Why you should be scared of the Dodgers in 2019 and beyond

[Dan Druff]

Now that baseball is over, and the Dodgers fell one game short of winning the World Series, it's time for some CONTRACTS talk.

The Dodgers have been maligned by haters in recent years who have claimed the team has had success because of its monster payroll. More keen observers point out that much of that payroll was dead money -- either paid to players who are gone, or ones who were contributing little. Much of the team's success was thanks to the lower and middle salaried players.

Dodgers already have some money freed up this year, but offseason FOLLOWING 2018 will be the big one.

For the 2018 season, the following large/medium salaries will be paid, barring any trades:

Clayton Kershaw $35.6 million
Adrian Gonzalez $22.36 million
Kenley Jansen $10.8 million
Justin Turner $12 million
Brandon McCarthy $11.5 million
Scott Kazmir $17.67 million
Rich Hill $16.67 million
Yaseil Puig $9.21 million
Logan Forsythe $8.5 million
Hyun-Jin Ryu $7.83 million
Erisbel Arruebarrena $6.5 million

In arbitration, Grandal is expected to get about $7.7 million, and Alex Wood is expected to receive around $6.4 million.

As you can see, some of that money is well spent (Kershaw, Tuner, Jansen, Puig), some of it is a waste (McCarthy, Kazmir, Ryu, Gonzalez, Arruebarrena), and some of it is in the middle (Hill, Forsythe).

But what about a year later? Coming into 2019, of that group above, ONLY Turner, Puig, Hill, and Jansen are locked up! (And it will be Hill's final year.)

The rest will be free agents, except Kershaw who is signed through 2020 but can opt out after 2018.

This will free up a lot of money.

What about cheap players who will become free agents and need to be paid a lot to be kept?

Not many. There will be two free agents the Dodgers would want to consider keeping after 2018: Grandal and Forsythe. And if Barnes continues hitting the ball, the Dodgers might decide to part with Grandal -- if not before that.

So the Dodgers are going to shed a lot of obligations while not having to pay existing players much more.

There will, of course, be the matter of Kershaw. No doubt he will opt out. No doubt he will want a "reset" of his contract, to where he's guaranteed far past 2020. And it's very likely he will get it.

Kenley Jansen and Justin Turner will also see raises of about $7-8 million in 2019 over 2018.

Still, there will be a lot of money to be spent.

And most of the dead money will be gone. There will be a final Matt Kemp payment of $3.5 million in 2018, a few years left of the $5-7 million payments to Yasiel Sierra, and that's pretty much it.

The Dodgers only have $107.5 million committed for 2019 right now, and that includes Kershaw's big contract. The scary part? Despite all that extra money to spend, almost the entire Dodgers playoff roster can be kept in 2019 for not much more than that $107.5 million.

Hopefully the Dodgers will use the found money wisely, and not waste it this time on failpitchers like Kazmir and McCarthy.

Source: https://www.baseball-reference.com/t...ontracts.shtml

[Sanlmar]

The Dodgers have been maligned by haters in recent years who have claimed the team has had success because of its monster payroll

That is not the narrative. The Dodgers are maligned by haters because of their failure despite the monster payroll.

Nobody cheers stupid money. Big, rich and dumb is not loveable. Winning is lovable

In fairness, cause that’s what I’m about, I hate the Red Sox in recent years for precisely the same reason.

Boston sports always has more success than LA so I don’t suffer to the degree you do.

America loves the Astros. America likes winners and underdogs.

[Dan Druff]

How can winning 104 games and getting to Game 7 of the World Series be defined as failure?

How can 5 consecutive NL West titles and 3 NLCS appearances in that time be defined as failure?

[sonatine]

BUNCHA FAGS IN TIGHTS

[vegas1369]

Perennial chokers.

[Dan Druff]

Perennial chokers.

I think they would have won Game 7 if they started Wood (and had Kershaw on call) instead of starting Fuck Yu and leaving him in until the game was 5-0.

Or if they didn't win, I think it would have been competitive.

Their annihilation of the Dbacks and Cubs this year in the playoffs showed they weren't the same playoff team that they had been before.

Also, Houston was a legit very good team, and the Dodgers bullpen advantage was kinda negated in that lol ballpark in Houston where every routine fly to LF is a home run.

I really wish baseball had some reasonable minimum dimension standards for ballparks.

[big dick]

How can winning 104 games and getting to Game 7 of the World Series be defined as failure?

How can 5 consecutive NL West titles and 3 NLCS appearances in that time be defined as failure?

They remind me of the Buffalo Bills

[Sanlmar]

How can winning 104 games and getting to Game 7 of the World Series be defined as failure?

How can 5 consecutive NL West titles and 3 NLCS appearances in that time be defined as failure?

You can ask a Buffalo Bills or Atlanta Braves fan to explain this to you.

Even you will weary of division pennants.

[Sanlmar]

One minute apart but same quick truth, Bigdick

[Sanlmar]

I really wish baseball had some reasonable minimum dimension standards for ballparks.

Toward the end of the Series I recall Kershaw only 4 swing and miss pitches in his outing. Same for the rest. I can see your perspective here.

You will eventually come to grips with the fact division wins gain you a tourney ticket. Failure to win a World Series “at all costs” (read tough trades - saving chips is the wrong choice and heartless) is a critical difference. It is so hard to win it all and fortunes quickly change as Cleveland and Cubs will teach you.

[nunbeater]

How can winning 104 games and getting to Game 7 of the World Series be defined as failure?

How can 5 consecutive NL West titles and 3 NLCS appearances in that time be defined as failure?

Getting to the Big Show and losing after crushing your opponents all year is the definition of failure. Ask the 2007 Patriots

[Sanlmar]

How can winning 104 games and getting to Game 7 of the World Series be defined as failure?

How can 5 consecutive NL West titles and 3 NLCS appearances in that time be defined as failure?

Getting to the Big Show and losing after crushing your opponents all year is the definition of failure. Ask the 2007 Patriots

After all the success post 2007 the pain is still there. Yes, that was failure.

The Dodgers failed. Folks other than Druff will view 2017 the same way... except there will be no success later.

[OSA]

Nope, this is why.








Look at how hard those nips are.

[chinamaniac]

How can winning 104 games and getting to Game 7 of the World Series be defined as failure?

How can 5 consecutive NL West titles and 3 NLCS appearances in that time be defined as failure?

Gotta win it all or it is a failure

[big dick]

How can winning 104 games and getting to Game 7 of the World Series be defined as failure?

How can 5 consecutive NL West titles and 3 NLCS appearances in that time be defined as failure?

Gotta win it all or it is a failure

[Sanlmar]

This thread bump made my day. Look at this post.

5 tight lines of code. This simply must be amongst my top Dodgers posts ever.

Nostradamus? “Boston sports always has more success than LA”. written a year before the Red Sox best the Dodgers. Not brain surgery to make such a statement but jeez.

Humility really isn’t appropriate here. Drops mic

The Dodgers have been maligned by haters in recent years who have claimed the team has had success because of its monster payroll

That is not the narrative. The Dodgers are maligned by haters because of their failure despite the monster payroll.

Nobody cheers stupid money. Big, rich and dumb is not loveable. Winning is lovable

In fairness, cause that’s what I’m about, I hate the Red Sox in recent years for precisely the same reason.

Boston sports always has more success than LA so I don’t suffer to the degree you do.

America loves the Astros. America likes winners and underdogs.

[Dan Druff]

Um, Boston is probably missing the playoffs this year

[Sanlmar]

Um, Boston is probably missing the playoffs this year

NL West 2nd place is occupied by the SF Giants. Congratulations on your recent “success”

You take your cues from the sharp money. A lot of sharp money is buying futures on the Red Sox @+1200-1400 to win AL East

Snell fell. Yankees pitching can look scary bad in poor lighting.

It’s a bet question I am wrestling with currently. I am close to firing. I think I have to. Part of me doesn’t want to get in front of Bauer but there might be value in being preemptive.

[badguy23]

[badguy23]

Now that baseball is over, and the Dodgers fell one game short of winning the World Series, it's time for some CONTRACTS talk.

The Dodgers have been maligned by haters in recent years who have claimed the team has had success because of its monster payroll. More keen observers point out that much of that payroll was dead money -- either paid to players who are gone, or ones who were contributing little. Much of the team's success was thanks to the lower and middle salaried players.

Dodgers already have some money freed up this year, but offseason FOLLOWING 2018 will be the big one.

For the 2018 season, the following large/medium salaries will be paid, barring any trades:

Clayton Kershaw $35.6 million
Adrian Gonzalez $22.36 million
Kenley Jansen $10.8 million
Justin Turner $12 million
Brandon McCarthy $11.5 million

B4 u delete this Todger its really a worm..
Scott Kazmir $17.67 million
Rich Hill $16.67 million
Yaseil Puig $9.21 million
Logan Forsythe $8.5 million
Hyun-Jin Ryu $7.83 million
Erisbel Arruebarrena $6.5 million

In arbitration, Grandal is expected to get about $7.7 million, and Alex Wood is expected to receive around $6.4 million.

As you can see, some of that money is well spent (Kershaw, Tuner, Jansen, Puig), some of it is a waste (McCarthy, Kazmir, Ryu, Gonzalez, Arruebarrena), and some of it is in the middle (Hill, Forsythe).

But what about a year later? Coming into 2019, of that group above, ONLY Turner, Puig, Hill, and Jansen are locked up! (And it will be Hill's final year.)

The rest will be free agents, except Kershaw who is signed through 2020 but can opt out after 2018.

This will free up a lot of money.

What about cheap players who will become free agents and need to be paid a lot to be kept?

Not many. There will be two free agents the Dodgers would want to consider keeping after 2018: Grandal and Forsythe. And if Barnes continues hitting the ball, the Dodgers might decide to part with Grandal -- if not before that.

So the Dodgers are going to shed a lot of obligations while not having to pay existing players much more.

There will, of course, be the matter of Kershaw. No doubt he will opt out. No doubt he will want a "reset" of his contract, to where he's guaranteed far past 2020. And it's very likely he will get it.

Kenley Jansen and Justin Turner will also see raises of about $7-8 million in 2019 over 2018.

Still, there will be a lot of money to be spent.

And most of the dead money will be gone. There will be a final Matt Kemp payment of $3.5 million in 2018, a few years left of the $5-7 million payments to Yasiel Sierra, and that's pretty much it.

The Dodgers only have $107.5 million committed for 2019 right now, and that includes Kershaw's big contract. The scary part? Despite all that extra money to spend, almost the entire Dodgers playoff roster can be kept in 2019 for not much more than that $107.5 million.

Hopefully the Dodgers will use the found money wisely, and not waste it this time on failpitchers like Kazmir and McCarthy.

Source: https://www.baseball-reference.com/t...ontracts.shtml

How has this not been done yet??



Todger b4 u delete this no thats a worm..