The Los Angeles Dodgers Have Landed Roki Sasaki

Sam Navarro-USA TODAY Sports

Major League Baseball had its “Kevin Durant is a Warrior” moment on Friday, when 23-year-old Japanese phenom Roki Sasaki agreed to sign with the defending World Series champion Los Angeles Dodgers for $6.5 million. Sasaki himself announced his decision via his Instagram, while his bonus was reported on X by The Athletic’s Fabian Ardaya and Alden González of ESPN.

If he can stay healthy, Sasaki is a likely front-of-the-rotation arm who has the talent to win Cy Young Awards. When he’s been fully operational, his fastball has averaged nearly 99 mph, he has an elite splitter, and his slider became a useable weapon in 2022. He joins a loaded Dodgers roster that has five or six other players who either have won a Cy Young or MVP (Freddie Freeman, Shohei Ohtani, Mookie Betts, Blake Snell), or could conceivably do so in their best season (Tyler Glasnow and maybe Yoshinobu Yamamoto). One and a half of those players weren’t even on last year’s Dodgers title team. As I’m writing this, the Dodgers have not yet announced the signing. Though Sasaki’s contract is technically a minor league deal, and he isn’t yet on the 40-man roster, he is overwhelmingly likely to break camp with the Dodgers’ big league club and be part of their squad that opens the season against the Cubs in Japan on March 18-19.

Sasaki did not have his peak stuff in 2024 (more on that below), but in his four NPB seasons – 414 2/3 IP, 275 H, 0.883 WHIP (lol), 524 K, 91 BB, 2.02 ERA – he has at least met, and arguably exceeded, the all-world expectations foisted upon him since he was in high school. He has been a viewed as a generational talent, the LeBron James of Japanese baseball if you will, since his junior year. His exploits in Japan have been Herculean. Sasaki’s fastball was touching 101 in high school; he once threw nearly 500 pitches in an eight-day span, including a 12-inning, 194-pitch complete game during which he also hit the game-winning two-run homer.

He was the first pick in the 2019 NPB Draft by the Chiba Lotte Marines, had a sub-2.00 ERA in his 2021 rookie season, and then transcended the sport in 2022 when he threw 17 consecutive perfect innings that April. The 6-foot-2 righty retired 52 consecutive batters during that stretch, more than the MLB record of 47. It was at this point that Sasaki became something approaching an international household name. His fastball averaged just shy of 99 mph and touched 103 mph in 2022, making him the hardest-throwing pitcher in the history of NPB. He was having an even better 2023 – 85 IP, 39% K%, 5% BB%, 62% GB%, 1.88 ERA, 0.92 FIP — before he was shut down with an oblique tear that July. It cost him to most of the rest of that season.

Then in 2024, Sasaki missed time with shoulder soreness, and his stuff was down when he pitched. His strikeout-to-walk ratio was roughly halved compared to 2023. Here are some splits illustrating the dip:

2023 Roki Sasaki Pitch Splits
Pitch Type Usage% Avg Velocity Miss% Chase%
Fastball 50% 98.8 24% 29%
Splitter 35% 89.6 53% 48%
Slider 14% 87.6 45% 33%

2024 Roki Sasaki Pitch Splits
Pitch Type Usage% Avg Velocity Miss% Chase%
Fastball 48% 96.7 12%(!) 25%
Splitter 29% 88.6 51% 35%
Slider 22% 84.2 37% 23%

His bouts with injury combined with this dip in performance create some risk that we’ve already seen Sasaki’s peak. He’s a spindly guy with a very violent delivery, and injuries could conceivably be something he deals with frequently. This, plus the Dodgers’ unbelievable depth of starting pitchers, means Sasaki can be handled with extreme caution in his first year if the Dodgers so choose. He’ll likely provide premium rate performance and less in terms of innings volume, at least initially. If Sasaki’s fastball returns to its prior level of performance and his body keeps getting stronger into his mid- and late-20s, then we’re talking about a frequent Cy Young candidate in the mold of Kevin Gausman or Nathan Eovaldi, except Sasaki signed for just $6.5 million and is subject to the same six-year window of team control as any other rookie.

The Dodgers began the 2025 International Signing Period with a $5,146,200 bonus pool, tied for the second lowest in baseball. Sasaki’s deal is reportedly for $6.5 million. MLB rules dictate that teams can trade for up to 60% of their original pool space, which puts Los Angeles’ maximum potential pool at just over $8.2 million. The Dodgers made two trades for bonus space on Friday, one with the Phillies (for prospect Dylan Campbell) and one with the Reds (for prospect Arnaldo Lantigua) for a combined total somewhere in the range of $2.25—$2.5 million in additional space. (The specifics of the Phillies deal are unknown but have a $250,000 range.) In the days leading up to the start of the 2025 international signing period on January 15, three prospects who had verbal agreements with the Dodgers changed teams: Darell Morel (Pirates), Oscar Patiño (White Sox), Teilon Serrano (Twins). All three seem to have done so of their own volition — though likely in response to the risk that Sasaki would be a Dodger — and got more money from their new teams than they were slated to receive from Los Angeles. Cuban journalist Francys Romero reported that the Dodgers intend to honor their other agreements, which they’ll have to get done with, at most, roughly $1.7 million (their $8.2 max pool minus Sasaki’s bonus). The ripple effects of Sasaki’s signing — which so far are those prospects’ changing organizations for more money and a couple of bonus space trades that included marginal prospects — have been relatively benign.

Where should Sasaki fall on Ben Clemens’ annual midseason Trade Value rankings? If he’s healthy and productive on a rookie deal, with six years of team control, one could argue he belongs in Paul Skenes and Elly De La Cruz territory, in the middle of the top 10. The surplus value of Sasaki’s deal for the Dodgers is almost incalculable. In addition to his signing bonus and league minimum rookie salary, the Dodgers will need to pay Sasaki’s NPB club, Chiba Lotte Marines, a 20% posting fee of $1.3 million. It makes their first-year outlay for Sasaki about $8.5 million when you include his league-minimum salary. That’s less than the first three picks in the 2024 draft received for their bonuses. Sasaki’s on-field performance is likely to outpace his salary several times over, plus he is also now an intercontinental celebrity in the second-largest media market in the U.S., on the team with the sport’s biggest global star, and generating interest and revenue on both sides of the Pacific Ocean. This is as quintessential an example of “the rich get richer” as you’ll find in sports, where amateur player acquisition is almost always tailored to funnel elite young talent to the bad teams.

Will the concentration of talent in Los Angeles cause meaningful disillusionment among baseball fans? As excited as everyone is to watch Sasaki pitch, our culture tends to tire and make villains of dynastic sports franchises. One of the many (seemingly spurious) things that Sasaki’s agent, Joel Wolfe, stated publicly during a poorly mic’d Winter Meetings press conference was that Sasaki did not have an enjoyable experience with the media in Japan, going so far as to say it might be beneficial for him to land in a small market in order to avoid more of it. Well, now Sasaki has chosen the antithesis of that. He is intentionally moving into the place where the spotlight is already shining brightest, and where most baseball fans look with ire at the reigning champs. Is $6.5 million enough to subject yourself to schadenfreude from swaths of three different countries in the event that the 2025 Dodgers are the 2012 Marlins or 2011 Eagles? Is “begrudging respect” Sasaki’s cultural ceiling? These are much more difficult questions that will take years to answer.





Eric Longenhagen is from Catasauqua, PA and currently lives in Tempe, AZ. He spent four years working for the Phillies Triple-A affiliate, two with Baseball Info Solutions and two contributing to prospect coverage at ESPN.com. Previous work can also be found at Sports On Earth, CrashburnAlley and Prospect Insider.

277 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
PaulMember since 2020
26 days ago

Yawn. I get that it is fun to have teams to root against, but when a team becomes an all-star team due to the financial disparities between franchises, it gets hard to be a fan of the sport. Freeman, Betts, Yamamoto, Sasaki, Snell, Glasnow, Ohtani, Teoscar. If anything, it completely devalues any titles the Dodgers win and is really only news if they don’t win it all…and as noted, it is just bad for the health of the sport.

CC AFCMember since 2016
26 days ago
Reply to  Paul

Cry me a river. It’s not really financial disparities as much as willingness to spend to try to win and willingness to treat the team as a real, competitive sports franchise and not just an appreciating asset to be sold at such time is convenient to the failson Scion.

And in two years, you’re all gonna be laughing at the “albatross” contracts of mid 30s Freeman, Betts, Snell, Teoscar, etc

Last edited 26 days ago by CC AFC
Randy HEatonMember since 2020
26 days ago
Reply to  CC AFC

Yes other teams COULD spend like Dodgers, but they would lose tens of millions of dollars a year. The Dodgers could have signed Soto and they still would be profitable.

And the albatross contracts won’t keep the Dodgers from signing other huge contracts because even with albatross contracts they still will be profitable. Imagine what just one albatross contract like that would do to some teams.

CC AFCMember since 2016
25 days ago
Reply to  Randy HEaton

You know all this because you have access to all the teams books? Y’all are getting Stockholm syndrome defending the billionaires you’re in an abusive relationship with

Last edited 25 days ago by CC AFC
jdbolickMember since 2024
24 days ago
Reply to  CC AFC

We have access to Atlanta’s, and from that data can reasonably estimate others. I don’t know what you’re even arguing, as it’s obvious that there are massive revenue disparities between markets.

Maybe you’re arguing that most owners can afford to cover those disparities, but the wealth of a team’s owner really doesn’t matter unless they’re willing to lose large amounts of money annually. Thus far, that has only applied to Steve Cohen, who happens to be more wealthy than the third and fourth wealthiest combined.

The reality is that Major League Baseball teams are constrained by their revenue streams, not their owners’ net worth, and that revenue divide is only continuing to grow. It’s something the sport needs to address and preferably sooner rather than later.

MikeDMember since 2016
25 days ago
Reply to  Randy HEaton

The issue here isn’t that the Dodgers can spend. Ohtani choose the Dodgers because he wanted a west coast team. That’s why he originally signed with the Angels, telling all the east coast teams not to bother. He then selected a better west coast team six years later. Being the biggest baseball star ever from Japan then helped recruit Yamamoto, and almost assuredly Sasaki. Other teams could have paid Ohtani underl his current contract terms, especially with so much deferred, but Ohtani wasn’t offering that deal to other teams. He went where he wanted to go. Every team could have signed Sasaki, but he went where he wanted to go. It’s not the money; it’s the location and the fact the Dodgers are currently a highly preferred destination. History says this will change, but for now, all roads from Japan lead through Chavez Ravine.

Sports benefits by one team playing the heel. Right now it’s the Dodgers. The beauty of baseball is teams can build playoff teams many different ways. That’s why MLB hasn’t had a repeat champion or a dynasty since the mid-90s to early aught Yankees.

Last edited 25 days ago by MikeD
pepper69funMember since 2020
25 days ago
Reply to  MikeD

Disagree completely that sports benefit by one team being the heel. Everything else you say is 100% accurate. You left out one point. Dodgers are a very well run organization, maybe the best run. Why wouldn’t a player want to play for them if the money is the same?

Smiling PolitelyMember since 2018
25 days ago
Reply to  Randy HEaton

to people who believe this: if an owner is unwilling to run a competitive team because they prefer more money, then sell it to one of the MANY MANY MANY bidders who would give you billions of dollars. Who loses here?

Or would you rather keep defending the Reinsdorfs of the world?

jdbolickMember since 2024
24 days ago

 if an owner is unwilling to run a competitive team because they prefer more money, then sell it to one of the MANY MANY MANY bidders who would give you billions of dollars.

Only one of the thirty owners has shown any inclination to spend far beyond the team’s revenue, that exception being Steve Cohen. If there were any other billionaires out there willing to do so, they presumably would have. Everyone else ties spending to revenue.

Or would you rather keep defending the Reinsdorfs of the world?

The White Sox spent $132,497,547 in 2024. Spending was not their issue.

Travis LMember since 2016
23 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

Padres are another example. But to your point, I agree with the evidence, but reach a different conclusion. The conclusion I reach is that owners, because they control who can buy the franchise, only allow other greedy owners who care more about money than winning.

That’s why we see this clustering behavior. Not because it indicates anything about actual finances, just greedy billionaires.

jdbolickMember since 2024
23 days ago
Reply to  Travis L

The conclusion I reach is that owners, because they control who can buy the franchise, only allow other greedy owners who care more about money than winning.

If that were true then they never would have allowed Steve Cohen. The reality is that 99% of businesspeople act in a similar fashion. They don’t like to lose money, so their business spending ends up being constrained by business revenue. That’s not just in MLB, that’s in every industry. The only exceptions are the mega-billionaires like Cohen and Musk who have so much that they can casually throw away billions like Musk did on Twitter and Cohen did bailing out his hedge fund buddies.

mikejuntMember
25 days ago
Reply to  Randy HEaton

The thing about the Dodgers right now is that most of their financial flexing (which has nothing to do with Sasaki, who could have got more money from everyone else, including Toronto) is based around something everyone could have done: Ohtani’s deferred deal is a *profitable contract* in and of itself, and generates more revenue directly than it costs (the most recent estimates I saw have Ohtani at 70-75m in direct revenue).

Every team could have done that contract; he appears to have discussed it with others. It is not Dodger-exclusive; anyone could have afforded it because it more than pays for itself.

And it, in particular, is why they’re doing what they’ve been doing recently – other players negotiate interest rates, usually around market. Ohtani gave the Dodgers a 0% interest rate. This is why the contract is so steeply devalued, but also why its so wildly profitable.

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
25 days ago
Reply to  mikejunt

Gotta be honest – it seems like you’re describing how the Dodgers’ commitment to winning pays dividends on and off the field?

Chili Davis Eyes
26 days ago
Reply to  Paul

Any team in baseball could’ve signed Sasaki for exactly the same amount of money, so I’m not sure how “financial disparities” are relevant here.

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
25 days ago

The disparity is that the Dodgers ownership views player salaries as an investment rather than an expense.

This attracts FO talent, which leads to a strong team, which leads to them winning any “tiebreakers” when it comes to free agency.

At least the Mets are going to be Dodgers East soon enough?

Gunther042Member since 2024
25 days ago

By itself no financial concerns re Sasaki. Moreso Dodgers with 5 total MVP trophies, 5 cy young awards (assuming kershaw resigns) on their roster, plus over one billion in deferrals. Before people say other teams could spend the same, other teams don’t have the gate receipts or regional sports network stability the dodgers have. Plus Ohtani is basically printing money for them

Travis LMember since 2016
23 days ago
Reply to  Gunther042

Ohtani is printing money for them because they invested in him. He was acquired on the free market. Literally any team could have signed him if they wanted to take advantage

david k
23 days ago
Reply to  Travis L

Literally false, because even if other teams offered the same thing the Dodgers have, and significantly more, he had decided he wanted to come to LA, so Bos, NYY, NYM, etc. were off the table from the get-go.

synco
25 days ago

Sasaki signed with the Dodgers because they have a ton of the best players in the world (including all the best Japanese players), which is literal output of their financial advantage. That’s not a pejorative, it’s just true.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
25 days ago
Reply to  synco

It’s pejorative for MLB as a league.

pepper69funMember since 2020
24 days ago

The devil’s advocate response from me. There wasn’t a direct financial benefit to Sasaki. But the Dodgers financial might created an environment that is highly beneficial to play in. It’s not irrelevant to his signing with Dodgers. Please note that I didn’t pronounce this good or bad. I just acknowledge its existence

Charles BalterMember since 2019
22 days ago

Love your screen name!

sadtromboneMember since 2020
25 days ago
Reply to  Paul

Normally I would agree with you, but this case is different. This is a case where he just decided to sign with the best team, and maybe also because it’s a relatively friendly market for Japanese ball players.

But I do think this is another moment that will lead to my general resentment of the Dodgers. They had to work to get there, but now this team is building a team on easy mode.

Last edited 25 days ago by sadtrombone
sadtromboneMember since 2020
25 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

FWIW I will add that the Mets spending right now has some of the hilarious WTF charm but I fully expect them to be in that state in five years or so too. I didn’t really dislike the Dodgers until the Scherzer / Turner trade, and in fact thought the whole thing was rather charming up until around that point. I am expecting a similar transition for me and the Mets and some point.

MikeDMember since 2016
25 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I think the Mets are already there in one sense, escalating MLB’s salaries and payroll to new levels, blowing past a $340MM total payroll and the “Cohen tax line”. Having MLB’s wealthiest hedge fund owner; paying a $43.5MM AAV to two aging pitchers, then discarding them when it was clear age had caught up; paying Soto what will end up being a $55MM AAV and in total $800MM plus, in the process dismantling Ohtani’s $700MM commitment, likely isn’t viewed as charming by most fans, or most of the other MLB owners. : -). The only reason they’re not in the Dodgers resentment camp at the same level is they’ve yet to win anything. Yet.

It will be interesting to see what MLB attempts to do in the next CBA regarding deferred pay, the influx of the best Japanese players to a single team, and the escalation in spending by the Mets. Maybe nothing, but I suspect there will be something. Isn’t there always?

It’s sort of interesting that we’re seeing a bit of a replay in the NL as to what happened in the AL. When the Yankees rose up to be a dynasty again, the Red Sox had to counter, which then reverberated across the AL, making other teams spend more, or get smarter, as was the case with the Rays and the A’s. The AL became the dominant league for a quarter century. Now it’ happening in the NL, as the Dodgers and Mets spend heavily, other teams have to be more aggressive and smarter, causing a drain of talent from the AL to the NL. Will than continue for a decade or two?

hurricanexyzMember since 2016
25 days ago
Reply to  MikeD

Not viewed as charming by the other owners, indeed. By the fans? Why are fans always presumptively on ownership’s side lol, I want my favorite players to get paid!

(Full disclosure: yep I’m a Mets fan, what of it)

jdbolickMember since 2024
24 days ago
Reply to  hurricanexyz

Why are fans always presumptively on ownership’s side

Because the only people who burn money are mega-billionaires like Cohen and Elon Musk, who never had to work for any of their wealth and have absolutely no concept of a budget. Every other team in the league besides the Mets operates with spending tied to revenue. When revenue goes up, spending goes up. When revenue goes down, spending goes down. And unfortunately, teams in certain markets like the Dodgers and Yankees have absolutely massive revenue advantages over teams like San Diego and Baltimore.

Fans want to believe that their team has a chance next season. It’s hope that keeps us going, and an ever-increasing revenue divide is crushing that hope.

Glengarry Glenn Braggs
23 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

This discussion of spending/competitive balance always takes on a centrifugal quality, with fans required to defend either underspending, penny-pinching billionaire owners or a rampant free market. Can’t it be true that (a) lower- and middle-market teams like the Pirates and Guardians certainly CAN and should be spending more (in many cases a lot more), AND (b) large-market teams like the Dodgers and Yankees have built-in geographic and market advantages that make it hard for most teams to keep up with them? I don’t really see why standing by (a) or (b) necessarily negates the other.

jdbolickMember since 2024
23 days ago

Can’t it be true that (a) lower- and middle-market teams like the Pirates and Guardians certainly CAN and should be spending more (in many cases a lot more), AND (b) large-market teams like the Dodgers and Yankees have built-in geographic and market advantages that make it hard for most teams to keep up with them? I don’t really see why standing by (a) or (b) necessarily negates the other.

Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and other small markets have dramatically less revenue than the Dodgers and Yankees. The only way it is possible to spend more than your revenue stream creates is if someone is financing that loss, either through loans or a wealthy owner who doesn’t care about draining that wealth. The latter almost never happens in the United States, although there are some examples in European sports.

If spending is constrained by revenue, which it almost always will be and arguably should be, then it’s impossible to rationally argue that Cleveland should be spending more. Fans want our teams to spend because it’s not our money, but realistically, the long-term fiscal outlook of the franchise requires not spending beyond your means.

Glengarry Glenn Braggs
21 days ago
Reply to  jdbolick

I just completely disagree with your premise. There is almost no doubt that the Guardians can spend more – probably considerably more – without operating at a loss. When you add in what the ownership group paid for the franchise (Dolan as majority owner in ’99, Blitzer’s group as minority owners in ’22) vs. the value of the franchise now, there is no way they are involved in a losing endeavor, even if they increased payroll by quite a bit. I DO agree that the Guardians of the world have to be more prudent than the Dodgers/Yankees and can’t afford to take on as many risks, but that’s not to say the franchise can’t be doing more.

jdbolickMember since 2024
21 days ago

I just completely disagree with your premise. There is almost no doubt that the Guardians can spend more – probably considerably more – without operating at a loss.

That isn’t true. We know team revenues and we can reasonably estimate team costs. You’re getting confused by team values, but those are independent of revenue.

Charles BalterMember since 2019
22 days ago

Great comment, and great screen name!

Glengarry Glenn Braggs
21 days ago
Reply to  Charles Balter

Haha – thanks!

Noah BaronMember since 2016
24 days ago
Reply to  MikeD

The Mets are not even going to exceed the top luxury tax threshold this year.

NYYfaninLAAlandMember since 2020
23 days ago
Reply to  Noah Baron

Uhhh, sorry but it’s quite likely they will, and by a fair shake. Still holes at 1B or 3B and likely to add a set up righty for the pen. They’re $6 mil under the top – those adds (especially if the Alonso stare down goes as expected) will easily put them over

gettwobrute79Member since 2020
25 days ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The good news is it’s still really hard to win a title. So a lot can happen between now and October. Or November. That last part felt weird to type.

MikeDMember since 2016
25 days ago
Reply to  Paul

Nah, it doesn’t devalue anything.

Ivan_GrushenkoMember since 2016
25 days ago
Reply to  Paul

I think it’s wonderful for the health of the sport that a team without the highest payroll can still attract the best players and win the most.

They didn’t sign the most expensive players, I.e. Soto, Fried, Burnes. Boston and Atlanta could have kept Betts and Freeman.

Several teams could have afforded Ohtani and Yamamoto and Snell.

They’re successful because Friedman is doing a great job, much better than Zaidi or Moreno.

Gunther042Member since 2024
25 days ago
Reply to  Ivan_Grushenko

Where would their payroll be without deferrals?

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
25 days ago
Reply to  Ivan_Grushenko

They’re successful because of their financial advantage. You only have to look at the difference between the Friedman era Rays and the Friedman era Dodgers to see that. And of course that financial advantage is what got them Friedman in the first place, too.

Last edited 25 days ago by cowdisciple
Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
25 days ago
Reply to  cowdisciple

When Friedman started, they really didn’t have that much of a financial advantage over a “normal” big market team.

They must have a smart ownership group who understand, like Steinbrenner did, that winning pays off.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
25 days ago

You’re right, they didn’t have that much advantage over the three or four other teams with the huge advantage.

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
25 days ago
Reply to  cowdisciple

Try 20

Toronto, Miami, Atlanta, LA, SF, Phoenix, Washington, Philly, NY, Houston, Dallas, Chicago, Boston, Detroit, Seattle, Denver, Baltimore, San Diego, Minneapolis, and Tampa all have larger metro populations than St. Louis.

The Dodgers’ ownership just operates under a value creation model rather than a value extraction one.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
25 days ago

I’m not sure why we’re talking about St. Louis.

Let’s try this: I’m Warren Buffet, and I’m on a MISSION FROM GOD to do whatever it takes to make the Kansas City Royals as valuable a franchise as the Yankees or Dodgers. To do that, I need to dominate MLB. I want to win 8 championships in 20 years, because that’s what it’s gonna take.

I’m going to go back in time and offer Ohtani 750m in net present value, distributed any way he likes. I’m going to pitch him on building a legendary legacy of Japanese baseball in Kansas City, give him a 5% stake in the franchise, and fly a jetload of his biggest fans in from Japan for every home game. I’ll give Yamamoto 450m. I’ll offer Soto a billion. Let’s say this makes me Sasaki’s choice – I’ll give him a lifetime contract offer right off the bat.

How long would I have to keep operating like this? If I run $300m operating deficits every year for 30 years, would that be enough to get me to self-sustaining?

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
25 days ago
Reply to  cowdisciple

I’m not sure why we’re talking about Kansas City, mate.

Did I mention them?

Or are you sweatily trying to fit your mouth around the leather boot of a billionaire who will never, ever take your virginity?

Incidentally! The Royals spend more on players than quite a few teams I listed….despite their smaller market.

But hey! If you keep sucking that boot, maybe an owner will eventually let you suck something else.

GreggMember since 2020
23 days ago

Just a heads up – there is no correlation between the persuasiveness of an argument and the explicitness of the insults.

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
23 days ago
Reply to  Gregg

I’m just not huge on billionaire gargling.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
23 days ago

So you admit that your position is indefensible, that no amount of deficit spending could overcome the structural advantages enjoyed by LA/NY, and are down to crude name calling. Pathetic.

Last edited 23 days ago by cowdisciple
RoyalsFan#14321Member since 2024
25 days ago

They had a financial advantage when McCourt owned them… he just pocketed and/or you know whatever it was he was doing with the money.

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
25 days ago

Exactly.

It’s a choice.

synco
25 days ago

The Dodgers won three division titles in the 8 years McCourt owned them (+1 wild card berth). Those were pretty decent teams, despite his being a crook.

Gunther042Member since 2024
25 days ago
Reply to  Ivan_Grushenko

Of course they signed the most expensive players – no one else has 3 players making over 300 mil. Are you saying Ohtani and Yamamoto aren’t among the most expensive players in the sport?

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
24 days ago
Reply to  Gunther042

The Mets have Soto and Lindor, mate…

david k
23 days ago

Ok but what about the OTHER 28 teams that would like to have a fighting chance?

NYYfaninLAAlandMember since 2020
23 days ago
Reply to  Ivan_Grushenko

Uhhh, their payroll, even with the deferral depreciation, is currently projected to be at least $50 million more than any other team.
You may have been sardonic here but just checking in case

dangledangleMember since 2024
23 days ago
Reply to  Paul

I mean that’s the hot take but this has always been seen as the Dodgers race to lose. They have the best fit. I would have loved to see him go somewhere else. Beyond the team I root for (Red Sox), I think there were other interesting fits that just were not in the running.

Personally it would have been really interesting if he joined a club like the Phillies. They have done a great job and there would have been less pressure on him with two workhorse aces in front of him. LAD rotation has aces but no workhorses.

Baltimore would have been awesome with all of the young players they have but heir pitching situation would have put way way too much on him from day 1.

I never understood Toronto as a landing location. Their window has already closed unless they were able to land some high impact players in FA.

fjtorres
23 days ago
Reply to  dangledangle

Well, they got Santander. That’s a plus.
They got a closer. That’s good if he stays healthy. Pitchers, you know.
They got Gimenez which isn’t bad and has an upside if no certainty at the plate.

And they got Straw which is…?

Charles BalterMember since 2019
23 days ago
Reply to  Paul

Great comment. You’re stating the obvious. As today (1/20/25) proves, we live in a society chock full of dullards who are immune to reason and goodness.

Yes, of course the money and the people in charge of the sport are ruining the game. There could well be a work stoppage in a couple years over this BS.

loria_estefanMember since 2019
23 days ago
Reply to  Charles Balter

there is going to be a work stoppage either way

Last edited 23 days ago by loria_estefan
Charles BalterMember since 2019
22 days ago
Reply to  loria_estefan

That we’re even having a conversation about a work stoppage when there’s more money floating around the game than even IS PRECISELY THE POINT to many of us. Our experience as fans has greatly diminished. We’re paying more and more for less. Going to a game is like getting searched by the TSA.

And we’re looking at guys getting paid $400, $600, $700-800 million to play baseball and they’re arguing over a few millions dollars with these a-hole billionaire owners who just take and take more money while giving the fans nothing but the middle finger.

The fans should unionize and go on strike.