0000

Stupid, Kevin? I admit that I would have liked to watch to Eovaldi, Webser, and de la Rosa develop as Dodgers, but what they got in return– Ramirez, Gonzalez, Crawford, and even Beckett– makes the Dodgers more competitive over the next 3 years than sub-five year major league pitching.

That could just be me, of course. You’re the one with the untainted vision, right?.

By: fiddytucker

fiddytucker — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 13:05:28 +0000

Doyers preent mony senior.

By: cavemanna

cavemanna — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 04:28:07 +0000

All I know is that from here on out the Dodgers have money to build a squad. How n the world is HanRam an over the hill has been ? Last I heard AGon was a pretty decent hitter. We took on the Beckett and Craford contracts cuz we wipe our azzez with dough now. Go Blue

By: fanofevilempire

fanofevilempire — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 00:24:17 +0000

I have no problem with how the Dodgers spend their money, at least they put their money into their team and they often win. I hate owners who get the revenue share money and write themselves huge bonus checks, then they cry poor for the fans.
I’m a Yankee fan, so you know I like huge salaries and I like to beat up on .500 teams too.

By: lostsok

lostsok — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 00:04:03 +0000

Maybe LA should just team up with BALCO like the Giants. That seems to work…

By: paperlions

paperlions — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 21:46:52 +0000

What the Dodgers have is a lot of expensive players, many of which have not played up to their reputation for a while, or have never been as productive as their reputation suggests. They have a LOT of “names”, most of which can expected to be solid regulars and not much more.

By: D.J. Short

D.J. Short — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 21:05:47 +0000

By: Kevin S.

Kevin S. — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 20:16:13 +0000

Ethier signed his extension a month after Guggenheim bought the team, and for a player of Ethier’s body type and skill set, early decline is something I’d look for.

And you’re right, picking up contracts isn’t the same as handing them out. The Dodgers were dumb enough to surrender prospects with actual value, too.

By: whitlockd

whitlockd — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 19:44:55 +0000

The first Huff signing was a steal. The second signing was the make-up.

By: phipfwe76

phipfwe76 — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 18:42:29 +0000

As long as Vin Scully goes with, it doesn’t matter to me where they show their games.

By: cosanostra71

cosanostra71 — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 18:30:40 +0000

Whether or not they signed Crawford, Beckett, etc, themselves, they still acquired the contracts, which has the same effect.

By: bubbalynch

bubbalynch — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 18:26:36 +0000

Look who is talking, a die hard sf fan (since 2010) whose team signs the likes of Rowand, Huff, Zito just to name a few! SF fans have never been accused to be the sharpest tools in the shed. THINK BLUE

By: koufaxmitzvah

koufaxmitzvah — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 18:07:44 +0000

Over the hill at 31? Ethier was signed by McCourt. Picking up contracts does not equate signing players to those contracts.

Do 3 strikes still make an out in your world?

By: Kevin S.

Kevin S. — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 17:59:19 +0000

Brandon League
Andre Ethier (locking into his years of likely being an over-the-hill hasbeen, anyway)

Acquiring the outlandish deals of over-the-hill hasbeens Hanley Ramirez, Carl Crawford, Adrian Gonzalez and Josh Beckett.

By: koufaxmitzvah

koufaxmitzvah — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 17:52:18 +0000

Can you name the over the hill hasbeen whom the new Dodgers ownership signed to an outlandish contract?

Apparently, one needs at least 3 World Championships before the fandom begins to make any sense.

By: dirtydrew

dirtydrew — Sat, 05 Jan 2013 17:17:01 +0000

Now they will just be paying more for lousy play by over the hill has been’s. Go GIANTS!