Dodgers Are Ruining Baseball

[mvp 78]

Just now, notin said:

I think teams like the Reds are ruining baseball.  I hate the Dodgers, but they’re not the team keeping payroll low start can pocket revenue sharing money that they don’t re-invest…

Pirates

Reds

A's

Marlins

[notin]

2 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Elly should be better this year, but I'd rather be a Sox fan.

I think Matt McLain can improve since last year was more about coming back from extended injuries.  But the rest of that lineup beyond those two is weak…

[JoeBrady]

On 11/2/2025 at 9:48 AM, Jasonbay44 said:

In leagues with salary caps, the teams with bad ownership are still bad

I agree 100%.  As a Raiders' fan, I had this conversation with my Bears' friend.  While Chicago has made unbelievable improvements over the past few years (and not just Caleb), the Raiders are now paying 4-5 coaches.  You cannot fix stupid with more money.

Just irt to Pitt and Cincy, both teams should be moving in.  I think increased attendance and/or a playoff spot can easily pay for another $30M in acquisitions.  Even if I am wrong, what's the point of owning a team if you don't want to compete.

[notin]

Just now, mvp 78 said:

Pirates

Reds

A's

Marlins

The A’s are trying.  They left a market they shared with another team.  Vegas should be huge, and Big Amish could be a marketable player for them.

I cut the Pirates some slack.  They seem to be the poster child for a disinterested fanbase.

Marlins are pathetic.  Ditto the Rockies…

[JoeBrady]

On 11/3/2025 at 9:43 AM, moonslav59 said:

Not trying to go political, here, but doesn't every company follow the same path towards maximizing profit, even if their customers get short-changed?

Yes and no.  Unless you some type of monopolistic aspect to your company, then you have to continually pursue the customer.  We kept improving our products because we always wanted to stay ahead of our competitors.  Of course, BB is a monopoly.  But even then, teams lose their attendance if they don't stay ahead of their competition.

[JoeBrady]

On 11/2/2025 at 6:45 AM, Tedballgame said:

the Dodgers have an unlimited budget and they are able to sign all of the good Japanese players.

Not everyone can sign them, but there is not doubt that at least 10 teams can afford them.

IRT to drafting them, that's a solid no.  Most of these guys, if not all, have put in a lot of time in Japan.  If they play in Japan until age 27, it would be ridiculous to expect them to put in another 6 years in MLB before becoming a FA.

[mvp 78]

17 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

Even if I am wrong, what's the point of owning a team if you don't want to compete.

Because you make a ton of money and do nothing. 

[mvp 78]

16 minutes ago, notin said:

The A’s are trying.  

No, they have no clue what they are doing. They can't get trademarked in Sacto or Vegas. They were hoping to get more gov't funding than they actually got. They spent years in Oakland not spending on their team. Back in the 80's and early 90's, they were able to fill up that stadium and had stars. They really screwed up a storied franchise. 

[moonslav59]

On 11/3/2025 at 8:48 AM, mvp 78 said:

Is running the Boston Red Sox the same as running Boston Beer Co.? Should it be? For a beer company, the goal is to make a profit and everyone is happy and nobody gets fired. The Sox make a profit every season, but people get fired every few seasons if they don't win enough. Nobody is getting fired at Boston Beer if they don't win a gold medal in beer or whatever as long as the money is still coming in. 

Not sure why this matters, but I'm sure some beer companies make way more money and profits than others based on similar revenue vs expenditure ratios.

[moonslav59]

21 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

Yes and no.  Unless you some type of monopolistic aspect to your company, then you have to continually pursue the customer.  We kept improving our products because we always wanted to stay ahead of our competitors.  Of course, BB is a monopoly.  But even then, teams lose their attendance if they don't stay ahead of their competition.

Yes, and I'm sure the Sox ownership group studies what their customers want and need and find the price and production points that keep them just happy enough to keep "buying their product." Maybe a good analysis is the cigarette companies. They have customers that are hooked for life, no matter what you do.

[mvp 78]

20 minutes ago, notin said:

I cut the Pirates some slack.  They seem to be the poster child for a disinterested fanbase.

There have been quite a few articles over the past year or so about how horrible the PITT ownership is. The franchise's ineptitude has nothing to do with the fanbase. When they are good, the fans show up. From 93-26, they were only in the playoffs in the 3 years from 13-15 (29 out of 33 years below .500 too). 

[Bellhorn04]

14 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Because you make a ton of money and do nothing. 

The Pohlad Principle.

[mvp 78]

10 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

The Pohlad Principle.

And there's a bunch of Pohlads living the MLB owner dream. They multiply like sea monkeys. 

[drewski6]

1 hour ago, notin said:

Why?!?

You keep citing the Sox had only one hitter in the top 60, but you prefer a roster that had none?

I think Elly and Hays are both in for better offensive seasons.  Probably McClain too.  Also, I may have wrote that before Gray, Contreras....

[notin]

3 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

I think Elly and Hays are both in for better offensive seasons.  Probably McClain too.  Also, I may have wrote that before Gray, Contreras....

Hayes has never been much of a hitter and never had an OPS over .659 in a season where he has had 100 PA.

He is an excellent defender at 3b, however.

[mvp 78]

7 minutes ago, notin said:

Hayes has never been much of a hitter and never had an OPS over .659 in a season where he has had 100 PA.

He is an excellent defender at 3b, however.

Hayes is outstanding at 3b, but I don't know if you put up with his bat at the bottom of the lineup. For a long stretch of the year, you'd have two auto outs with Rafaela and Ke'Bryan. 

It would be nice to bring him over so that I could see the myriad of ways that his name would be butchered on here: K'Bryan, Ke'Brian, KeBrain, Kebryan, Hays.

[drewski6]

39 minutes ago, notin said:

Hayes has never been much of a hitter and never had an OPS over .659 in a season where he has had 100 PA.

He is an excellent defender at 3b, however.

Austin Hays.

[mvp 78]

1 minute ago, drewski6 said:

Austin Hays.

Charlie Hayes was a decent 3b. Von Hayes barely appeared there. 

[JoeBrady]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

Because you make a ton of money and do nothing. 

But if I own a team, I've already made a ton of money.  And I'm not saying I'd simply ignore the P&L, but it's a bit like you saved up money in your 401k all your life, but then don't want to spend any of it in retirement.

[JoeBrady]

1 hour ago, Bellhorn04 said:

The Pohlad Principle.

11 1st place finishes in 25 years, and 2 WSC.

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, JoeBrady said:

But if I own a team, I've already made a ton of money. 

Some owners just want to take more and more distributions out. They don't really care about the product on the field as long as they aren't the 2024 ChiSox.

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, JoeBrady said:

11 1st place finishes in 25 years, and 2 WSC.

Uh, 9 1st place finishes and the last WS was 1991. The team has also did a huge selloff last year and fans are not happy. 

[Kimmi]

4 hours ago, notin said:

I think teams like the Reds are ruining baseball.  I hate the Dodgers, but they’re not the team keeping payroll low start can pocket revenue sharing money that they don’t re-invest…

The Reds (and a few other teams) need to spend more money, I agree.

The Dodgers are the team that are the main culprit behind these skyrocketing contracts.

Both are guilty.

[Larry Cook]

The dodgers win because they have the best scouting and  league development system in baseball!!!

the money allows them to retain the players they want, sign players they want in order to fill development holes!  
 

I truly felt hang’em Chaim was building that for us!  But his strategy and vision were narrow. He over drafted middle infielders and he totally ignored pitchers, unless they went through waivers first!! 

bres-slow is even harder to figure out. He never truly picks a lane!  Is he a total salary dump guy? No. Is he a development guy? No! 
 

why does bres-slow trade dobbins and fitts for gray (1 year of control) and Contreras (2 years of control)!  Short term strategy and a waste of assets!! 
 

Bres-slow appears to be playing whack a mole (being reactionary) when he should be demonstrating and sticking with a long term strategy and vision designed to deliver consistent annual results!!!  

[JoeBrady]

52 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Uh, 9 1st place finishes and the last WS was 1991. The team has also did a huge selloff last year and fans are not happy. 

Since 1987.  Still pretty good.  And I saw nothing wrong with selling off some assets if you're not making the playoffs.

[JoeBrady]

15 minutes ago, Larry Cook said:

bres-slow is even harder to figure out. He never truly picks a lane!

That's how it should be.  Picking a single lane is not optimal, imo.  If you have a prospect that you see no future in, you should move him.  If you see someone out there you think has promise, you should acquire him.

[notin]

57 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Uh, 9 1st place finishes and the last WS was 1991. The team has also did a huge selloff last year and fans are not happy. 

That might have been the biggest sell off in MLB history, and they held on to one of their most sought-after trade assets…

[notin]

5 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

Since 1987.  Still pretty good.  And I saw nothing wrong with selling off some assets if you're not making the playoffs.

They unloaded like 10 players on 2 days and were one season removed from just missing the playoffs and they’re in a very weak division. 
 

That fire sale wasn’t about rebuilding or reloading…

[Larry Cook]

1 hour ago, JoeBrady said:

That's how it should be.  Picking a single lane is not optimal, imo.  If you have a prospect that you see no future in, you should move him.  If you see someone out there you think has promise, you should acquire him.

The dodgers pick a lane! Build a superior scouting and minor league developmental juggernaut 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

5 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

It would be nice to bring him over so that I could see the myriad of ways that his name would be butchered on here: K'Bryan, Ke'Brian, KeBrain, Kebryan, Hays.

Look -- I'm ok with adding a trusty glove anywhere on this sieve of a defense. 

But I can't won't don't want anyone else swinging a bat nicknamed K-Brain.