All you need to do is look at the Phillies to see the risk of long pricey contracts.
Now maybe the Dodgers truly are the Yankees of the West now and have no concerns at all about “maxing out”. If that’s the case then why not take on $300 million in payroll commitments.
Adrian Gonzalez is that good? This was the cheapest way to get a first baseman with a .343 on base percentage?
Not for nothing, but the options at 1b are limited. I’m not saying that this makes it a good deal for LA, but it’s not as horrifying as it seems at first glance especially if Crawford gets healthy. That’s a big if I know.
Forgot to add, the NL west race is close and LA and SF have one more three game series before the season is over. One player could make a difference.
Actually, yes.
Beckett and Crawford are the question marks. Getting Adrian Gonzalez is not only worth it, but worth it to the point that it offsets some of the danger of the others.
Maybe not offsets it enough to make the overall deal worth it though.
It’s not about cheap, not for a big-market franchise. LA, Chi, NY, Bos, and Phil teams really aren’t budget-constrained.
It *is *about winning in October. This October, mainly, and a few more if possible. Yes, the Dodgers can take on a quarter billion dollars in extra payroll, remembering that it’s mainly offset by increased ticket sales, parking and concessions, and cable viewership, especially in a year when the Angels aren’t competing for those.
There’s a price to pay eventually, yes, if you neglect scouting and drafting and farm system development, but that run of winning sure was worth it, wasn’t it?
Two more, actually, including the very last series of the regular season.
Fan boy question: given that the official team announcement just happened 30 minutes ago, and game time is in 3.5 hours, is there any realistic chance any of the new guys will be playing, or at least in uniform, tonight? And yes, I realize saying that that Beckett and Crawford aren’t realistic for other reasons.
You’re misled if your metric for “pretty good” is regular season performance. Despite the large number of games and the strong temptation to consider them a good statistical data base, it’s still a misconception - teams know the games that matter are the ones in October, and the best-planning ones make sure they qualify and then enter October as healthy and prepared as they can be. If your assumptions about the data don’t match the facts, then your conclusions will not be useful, either.
The team that wins it all is the best team by definition.
There certainly are franchises whose managements want to keep the fan interest high but not high enough that they’ll have to shell out big money to the players afterward. The Boston Bruins, for example, were devastated by decades of that shit before the fans caught on and they changed their ways.
I also know you’re tempted to dismiss victory in the postseason as simply a matter of luck, based on the limited size of what appears to be another statistical data base. But it is possible to build a roster based on matchups against probable opponents, for instance, and to get guys in whom you have high confidence can handle the pressure, and to select field leadership that can keep the team appropriately focused. That’s not luck, that’s planning.
Yes, obviously there’s a large element of chance in sport. But “chance favors the prepared”, as you might have heard.
To a point, yes, except for a couple of things: Again, regular season wins don’t matter; qualifying for the playoffs matters. And, due to MLB’s backwardness with revenue sharing and salary capping and guaranteeing of contracts, money does matter; if you’re not a big market then you have to either develop your market or mortgage your future in an attempt to win now and develop the market that way. Tomorrow never comes.
There was a twitter photo of the three active players on the charter to LA several hours ago. They should all be there in time.
Isn’t the lineup posted on a website somewhere? Thought I read a post that A-Gon was in it.
I saw a Twitter photo on Nick Punto’s account of all of them on a private jet to LA with a timestamp of 11:45 am, but I am Twitter-ignorant and can’t figure out if that’s his local time or mine.
Jon Heyman of SI claims Gonzalez is in LAD’s lineup tonight, FWIW.
Edit: Elvis beats me!
Dodger twitter account saying AGon batting 4th tonight.
Apparently Rubby and Sands are both PTBNL’s. Wha’evs, just don’t get hurt, fellas.
Thanks, guys. Methinks I’m gonna try to get to the stadium early tonight. Should be a fun atmosphere.
Bautista was activated yesterday, and he’s now come out of today’s game against the Orioles, apparently with more wrist problems.
I’d say Adrian is going to make an impact. He just took the second pitch out into right field for a 3 run homer. 
The Adrian Gonzalez move will be popular in San Diego, even among Padres fans, i think.
He’s a local boy, and a local favorite, and there will be people (Padres and Dodgers fans) who will make a point of going to Dodger games just to see him. Most Dodger games in San Diego have pretty decent attendance anyway, but this will only help.
This does not surprise me in the least.
Hell of a night at the stadium! Adrian’s first at-bat, Ethier breaking a Dodger record with 10 consecutive at-bat hits and coming up a triple shy of a cycle, and my wife “catching” a foul ball from Juan Rivera that ricocheted off the level above us and then nailed her in the back! Definitely glad I went. 
Success in the postseason isn’t ‘simply’ a matter of luck: skill, preparedness, etc. are important.
But you can’t just wave away the huge element of just plain luck that MLB has introduced into the postseason.
Let’s say you’ve got that team with the great pressure players, who have the right matchups against all the other contenders, have the right field leadership, etc., etc.
Let’s say this team has all these attributes to the extent that they’re deservedly 3-1 favorites in any 5- or 7-game series against any of the other 9 postseason qualifiers, that they’re that much better than everyone else under the very metrics you’ve set up, that they’ve got a 75% chance of beating any other team in a head-to-head playoff series.
You know what their chances are of becoming world champion?
42%.
It’s more likely than not that one of the other contenders is simply going to get the right combination of hot and lucky for a few weeks, and walk off with the crown. That’s what happens when you introduce more and more layers of playoffs: it becomes more and more about luck.
Maybe by your definition. The problem with a metric like that is that it treats the MLB-designed path to the world championship as divinely inspired: the judgments of the playoffs are true and righteous altogether, to riff off of Psalm 19. Whereas I look at the current season/postseason structure and see a really sucky design, no matter what team attributes you think the path to the championship should be testing.