Organizational Rankings: #14 – Dodgers

On talent, the Dodgers may be top ten. They’re the favorites in the NL West this year (or at least co-favorites with Colorado) with a club built around mostly young talent, including several of the best under-27 players in the game. The core trio of Matt Kemp, Clayton Kershaw, and Chad Billingsley are tough to beat, and they’re surrounded by quality or upside at most spots.

So, why are they 14th? The Divorce. The uncertainty surrounding the ownership of the Dodgers is a big problem. Frank McCourt can talk about how it will be business as usual once everything gets settled and the court gives him control of the team, but that’s not the only possible outcome, and he knows it. There’s a reason they didn’t really spend any money this winter.

The whole thing is a mess. The revelations that have surfaced in the divorce proceedings paint the McCourts in an even less flattering light than before, which is saying something. Any owner that would essentially use his team as an ATM to finance his personal lifestyle is a problem, and that description undersells how the McCourts behaved with Dodger money.

As a Dodger fan, I can only imagine the frustration when you see the team declining to offer arbitration to players who clearly won’t accept it, because of the perceived risk, yet later finding out that the team has both of the McCourts sons on their payroll at a total of $600,000 per year, when neither actually work for the Dodgers. I bet Logan White would love to have another $600,000 to spend on the draft. I can only imagine how much they could upgrade their information systems with a $600,000 per year investment.

Regardless of how it turns out, the McCourts have been exposed as people you don’t want owning your team. Through their own personal issues, they have created a cloud that hangs over the team, and is now affecting the way they put together their ball club.

If I’m a Dodger fan, I’m hoping that the Judge orders a sale of the team. But, no matter what, this doesn’t look like its going to end any time soon, so while 2010 should be an exciting year for LA fans as they push for a playoff berth, it’s all secondary to the drama of the owners.

We hoped you liked reading Organizational Rankings: #14 – Dodgers by Dave Cameron!

Please support FanGraphs by becoming a member. We publish thousands of articles a year, host multiple podcasts, and have an ever growing database of baseball stats.

FanGraphs does not have a paywall. With your membership, we can continue to offer the content you've come to rely on and add to our unique baseball coverage.

Support FanGraphs




Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

newest oldest most voted
scott
Guest
scott

I really hate to be a jackass about this, but can you guys please employ an editor? Back to back posts with annoying errors:

Marc’s “James Loney is a valuable first base.”

and now…

“So, why are their 14th?”

You guys are all math-whiz intelligent baseball writers. Proof read.

Smeck
Guest
Smeck

If you really hate being a jackass about this stuff then let it go. They are offering free content that is great. I can’t stress this enough, the content is great, best on the web with respect to baseball and it is free. There are no free lunches, except for fangraphs. If the options are bring in an editor and goto a subscription model, or leave the status quo, i vote for the leaving things alone. I’m sure they proof read, I’m sure they peer review, but sometimes stuff slips by when you’re doing multi-tasking. It happens to the best of em. I think you should feel free to piont stuff out, but just point it out an move on.

Charles
Guest

“when you’re doing multi-tasking”?!?!

When you comment would you please use an editor?! I have no idea what you are trying to say!!

B
Guest
B

If you can understand what they’re saying, then really….who cares?

Mike K.
Guest
Mike K.

I concur with this. A lot of complaining recently about format, whether things were 100% fact-checked, etc. This isn’t a job for these guys, it’s a hobby. They need to do other things to get paid. If you see an error, politely point it out; these guys seem to have no problem making changes (as time permits), but stop grading!

Carson Cistulli
Member
Member

In fact, we do employ a copy editor here: me. And, to be honest, I do feel a slight pang of embarrassment any time an error leaks through.

That said, because (a) this is a blog and (b) the content is produced/published so very quickly and (c) I’m sometimes away from the computer, stuff like this will happen.

It’s most difficult with Cameron: dude can write something like the above — that is, smart and pointed analysis — in like 10 minutes. No joking. He’s a machine.

Seriously, Dave Cameron is part robot.

Chris A.
Guest
Chris A.

Have you ever tried producing writing for a mass-audience? I’ve worked as a copy-editor and have re-read the same document 15 times and errors still slip through. In college 7 of the newspaper staff would read each page before publication and errors still got though. My point is that I doubt you really understand how hard it is to find every error of your writing, especially if you publish with any frequency.

If you don’t want to be a jackass you could:
1. stop rudely demanding things
2. be much more understanding
3. instead of posting a comment proving how much of a good grammar checker you are to everyone reading you could send an e-mail to one of the writers to get it fixed. That way the comments are actually filled with actually interesting responses (maybe, that’s the ideal anyway).