Dodger Thoughts

Jon Weisman's outlet for dealing psychologically with the Los Angeles Dodgers, baseball and life

NMA weighs in on Dodger sale


Optimistic despite the warning signs


One for the bullish


  1. Anonymous

    How about a “What if…’ thread. What if the deal had closed in November instead of April?  What players may have been signed instead of some of the mediocrities that were signed? I’m glad we signed Kemp and glad we didn’t sign Pujols or Fielder. Those contracts were way, way over priced, both players will be roster handicaps long before their contracts run out, Vernon Wells in waiting… Gonzales would have been good (if available), so too Joey Votto. I’d much rather sign two good solid productive players for $12M apiece than one over-priced player who will probably not live up to expectations. I know others feel differently, what are your thoughts?

  2. Posted in response to last comment at end of last thread: I’m in SF, too, and can’t resist comparing the two ownership groups. I’ll say that given changes in SF and now in LA, I feel a lot better about the rivalry than I did two years ago (between the SFG WS win and the McCourt mess, I just wanted to hide my head like an ostrich.)   ANyway, I agree the team won’t see massive overhaul right away, it will take them time to evaluate personnel both off and on the field. But I am optimistic about the future, and this week starting out with the Dodgers actually paying good money for Latin American talent was a good start (even if not officially done by the new ownership, it’s a sign of things to come methinks.)

    Btw, Jon, I, too, am glad we never got to see a Major “King” Kong McCourt scenario at the end of this ownership saga, but it sure would’ve been a sight! 

  3. Anonymous

    >>Jon,Indicators of an owner’s likelihood for business success frequently include relevant past business successes, owner capitalization, knowledge of the new business, marketing/sales/pr savvy.  The McCourts would rate F’s on all these, while Guber/Kasten/Johnson would rate A’s.  So I think the confidence and enthusiasm about the new owners is warranted.<<


    In a nutshell I think this post from the previous thread sums it up perfectly, the Dodgers have positioned themselves for success.

  4. Dilapidated?  I think the entire renovation thing with the stadium is overblown – it’s a beautiful stadium as is.  You win – fans will come – 40K+ on summer weeknights, sellouts on the weekends- has nothing to do with the troughs in the men’s bathrooms.  Use the $ to fill the Dodger uniforms with the proper players as Kasten was quoted – “We don’t plan to wait for 25 players to grow into our uniform.” Make no mistake we are competing with the team in OC.,0,5524701.story?page=1

  5. Anonymous

    I definitely agree that the confidence and enthusiasm about the new ownership group is warranted.  But while I loathe McCourt – and I do, believe me, I do – I think in retrospect his ownership era was very consistent – and very successful – in terms of what HE always thought success to be (even when he didn’t admit it).  His only real object with the D’s was self-interest, self-promotion, and increasing his own personal wealth.  And insofar as winning helped those goals – he wanted to win. But only insofar as winning promoted his own personal agenda.  He didn’t want to win for the team, or for LA, or even just for the joy of winning. “Winning” for him was getting as rich as possible and promoting himself as much as possible.  And along those lines – he won big time.  Thankfully, he is now gone.  And we, as fans, and as a community, can begin winning again as well.  Because what might be the most hopeful aspect of this new ownership, is that their definition of winning is – I believe – a world apart from McC’s, being about succeeding on the field, succeeding for the pure joy of winning, and succeeding when it comes to improving the fan & community experience (both in terms of the park experience and the TV/media experience).  And while some may think the cost of the franchise may inhibit this – I actually believe the opposite – as it means this is not just about short term profit, and is all about creating a long-term, ongoing franchise that will pay off and make profit not in terms of years – but decades.  And that’s going to demand an ongoing investment in the team – and the success of the team far beyond the purchase price.  And while no one has unlimited funds – the Guggenheim Partners – which is where the real $ is coming from I believe – not from Mark Walter personally – have resources beyond that of any single individual.

  6. Anonymous

    On a totally different topic, I wondered if there’ve been any threads here about KLAC’s Dodger Talk. Apologies if it’s already been discussed here, but while I wasn’t expecting great things from the Kevin Kennedy/David Vassegh version of Dodger Talk, I thought it would at least be something I could listen to.  But honestly, I can’t.  At least not what I’ve heard so far.  I try, and I turn it off within a minute or two.  I’m beyond disappointed, at least so far.  It’s slow, dull, plodding – and unfortunately, the problem seems rooted in the hosts themselves, rather than some wrong approach.  I’m hoping that the new group not only start their own TV network – but radio network as well.  At least if this is the sort of pre and post game experience that KLAC will be offering.

Comments are closed.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén