With a debt reportedly in the hundreds of millions, the Dodgers are trying to cut costs in order to stay in compliance with MLB’s debt service rule, as Bill Shaikin of the Los Angeles Times reported earlier today. Obviously a debt of that size means that cutting player payroll is only one step the Dodgers will need to take to become more financially stable, yet given how the Dodgers ended last season paying over $291MM to its 40-man roster and have just under $172MM committed to 15 players (only 11 of whom are still in the organization) in 2017, payroll seems like a natural starting point.
The catch, of course, is that the Dodgers wholly plan on contending in 2017, so any type of a fire sale is out of the question. (So no, there’s no chance of your favorite team trading for Clayton Kershaw.) In fact, the phrase “too big to fail” comes to mind — the Dodgers have invested so much in their on-field product that they essentially can’t afford to fall out of contention, as drops in attendance or TV ratings would make their financial situation even more severe.
While Dodgers fans may be automatically fearing a return to the Frank McCourt era, there are plenty of reasons not to worry. Andrew Friedman’s front office has plenty of ways to save money while still reloading the roster for another run at the postseason, some of which they’re already exploring. For example…
1. Backloaded contracts for beyond 2018. Kershaw, Kenta Maeda and Yaisel Sierra are the only Dodgers under contract past the 2018 season, and Kershaw can exercise an opt-out clause following the 2018 World Series. Corey Seager, Joc Pederson and several other important players will be arbitration-eligible by that point and making well beyond their current minimum salaries, yet L.A. will have plenty of payroll breathing space in just two years’ time. Even by next winter, they’ll have over $46MM worth of breathing space when Carl Crawford and Alex Guerrero come off the books and Andre Ethier’s club option is presumably declined.
If the Dodgers wanted to land a big free agent this winter or re-sign at least one of Kenley Jansen or Justin Turner, therefore, the team could manage it in the form of a backloaded contract. Deferred money could also be an option; the Dodgers already used this tactic last winter with Scott Kazmir’s contract, as the lefty will be receiving deferred payments through 2021 even though his deal only runs through the 2018 season.
2. Replace Jansen and/or Turner internally, or with cheaper external options. The Dodgers’ bullpen finished at or near the top of the league in many important categories in 2016, and while Jansen and fellow free agents Joe Blanton and J.P. Howell were big reasons behind the pen’s success, there’s still lots of talent on hand. Pedro Baez, Adam Liberatore, Luis Avilan, Josh Fields, Grant Dayton, Josh Ravin and the newly-acquired Vidal Nuno all form a solid relief core, and that’s not counting further support in the form of starters who might be available for reliever roles. The Dodgers could supplement this group with a free agent with closing experience (i.e. Greg Holland, Koji Uehara, Brad Ziegler) with a much lower price tag than Jansen.
The third base picture is less clear if Turner leaves. Supersub Enrique Hernandez could take over in at least a platoon role, as Hernandez has hit very well against lefties in his career and the Dodgers could use another solid right-handed bat to balance their lineup. Looking at free agents, Luis Valbuena would command a solid but not unreasonable multi-year commitment, while Trevor Plouffe or Stephen Drew would be more inexpensive options.
Probably the best common ground for the Dodgers would be to use one of these scenarios to address one departure and then re-sign the other of Jansen or Turner. Letting both players leave would be a blow, though L.A. could collect the first-round draft picks attached to Jansen and Turner via the qualifying offer. With the farm system bolstered, that could free the Dodgers to…
3. Trade prospects for stars on inexpensive contracts. Thanks to their big spending and deep minor league system, the Dodgers are rumored to be involved pretty much every time a rebuilding team floats a notable player in trade talks. Both at the deadline and during the early stages of this offseason, the Dodgers have reportedly shown interest in players ranging from top-of-the-rotation aces (i.e. Chris Sale, Chris Archer) to second basemen like Brian Dozier or Logan Forsythe. These four not only bring value on their field, they also offer multiple seasons of cost-effectiveness thanks to team-friendly contracts.
It would take a lot to pry any of these players away from their current teams, though the Dodgers have the pieces to make a deal happen if they choose this direction. While Friedman has moved his share of notable prospects, he has also wisely held onto such blue-chippers as Seager or Julio Urias. Would he be similarly loath to part with the likes of Jose De Leon, Cody Bellinger or Alex Verdugo, especially since there’s no better way to keep payroll costs down than to replenish the roster with cheap young talent?
4. Swap one big contract for another that is a better fit. One of the main payroll issues facing the Dodgers is the substantial amount of money committed to players whose role on the 2017 team seems rather tenuous. With Kershaw, Maeda, Kazmir and Urias locking up the top four rotation spots, that leaves Brandon McCarthy and Hyun-Jin Ryu (owed a combined $38.6MM through 2018) battling for the fifth starter’s role, and that’s assuming either can stay healthy. Andre Ethier missed almost all of 2016 due to a broken leg, and while Yasiel Puig seemed to regain his standing within the organization after hitting well in September, it remains to be seen if the Dodgers necessarily still see him as a long-term building block.
Given how injuries ravaged the Dodgers’ rotation last year, it seems odd to suggest that they should consider dealing a starter, yet I’d think they would be quite open to moving McCarthy or Ryu if a decent offer arose. Teams would normally stay away from starters with such checkered injury histories, though there might be a slight opportunity for L.A. this winter given the very thin free agent pitching market. The Dodgers could explore trading McCarthy, Ryu or possibly even Kazmir for another player making a significant salary over the next one or two years, yet who is a better fit for their needs at second base, third base (if Turner leaves) or in the outfield.
Ethier and Puig are the most experienced names amidst the many corner outfielders on the Dodgers roster, a list that includes Andrew Toles, Trayce Thompson, Scott Van Slyke, Rob Segedin and even part-time infielders like Hernandez, Darin Ruf or Micah Johnson. L.A. could continue to see what it has with its younger outfielders, or cut through the platoon-mix uncertainty by acquiring a clear-cut everyday corner outfielder. The Dodgers already dealt from this surplus when Howie Kendrick was sent to the Phillies two weeks ago.
Since the Dodgers can and will be spending significant money regardless of their debt reduction actions, they might as well allocate those funds towards players who can more clearly help the 2017 roster. They have the flexibility to mix and match a package of veterans, part-timers and prospects to make a deal happen — say, offering Puig, McCarthy and a good prospect for an everyday second baseman.
5. Keep doing what they’re doing. As noted in Shaikin’s piece, both the Dodgers and Commissioner Rob Manfred are confident that the team will be able to avoid any notable sanctions under the debt service rule, and obviously the Dodgers didn’t just become aware of their debt overnight.
It could be argued that the Dodgers have been addressing their debt issues more or less since Friedman was hired in October 2014. Team officials including Friedman himself, CFO Tucker Kain (as quoted by Shaikin) and team president Stan Kasten have often said in recent years that the team’s long-term plan was to revamp the farm system and international pipeline to such an extent that the Dodgers would no longer require payrolls in the $300MM range.
To that end, I’m guessing that Friedman and company have already explored the first four steps on my list, as the Dodgers work towards their three-pronged goal of winning a World Series in 2017, preparing themselves to contend every year in the future and getting payroll under control. Considering that the Dodgers have continued to win NL West titles in the two years under Friedman’s leadership (including overcoming a ton of injuries in 2016), this slightly reined-in spending hasn’t damaged the product on the field.
Absolutely no sympathy for this joke of a front office and ownership.
Oh yay the ignorant comments coming in 3,2,1……
0…
A front office that is smart enough not to give insane contracts to players over 30, and build for the future with plenty of young talent. Unlike colleti who had no long term outlook and handed comp picks to division rivals which lead to trevor story and aj pollock. They rebuild while still making the playoffs instead of suffering through years of mediocrity. The Dodgers FO is the most innovative in baseball at using their resources. Sorry but we dont give out 184 million dollar deals to 220 hitters
So smart…with that 290 million 40 man and zero World Series appearances.
Glad someone has some sense. This isn’t the Pirates making the postseason, this is the Dodgers, go out there and win a championship.
bleedcubbie just proved my point. Rome wasnt built in a day. You cant rebuild a farm system in 1 season. If the core of seager, pederson, calhoun, bellinger, verdugo, urias , de leon doesent get it done then yes you have every right to bash the dodgers. Until then you just sound like a fool. The Dodgers payroll wasnt 290 million in 2016 get your facts straight. The high amount of money spent in 2015 was to get rid of bad contracts from the colltit era. The goal wasnt to just go out there spend big and win it all. Its a double edged sword with these people. Had they re signed greinke everyone would say its trying to buy a championship but when they dont spend these people still find BS to spill
Playoffs are a dice roll. Largely out of the front offices control.
Its not like they chose to not sign Greinke. They were outbid. The did try to “buy a championship.” They just weren’t successful at it.
This “joke of a front office” has only been in charge for less than 2 years. Not sure how they are to blame for all the payroll and especially for not winning a WS since 1988. They certainly haven’t been perfect in every regard but they are far, far smarter with smarter goals and foresight than the Colletti team they replaced. They’ve quickly rebuilt the farm system with much better drafting the last 2 seasons alone, and show better foresight with most of the contracts they’ve handed out (the Maeda one is amazingly clever). Not everything has panned out, taking on injury risks like Brett Anderson didn’t work out, but they have made loads of under the radar moves that were rare under their predecessors, like acquiring Grant Dayton and Josh Fields for the pen, for very little. Obviously the fanbase is impatient, but they’ve shown they can keep the team a contender for a title every year while not mortgaging the future (i.e., ignoring the pressure to deal Corey Seager the year before). Your comments on them are rather lazy, frankly.
The new FO hasn’t rebuilt the farm. Their first draft pick didn’t even sign. All the strong prospects the Dodgers have were carryover from Ned. The new ownership group has rebuilt the farm, but not AF and FZ. They’ve acquired prospects but traded some of those away too, so maybe they’re a net positive on the farm system, but not tremendously so. They trades they’ve made have underwhelmed as well. It’s fair criticism to say they haven’t done a good job. They’ve assembled two teams that are okay but not great and didn’t go make a move to make that team great. Playoffs are somewhat random, but being a great team is a lot like having more tickets in the raffle. There have been ample opportunities to make a key move without dismantling the farm system and the FO hasn’t done it. They’ve been in charge for two years and it’s been nothing but half-measures.
Actually that’s not true true at all really. Their first pick was Buehler and he did sign. Funkhouser didn’t sign as their comp pick but his performance kind of dictated that he could have made a significant higher bonus if he rebounded in his senior year. Half of their current 6 top 100 prospects have been brought in under the current FO. Make it 4 when Buehler throws a full season. Alvarez, Diaz, Calhoun are all the current FO. The prospects they’ve traded have also had serious question marks. So in judging on the prospect side they haven’t given up much at all. Yes credit Logan White for Seager, Pederson and Urias but also take a hard look at their absolutely dreadful drafts during a major time period.
But the prospects that made the Dodger system #1 weren’t on this FO. The “untouchables” of Joc, Urias, JDL were already there. They did good to keep them (except that they could’ve had Hamels for JDL and SVS), but those aren’t their guys. I’m not saying that the FO hasn’t done a good job of getting prospects, my point is that they didn’t build the #1 farm in baseball, they inherited most of it. I guess I don’t really see how throwing away a #1 comp pick is more excusable than a late round 1 pick. It’s still a high value pick that they used on someone who was almost a lock not to sign.
Take into account where they were drafting in terms of Seager. They weren’t getting Hammels for JDL the deal hung up because they wanted a Seager or Urias. Look at the package the rangers gave up so don’t get any illusions they were getting Hammels for just JDL and SVS. Obviously their top players graduated so in terms of farm status you can expect a drop off. Sure they had the number 1 system but it was extremely too heavy with Seager and Urias. They are still a top 5 farm system for now. The aversion has never really been solely the draft pick. It also involved the overall draft pool which is hurt significantly with the loss of a first round pick. Sure but Funkhouser provided the high end upside that was a clear 1st round pick before is rough patch. They didn’t throw it away thy took a chance. Didn’t hurt they received another comp pick because he didn’t sign in 2016. They took a calculated chance on a high upside guy.
Top*
All I’m saying is give it time to breathe they’ve only had two drafts. There’s already one top 100 prospects 2 in the near that’s already appeared from their first draft. They’ll have time to rebuild it to 1 then restore it then so on so on.
Preach
We’ll see how the prospects end up panning out. I agree some of them look promising, and the FO has only had two drafts, but prospects are prospects. There’s something to be said for building a solid system, but California League titles aren’t the same as World Series titles, and pitching prospects are notoriously fickle. Not everyone needs to be Theo, but his avoidance of drafting pitching highly in rebuilding the Cubs has been well documented and makes me question how well the Dodgers’ farm build will turn out.
I’m going based on the Molly Knight account, which makes it sound like the Phillies were ready to go on that deal, and the Dodgers’ FO slept on it and the Rangers came in with their killer offer. To me, that sounds about in line with the incompetence I’ve seen from this FO. They will not make key moves. 2015, the Dodgers could have gone for Price, Cueto, Hamels, and they got Latos and Wood. This year they got Hill, which was a good deal, but then they get an already-slumping Reddick, who only tanked even harder in LA, and they sent down a surging Puig to make room for him. The moves the FO makes seem to defy logic at times. Last year when they cut Heisey, then traded for Heisey. Trade away Sweeney, then trade back for Sweeney and Darin Ruf, who is essentially the same player as Scott Van Slyke. These are lateral, or even negative, moves. They refuse to spend money on position needs, yet rack up salary by taking on bad/useless contracts: Tabata, Morse, Arroyo, Beachy, etc. I didn’t hate this FO coming in, I’m not part of the Fraudman-anti-analytics crew, but what I’ve seen in two years under this management has been wholly underwhelming. This team has gotten steadily worse since they’ve been in charge. With the team in 2013-2014, going into the playoffs, I felt like there was a legitimate chance to win it all. 2015, I knew it was possible, but I felt less confident. This year, it was just waiting for the inevitable elimination, because the Dodgers didn’t have a competitive team. This year, I have no confidence they’ll be better than about 83 or 84 wins. I hope this FO gets dumped before they let Kershaw walk because they don’t hand out $200MM+ contracts to pitchers in their 30s, and cripple the team.
Please hit return occasionally. Reading this massive wall of text is just impossible.
The dodgers front office approach hasn’t worked yet and the 184m dollar 220 hitter has a ring. Innovative? Clear the debt and win a World Series without a 300m dollar payroll. That’s when you will finally get your attaboy. It takes Tim and patience Rome wasn’t built in a day.
I wish I was named Tim right now.
Be smarter. The Hayward contract was awful.
As opposed to tanking? In which this marketplace wouldn’t allow it. Fans didn’t show up to boycott McCourt. They clearly needed to get fans back to the stadium and they needed a new tv deal to try and offset the debt they incurred from bankruptcy court.
Seems to me that is exactly what the dodgers are doing they’ve been clear and upfront from day 1. The first real step was the purge of Kemp’s hideous contract. Ethier’s contract was immovable. The fatal flaw in this whole plan was not having a farm system because of McCourt and his terrible handling and lack of cash flow. It hurt them badly having to take on Beckett and CC commitments. It’s pretty simple they took on contracts that are about to expire giving them extended breathing room within the 5 year window. 50 mill, 45 against the cap and then 60 is coming off the books. That’s 100M in two year time span. Seems to me it was more of the situation they acquired than terrible mishandling. But hey darn Dodgers should have just said screw it let’s tank.
Explain the difference between the new “tanking” catchphrase and what is called rebuilding.
I’ve personally never thought “tanking” was used when it should have been used. To me the word implies purposely losing games despite having the better team. What happens in most cases is an organization just doesn’t have the pieces it needs to be legitimate contenders and instead decides to use what higher end resources that it does possess to gain more longer term resources for a future season. That is rebuilding in my mind and makes perfect sense. MLB is a business and you wouldn’t expect any other business owner to make poor decisions when the current market clearly speaks out against it. Why do we do that when a major league baseball team adjusts current resources for future ones? Some teams just don’t have as many options as the larger market teams and must utilize strategies that are less popular but more intelligent.
Kemp was just 160 million:-). Carl Crawford another great contract for dodgers.
Mikel – The Dodgers did not sign Crawford. Boston did and then traded him to the Dodgers. It was an attempt to win now so they could gain as much revenue (tickets and merchandise) as possible. Strictly a business move. Gonzalez, Crawford, and Beckett were popular so they knew it would bring in more money
Oh yeah, that would be the genius Theo Epstein, who also gave Edwin Jackson a barrel full of $$. Thank God for him he’s got the likes of Jason McCloud scouting for him, and Ricketts supplying him with unlimited dollars.
I’ve been impressed with how the Dodgers have built their farm system into the #1 ranked system in baseball last year (they were near the bottom when McCourt sold the team) while still remaining competitive. The Dodgers are set up to succeed in the future while cutting their payroll at the same time. They could’ve thrown money at Cueto and others, but went with cheaper guys and a shorter commitment.
Cheaper and less good. Cueto would’ve made the Dodgers rotation feared in the playoffs. It was telling when the “starter” the Dodgers went to for a win-or-go-home game 5 was 3.2 of Hill, a rookie, then the bullpen. That should be when you hand the ball over to your #2 and that’s all they had. Miracle they won that game. But I’m glad the FO finds bargains. That fills the trophy shaped hole in my heart quite nicely.
Oh no, they had to go to 2.1 ERA Rich Hill, the #1 prospect in baseball who was lights out the last month and one of the best bullpens in baseball.
Do enlighten us oh wise one.
Hey Addison they surely are not a joke! And don’t feel sorry for them at all! They are not once o ever in financial trouble! A 8 billion dollar TV deal. Like the article said they have known about this for some time. So with that said number one farm
System boat loads of money ya doesn’t sound like a joke to me!
amen
Is that because they finish 3rd in the division? Or no was it last? Darn! If only they would have made the playoffs…what might have been huh?
From a great analyst and writer at truebluela.com:
▼The game of telephone is always troubling
when applied to baseball, especially when outside of LA people think only the LA Times covers the Dodgers.
First of all, Bill Shaikin’s article on the Dodgers’ payroll
Gah! Character limit!
Point is, this “financial problem” is being dramatically overblown for clicks. The front office has an $8.5B tv deal. The dodgers are in no way hurting for cash. Did Friedman et al leak this so that fans clamping for coespedes would tone it down? This is a nothing story…
They took in like $120 mil in ’15 from tv deal. With debt payments, the huge payroll, and operating expenses I doubt there making much profit. They take in around $400 mil before expenses. They have serious financial trouble if they want to win 91 games again.
That doesn’t mean they immediately get 8 billion and that is all resting comfortably in a hidden safe somewhere. That’s over a several year span and those funds go to a wide variety of recipients within the Dodger realm.
It works out to $343MM/yr over the life of the contract. Plus 4 million fans at $50 a ticket? Plus probably the second most recognizable/marketable worldwide baseball brand? I don’t buy for a second that the team is running a deficit anywhere besides QuickBooks.
Give one of the top closers an Opt out after 1 yr and bank $20 mil or stay for the 5yrs/$80 mil. They hit the market and bank another $80 mil in 2017 free agent market. That’s only way I feel a closer makes $100+ mil in next 5 years.
simplest solution to me is to package Gonzalez and puig to the Mets for wilmer flores, Lucas duda and zach wheeler. flores starts at second, duda at first til bellinger is ready and just move wheeler to the pen where he can be dominate if he regains his stuff. knocks about 20 mil off the payroll, fills the second base hole and maybe wheeler can be a jansen lite.
They can package Gonzalez to Texas for some money and prospects.
I personally think Texas should just give Gallo a shot so I don’t see a fit. also problem is Gonzalez is hardly worth his contract. hence the deal I proposed isn’t huge. just a couple average players for an average player and a little upside while saving money.
Yup. Mets are looking to add expensive players at positions they don’t need. Dom Smith is a year away for 1B and they have enough corner OF’s as it is.
puig can play center, didn’t Mets just watch cespedes out there? smith will also have options and it’s only a 2 year deal on Gonzalez to raise their floor, remember how they were barely a playoff team.
Why? Why wouldn’t they just take the 100M in one time expenditures and pay off debt.
That is a horrible trade for the Dodgers
puig and Gonzalez put up 3.5 bwar and 2.4 fwar combined last year and combine for 30 mil. in what world is it bad for them. the Mets side is closer to losing, simply from a dollars standpoint.
Well you know playing through back and neck injuries usually does that offensively. He’s all a team leader and plays pretty good defense. Oh yeah and he’s they type of player that answers the bell day in day out.
Way to cherry pick. Puig was hurt for a month and inexplicably sent down for a month in the midst of a tear. The three months he was healthy and up last year were close to 4 wins alone over a whole season.
lol, if you want to write off injuries than wheeler and duda are more valuable. duda had back to back 3 war seasons in 14 and 15 and wheeler was an above average starter when he was last healthy. you are cherrypicking when you excuse performance like you did. also team leader and pretty good defense is lol. led them how? last year is the first time out of the first round in how long?
Back to back 3 WAR sounds less productive than a 4 win player to me. Duda hasn’t even had better numbers than AGon and AGon is a leader in the clubhouse and DOES play solid defense. Why trade a player with elite potential like Puig and a consistently good player that hasn’t missed significant injury time ever in Gonzales for someone who is not an upgrade but only played 47 games last year and an “above average starter”? It makes no sense.
Last time out of the first round since 2013. 2 NLCS in 4 years.
But the Dodgers are desperate now, haven’t you heard the new storyline?
The dodgers have plenty of position players internally. Hopefully KIke Hernandez and Rob Segedin end up as the 2nd Baseman and 3rd Baseman. Micah Johnson could potentially be a platoon at 2nd or 3rd. Culberson as the Super utility. Gonzales and Seager as 1st basemen and Shortstop. Trayce in Left, Joc in Center, Puig in right. Toles as the 4th outfielder. I don’t wanna see Eithier on the team because that will take playing time from Toles, Puig, Joc, or Trayce. I’d rather see Van Slyke, who will be more as a bench role than Eithier. Then Grandal and Barnes as the backstops.
LA doesn’t need to sign any position players
There’s no chance Kike and Segedin are both starters.
Stop plz I’m going crazy. Segedin is a decent bench piece, but that’s about it. There were talks of selling him to the KBO. He’s a 4A guy that is a great story. Kikè is a very nice super utility guy but hasn’t shown he can make an adjustment back to the league offensively. Johnson’s arm is shot and he’s a little tick below average 2b defender at best so 3rd is out of the question. If that’s the team they throw out there day after day then they can kiss the playoffs goodbye. LA desperately needs to resign Turner, make an upgrade at 2b, and also an upgrade in a corner. Hopefully RF so they can let Toles and Thompson platoon while bumping Thompson around.
There is a lot of question marks with Duda and Wheeler, more so than Puig quite frankly, The dodgers would be getting rid of A-Gon’s contract, but also be getting screwed in the deal. There’s no way they deal Gonzalez anyways
how do they get screwed? taking a chance on a healthy duda and wheeler while getting 4 years of an average second baseman?
You’re assuming Duda will be healthy and able. That’s quite a leap.
no the package is based around flores who is an average 2b with 4 years of control. duda and wheeler are upside plays.
Yeah I’m sure the Angels wish they could get their hands on Kershaw. But when you have the best player in baseball you don’t give him up.
Wrong thread. Mobile app got me again. Won’t let me edit or delete, can be removed if possible. Thanks.
Package Gonzalez and McCarthy a bit of cash to the Astros for Kemp and PTBNL.
The Dodgers will be fine. They have some bad contracts coming off the books. I think as long as you have Kershaw in the starting lineup, they will always be in playoff contention. I hope they don’t anything rash and gut their farm system. According to the baseball pundits, LA has one of the best farm system in the league so lets prove it by building internally.
Why is there a full article on the Dodgers but none on the Mets? Some biased BS here.
Yeah I’m sure this site is biased.
– Said no one ever
I’m here for you if you need a hug
Braun being the discussion for being traded to the Dodgers, I could also see the Brewers trading Junior Guerra to the Dodgers. I’m having a hard time figuring out what the Brewers might get in return for Guerra in this barren pitching market. Hard to predict for me because he doesn’t have much of a track record, and he’s 32 years old.
For Guerra alone the Brewers should probably get 2 top 100 prospects and maybe another wildcard type prospect. Probably similar to what they got for Lucroy and Jeffress
I don’t see any team giving 2 Top 100 prospects for a soon-to-be 32-year-old #4 type starter.
He’s not your average 32 year old pitcher, he was a catcher for most of his career so he’s not as worn as your average 32 year old pitcher. He’s also under contract for 5 more years making peanuts. In this market with very little pitching this is exactly what the Brewers should be asking for. There is no point in the Brewers trading him for less really. He’s a #3 starter
31* (will be 32 by the start of the season).
Scooter Gennett could be an option for the Dodgers at 2nd base as well.
Well… They could be the wanna be LA organization. At least LA has an organization that understands baseball and wants to win. The other wanna be LA organization is not even close to LA, hell! It’s not even in LA County. The wanna LA organization, has zero clue on how to build a winning organization. Think about it…. Los Angels Angels of Anaheim Orange County California. Who in the hell names a team that!?!? Only a lost organization. And yes I am an Angels fan, just one of the very few that get it and understand the game.
Ya it’s too bad one LA team has the best player in the game and the other one doesn’t
Yeah I’m sure the Angels wish they could get their hands on Kershaw. But when you have the best player in baseball you don’t give him up.
Scenario #1 is always on the table, for Dodgers and 29 other MLB teams. Scenario #2: Kike Hernandez or any other 2017 FA at 3b in place of Turner and some combination of Baez, Ravin, et al closing with Jansen, or Chapman, or Melancon in SF AND still be competitive in 2017 — not going to happen. Scenario #3: How does swapping prospects for veterans under contract help reduce payroll? Scenario #4: How does swapping big contracts help reduce payroll? Scenario #5: The most likely. Commissioner even alluded to the possibility that if Dodgers are making progress toward debt reduction that more time is possible.
they could potentially be getting screwed. Why would you deal Gonzalez, and the potential of puig for a CHANCe of a healthy Wheeler and healthy Duda.
lol, Gonzalez isn’t special and they get duda back, with bellinger in AAA. it’s reallocating value.
Love how Gonzales isn’t special when he’s nearly mirrored Dudas production minus the past season in which he put up a 113 OPS+ playing through injury while Duda was broken and only played 47 games of well below average baseball. Duda will be 31. He’s not getting any younger either. This isn’t a reallocation of value, it would be trading just to trade.
This is getting comical it’s not like the team didn’t know and this isn’t news to anyone following the Dodgers.
MLB was negligent and partially responsible for McCourt and his 412M in incurred debt. That being said there was no national outcry when McCourt was funneling money and depression of the payroll. But now there’s so much national outcry. Grow up seriously or do the research.
So regardless of the ownership group this was bound to happen and the FO has done a pretty good job of lessening the blow of such a mess created by McCourt and Colletti. I cringe to even think about what would have happened if Kemp’s full salary were still on the books. They have more or less a 100M coming off the books in the next two years. They also have money free from one time expenditures, cough cough 100M to place forward to the debt. Reup what they have and do not go crazy in FA and they’ll be fine. The young talent is the reason why they have an opportunity to escape this patch unscathed. They can continue to save money by finding Ethier a new home, in which he’d wave his 10-5 and a DH was available, and looking to move McCarthy, Kaz, and Puig. This is all just click bait. They recognized they had an opportunity to spend big on IFA and they took it which messed with the calculator. They’ve also been shedding major contracts that could destroyed him. Let’s stop pretending like this is a death sentence.
I agree. The last thing Manfred wants to do is damage a major market team or force them into a position where they can’t be as competitive as they’ve been since the McCourt debacle. I also agree that this is a story that isn’t much of a story. Not much on deals coming from the FO, so some kind of story is needed. That said, I don’t believe there are viable internal options to close games (reliably) and provide full time dependable production at third base.
There’s a difference between hoping Puig can play like an every day player, and hoping Duda hits 20 Homers and plays roughly 120 games and Wheeler to step on the mound. If I trade Puig, I’m asking for Wheeler and Flores. Throwing in Gonzalez for Duda isn’t fair game.
not really, duda was worth 3 war in 2014 and 2015. he has been above average more recently than puig.
Yes the big difference is Duda has shown he can hit an average to above average fb. Puig has not. I’m a dodger fan and if I’m the Mets I’m laughing as I hang up the phone.
Thanks Mark! This is a very well-written and thought out article. As always, MLBTR delivers quality work that keeps a baseball fan such as I informed on matters outside the regular rumors mill. I appreciate it!
The Dodgers have spent so much money on the international market… of course, nobody but mlb and the Dodgers know how much debt they have, but assuming it isn’t too severe, couldn’t they just cut back on the international spending? (They have to anyways due to the penalty). That may be the only real change we see- I really doubt the dodgers weren’t aware of their situation, and because of manfred’s comments, I think it’s unlikely we drastic changes made.
When the term “debt” is used in this post, it’s used in an unorthodox sense. Debt is typically associated with interest and is amortized over time because some can’t fund an expense at once. This is not “debt” this is a annual obligation. With the assets the GP possess, one check can make this “debt” go away. Re allocating financial obligations is not difficult.. this is a poor story to make nothing into something. The Dodgers are in no true trouble.
Debt is associated with the $412M that the bankruptcy court ruled McCourt owed in order to make the insurers etc. whole. They can always write a check to make that debt go away but that hurts their working capital. They aren’t in trouble by any means but they’d probably like to start making money on their investment sooner rather than later.
According to the MLB Debt Service Rule, salary deferrals are counted as team debt, so they don’t help with complying with the rule.
There needs to be more attention paid to the panic sale of the Dodgers that MLB approved. They were so happy to rid themselves of McCourt, they let in a highly-leveraged, under capitalized ownership group. Basically, they sub-primed a mortgage, and now are crying that the house is too big for the paycheck.
Not the end of the world. Package an A-Gon with a prospect, lose some of the salary. Do the same with some others. It’s actually pretty easy.
Remember they have the advantage of being in the same division with the perpetually confused Padres, and the decimated D-Backs; both those teams are 5 years from being competitive.
They have to spend some of their most treasured asset (their system) to regroup. And it’s not even a real challenge; they can reorganize and still stay competitive.
Or just crazy spitballing here. Maybe if the MLB had vetted properly and done the job right in the first place debt wouldn’t have been collected or at least to magnitude where an owner had to declare bankruptcy. They are fine and don’t need to make drastic changes to trade a big piece unless there is a big piece returning.
How about Dodgers’ ownership simply write a check and pay down their debt? Mark Walter and Guggenheim certainly have enough cash to do it, but in their way of thinking it’s always better to use “other people’s money” to pay for everything, so they’re not leveraged themselves. They bought a team that is a gold mine financially…put up your own money or stop whining about being in “debt”.
They have been but why spend full in year one when you have a 5 year window to get the house in order. And there’s never really been any whining. A little after the bankruptcy ruling. But they haven’t changed course. It’s not like they’ve simply created their own debt. Plain and simple after paying for the club they were also responsible for the McCourts debt. This isn’t a news story because the Dodgers desperately need an altering organizational change. This is a story because there is no CBA and it is a slow time of the year before winter meetings. It’s a story because flow of traffic needs to be had at LA times. It’s also a story because in the last year they need to control the calculator which isn’t too difficult. They aren’t going to go wild on the IFA market(partially because they can’t), they aren’t going to spend upwards of 270M on payroll. So simply put they’ll continue to pay the debt off and watch bad Colletti contracts come off the books.
The problem isn’t the story, but how it’s being spun (mainly by people who apparently didn’t actually read it). The real takeaway is MLB does not believe the Dodgers have financial issues that will require the commissioner to take action.
Absent from this discussion are the actual numbers. Understanding where the Dodgers stand with respect to the Debt Service Rule requires knowing the net revenue as calculated by a complex accounting formula. Debt might be easier to guess but from what I’ve read, it too is formula-based in the way it calculates annual debt obligations.
All we really know is the Dodgers have shown paper losses in the last couple of years, mainly as a result of massive spending in the IFA market, which is by definition a one-time event, and for stadium improvements. (The latter is what earned them the larger 12-times multiple for debt carriage; it would otherwise be 8-times)
We also know that their annual revenue exceeds $400M, payroll is on the way down, and revenue on the way up. All of which seems to explain why MLB isn’t worried.
How hard would people laugh at a trade built around Dozier and De Leon?
Depends on what else is going to the Twins.
Todd Frazier and David Robertson would seem to make sense for the Dodgers ……….. Both on short Deals at positions of need
Even if the payroll was $5M for the entire MLB team, the rest of the organization cost too. The debt itself is overwhelming; the debt will still mount. The Dodgers took a gamble a couple years ago and lost. The group didn’t do it because of good baseball sense. The group spent all that money because they wanted the attention on them.
Sport players shouldn’t be making $ B/career . Its so out of control.
Greed!
I get paid 85 bucks hourly for freelancing. I never thought I can manage to do it but my good friend is making 10000 dollars each month by doing this job and she recommended me to check it out. Try it out on following website, you have nothing to lose…
Click this link……………….. http://www.Nypost55.com
LA is well on their way to becoming a team like the Braves were from 1990-2005 where they made it to the playoffs in all but 1 of those years with 1 WS championship. Under Kasten, as were the Braves. NL West champs 4 years in a row. The FO building for the long term instead of throwing it all in for a short term gamble.