This is not fair

[Lou]

The dodgers are 0-2 since AJ started this thread.

[Warfarin]

1 hour ago, Lou said:

The dodgers are 0-2 since AJ started this thread.

It's actually rather uncanny.  I get why this thread exists now, lol.

Unfortunately though, maybe he should have started it after the Dodgers faced the Mariners .. as them losing to the Mariners last night actually hurt us, lol.

[Warfarin]

23 hours ago, Stradling said:

I think that Seager will get Lindor money and it will probably be from the Dodgers. I’m more convinced he will resign with the Dodgers than he will get Lindor money.  He could get 5 years and $200 million from the Dodgers. But my guess is he gets $345 million.  Kershaw will start getting one and two year deals from the Dodgers at high annual salaries. 

They might.  Although at some point, they really can't keep everyone - Betts, Bellinger, Seager, Buehler, Kershaw.  I suppose Kershaw will probably only be around for maybe 2 or so more years, but even without his salary, the other 4 should combine for what, 120-130mil+ per year?

I think at some point, they are going to have to let someone significant go, and of those guys, my guess would actually be Seager.  Seager's not very good defensively and will likely have to come off SS soon, which means his value will go down.  He should still be a very good player, even as a 3B, but he probably won't be as valuable as he is now.

My guess is Seager leaves as a free agent and they probably shift Lux over to play SS instead.  They'll probably instead use that money to sign Bellinger and, eventually, Buehler to mega deals, along with the one Betts already has.

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Warfarin said:

They might.  Although at some point, they really can't keep everyone - Betts, Bellinger, Seager, Buehler, Kershaw.  I suppose Kershaw will probably only be around for maybe 2 or so more years, but even without his salary, the other 4 should combine for what, 120-130mil+ per year?

I think at some point, they are going to have to let someone significant go, and of those guys, my guess would actually be Seager.  Seager's not very good defensively and will likely have to come off SS soon, which means his value will go down.  He should still be a very good player, even as a 3B, but he probably won't be as valuable as he is now.

My guess is Seager leaves as a free agent and they probably shift Lux over to play SS instead.  They'll probably instead use that money to sign Bellinger and, eventually, Buehler to mega deals, along with the one Betts already has.

If the Angels and their revenue can afford Trout, Albert, Rendon and Upton, then the Dodgers and the fact they have over twice our revenue can sure afford Betts, Seager, Bellinger, Buehler and a couple years of Kershaw/Bauer.  

[Warfarin]

8 minutes ago, Stradling said:

If the Angels and their revenue can afford Trout, Albert, Rendon and Upton, then the Dodgers and the fact they have over twice our revenue can sure afford Betts, Seager, Bellinger, Buehler and a couple years of Kershaw/Bauer.  

I don't think it's purely a year-to-year thing, but rather the amount of long-term commitments.  The Dodgers seem to shy away from super long-term commitments for the most part, but clearly do make exceptions for someone like Betts.  They seem to prefer short-term, high AAV type deals - Bauer, Kershaw (the one he recently re-signed), and the offer they allegedly made Harper was like 4/170 or something like that.

I think they try to avoid Pujols-type situations where they have a deadweight on their payroll for 5+ years (i.e. long-term).  Betts will probably be an anchor towards the end of that deal, but they likely accept it given how much value he provides them now.

I think the issue with Seager moreso is he doesn't project as a SS for much longer.  He's actually subpar defensively now, but he can sorta get away with it by defensive positioning, etc.  My guess is they move on from him because he doesn't figure to stick at SS, and they do have a former top 5 prospect (Lux) who plays SS.

As for our team, yes, we have those 4, but Pujols is off the books this year, then Upton the next.  It's probably why we couldn't pursue any significant FAs, and is probably why we won't pursue any next year, too, or at least the type of FAs people want to see us sign (i.e. top level SP).

[Stradling]

We brought on Rendon with two years of Albert and three years of Upton left.  They could easily re up with Seager, along with Betts because they’ll only have Bauer and Kershaw for a couple more years a piece then justify Bellinger because those one of the two pitchers are coming to an end then do the same with Buehler as the other pitcher falls off. 
Seager moving off of short isn’t a problem because he could slide to any other infield position and still have a plus bat for that position.   I think it was this thread where I mentioned I wouldn’t be surprised if he got a huge dollar short term deal from the Dodgers.  But I highly doubt they let him walk. 
Hey I hope you are right but they generate $300 million a year in tv revenue.  They’ll spend whatever they feel like it takes. 

[T.G.]

F the Dodgers

[Angelsjunky]

Maybe I should start taking requests.

[T.G.]

13 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Maybe I should start taking requests.

I don't think that will work... it's your thought process and the conclusions you come to that have a direct impact.  You should know that as a professional jinxologist.

[ten ocho recon scout]

7 hours ago, Lou said:

The dodgers are 0-2 since AJ started this thread.

Ayyyyyyyy J

[Lou]

The Dodgers' #5 starter has given up 1 hit and struck out 11 batters in 7 innings vs the M's.

[ScottT]

The Dodgers have won one World Series in the last 31 years

Big fucking deal

[Warfarin]

9 hours ago, ScottT said:

The Dodgers have won one World Series in the last 31 years

Big fucking deal

Every fan is different, but would I rather cheer for a team that wins 1 title every 30 or so years, but is incredibly competitive on a yearly basis, or cheer for a team like the Marlins, who have won 2 titles in the last 25 years, but have been rather awful for most of those other years?

Personally, I'd opt for the former, but I know others may differ in that opinion.

[Blarg]

On 4/20/2021 at 5:25 AM, Warfarin said:

It's actually rather uncanny.  I get why this thread exists now, lol.

Unfortunately though, maybe he should have started it after the Dodgers faced the Mariners .. as them losing to the Mariners last night actually hurt us, lol.

The Mariners are going nowhere this season so their blind squirrel win against the Dodgers has zero impact on the Angels. 

[Lou]

1 hour ago, Warfarin said:

Every fan is different, but would I rather cheer for a team that wins 1 title every 30 or so years, but is incredibly competitive on a yearly basis, or cheer for a team like the Marlins, who have won 2 titles in the last 25 years, but have been rather awful for most of those other years?

Personally, I'd opt for the former, but I know others may differ in that opinion.

I'd rather win 2 World Series than win 1 (in a short season) and endure the annual disappointment dodgers fans had to endure. 

I like championships. 

[Taylor]

Since AJ created this thread, the Dodgers are 2-6 and are now tied for 1st place with the Giants.

[ten ocho recon scout]

2 minutes ago, Taylor said:

Since AJ created this thread, the Dodgers are 2-6 and are now tied for 1st place with the Giants.

Sometimes I picture AJs skin and eyes turning yellow, as he becomes a sith, when he posts something positive. About anything.

AJ could make a post about how much everyone likes pizza. And then an article would come out saying pizza shrinks your wiener.