Matt Kemp

[ten ocho recon scout]

They mention his "bad" defense but they put Ethier in centerfield. What am I missing here?

kemp is black?

[ELEVEN]

kemp is black?

So you're saying his defense is Michael Jackson BAD?

[ten ocho recon scout]

There is an example of a dude that got his pay day and stopped trying.

I dont think its that. Hes a talent, and from what I hear a very hard worker.

I think its more that he struck lightning in a bottle (perhaps one filled with pills) and has normally declined back to who he was before his mvp year.

Cant discount his injuries...but I think people got hoodwinked with his big year.

[ten ocho recon scout]

So you're saying his defense is Michael Jackson BAD?

pfft, I didnt say he used to be black.

The only baseball player worthy of a michael jackson reference is sammy sosa. All those barney vitamins gave him barney's complexion late in life.

[Blarg]

Getting mislead by numbers again I see.

 

I don't follow the Dogs that much but Kemp was getting plenty of playing time (42 appearances in 52 games) and his bat will put him back in the lineup. It's not as though Crawford is hitting the cover off the ball, nor Ethier, so demand to score some runs will make room for Kemps bat and they will forget about his glove that was never great in the first place.

[Lou]

But is he a superstar?

[Blarg]

Rising.

[markb]

I don't follow the Dogs that much but Kemp was getting plenty of playing time (42 appearances in 52 games) and his bat will put him back in the lineup. It's not as though Crawford is hitting the cover off the ball, nor Ethier, so demand to score some runs will make room for Kemps bat and they will forget about his glove that was never great in the first place.

 

Actually Crawford has been on a tear the last few weeks (hitting .355 since the 5th) which I think is why they can't justify displacing him in LF for Kemp.  I was surprised to hear how bad his defense was since I don't watch a lot of Dodgers games (neither do their fans right now lol), but metrics, though pretty unreliable with such a sample size, show him to be mostly a trainwreck.  

 

Drama like this is what you get when you have that many bloated contracts for underperforming players though.  Too many egos to juggle.  

[mrwicked]

i thought kemp was supposed to be a super badass.

is that not the case anymore?

[Butcher'd]

Can't they just move him to DH?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's funny...all my Dodger fan friends that argued against the DH for so many years are just now changing their tunes.

[Tyler]

i thought kemp was supposed to be a super badass.

is that not the case anymore?

 

He still is, but like I stated earlier in the thread he's there only moveable piece that has value around the league. They want him to ask out so they can get a nice return.

[Guest]

Fify

his weight is inversely proportional to his batting average 

[The Ghost of Bob Starr]

Crawford rolled an ankle tonight. Kemp moves up from 5th to 4th.

[ten ocho recon scout]

And so it begins

Ive been saying for a while now (mostly to my dodger friends, but also to a few on here) that the dogs painted themselves into a corner.

Kemp, ethier, agon and crawford have 3 years left at least, and all are in their 30's. And im assuming they keep hanley this off season.

They wanted to be the yankees...and theyre becoming them. Lots of income, but so much of it wasted on older guys

[Lou]

Dogs have payroll commitments in 2017 of $171M. 

 

That's without Hanley

[ELEVEN]

Guggenheim has over $200 Billion in liquid cash at their disposal.

[ten ocho recon scout]

Dogs have payroll commitments in 2017 of $171M.

That's without Hanley

and thats BEFORE the money being paid to los zetas for not cutting off heads because of puig.

(Though they might get a discount on guerrero now, being that hes not a whole person anymore)

[ten ocho recon scout]

Guggenheim has over $200 Billion in liquid cash at their disposal.

true.

But they got that way not by spending, but more investing. EVERY owner has a TON of money. But they dont own teams because they are fans. Its an investment. The owners of that team wont brush off bad money just because they have a bunch more.

It hasnt been reported, but ive heard from reliable back channels that the dogs misjudged their tax liability from the media deal. Not at all that its hurting them, but theyre not happy about it at all....and sort of skewed their budget (of what they wanted to spend).

[gotbeer]

true.

But they got that way not by spending, but more investing. EVERY owner has a TON of money. But they dont own teams because they are fans. Its an investment. The owners of that team wont brush off bad money just because they have a bunch more.

It hasnt been reported, but ive heard from reliable back channels that the dogs misjudged their tax liability from the media deal. Not at all that its hurting them, but theyre not happy about it at all....and sort of skewed their budget (of what they wanted to spend).

 

i think you mean the tax they owe the MLB right?  Or more specifically, the % of your local media deal that gets put in a pool to share with the other teams.  I think it was 1/3 (going off memory), but the Dogs said they only have to pay 1/3 of like 1/10 of their media deal since 1/10 was for the broadcast rights, and like 9/10 was equivalent to a signing bonus.  (again going off memory)

 

In the end though, the Dogs should be worried about Comcast going bankrupt.  Because if they do, they will probably only get a fraction of the pot of gold from Fox.  And you can look to Houston for examples of Comcast going down in flames.  

[Make Angels Great Again]

true.

But they got that way not by spending, but more investing. EVERY owner has a TON of money. But they dont own teams because they are fans. Its an investment. The owners of that team wont brush off bad money just because they have a bunch more.

It hasnt been reported, but ive heard from reliable back channels that the dogs misjudged their tax liability from the media deal. Not at all that its hurting them, but theyre not happy about it at all....and sort of skewed their budget (of what they wanted to spend).

 

 

When you have virtually endless funds, when it comes to these payrolls there really is no difference between a 150m payroll and a 220m payroll. It's chump change to them. However the investment comes in the way of big name players. The marketing possibilities are huge when they can literally grab every marquee free agent every single year, they could almost become bigger than the Yankees.

 

I hate them because of this.

[Lou]

The dogs are $40M over the luxury tax threshold.  Add in the penalty for exceeding it for the second consecutive year, that roster will cost them $281M this year.

 

You can't tell me $131M difference is chump change to any mlb owner

[Tyler]

And then you realize the group is trying to buy the Clippers too.

[ABC]

When you have virtually endless funds, when it comes to these payrolls there really is no difference between a 150m payroll and a 220m payroll. It's chump change to them. However the investment comes in the way of big name players. The marketing possibilities are huge when they can literally grab every marquee free agent every single year, they could almost become bigger than the Yankees.

 

I hate them because of this.

 

The Dodgers are not the only money worry they have. It's never chump change.

[ABC]

Where is Matt Kemp's advocate? Tell us more how he is an elite defender and superstar.

[Stradling]

Where is Matt Kemp's advocate? Tell us more how he is an elite defender and superstar.

He is certainly better defensively that Ethier.