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

[GambleBotsChafedPenis]

btw why the hell didn't the dodgers sign grienke? is it that whole small market operation shit seeping in...I know he's getting older and stuff, but you sign him for like 3-4 years at that bloated $30M per and you have a sick 1-2 with him and Kershaw...id ride or die with those two as my aces come the postseason...

or did he want too many addition years? it's tough with him...think he's 34 (?) this year...you give him 6 years when he's in his age 32 year, yeah you're probably eating shit on those last 2 years but still think you get 4 years of decent #2 starter stuff...he was shit in AZ last year, but was great this year...probably a shock going from pitching half the games in dodger stadium to half in Arizona...

[Dan Druff]

btw why the hell didn't the dodgers sign grienke? is it that whole small market operation shit seeping in...I know he's getting older and stuff, but you sign him for like 3-4 years at that bloated $30M per and you have a sick 1-2 with him and Kershaw...id ride or die with those two as my aces come the postseason...

or did he want too many addition years? it's tough with him...think he's 34 (?) this year...you give him 6 years when he's in his age 32 year, yeah you're probably eating shit on those last 2 years but still think you get 4 years of decent #2 starter stuff...he was shit in AZ last year, but was great this year...probably a shock going from pitching half the games in dodger stadium to half in Arizona...

He got more $ from the Dbacks at the last minute, and the Dodgers said fuck it, we aren't going that high.

Actually not a bad decision to pass on him, because he was going to be too old in the second half of that contract.

[GambleBotsChafedPenis]

btw why the hell didn't the dodgers sign grienke? is it that whole small market operation shit seeping in...I know he's getting older and stuff, but you sign him for like 3-4 years at that bloated $30M per and you have a sick 1-2 with him and Kershaw...id ride or die with those two as my aces come the postseason...

or did he want too many addition years? it's tough with him...think he's 34 (?) this year...you give him 6 years when he's in his age 32 year, yeah you're probably eating shit on those last 2 years but still think you get 4 years of decent #2 starter stuff...he was shit in AZ last year, but was great this year...probably a shock going from pitching half the games in dodger stadium to half in Arizona...

He got more $ from the Dbacks at the last minute, and the Dodgers said fuck it, we aren't going that high.

Actually not a bad decision to pass on him, because he was going to be too old in the second half of that contract.

yeah but fuck it, like I said you eat shit probably on those last 2 years but if you have the means to do it, to give yourself a damn good 1-2 punch think you gotta do it...especially if grienke was a durable pitcher...its a bitch to find guys that can go out there 34-36 times a year...and its an even bigger bitch to find guys who can go out there and be dominant 30+ times per year..

[GrenadaRoger]

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.

well, the statistics of the Houston ballpark seem to tell a different story

http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor

the Houston park was the hardest place to score runs in both 2017 & 2016, while in 2015 it was in the lowest 3rd of the major leagues. It is true that despite low run production, home runs are slightly above league average, but home run frequency for Houston is about the same as Dodger Stadium during that time...it appears that the Houston ballplayers overcame their homepark because during those years their average run's scored for the entire season was 3rd best in the major leagues

https://www.teamrankings.com/mlb/sta...ate=2017-11-02

[Daly]

Be scared of Houston.

[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.

[duped_samaritan]

Micon cursed the Dodgers years ago.

[ToasterOven]

If the Dodgers don't trade for Kinsler, I declare them to be cursed for 2 more decades.

[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

[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..

[gut]

He got more $ from the Dbacks at the last minute, and the Dodgers said fuck it, we aren't going that high.

Actually not a bad decision to pass on him, because he was going to be too old in the second half of that contract.

yeah but fuck it, like I said you eat shit probably on those last 2 years but if you have the means to do it, to give yourself a damn good 1-2 punch think you gotta do it...especially if grienke was a durable pitcher...its a bitch to find guys that can go out there 34-36 times a year...and its an even bigger bitch to find guys who can go out there and be dominant 30+ times per year..

I think it was brilliant to not match that offer for Grienke. Even with deep pockets, there is no reason to sign a 31 year old pitcher to a 6 year deal at 34 million a year. Grab 3 others at 10 mil a year (Hill, Kazmir, McCarthy) and see what happens. I think recent history agrees with me on this one.

[gut]

Also, once you sign a guy to a monster deal like that, he really becomes an almost negative asset. Look at others right now. Miggy is fucking untradable unless DET eats all the money, Mauer was in the same boat 3 years ago, and now we'll see what the LOLMarlins can get for Giancarlo. If they tried to trade him without covering any money, at best all they would get back is 2 "45" level prospects and maybe a throw-in big leaguer.

You commit the years + money at that level, the player HAS to produce like an all-time great to even tread water.

[Hockey Guy]

FTR, I'm not scared.

[GambleBotsChafedPenis]

Also, once you sign a guy to a monster deal like that, he really becomes an almost negative asset. Look at others right now. Miggy is fucking untradable unless DET eats all the money, Mauer was in the same boat 3 years ago, and now we'll see what the LOLMarlins can get for Giancarlo. If they tried to trade him without covering any money, at best all they would get back is 2 "45" level prospects and maybe a throw-in big leaguer.

You commit the years + money at that level, the player HAS to produce like an all-time great to even tread water.

heres my thought on why I would have bitten the bullet...you are right on all those huge contracts being loads...but we're talking about a team with relatively no worry about eating money...its unlike DET, MIN, MIA in that regard...when (not if) that deal goes to shit in the last 2 years the dodgers should be comfortably able to eat it...look at what they ate with Crawford and now Gonzalez...

come October gimmie as many aces or near aces as I can have (count a bullpen ace like jansen as an ace)...id rather have that guy like grienke than a mish mash of mid level guys who you really aren't that confident in sending out in October...I get where you are coming from, gimmie 3 shots at $10M guys who aren't an anchor on the payroll and hope one pans out than one shot on a $30M guy...in this specific circumstance i'd much rather take my shot with the $30M guy...I wouldn't say that for a mid-small market team who would be eating a lotta shit if they were really wrong about something like that...

and that's not to say that deep pocketed teams should be going out throwing around those contracts like theyre going outta style, but they had a track record with grienke being dominant in that situation and healthy (I think)...

[Texter]

Woulda coulda shoulda

Dodgers manager screwed the pooch...Astros couldn't hit Hill and he starts Darvish...dipshit move.

Dodgers are sitting good but they should be with that payroll.

I take my kid to Astros fan fest every year, this year will be a shit show of bandwagon fans.

[gut]

Also, once you sign a guy to a monster deal like that, he really becomes an almost negative asset. Look at others right now. Miggy is fucking untradable unless DET eats all the money, Mauer was in the same boat 3 years ago, and now we'll see what the LOLMarlins can get for Giancarlo. If they tried to trade him without covering any money, at best all they would get back is 2 "45" level prospects and maybe a throw-in big leaguer.

You commit the years + money at that level, the player HAS to produce like an all-time great to even tread water.

heres my thought on why I would have bitten the bullet...you are right on all those huge contracts being loads...but we're talking about a team with relatively no worry about eating money...its unlike DET, MIN, MIA in that regard...when (not if) that deal goes to shit in the last 2 years the dodgers should be comfortably able to eat it...look at what they ate with Crawford and now Gonzalez...

come October gimmie as many aces or near aces as I can have (count a bullpen ace like jansen as an ace)...id rather have that guy like grienke than a mish mash of mid level guys who you really aren't that confident in sending out in October...I get where you are coming from, gimmie 3 shots at $10M guys who aren't an anchor on the payroll and hope one pans out than one shot on a $30M guy...in this specific circumstance i'd much rather take my shot with the $30M guy...I wouldn't say that for a mid-small market team who would be eating a lotta shit if they were really wrong about something like that...

and that's not to say that deep pocketed teams should be going out throwing around those contracts like theyre going outta style, but they had a track record with grienke being dominant in that situation and healthy (I think)...

IMO, you dont pay for old aces....hopefully you find and develop them yourselves. Kershaw (pre-extension)=Russell Wilson really when you think about it. You strike gold on the most important position at low cost, you have a window to succeed. Of course the Dodgers are past that point now with Kershaw (as are the hawks with Russell), but that gave them a head start.

If they think they have another one in Urias, again no reason to spend too big for one guy. Gather depth, use the big bankroll to have 4 #3 starters around as opposed to a couple aces and a bunch of junk.