Home > Uncategorized > The Fans’ Loyalty Should Not be Greater than the Owners’ Loyalty to Us

The Fans’ Loyalty Should Not be Greater than the Owners’ Loyalty to Us

February 15, 2017


Happy Valentine’s Day.


Tomorrow, the Dodgers begin the spring training portion of the 2017 season. Lots has been said of the Dodgers improvement, some true, some not, and many expect the boys in blue to be among the top handful of teams in baseball this season – largely based on their high payroll and “depth.”


Before I get into that, I do want to say what I have tweeted several times this week – the lack of TV across the LA market for a 4th season is shameful. The Dodgers have been passed around from one bad owner to another since Peter O’Malley decided to sell the team to Fox. At the time, we fans knew it was quite a change – going from mom and pop ownership to a greedy Rupert Murdoch run corporation that only was interested in baseball in order to start a local sports network. Little did we realize, however, how bad it would get.


It’s debatable to some whether the skullduggery of Frank and Jamie McCourt is worse than the Guggenheim Partners time as owners, I would say different. When “Hall of Fame commissioner” Bud Selig handed the keys to the Dodgers kingdom to a cash poor Boston parking lot attendant, we knew it wasn’t good. As the McCourts rode high on the hog and drove the franchise into embarrassment, bouncing checks to staff, including Vin Scully, and cheaping out on security until people’s lives were in danger, we ultimately rebelled. Now, with Magic Johnson’s smiling (now absent) kisser conning us into believing everything was ok again, we sit staring at our blank TV screens, or MeTV re-runs of “Hogan’s Heroes” instead of our LA baseball team.


I would say from Fox to the McCourts to Guggenheim, LA Dodgers fans have been passed from one bad guardian to another, much like the Baudelaire children in the “Unfortunate Events” books and Netflix episodes. None of them have/had Dodgers tradition at the core of their belief system – all have been in it for profit motives purely. Yet, through generations now, Dodgers fans infight and quarrel and flaunt loyalty ownership doesn’t have to them. It’s quite amazing, the level of love and Stockholm Syndrome displayed since O’Malley sailed off into the sunset.


To me, it’s easy. Greed + no TV coverage = you lose my loyalty. You want it back? Focus on our needs, and that includes games on TV. Stealing Vin Scully’s final years was a heinous act. Lest anyone think Guggenheim is in no way like the McCourt era, think about that. Consider it when you get an overload of Charlie Steiner.


We will never get back what was taken from us, and considering the misdirection of the overly bloated narcissistic front office, it makes it hard to forgive. All of my life, and prior, the Dodgers were a team known for strong pitching. Over the years there were good offensive teams, and bad ones. The pitching was always key. Look through the Dodgers record books and recall the names. Behind the greats were many good ones, and those who held the fort, eating innings and supplying consistency that always kept the Dodgers in the thick of the National League race.


I don’t recall, prior to this administration, such a dismissal of pitching. The Fangraphs lovers among you will point to cobbled together stats and suggest this is the best pitching staff in baseball. I may not understand numbers like you pretend to (by reading some nerd’s analysis), all I have to base my opinion on is many decades of following baseball and end results. A team, especially a Dodgers team, should be built around pitching – starting and relief. It seems an afterthought or a “ho-hum” to the collective geniuses that run the Dodgers.


So, if you put together no TV, no Vin and very little pitching, it’s hard for me to get overly excited. There’s a reality that says the rotation is three guys, all of whom have concerns. Clayton Kershaw may be the best pitcher in baseball but after years of carrying the burden of the team on his back, his back gave out. Backs can flare up at any time, and while Kershaw may be healthy all of 2017, his sudden vulnerability at least merits a conversation.


Rich Hill has resurrected his career from independent league hurler (like his fellow well paid staff mate Scott Kazmir), but he’s also an older pitcher who has spent a lot of time on disabled lists across baseball. To assume his “Koufax-like curve” can be counted on for a full season is perhaps a stretch. Then comes Kenta Maeda.


I liked the signing of Maeda, but then I like the signing of most Asian players. Maeda is a gamer with good stuff, but he’s also Japanese and their seasons are shorter than those in the bigs, so his eventual tiring in 2016 should have been expected. He was gassed the last quarter of the season and of course in October, when we all closed our eyes and crossed our fingers as he went to the hill. He is slight of frame and while he could improve on his stamina and continue to evolve, he could also at least be considered someone who may have a solid first half and then vanish after that.


The rest of the rotation is more worrisome than the top three. Julio Urias is a talent touted as another Pedro Martinez. He sure can look good, but he’s also 20 and his young arm is not ready for a full season’s workload. In fact, I’d say given the way he was pushed in 2016, due to Andrew Friedman and Farhan Zaidi not considering reliable innings out of the rotation last year, he could even be a candidate for an injury due to overuse. I am not worried about Urias at the start of the season, but like Maeda, I am worried what happens as the year progresses. A baby pitcher should have his innings built up through the minors; Urias’ success and the front office’s desperation has rushed that timeline. Watching how they use him in 2017 should be interesting.


With Urias as the 4th starter (he should ideally be the 5th), it means a gaggle of curiosities will compete for the last spot. At this point most fans realize the signings of Kazmir and Brandon McCarthy were foolish ones by Friedman/Zaidi. They will compete with Hyun-Jin Ryu, former warrior with a shot shoulder, and assorted guys Friedman devotees will tell you are superstars in the making. No, they are just guys. The league is full of guys who fill roster spots, go up and down from the minors to the bigs and are not stars. Newsflash – not everyone who comes up through the Dodgers system will be a star. And another newsflash – every team has “depth” – it’s called a 40-man roster and minor league system. Living, breathing humans do not “depth” make.


For these reasons, the Dodgers rotation does not impress me. It’s possible they will have a decent first half, enabling Friedman/Zaidi to make a July deal for the 2nd half, but I’d argue, given what we see from most of their deals, and the fact the beef in the rotation should already have been added, who cares? As of today, the rotation is not ready for Oct play, which begs the question: “What have Friedman/Zaidi fixed since taking over?” I’d argue the deficiency the team had was the Oct part of the equation – that one more piece or two that could get the Dodgers over the hump. They already were making the playoffs for years. That isn’t enough. Friedman/Zaidi tinker, like mad scientists, but with the April through September part of the team, which, like I said, was in good enough shape before.


Friedman/Zaidi and their disciples would tell you it’s all about the regular season; the playoffs are all luck and a total crapshoot. That’s what Billy Beane has said, and the Moneyball record of World Series titles would bear that out. Small market executives, like Beane, like Friedman, like Zaidi, think like this because they must. They are traditionally hampered by lack of resources, financial most specifically, and need to assume getting to the dance is good enough. Perhaps, once in the post-season, they get lucky – it happens. Just not to Moneyball teams.


Guggenheim must have had their reasons for hiring Moneyball types to run the Dodgers – either hoping to save some money they could put into their own pockets (that’s not working, Friedman and Zaidi spend like gold-diggers out on the town), or because they were tipped off that the game has gone data and whiz kids who are all Ivy League are the ones you want in charge. I’m not dismissing data, it’s important (I recall loving Ross Porter’s constant stats that drove fans insane), but it doesn’t seem to apply to the work being done by Friedman, Zaidi and their crowded front office team.


Friedman inherited a windfall. He got a playoff team with a new rich ownership group and ripe farm system. A smarter man would have added the missing parts – perhaps a 3rd starter better than Brett Anderson – in order to go deeper into Oct. Instead, much like Paul DePodesta before them, a lot of tinkering, convoluted, needlessly complicated trades, signings of Cubans, reliance on unimpressive and often injured pitchers (overpaid), and other factors have led the team to no more Oct ready than before. I’d add, taking the long way around the mountain, creating needless busywork to get there.


At some point, perhaps luck will roll the Dodgers way and they will win. There IS talent on the roster. Some of the prospects in particular, holdovers from Ned Colletti and Logan White, look like this generation’s great Dodgers – Corey Seager, Joc Pederson, Julio Urias and Cody Bellinger, to name a few.


I just have no idea why fans continue to believe in a front office that shuffles pieces around, wastes money, skimps on money (hard to do both at the same time) and is rebuilding the regular season part of the team that was already a playoff contender, rather than the post-season part, which was the obvious weakness.


I chock it up to youth – easy to say, as I am old. I think baseball fans are not as diehard as they used to be, and youth comes with lack of perspective. As you get older, not only do you have to sometimes wake up in the night to pee, but you gain wisdom. As Louis C.K. famously mused in one of his routines, just by virtue of being on the planet longer than a young person, you generally come to know more. A young fan has the right idea – love their team, no matter what, but without a frame of reference, it’s easy to not really know what the fuck you are talking about. I have been young, and now I am old. Believe me, I know more now than I did when I was young.


I won’t even go into depth about the bullpen that was not improved at all over 2016, or the 2 guys for every position approach in the lineup that could work – if rosters are expanded to 35. A new season is upon is, so don’t let me burst your bubble. I will say, perhaps don’t be gullible. Keep your eyes open and your head up. Call “bullshit” when you see it. And yes, you should be very angry that for a 4th season, games are not on TV across all of Los Angeles. I would suggest you don’t pay for games, or McCourt’s expensive parking. If they won’t televise the games, listen on the radio, or just read the box scores the next day. If they don’t care enough about you, you shouldn’t care so much about them. Guggenheim is in it for the money, just as Fox and the McCourts were. The team has not been to the World Series since 1988, and that was a fluke. The rot had set in after the 1981 championship and the greats from the 70s teams moved on.


We are owed more than this. The fans’ loyalty should not be greater than the owners’ loyalty to us. Bickering on Twitter can be amusing, but it does not hold the owners accountable. Demand more and if they don’t give it, consider what else you want from life. Maybe it’s going to the beach, catching the latest superhero movie in the theater or just spending more time with family and friends. For me, if a group of smarties can’t figure out your rotation needs reliable innings and your bullpen should be several guys deep at the back, you don’t deserve my respect. If the games aren’t even available to watch, why should I care?


Here’s to another season of Dodgers baseball. Let’s see what happens. Have a Happy Valentine’s Day, everybody.

  1. Mike Tucker
    February 15, 2017 at 4:56 am

    Yes we have a new generation that lost the inspiration of Vinnie and the family of baseball.

    • Freudy
      February 15, 2017 at 2:59 pm

      Vin hung in there as long as he could, no doubt for another World Series team. He was shortchanged by several ownership groups. Sadly, if they had made it to a World Series, he’d likely have missed it anyway. Fox too stupid to showcase Vin as he finished up. Celebrating baseball by having the best announcer call at least some or ONE game would have been classy, but noooo.

  2. Jeff KEVAN
    February 15, 2017 at 1:23 pm

    How true, Guggenheim don’t care about anything but the bottom line. They have no respect for the fans or the Dodger tradition. Until they start by hiring a “real” baseball person to be GM and give them the chance to build the broken parts nothing will change.

    • Freudy
      February 15, 2017 at 2:57 pm

      While the team has been successful under this admin, they aren’t anymore successful than they were under the previous. If Ned had remained, or even bald eagle Kasten, the same prospects would have come to the team and we wouldn’t have had to endure the drama of McCarthy, Kazmir, Olivera, other Cubans, confusing trades, moving Dee Gordon, etc. I’m not a fan of arrogant front offices who have to put their brand on a team for no good reason. All that was needed was for them to bolster the areas that needed bolstering, such as a good #3 behind Kershaw and Greinke. Instead, they signed injured, overpaid losers and dealt Greinke. Not sure what their supporters see in them, to me it’s needless movement without forward progression.

  3. Badger3
    February 17, 2017 at 1:41 pm

    Another well written piece. Like you, I am old enough to see what is going on here and find other things to do. I’ve purchased mlbtv the last two years, with ’16 being purchased just to hear Vin. I’m still interested in the Dodgers, but not invested like I was the first 60 years of my life. I feel older just saying that.

    I’ve proposed a 6 man rotation and presented argument that supports the premise that it’s possible, and even likely, that you would get as many innings out of this crystalline staff by doing so, but no one seems to buy it. As much as I believe in starting pitching, teams like KC have shown if you’ve got about 8 bullpen canons, who in total make less than a Kershaw, you can get it done. Like you mentioned, platoons will be more effective when rosters are expanded. Now they bore old guys like me.

    Keep writing. You’re a seasoned voice in the wilderness.

    • Freudy
      February 17, 2017 at 3:07 pm

      Thank you for the kind words, fellow oldtimer.

      I think a 6 man rotation makes sense too because the guys generally throw 3-5 innings anyway and this would at least add in another day of what is essentially a long man.

      Not sure how they are going to figure out an opening day roster from all of this – I suspect buying time with DL trips. I was listening to MLB Radio yesterday and they were discussing how Roberts had his work cut out for him last year and how he does again. How he has to do a balancing act with all these parts. I’d say a) probably a lot of Friedman/Zaidi and the gang calling all these moves and b) if you had a front office that wasn’t trying to be clever, you’d have starters capable of going deep into games, setup men and hitters who could play against right or left-handed pitching. I’d call it the front office doing their job, but I know that would be scoffed at by dummies who worship Ivy League data dipshits over baseball.

      The platoons can work on occasion but different lineups every day with two guys manning several positions at once means opposing managers can easily win the chess game by countering your Joc with a left-handed pitcher, or a Puig with a right-handed one. It makes managing against you easier, and of course very quickly you will expend your bench and be using pitchers to pinch hit.

      Anyway, who am I to burst their bubble? Let the data crowd predict 99 wins, it doesn’t look like that to me. I don’t care much since I can’t even watch the team on TV, and radio is out of the question with Steiner and the other butchers and yes men calling the games.

      I will follow through box scores and occasional glimpses. They are losing fans, not accumulating more. If baseball is worried about appealing to young fans to keep the games going, they might want to start by having the Dodgers on TV for the country’s 2nd biggest market. Believe me, the old fans are turned off and the young ones are busy with other “entertainment” options. This TV fiasco is costing a generation of future (paying!) Dodgers fans from getting on board.

  4. February 21, 2017 at 10:36 pm

    I just cannot understand why the good folks of Southern California continue to put up with all the BS. They didn’t with DePodesta and McCourt. Why now? FAZ has been proven wrong the last 2 years and now because they resign Turner and Jansen the press deems them super smart again. It is a shame the old guys like me and suffer. The young generation need to see what real Dodger fans are like.

    • Freudy
      February 22, 2017 at 2:16 am

      I find it interesting whatever Guggenheim is doing. On one hand, they blew a ton of money on payroll and have went through various executives, all with different plans. The large financial company doesn’t know anything about baseball, so they must assume each exec knows what he is doing. Meantime, I’d argue the team isn’t any further along than they were before Guggenheim bought the team, and more painful to follow – I’d say watch, but few in LA can watch the home town team. Sigh.

      So while there are good pieces, it’s hard to say how many can be attributed to the large group of current execs stepping over one another to run the Dodgers. Fans think it’s swell. I recall, as a kid, collecting baseball cards and getting to know what I could of the players on the team. Nowadays it seems following execs is the pastime for young fans.

      At some point the Dodgers will win again. I am not sure if it’s going to happen with this front office, or the next, or the next after that one. I like certain players, mostly those who came under Ned and Logan White’s tenure, but I don’t see an urgency to win nor a particularly encouraging direction. Throwing away an ace and not getting a replacement/s and then spending $150M on lesser arms like McCarthy, Kazmir and Hill, not to mention the money blown on Anderson and others, seems foolish. Why not just keep Greinke and add another arm? I’m told I don’t get it. Happily, I do not.

      I come from a time (it’s still that time, just not in LA) where a team built a strong pitching staff and then looked beyond that. Here it’s always an afterthought. Some cobbling together of broken pieces to achieve what a few solid acquisitions could accomplish.

      Let’s see how long Guggenheim stays with their toy. They already extracted $6B+ profit from their $2B investment. I don’t know why a financial company would care to continue in the baseball business if the team’s fortunes don’t turn around soon.

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: