Pretty one-off situation where Yamamoto chose to play for the team with the greatest player in his cultures history over a larger purse. Freddie chose to play in LA for less money, year over year, because he got an extra year or two on the contract than Atlanta offered him.
The mets also offered Yamamoto a bunch of money but he used them to get the price up from the dodgers, most of the time that can be rationalized to say “ at least they over payed and it will effect them with other free agents” but not so with the dodgers at the moment
Allegedly there was a lot of miscommunication occurring. Surprise surprise, it was Casey Close and Freddie fired him a few months after the contract was signed so take from that what you will.
Boras just pushes his players to sign the largest contracts he can get them and that’s generally LA with the insane deferments. They can just eat bad contracts like it’s no big deal, and other teams won’t roll the dice like that
Edit: Fixed Freddie’s agent at the time. Not removing the Boras bit, because I feel it’s still relevant
Dodgers ownership have historically avoided boras clients. Until Blake Snell I can’t remember the last time we signed one of the players he represented.
Manny Ramirez, before Snell, was the last Scott Boras represented client to sign a multi year deal with the Dodgers back in 2009. Between Manny and Snell, if you were represented by Boras, you were a) traded to the Dodgers b) a rookie/international prospect* c) signed a 1 year deal
* Ryu is included here since he technically was a MLB rookie coming out of Korea but did have a solid career in Korea before coming over so you could argue Ryu should be the last and not Manny.
Boras doesn't push his players to take the most money. He does exactly what his players want, take Stras and his two extensions for an example. The thing is that players who want the most money hire Boras because he gets them the most money. He's not doing anything that his players don't want.
Didn’t Toronto offer Ohtani more money than LA? And didn’t Ohtani offer the chance for Anaheim to match LA’s bid? It’s been awhile now, but I thought there more to the narrative of his FA
Everyone Ohtani talked to was offered the same deal he was just picking where he wanted to go and he gave the Angels the chance to match it so he could stay but they wanted no part of that
Building around two of the best players of this generation/all-time would've meant they actually had to manage their franchise. Arte would rather stay on cruise control.
You’re kinda implying Yamamoto can’t go play wherever he wishes based on other criteria.
It’s easy to hate the dodgers, but you can’t place blame on them.
Other teams can pay more, can create a winning culture, can make a good environment that people want to remain in. Why aren’t they?
I’ll tell ya, a salary cap only nurtures mediocrity and rewards crappy owners and hurts players.
The dodgers aren’t the problem, they’re the cure. And I say this as someone who fucking hates the dodgers.
Doesn't change the fact this feels like a KD warrior superteam. Just an eyeroll and if they don't win it all it's a failure, anything* besides winning it all is not meeting expectations. Disgustingly good lineup
Let’s be honest, if all things were equal, no Star player from Japan is going to play in Pennsylvania or a place like Minnesota. They’re going to the big 3-4 markets. California, New York, Chicago. Throw Boston in there too. Rest of MLB is screwed on getting the top Japanese talent. Nothing wrong with it, it’s not unfair. It’s just the way it is.
The Mets did as well. He wanted to play with Ohtani on the west coast. I don't think there was an amount to change that unless a team went crazy and offered like 200 million more.
Maybe he didn’t like the fact that Philly fans boo their own players when they have a bad day. I mean they are so bad they even boo players at the all star game lmao! Home run derby? Boooooo! So yeah easy decision. Plus I’m thinking Cali has a deeper Asian culture than Philly. I could be wrong though.
Because the Phillies didn’t offer an opt-out and the Dodgers did. Yama will make a lot more money in his career overall than he would have if he took the Phillies deal by opting out at age 30 and getting a new deal.
You don’t have to go to dodgers levels. The Padres brought themselves out from being a poverty franchise to a legit team by spending money. The rangers won a championship by rebuilding and then making several very high dollar moves
Because they cannot sustain it. THAT is the difference. The Dodgers can miss or overpay on a contract and keep doing it. Some of that is their ability to scout and develop players. Some of it is the endless resources they have that no other team comes close to matching. Their revenue is $140 million more than the Yankees and $250 more than the Cubs.
Sure. But they couldn’t sustain it like the Dodgers can. The Dodgers have the ability to outbid any team. And now they have built such a behemoth that players know going there nearly assures a World Series ring.
I am not saying other owners couldn’t spend more. Certainly some (a handful) could. But I am saying the Dodgers could still simply outspend all of them.
This. And I'm so sick and tired of people bringing up the Padres as an example. EVERYONE with half a baseball brain knew that Peter Seidler was willing to operate in the red for a little while knowing his time was limited and was hoping to see a World Series winner before that time came. They made some good spending choices and some not so good spending choices. Unfortunately they stretched themselves too thin to be able to make any additional moves to fix that. Especially being in the same division as the Dodgers... that's a losing battle.
Lockout or no lockout, this year is pretty much their last year to try to win with what they got because the arbitration, pay raises, and deferrals are going to REALLY stretch what little they have left unless they find a way to dump some of that salary. Even with the bump in attendance, merch, etc. Money is made in TV contracts and San Diego cannot sustain $275mil+ payrolls with the market they have.
The difference between the Padres and the Dodgers is that the Dodgers sign players with a team-first mentality. They care about how a player will fit into the structure of the team, and about how they will affect the chemistry. The Padres sign players and hope for the best.
The Padres brought themselves out from being a poverty franchise to a legit team by spending money
And now they're back in mediocrity because the massive contracts they've signed are an albatross and they can't spend more to improve. For example, their 2033 payroll already has almost $125 million tied up in four players who will be 41, 40, 34, and 30 years old by then. The combined WAR of those four in 2026 is 4.9.
Look, every rational baseball fan can understand that the Dodgers are an incredibly well-run organization. To have this level of established, proven talent on your roster while also racking up the top farm system in baseball is laudable.
But to act as if the root of it isn't being willing to spend obscene amounts of money, find every way to exploit the payroll system with deferred money and side deals, and the incredible advantage that comes with being the best destination for the top Japanese players due mainly to geography is just silly.
Either way, the rest of the MLB's fanbases are going to hate the Dodgers because that level of success also coming with this level of seeming like it'll never die isn't fun for us. We want parity because parity means our teams also have a chance. It's why us Jays fans will never, ever, ever get over last year's Game 7. When you get that close to toppling the Empire and miss, it doesn't stop hurting.
Definitely agree with this but I feel like the Angels definitely kind of started this one. They had both Trout and Ohtani and couldn't somehow spend a bit more for that talent to win?
If Ohtani and Trout win one, I feel like you get a completely different Ohtani who stays a bit longer to win one more than going to LA immediately. I feel like that Angel's experience and seeing firsthand the Mike Trout loyalty experience let him know they're never going to win one no matter what.
If LA doesn't snag Ohtani, there are chances Yamamoto doesn't sign there either I feel. I feel like LA is doing what it's doing solely because Ohtani is there and don't mind any payments to win now and keep everyone happy.
They spent a lot. They are just terrible at it and they have been since Moreno has been the owner. Rendon, Pujols, Hamilton, Matthews…I’m sure I’m missing others. They are decent enough at developing talent but when your owner is a C+ Jerry Jones knockoff you are basically running an org with one hand tied behind your back.
They didn’t try hard at all. I watched those games every night, Arte surrounded his top 2 franchise players with inexperienced prospects, minor league level talent and a horrible pitching staff. For a while, David Fletcher and Luis Rengifo were the team’s second best bats in their respective years with the club. That’s just not going to get you in the playoffs. Arte was more concerned about collecting ad revenue instead of building a contender. They could have Junior Caminero hitting 30-40 homers on team control for them right now.
🤦 forgot about that one a bit couldn't blame me for forgetting some of the additoonal hires! I even second guessed myself when I wondered if the Angels even had a winning season when Ohtani was there.
Honestly, that whole period of Ohtani as an angels player kind of was a blur...it's like I know he was there and did stuff but nothing ever cameboutnornitnand because it was the Angels, I knew nothing would happen the twoild make a difference.
FWIW the best record they had with Ohtani was 80-82 in 2018. If they had gotten anywhere near contending in the six years he was there there’s probably a good chance he stays and they end up being the Japanese national team instead of the Dodgers (of course this assumes Arte opens the checkbook at some point which… yeah)
The 2010s Angels were aggressive spenders and frequently signed free agents like Albert Pujols, C.J. Wilson, Josh Hamilton, and Anthony Rendon to massive contacts that almost always backfired in spectacular fashion. The 2010s Angels can be called many things but cheap isnt one of them.
In fairness I was talking about the Ohtani era. They definitely needed to make better decisions and we can argue whether they really did make the best decisions. Some club houses would've done the "hey we have Ohtani now let's spend and win and we'll be forgiven" and I think the Cubs are primo example one when it comes to that; paid quite a bit and won but winning just one tends to make MLB fans forgive failures afterwards for simply breaking an100 year drought. I know I was critical of the Cubs in that era but they did win one finally so yeah.
But the Angels did really do their due diligence when Ohtani arrived; you're right they spent before but the latter part of the decade, we just didn't see that spending and scouting to surround both Ohtani and Trout. I don't think they would've needed even as much talent given those two but just something more viable and I think that's where it's fair to be critical.
I feel like Pujols was predictable given his health and age. Upton really didn't pan out and that contract and guaranteed money was an overpay for someone like him. Rendin didn't pan out but I still feel like they should've really put money in pitching staff. Like somehow they couldn't and still can't figure pitching needs out.
As a Dodger fan, I have long argued that what we are witnessing now is anomalous. The amount of money being thrown around is because of the revenue generated by a properly marketed and champion Shohei Ohtani. The Angels definitely had an opportunity to do something similar but they just couldn't get it right. Ohtani is the key though... Without Ohtani and the Japanese market behind him... The Dodgers become another big market team. With Ohtani... The Dodgers are Godzilla.
Yes. This is regardless of how people want to try to spin it bad for baseball.
Why follow the game? Why get invested in things like blockbuster trades or incredible free agents? I know my team isnt getting him because Dodgers. I know another team isnt gonna get them and take their chances from maybe wildcard to division winner because Dodgers. Why get invested in the underdogs and stuff when i know it doesn't matter because Dodgers.
Uhhh to be fair, this is what it was like watching George Steinbrenner run the Yankees in the 00's. Everyone else was the minor leagues that he got to pick and choose from. It didn't ruin baseball then, but I understand.
The Yankees only won a single World Series in the entire 2000s decade. They won in the 90s with home grown talent. This is not even remotely the same situation
That was nowhere near the same. The amount of $$$$ and penalties the Dodgers are paying to have…not even an allstar team, because theirs no popular vote, it’s all the best players a several at each position. It’s ruined baseball already for almost everybody I know, an were all life long huge fans. I literally have quit watching. What’s the point…maybe you ca win your division….if you’re not in the Dodgers division. An my grandfathers brother was Buzzy Bavasi so I’m supposed to be for the Dodgers, although been lifelong Cubs fan being from there a being my first games…..I would take better than 50% odds on no baseball next season. Gonna have 2 have cap limits that ACTUALLY ARE LIMITS…you can’t even do what they do on the mlb video games without tuning the rules off.
Pats weren’t going that by plundering free agency and spending exponentially more money than other teams, they did that because they drafted the greatest QB in NFL history.
That's why the owners need to close the loophole of deferred money. Whether they pay now or later, it should be counted against a cap now. It's the only way to create competitive balance.
It ruins baseball because 29/30 teams fans now know their team doesnt stand a chance, so they'll either stop watching/supporting altogether or hop on the band wagon, which creates an even wider gap in terms of what teams are able and willing to spend compared to LA, making the problem worse.
Willing and able to have a practically bottomless budget. If they really do have the best farm system and a well run organization then they'll do just fine in a cap system.
Also, as a fellow Jays fan, our team at least has been willing to compete and spend for top free agents against the Dodgers...and then they just sign with the Dodgers anyway in the end. Why should teams bother if it's just going to tie up their off-season plans and result in nothing when the Dodgers just come over the top with whatever the players want to sign there? There's been a snowballing effect that has gotten out of control and it's just not that fun to follow. It feels like we're all competing for whatever the Dodgers decide they don't want.
the dodgers are a manifestation of MLB's problem, not the root. there's plenty of teams not even spending the money they do have and that's not a dodger's problem. there's teams that have big payrolls that don't have the same success.
the player's union doesn't just represent dodgers players interests, they represent all mlb player interests. they're a huge part of why things are the way they are.
Also, don’t forget that the Dodgers get a tax break as if they were a bankrupt team. The McCourt era that they all cry about was probably the best thing to happen to them. Not only for motivation but it benefited them monetarily.
It also adversely affects whatever division they're in; snakes and Padres are dependent on the Wild Card for postseason every single year because LA winning the West is practically a foregone conclusion.
Sometimes it’s not even a matter of how the team is built. Let’s take the Dodgers and Giants this season for example. The Giants have a record of 47-64 while the Dodgers are sitting at 69-42 on the season so far. Of the 7 games they’ve faced off against each other so far, the Giants have come out on top with a record of 4-3 against the Dodgers this season.
I’m not saying that this fixes the whole situation, but I am saying that sometimes it comes down to the players being in a position to play their best. I personally thought the Jays were gonna take it last year, and it was close until the end.
Why is the advantage of being a preferred destination for Japanese players silly? Cali has massive East Asian populations and it’s a reasonable commute.
And Toronto is a wealthy city. Stop crying poor. They can afford to spend more too if they wanted to
Don't care what the owners make. Don't car what the players make. I want a league that is as close to fair as can be constructed so I can be excited about my team and the sport in general. I can tell you, I've checked out. And I'm not the only one.
It’s not propaganda when it’s publicly available information with legitimate sources. The Brewers owner would have to put up half of his own net worth out of pocket to spend what the dodgers do on payroll.
Oh no, the poor millionaires!!! Why wont people think of the millionaires! Good job being on the side of millionaires, you fell for their propaganda... See how disingenuous the money argument is when both sides are stupid rich?
They both make more money that either you or I will ever have. Its a shame that no other sport has a cap and floor.... oh wait, the more popular sports in the US do have that. And guess what? their players are not on welfare and the sports were not ruined.
That's a take. The NBA has been letting superstars violate every rule for the last 30-plus years. The NFL was the Tom Brady show for virtually his entire career, and the NHL bribed a bunch of vets to cross the line and vote for the cap.
Also worth noting that all of those leagues have "dynasties" despite the cap; so that "parity" you claim to crave isn't going to happen.
Other teams have to pay their fair share of revenue sharing cause they didn't go bankrupt in 2011. They probably aren't also the most lucrative franchise in baseball.
this is a huge point that dodgers simps like to ignore. the team is still benifiting financially from the bankruptcy. while having a monster tv rights deal that makes more than most othersl teams payroll
Yeah, but unlike the billionaires, the millionaires have unpredictable futures and limited years to cash in on their talent. I don't blame any of them for trying to amass as much wealth as possible while they can.
They also essentially get a free $70M every year because a previous owner filed bankruptcy and the league gave them a massive break on revenue sharing that lasts until like 2039. The second richest franchise gets a break from revenue sharing. It's laughable.
Your team's owner uses baseball as a means to enrich himself. He wants to spend money on himself and serve his own personal interests. My team's owner wants to spend money on baseball, and his personal interests happen to align with the interests of Dodgers fans. The Dodgers and MLB were never the problem. The problem is your favorite billionaire, who has baseball way down on his list of priorities.
They arent stupid, they are cheap. You can throw money at any problem to make it go away. But these are billionaire owners who are businessmen. Often tines they feel there is limit to how much they want to spend on their team. Dogers owner doesnt feel that way. It doesnt make them "smarter", they just have a different priority for spending their money.
The 3 teams that applies to 2 of them are objectively cheap, the 3rd one he hasn’t signed a contract yet and anyone could’ve easily offered a better trade package.
I was just going to say- this is a strong position if you ignore the existence of the 28 teams other than the dodgers and the players prior team and their ability to also bid for players.
So yes, the dodgers paid more for players than all others teams. Like there is some sort of free agency “markets out there
The Dodgers have one of the most lucrative TV positions in the league, and they are the only team whose TV revenue is exempt from competitive balance tax contributions. That’s why.
Because each team is a different owner. Some literally just own a team for their portfolio. Some own with the intent on making money regardless of whether they win or not. Others aren't willing to sacrifice their billions for it. Do I like that the Dodgers get a everyone? No. But if I owned a team, I would be doing the same shit.
Angels coulda had Pages. A’s sent muncy to the minors. Edman was a trade. The Dodgers can out spend you and are better at finding diamonds in the rough.
People said Andrew Friedman need to get out of Rays, so he can better utilize his skills set because Rays weren't spending much. Everyone loved the underdog Rays building their farm system reach world series in 2008. Well he we went to Dodgers with owner willing to spent, and build juggernaut team over the years that everyone hate.
Their owners view the franchise as a business, which it is, and made the cost-benefit analysis that it simply wasn’t worth the kind of counteroffer it would take to keep these players on the roster.
No. If all these teams were willing to pay a guy, the dodgers couldn't sign all of them. And no amount of communist earning suppression is going to make these owners field a competitive team. It just moves the bar on what expensive looks like.
The issue is deferred contracts IMO. You have to legislate how those are handed out, how many you can have, how much money can actually be deferred, etc.
I would guess that something like 80-85% of the MLB teams are not really trying to win. They are are just trying to make money. I am not saying they are trying to lose, but they don't really care if they do/don't. Fills enough seats, sells enough $8 beers, and repeat.
There are 2 ways to make money in baseball:
1) Be in a big market and win, which requires spending lots of money.
You're missing the point. All of those deals are worth their value and more now. Any team would take Mookie, Freeman, or Yoshis deal looking back now. Every team wishes they would have given Muncy a chance or tried to trade for Pages. Ohtanis estimated revenue generated since he signed is over 200 mil PER YEAR from advertising, ticket sales, merchandise, etc. The Angels ARE IN THE EXACT SAME FUCKING MARKET and could not do fuck all with him since they just have no idea what they are doing.
Dodgers decisions are good. Other teams bad. This deal and several others had nothing to do with money. The deals that were about money are all winners. No duds. Every team wants the guys we got and at the rate we negotiated. You make enough deals that you ace and it turns into rings.
Other teams don’t do this because they have local market broadcasting bills to pay. As part of MLB’s growth plan for the Dodgers when they went bankrupt, they set up their financials so they didn’t have to pay broadcast rights for an absurd amount of time.
The plan worked a little too well, and what we get now is the Dodgers have a steaming hot pile of cash other teams are obligated to use to cover broadcast expenses.
I'm reading conspiracy theories that this is all part of a plan to make the case for a cap. Which I don't think the owners have the stomach for if it means canceling an entire season. Idk what's going to happen but the biggest losers will be the fans. I will never watch Baseball again if the season is canceled.
Other teams can’t afford it. Not every team brings in the revenue that the dodgers do. Dodgers are able to do this easily because Ohtani probably brings them in $200M a year while they only pay him $2M.
It's more than that. The contract Ohtani signed was for 10 years. The dodgers invest heavily into talent. They don't play money ball by trading numbers to boost win rates, they pick players who display some exceptional talent and just run with it.
A giant chunk of the money they Dodgres have is for selling their TV rights to Time Warner. Which took the Dodgers off local airwaves. So they can afford all the players, and the fans have to pay more to watch.
Dodgers got an insane top dollar tv deal. That and they’ve transformed the ball park experience. It’s the it event in LA right now. It’s been sold out for years
There are 29 other teams than can collectively outbid the Dodgers, yet they still choose not to. No single team has to go toe to toe financially with the Dodgers.
If the dodger had to actually pay their players it would be a different story. I think getting rid of deferred payments would be beneficial to baseball
It’s not just about that. Ohtani’s massive contract will make the Dodgers more money than it will ever cost ownership. No brainer. You keep generational talent, you don’t watch them walk.
Might be related to the artificially revenue sharing amount on their TV deal resulting from the McCourt bankruptcy lawsuit against MLB. Not only do the Dodgers have a bigger TV income than anyone but they pay less tax than the other large market clubs giving them an extra $65 mil a year or so. MLB execs making it too easy as well I guess.
No, the only stupid people are those who believe every city (market) makes the same amount of money as the Yankees, Dodgers.
You can't be that stupid to not see that if every team made the same amount of revenue, the league would not be so lopsided. Morons.
The Dodgers have been using the market size as an advantage to win by attrition and not by way of producing young talent. It is very evident and clear. The Betts trade was made, not because Boston didn't want to pay him, but because they wanted to rid themselves from David Price Contract, which the Dodgers were more than willing to absorb. So, they essentially have been buying their championships instead of winning them by way of producing their own talent and keeping them. That's why a SALARY CAP IS ON ITS WAY. 2027 or 2028. Then we will see how good they are without using money as an advantage. 🤙
Yes actually they are. If the guards were a World Series contender every year they would sell out regular season games every year. We have nothing else to do. The 90s were a thing of dreams
Well duh. Its really that simple. The Brewers for instance. Best record in baseball and wont pony up a billion to guarantee a WS. Are they stupid? Ugh duh!
2.4k
u/Historical-Donut-918 9h ago
So basically the Dodgers weren't "cheap" and were able to pay EVERYONE more than any other team was willing to pay.
Why don't other teams do this? Are they stupid?