I thought I was disappointed when I showed up at the OTB yesterday and found that none of the betting machines were operating. I thought I was disappointed when the Saints fired Randy Mueller as their GM. The Dodgers could have returned to the days when they were a well-run big market team - fun to root for because they would solve their problems by intelligence rather than backing up a truck full of money. The last two seasons had rejuvenated my interest in the Dodgers. Obviously McCourt is a bigger part of the problem than the solution. I cringe in anticipation of the future, even if another ex-Red Sox guy is brought in.

We've heard a great deal here in New Orleans about the Saints moving to LA. The stadium issue seems to be the same in LA (no public money). Are you guys interested in the LA Saints?

I'm so torn. A couple of days ago when the news first broke that DePodesta was not at the Hershier interview, I was very uncomfortable and I said as much in a comment I left here. I love sabermetrics, and I love that we had a sabermetrically-minded general manager.

But I hate the J.D. Drew out clause, and I'm still flummoxed by the number of years and dollars committed to Derek Lowe. Letting Beltre go was a revelation, and the Kent signing was marvelous at worst.

Let me be clear: I wish Paul DePodesta was our general manager. But as many people here have duly noted, the man did himself no favors. Steve Finley and Adrian Beltre both complained that they had been deceived and insulted. Mind you, this wasn't Pedro-esque incessant whining about not getting enough respect. This was, "DePodesta said he'd do X, and then he didn't do X." And maybe that's why Paulie is best at being a number two guy, because he was perpetually opening himself to attack from the Plashckes and Average Joe Fans of the world. Maybe not, but don't tell me anyone can be absolutely sure either way.

In any case, it's times like these when I realize how awesome Dodger Thoughts is. I disagree often with a lot of commentors and, but it's almost always civil and the thoughts posted are usually trenchant. Let me pose a parting question:

If we knew NOTHING about Paul DePodesta before he was handed the reins of the Dodgers (that is, we didn't know he was Billy Beane's number two, was sabermetrically minded, and was an econ major at Harvard) would we Dodger Thoughts readers (who clearly have a general sabermetric bent, and please don't anyone deny that sabermetricians don't have prejudices too) be harsher on the moves DePo made?

I think yes.

Jon, as a Yankee fan with only a passing interest in the Dodgers, I am sorry to see the situation the club currently finds themselves in. Your analysis today was enlightening and helpful in understanding the trends in Dodgers history. I'm not surprised that DePodesta was vilified by the local L.A. media--he doesn't have the over-sized personality that market would seem to require. But the viciousness of the attacks, often based on ignorance and certainly driven by personal agendas, was most discouraging.

I don't have any particular sentiments towards DePodesta. I read about him in "Moneyball" and he seems to be a bright guy. I don't know whether that would translate into success as a general manager, but as you mentioned, the guy did get his team to the playoffs which has to count for something. The fact that he was canned after two years and thus not given a genuine opportunity to put his imprint on the organization is a shame.

I take front office/media hysteria for granted because I live in New York and root for the Yankees. But I feel badly for you true blue Dodger fans because that is one great organization that seems like it is in complete disarray at the moment. With the resources and tradition they've got at their disposal there that is just a damn shame.

I'm not worried about a new GM trading our prospects.

I'm more worried about the new GM letting Bradley, Choi, and Werth go for nothing, and replacing them with even worse, and much more expensive players.

My worst nightmare is we'll go back to the old Dodger way of paying Paul Konerko 13mils/yr to do what Choi/Saenz can do for 2mils.

And then when we need starting pitching, the front office will say "We dont have the funds to do it"....

3. You read too much of the MSM, and not enough of actually evaluating what DePo let go, and what DePo acquired.

For a guy's whose worse deal was signing Jose Valentin to a 1yr 3.5 mils contract, I dont think he should have been fired.

Bringing in Bradley, Finley, Penny, Choi, Drew, Kent, Werth, Cruz, Lowe, Navarro all the while keeping the farm intact and keeping the payroll under 100mils should be commended.

Letting go Beltre, Green, Finley, Roberts, Cora, Loduca, Encarnacion should also be seen as a plus.

I'd rate Gagne's 2yr deal, and Izzy's 3yr deal as the only moves I found to be lacking DePo's part.

All the MSM speculation I dont let cloud my judgement of what DePo actually did do.

I could care less how many phone calls he returns. I only care about whom he puts out on the field.

5 - "I'm more worried about the new GM letting Bradley, Choi, and Werth go for nothing, and replacing them with even worse, and much more expensive players."

Even worse, much more expensive, and older players.

Welcome to your 2006 Los Angeles Mets.

BTW, Jon, again I wanted to reiterate how fabulous it is to come over here and read what you write on a daily or near-daily basis. The Plaschkes of the world leave an awful taste in my mouth.

3 - "Let me be clear: I wish Paul DePodesta was our general manager. But as many people here have duly noted, the man did himself no favors. Steve Finley and Adrian Beltre both complained that they had been deceived and insulted. Mind you, this wasn't Pedro-esque incessant whining about not getting enough respect. This was, 'DePodesta said he'd do X, and then he didn't do X.'"

So what? When is it a GM's job to be forthcoming about his activities? I would say entirely that a GM must needs be secretive and occaisionally employ subterfuge and even deceit.

9. You'd think if Beltre had been 'deceived', wouldnt Scott Boras have had problems dealing with DePo.

Yet somehow, after Beltre was 'deceived', DePo managed to sign 2 other Boras clients in Lowe/Drew to big money deals.

If Beltre's agent doesnt have a problem with DePo, how can Beltre? Bc its the agents that negotiate the contracts.

Whatever DePodesta's faults, he had this going for him--he wasn't influenced by anything Plaschke wrote. That's the most pathetic thing about the current ownership, the way they panic over whatever's written in the LA TImes. It's a sign of weakness.

DePodesta was on his way to fulfilling the mandate the owner gave him--to create a long-term winning team that turns a profit. (They already, as Jamie McCourt crowed, made money this year.) That's a difficult thing to do these days and he took a lot of risks to try to accomplish that. Yet they fired him because of (apparently) complaints from the press and Lasorda. Sad.

Apparently Team McCourt are well on their way to becoming known as 'Steinbrenner-West.' A reality series has to be in the works.

Perhaps after two decades of perpetual firings they'll be in a position to throw hundreds of millions at payroll and field a perpetual contender. Boy, I can't wait.

Jon,

Great way to wake up. The more snipits of information I come across regarding the Dodger situation, Depodesta is probably better off somewhere else.

Aside from Plaschke, the LA media reaction seems to mostly be focused on the McCourts, which is surprising. I am mildly impressed.

14 Hacksaw of all people was very critical of the DePo firing yesterday. He had some choice words for McCourt and Co.

"I could care less how many phone calls he returns. I only care about whom he puts out on the field."

Unfortunately, "whom he puts out on the field" isn't enough. Never was, really.

We heard for years that players want to play for the Dodgers and the Lakers because they were such classy organizations. That meant, among other things, that the communication, top-down, was clear, and that promises were kept. Obviously, there was a perception that DePodesta was lousy in this category, and with guys like Bill "Inspector Javert" Plaschke looking for any reason -- ANY reason -- to hate this guy, his inability to sell himself to the outside (and perhaps inside) world was a telegraphed back-door slider.

I like a lot of what DePo's done. A lot. But Aug C's right: if we knew nothing about DePodesta but what he produces -- that is, if we could quantify everything a GM does and look at him as one big stat sheet -- then i think more people would be willing to acknowledge that, as Jon put it, he did himself no favors. We'd say "Nice Prospects Kept Ratio, and look at that sweet Cutting Guys Loose at the Right Time Percentage. But what's up with this guy's Asserting Authority Over a Disobedient Manager Average? And my god, would it kill him to be a little more extraverted? A few more phone calls to guys on their way out, and he buys himself another five points of good will that he can use to keep the Hee-Seop whining to a dull roar for one more month..."

I'm furious at the McCourts right now. But I'm also disappointed in DePodesta for providing his critics with the ammunition they needed. It would be nice to believe that the only thing that matters is the product on the field, but a GM is a General Manager, not just a Roster Manager.

Sorry to see Depodesta (should I be calling him Paul?) go. Even sorrier to see Bill Plaschke become the Dodgers' Personnel Manager.

the best lies from the mccourt press conference:

"i am not an impulsive person... these decisions don't get made impulsively"

"my job is not to make decisions that worry about what looks silly in the public eye or what doesn't look silly in the public eye... my job is to make the right decisions, and that's what i'm going to continue to do"

"we did everything we could to achieve the success we wanted [this past season]"

Jon,

I thought my weekend was ruined by UCLA winning, Texas winning, and my favorite GM getting fired, but then I checked out this site. My weekend is still ruined, but this site made it a little bit better. My weekend will be truly ruined if Bobby Valentine is hired, because I clearly remember him hating JD Drew on Baseball Tonight, But I still know I can come here to help my brain out.

By the way, I had a dream last night where Jaime McCourt becomes GM and Manager and Owner and Assistant GM and it was awful ladies and gentleman. Worst dream ever...

The Plaschke article is SO BAD I thought I would cry. He has no idea what to think about baseball.

Re: 6, 9, 10

"Yet somehow, after Beltre was 'deceived', DePo managed to sign 2 other Boras clients in Lowe/Drew to big money deals."
Lowe and Drew signed deals that were universally regarded as overpayments. I fail to see this as evidence that DePodesta is capable of interacting well with negotiators.

My point is this: DePodesta may or may not have been a good GM (I think he was), but you can't pretend that politics isn't important in society. Don't tell me that at your job, part of your duties don't include not pissing everybody off. Of course I'd rather have an a-hole GM who puts championship teams together instead of a nice one who puts mediocre teams together. But if you put a 92 LOSS TEAM (!!) on the field, you're not going to get the benefit of the doubt for your inability to be political. I still disagree with the firing, because I believe you need to give a guy time and I also have faith in Paulie. But DePodesta did NOT prove unequivocally that he was a great GM, and it's also true that online commentators (who are generally sabermetrically inclined) especially at Baseball Prospectus gave DePodesta more leeway than he earned through his own merit.

What a great post, Jon. But I need some help.

Can someone please tell me WHY DePodesto was fired? What is the real reason? If it was because of the losing record this season, why would he have been allowed to handle the Tracy situation? And why would he be fired right at the end of the manager search, instead of before it started?

SOMETHING must have happened, right? One day he was in charge, and the next, he's gone. I just can't understand it. There were too many injuries this season to blame the guy. McCourt was the one that hired him and must have approved of his style and most of his moves. So what changed?

Did every manager who interviewed give feedback that they hated the guy? Did he conduct this search in an unprofessional way? Did Lasorda and Hershiser get together in the same room and bash him, saying he was un-Dodger like?

Will we ever hear the real story?

The McCourts have failed the Dodgers and set back the building of a dynasty organization.

So what if Depodesta has weaknesses? Every GM does. The point is to build a management team with complementary skills oriented around a common philosophy.

Ousting Depodesta in favor of "old baseball" hack advice from Tommy LaSorda shows clearly the lack of a baseball philosophy more than anything.

Dear Paul,
Thank you because:

You didn't seem to care what anyone thought
You based your descisions on facts, as best as possible
I believe you gave it all you had
You brought us Jeff Kent
You were different and innovative and edgey.
You put up with the McCourts for 2 years

Thank you Paul,

*I wish you could have stayed on as an assistant gm, but, I guess that's just not the way it works. You will be though, somewhere else, I am pretty sure. And maybe that's exactly what you are meant to be.

Anyone else thinking that Jamie McCourt is ready to set Kim Ng up as the first female GM?

If it happens, we could do a lot worse...

"as Jon put it, he did himself no favors."

Not how I put it. I don't agree with this.

8 - thanks, Rob. That means a lot.

21 - Someone yesterday mentioned this, but along with the organizational and media wheels turning against DePodesta, I think the misleading perception that the White Sox won their title playing smartball with character played a role in the timing.

Going for the cycle ... see update above with link to Mark Whicker's Register column.

Jon, Another great post. I guess I shouldn't expect anything less from you. It's nice to know there is at least one level-headed writer covering the Dodgers.

This from Gregg Patton's column at the Press-Enterprise (pe.com)....

"But whether DePodesta was really on a winning track or not, we'll never know. He never did get a chance to work with a manager of his choosing, a process that now has been turned upside down after three weeks of interviews and winnowing."

Full article:

http://tinyurl.com/7qk2q (registration or bugmenot required)

25 -- you're right -- how you put it ("might have needed to improve his communication skills") and how i read it were different. I misread it -- sorry to mischaracterize your words.

Instead, let me clarify: I think Paul Depodesta clearly did need to improve his communication skills, and I think he did himself no favors in failing to do so. I wish that weren't the case, especially given the preponderance of people who, as you actually did put it, "ha[d] their knives out for [him]."

This column sounds like something I would have written if I had about 25 times more writing talent.

It was excellent.

27 Yep. Exactly. It is like a daytrader chasing a hot stock based on its price movement. McCourt now thinks Smartball/Smallball is the way. He will rue this decision.

oh man, that register column was so absolutely dead-on. it's shocking that the LA times which recently won 5 pulitzers and was until a couple of years ago a very good paper(in fact i think it was a better paper than the new york times about 2-3 years ago), has fallen below the oc register, at least in terms of its sports coverage.

I'm extremely saddened to find out(or more accurately, have confirmed that) the McCourts are knee-jerk owners, immature and sensitive to how much people like them. If DePo gets the boot after a playoff season, and one losing season derailed by injury, I fear for the Dodgers as long as the McCourts are owners. "Stay the course" is not in their vocabulary and I'm not looking forward to the coming revolving door of managers, GMs, and front office executives. If they're not careful, they may get a revolving door of fans.

Jon: another terrific post. The availability of your analysis makes it easier to bypass Bill Plaschke's tripe this morning.

BTW, this has sort of been said already, but Paul DePodesta also deserves credit for going out as a class act. Maybe his communication skills were lacking in some respects (or maybe that's just more L.A. media pseudo-journalism) but the fact is that he never publicly trashed anyone during a miserable, frustrating season. This is especially remarkable considering all the bile that the likes of Plaschke and Keisser spewed at him. And he took full blame for the season, unlike Tracy and (in the end) Frank McCourt. I still think history will prove the wisdom of DePo's approach to roster-building, but in my mind there's already no doubt about his character.

A quote from the press conference:

McCourt said he talked with Hershiser "about what it means to be a Dodger. We want Dodgers here. People who lived it, breathed it, and don't have to have it explained to them."

I just don't know what to say. Is being a Dodger something unknowable unless you've been one? Kinda like how African-Americans say that one cannot fully understand what it means to be black unless you've been one?

Everyone talks about Depo's lack of communication skills. That may all be true, but I don't think McCourt means in the same way that we'd think of it. McCourt sees communication skills as being able to charm the media and explain to the masses the direction the Dodgers are going. I think a GM's ability to communicate his philosophy to his organization is much more important. All the public and the media needs to know is that the team will win.

I was excited when Depo was first hired, mainly because it was something new, and I was interested into what he would bring to L.A. After a 91-loss season, Depo being fired, Im looking forward to what may come. I guess I'm fairly optimistic.

Look, Lasorda won as manager, Hershiser won as a player, McCourt payed the money. These are the guys Frank wants here. If they dont win, at least they did the "dodger way".
(poking fun)

Did Frank let the pressure get to him? Yes.
Did Paul Depodesta do a wonderful job? No. Valentine was not a good signing, he held on to Izturis too long as well as Jim Tracy.

Well, hey, at least Jim Tracy works for Pittsburg.

37

Yesterday was my Aunt's Birthday, so I got to see a lot of my cousins and cousin-in-laws (including the one who introduced me to this site). I was talking to two of them and one of them wanted more old Dodger's back and the other made a great point: I do not need Dodgers, I need a Winner.

Thankyou Paul for everything, you are a Winner.

Dearest Frank McCourt-

If you get caught up in this tradition stuff, and are still mad we do not have Mike Scioscia managing us, then you are getting way too caught up in the Franchises image instead of their on-field results.(Unless you honestly think that Bobby Valentine is a good manager...)

Let us face it, the Dodger way is next to gone. The days of Maury Wills bunting for a base hit, stealing second, being sacrificed over to third, and then scoring on a fly ball are completely over. We have found reliable ways to manufacture runs that you probably cannot fit into you brain.

-The Home Depo

PS, Frank, What do you know about the Dodger way? You live in Boston half the time and the Dodgers were your second choice for a franchise to buy.

-The Home Depo

39 If you saw Valentin's stats at the beginning of the season, hitting 25 home runs in each of the last five seasons, not knowing what you know now, would you have signed him? Why or why not?

Until July, would you honestly say that you would have gotten rid of Izturis? I can tell you that most people here (myself included) when asked if late May if you would rather get rid of Gagne or Izturis, the concensous was Gagne.

Jon, your post should be [REQUIRED] reading for every Dodger fan, pardon my shouting.

The more I think about who is being perceived as the "winners" in this sorry state of affairs, the angrier I get.

I hope for Frank and Jamie's sake, Lasorda doesn't start showing up at games with Eli Broad. Then again...

39

On the contrary, Goozmani, DePo did not intend for Jose Valentine to play 90 percent of the games at third base. Before the season started DePo told the world that Antonio Perez was going to split time with Jose Valentine. I believe he was going for a 40-60 or 50-50 split, not 90-10...

-The Home Depo

Uh, I was going for bold caps above and failed. Because nothing grabs attention like bold caps!

(sigh)

I've seen no quotes from Depo. Does anyone know if he's turning down interviews? Does he live in L.A. or has he left town? I'd love to hear from him, even if he doesn't really talk about the details of what happened.

Newhan's take on Lasorda
-----------------------------------------
How many times has he told the story?

How many times has Tom Lasorda pointed out that this former left-handed pitcher who would make only six starts in the big leagues and who was merely another name among the 600 or so alphabetized into the old barracks at the Dodgers' training base in Vero Beach has emerged over the years as the last one standing?

The ultimate survivor, Lasorda has often suggested, and who can argue?

Who can debate his point, especially now, at 78, amid the ever-increasing chaos and instability at Dodger Stadium, he firmly has his feet on the ground, his fingerprints on the evolving events, his face again that of an organization lacking a general manager and manager as the critical free-agent season begins.

It's remarkable.

http://tinyurl.com/766r3

43

I was actually a huge advocate of trading Gagne.

I felt pretty great when an ESPN article came out a week after I developed my theory saying Gagne might be traded. But, Gagne got hurt... Oh well.

-The Home Depo

46 Use asterisks to get bold

Orel Hershiser knows what it's like to be a Dodger. He breathes it.

But he breathed different types of air in Cleveland, New York, San Francisco, and Texas.

The Dodgers blew a great thing and that makes me sad. You can count the number of more capable GMs on one hand. I seriously can't disagree with any move he made. Given more years, he would have made us a big market team founded on a solid farm system. That would have been a scary thought for our NL West foes indeed.

That said, I think it's clear that Paul would have lasted longer if he could intimidate the living daylights out of people like Billy Beane could. He tried to be too diplomatic. He tried to take things too slow. What he should have done was completely clean house once he was hired. With dopes like the McCourts running the show, he should have known that letting opposing forces fester inside the organization, inevitably leading the LA Times to have more influence than it should, would lead to disaster for him. Think about it. How bad was it for Paul that Tracy's lineup was essentially a daily F-U to him? How much easier did having Tracy aboard the anti-Paul train make it for LA Times writers?

In the end, Paul wasn't fired because he lacked people skills. He was fired because he was an outsider who was to nice to remove his enemies quickly.

I'm sure my girlfriend is glad that DT (she doesn't even know about DT, but that is besides the point) is around for me to vent or have others share in my misery.

48 Yes, Tommy Lasorda, blowhard and failed general manager, is the Dodgers' new "brain trust."

Think about it.

Yep. Agree whole-heartedly. I'm beginning to hate Tommy Lasordid more and more. What a snake in the grass.

38 -
"McCourt sees communication skills as being able to charm the media"

More importantly the ability to charm the McCourts themselves. That may be where DePo had his biggest failing. He didn't properly play the politics of sucking up to your bosses. He thought he was hired to build a winner, but in the long run his failing was not going to the T. Lasorda School of saying whatever works in any particular situation.

Whatever any of us think of Lasorda, we've got to admit he's a real survivor.

Every day and in every way Tommy Lasorda is starting to remind me of Augusto Pinochet.

I suppose Paul DePodesta is many people's Salvador Allende.

52 I hate to admit it because DePo seems to be a gentleman and a good dude, but there may be something to what you say. Sharp elbows come in handy, too. Backstabbing, Skullduggery and intimidation may not have been part of DePo's curriculum at Harvard. But my guess is that he incorporates some of those into his repertoire on his next job.

Great post, Jon. Right now, only Dodger Thoughts and my assumption that Vin Scully is unlikely to be fired (right? RIGHT?) are allowing me to soothe my baseball pain.

56 Yeah, but if the GM charms the media, it keep the heat off the McCourts. So, charming the media=charming the McCourts.

47 -

DePo quote - a class act to the end

"I truly believe that this franchise is poised to begin the next great era of Dodger baseball," DePodesta said in a statement released by the Dodgers. "I have a tremendous amount of affection for the players, staff and front office, and I wish everyone the best of luck."

59 I'd love to see McCourt try to fire Vin. I expect McCourt's creditors might have a problem with that.

And, I wonder what Vin REALLY thinks about the continuing foolishness that began for this franchise about 1998. Vin is so stoic, we may never know.

60 -

As successful as the McCourts have been in other businesses, they still seem to have self-esteem concerns. This results in being very thin-skinned.

I'm sure we will see Tommy out there leading the charge in the next few months, deflecting as much from the McCourts as he can (and at the same time getting all of that wonderful media coverage for himself).

We tend to look at the baseball world a little bit differently here at DT. Just as we had to keep reminding ourselves that we were in the minority with regard to our opinion of DePo, we must also remember we are in the minority with regard to our opinion of Lasorda. I say that assuming that most DT readers are not big fans of his.

63 When I was a casual observer of the Dodgers, I thought Lasorda was great. Now that I've started following the Dodgers more closely, my opinion has changed.

61 Sure wish that DePo visits this site.

65 You can be sure that if he does, it will be with his laptop. ;-)

FYI, so far in this thread, two commenters have called him just "Paul", per that espn article. Just in case we weren't 100% certain that the article was talking about this site.

I think Lasorda's come in for too much criticism here. He's harmless -- he has no ideology but Dodger ideology. What is that? Who knows? Who cares? Do cheerleaders have ideologies?

If McCourt suddently thinks he needs to chase the Scott Podsedniks of the world to win, or he's convinced that bunting is salvation, or that Bobby Valentine is worth ten wins a year, or that the experience of having traded 10 prospects for 10 36 year old middle relievers is a necessary prerequisite for making the same dumb mistakes and calling it "experience," well, I think McCourt is probably able to make up his own mind about that without turning Lasorda into the Dodgers version of Tom Hagen. I tend to think this is media-driven hype, attempting to continue controversy and sell papers.

57 Is this some sort of corollary to Godwin's law?

52 - "I think it's clear that Paul would have lasted longer if he could intimidate the living daylights out of people like Billy Beane could. He tried to be too diplomatic. He tried to take things too slow. What he should have done was completely clean house once he was hired. With dopes like the McCourts running the show, he should have known that letting opposing forces fester inside the organization, inevitably leading the LA Times to have more influence than it should, would lead to disaster for him."

Explain to me how DePodesta would have been in a position to fire Lasorda, who is rapidly emerging as the eminence grise behind the firings.

66 Yeah, and he found it using Google.

How many people in the last 48 hours have called Lasorda "Tommy?"

[67] but most call him depo or depodesta.

depo's problem was definitely that he was not as assertive and authoritative as beane. i think if he had more force of personality he wouldn't have been undermined as easily across the board.

68 - we care if it causes good men to be uprooted because some idiot who once wore the uniform to pull the plug on all his enemies. We care, in sort, if it causes the Dodgers to suck. Which it is.

[69] the thing about godwin's law is that it can be applied to anything, not just nazis. as they say, if you have enough monkeys banging at keyboards...

on the other hand, nazis are indeed inherently more likely than most things because of their immense metaphorical appeal.

72 And every time, I think people are talking about Naccarato. Uncanny.

73 DePo seems like the type of guy (again, this is just an assumption) that is good at doing his job (or was), but was too nice of a guy.

At my old job, I had a boss like that. She was totally competent at doing her job, but she is also a very nice person. Her boss on the other hand was not a very nice person. Guess who survived?

Allow me to restate -- the assumption appears to be that Tommy is the king and Frank is the pawn. What if Frank is the king and Tommy is the pawn?

Why must we call DePodesta "DePodesta" but Paul LoDuca "Paul" or "Pauly?"

Have we mined the depths of this hypocrisy yet, or shall we go further?

69

Well, it could be a corollary, but you can also think of DePodesta as the person who wanted to change an old way of running a baseball team (or country) and use ideas that would ruffle the feathers of the old guard (sabermetrics or Communism). While the new ideas were embraced as bold and exciting by some, the old guard wouldn't accept it. And Allende, like DePodesta, didn't help himself out by not running the government (or baseball team) well in the view of some and ticking off the Powers that Be (in both cases you can use "Yankees"). Eventually, the leader of the Old Guard, (Lasorda and Pinochet), had to pull off a coup.

If we don't hear from DePodesta for a while, then we might want to check out some of the renovations to the stadium.

57 - except that of course Allende was incapable of running so much as a municipal bus system. 140% annual inflation, widespread shortages of staples from supermarket shelves, and widespread strikes (some of which were admittedly financed by the CIA) were pretty much the proof that his expropriation of private property was a complete and total disaster.

Other than that, sure, I understand your meaning... ???

78 I think the analogy that fits is that McCourt is GW Bush, and Lasord is Karl Rove. Apologies to the Republicans out there.

[79] i don't like the sabermetrics:communism analogy, because communism doesn't work :)

Lasorda is not Karl Rove. If McCourt had a Karl Rove, he would not be in the mess he is in. Lasorda, is, at best, Sean Hannity.

79 Yesterday I posted something about comparing the Dodgers with Animal Farm. Great minds think alike...

-The Home Depo

"DePodesta bet his future on the Dodger Way, transforming the team into one that was going to rely on the farm system, supported by a few outside acquisitions" This comment is stretch that borders on upsetting me when reading it.

83

I disagree. Lasorda, at best, is Hannity's fish-like greaseball of an assistand (Alan Colmes or something like that).

78 - "Allow me to restate -- the assumption appears to be that Tommy is the king and Frank is the pawn. What if Frank is the king and Tommy is the pawn?"

You're missing the point, Steve. It's not that anyone's questioning whether Frank is in charge, it's what Tommy's role in this is. Is Tommy a sort of Wormtongue character, whispering bad advice into Frank's ear? I would suggest he is. So does Ken Rosenthal.

"Why must we call DePodesta "DePodesta" but Paul LoDuca "Paul" or "Pauly"?"

Why does it matter?

"Have we mined the depths of this hypocrisy yet, or shall we go further?"

Huh?

82

It is okay using communism as an analogy when the thing before it was communism. Remember, communism started off extremely well and it would have stayed that way if we were not so greedy.

88 edit

I ment to say: "the thing before it was fascism."

83 You're right. Lasorda is not the evil genius Rove is. But, I don't think you can look at the events of the last few days and discount his influence on McCourt.

Well, I thought the Allende-Pinochet thing was sort of a reach....

90

So what you are saying is that Lasorda is just very influential (but not in a good way like Karl Rove).

Is this scenario looming on the horizon:

Beane hires Depo back.

With his inside knowledge, they target core pieces of the Jacksonville squad and agree to take the controversial Choi off our hands.

They dangle Zito in front of the new Dodger GM. Tommy, Frank and Plashke bless the deal.

The future Dodger dynasty is now the A's future.

Am I paranoid?

[87] i think he was referring to the fact that pro-depo people get mocked for "lovingly" referring to depodesta as "paul" on their blogs (i forget who wrote that, probably plaschke), but the people who are doing the mocking are the same who lovingly refer to "tommy" and "paulie", "bulldog", etc...

on a side note, considering how we were among the first to be calling for an orel infusion several months ago, it's extremely ironic and sad the manner in which that chicken has come home to roost.

I have a feeling that the ultimate fallout between DePodesta and McCourt is exactly what Plaschke suggested - that McCourt didn't like the direction DePodesta was taking with the managerial search, that he tried to impose his own vision on the process and force him to interview Hershiser, that DePo chafed at the interference in the process (ultimately not attending the infamous dinner) and, in effect told McCourt "if you don't let me do my job this isn't gonna work."

I also don't doubt that McCourt was influenced by Lasorda and others in the front office. Plasche's article hints at this - the reference to the 5 interviewed candidates indicating DePo's "lack of contacts." That sounds like something that might have been drifting out of Jamie McCourt's and Lasorda's offices, no? Whatever the case, McCourt lost faith in DePo, and he's made himself look like a fool in the process. Has anybody in the media aside from Plaschke praised this move? The national press is almost uniformly scornful (to the extent that they even care).

Jon, this site is outstanding. You're coverage of this team is outstanding. Thank you.

Two different points, Rob, your confusion is in the fact that they are not related.

I guess I am suggesting that I'm not missing the point as much as minimizing that particular point. Bad advice is easily ignored. Furthermore, I would not be surprised if Lasorda's advice was simply reinforcing what Frank already believed

As to the other points, it is a particular piece of gall, and the worst line (of many) in Crasnick's odious ESPN article yesterday, where he refers to "stat-head web sites" who refer to DePodesta as "Paul." Even if these existed, which they don't, the personalization of someone you appreciate but do not know in the sporting world is not limited to "stat-heads." I say this as neither a "stat-head" nor someone who is in the habit of calling "DePodesta" Paul. It was the kind of line that makes me glad DePodesta is gone just so I don't have to read things like it anymore. More irony.

Maybe John Kruk was happy about this move.

94
Jerry Crasnick was the writer with the mention of people calling DePodesta "Paul". Plaschke rarely uses DePodesta's first or last names as he apparently is not worthy of repsect by him.

95
Ken Rosenthal thought the ouster of DePodesta was justified, mainly because he didn't think DePodesta could handle the personalities involved in running a team.

93 - well, it is Halloween tomorrow. What better time to start making up scary stories?

96 - bad advice is easily ignored by men of good judgment, character, and discerning intelligence. McCourt appears to have none of these attributes. Whether Lasorda is merely pouring fuel on McCourt's prejudices or not, the result is the same.

I'd like to think that the Lasorda-McCourt analogy is more like Barney advising Homer Simpson in Moe's bar.

As long as Steve is here I don't need to post since he seems to make my point better then myself. I am quite scared however that I have the same viewpoint as a lawyer educated in Utah. Given that knowledge, it is quite possible my viewpoint is wrong and I will have to rethink my positions.

102 Or Milhouse advising Bart...

"Hey Bart, want to go play with the old X-ray machine at the abandoned hospital?"

i'm not optimistic about the future considering the indicators coming from the dodger camp, but i am definitely willing to suspend my chicken little doomsday lamentations until we find out who the new people are.

I miss Icaros, usually he has some humor to help in moments like these. Has he taken a winter sabbatical?

Well, as Vin Scully says, "Baseball is a maddening game." Even when you are right, it can take a very long time to be vindicated. Even when you are wrong, you can look good in the short term: the Nationals in the first half of 2005, the White Sox all year.

I'll take that as a dig at Utah.

Lasorda has no accountability within the organization. He can say A, B, or C, or Z (though I suspect he's always just saying the same thing -- Dodger Way -- Dodger Way), which is essentially tabula rasa -- anyone can draw whatever understanding they want from the Dodger Way, since the Dodger Way is epic myth. One person thinks its pitching and defense; I think that anyone who thinks that wasn't watching the team's defense for, oh, thirty years or so. But I digress. I think that this reliance on demonizing Lasorda necessarily minimizes McCourt's own role in all of this, and I think that undermines the concerns most of us have about McCourt going forward.

96 Steve - it is clear to me that Crasnick was talking about this site in particular.

Witness http://dodgerthoughts.baseballtoaster.com/archives/278736.html where Jon is comparing EQA, Rate2, and VORP. Witness the comments in that thread. To the ESPN gang, that's a stat-head site. Granted, I would much rather be associated with a known "stat-head" site than to be associated with ESPN, but that's me.

Crasnick probably browses this site extensively for material. He sees some of the more outrageous DePodesta apologists and then paints the broad generalization from there. I mean, with all that's been posted over the past 24 hours, what with people wanting to egg the McCourts house, people exclaiming that they'll never root for the Dodgers again but will cheer for any team DePodesta rebounds with, people calling Jamie McCourt any number of insults, it isn't hard for an ESPN journalist to backwards-stumble his way into pigeonholing the site.

For once I am a dittohead -- today's post is spot on. This site has been really fun to read this weekend, painful as the news has been.

A couple of points:
1) Jon, is there any chance you can get an interview with Depo about what happened and what is in his future? I would think from his perspective, this would be an ideal forum to "speak".

2) My sense of the situation is that while Depo has the arrogance it takes to be successful as a GM (see Moneyball, the book) he never read "How to Swim with Sharks", a short treatise on the care and feeding of execs, academics and others who exist at very high levels of decision making. Baseball is still a good old boy system and it seems you can't succeed just by existing on the plane of pure reason.

Utah is a fine state. I hear they have a great Jazz tradition.

There is a book titled "The Dodgers Way to Play Baseball". Al Campanis wrote it.

In 1954.

They used to sell at the souvenir stands at Dodger Stadium. It was a paper back and had a cartoon of a batter standing with his foot literally in a bucket and a coach looking on a disapproving manner.

But if you want to go back to the Dodgers of the 1950s and 1960s (and only the good teams, not the crappy ones like 1958 and 1967 and 1968), you need the following things to come back:
1) the reserve clause
2) Sandy Koufax
3) a pitcher's mound that is the height of Mount Lukens
4) no PEDs (except for greenies)
5) have the ghost of Braven Dyer take over the body of Bill Plaschke.

He also learned about TV theme songs and the First Season of the Rockford Files then. You would think Crasnick would have more respect. It's possible he has to read quickly because of the regular delousing sessions he has to go through from hanging out with that agent he wrote about for so long.

have the ghost of Braven Dyer take over the body of Bill Plaschke.

But that would mean...gasp...Bill Plaschke might gain a soul!

We discussed the first season of the Rockford Files? Did I miss that? Man, where was I when that discussion was going on?

93 That is good stuff.

Lasorda: "We had to get this guy. This is a guy who can win games and will win games for a long time to come. This is the guy we need. Barry Zito has a curveball that falls of a table and the National League hasn't seen a guy like this and he's going to be great for us, our number one guy. Orel is playing a game of 150-pitch long toss with him right now to build his arm strength. It's a long season, you know."

Plaschke:
"Did you see it?

Did you see the Dodger Way in action today?

We should thank the guy most responsible. It's only fair.

Thank you, stat-guy.

Thank you for getting team computer to trade Barry Zito for five guys who might never be good (LaRoche, Guzman, Billingsley, Martin, Broxton).

Thank for you returning to a place that has still not won a playoff series.

Thank for you for taking a first-baseman who can't play (Choi) for nothing.

Thank you for being you so we fans can recognize the players on the field."

McCourt: "Pat Gillick is being replaced today. He apparently had problems programming his speed-dial with some of the other baseball people we have that have been following the game for 60 years now and that's impressive. This kind of miscommunication is understandable but we feel, me and my baseball people, that now is the time to move on. We appreciate what Pat has brought to this organization and I promise you that stability is always my goal and will continue to be something we strive for as we work to return to the great Dodger Way of doing things.

In the interim, one of the great Dodgers of the past, Jay Johnstone, will be interim GM."

It would appear that I have uttered the last word on this topic.

"I'm furious at the McCourts right now. But I'm also disappointed in DePodesta for providing his critics with the ammunition they needed."

This is exactly my take. As much as I was behind DePo, it's disappointing to know that he might have kept his job if he were able to articulate his vision. He should have found a local columnist early on who would at least listen to his views, to counter some of the misinformation. But he seemed to ignore the local media. When you're pushing radical change, that's a big mistake. And it's surprising to see that point lost on a Harvard cum laude.

He's at the forefront of a movement. Couldn't he at least try to explain his decisions?

Sorry if I missed this earlier, but did anyone with ESPN insider access read and summarize Peter Gammons thoughts on this situation? They're obviously critical of the McCourts, too, but I can't read the article itself.

Thanks!

As for me, I'm temporarily cooled off from all this ridiculousness. Maybe it's a good night's sleep, maybe it's wanting to wait to see who they hire before fully casting judgement (even though this is all undeniably an extremely poorly handled PR fiasco at best)... Maybe it's that today's a day for NFL action, or maybe it's just being fully in denial that my team is owned by fools. But for this moment, I feel fairly undepressed.

C

Unfortunately, the only columnist on DePodesta's side writes for the San Bernardino Sun, which is sort of like having me being your biggest supporter when it comes to influence.

118 Henson was able to get information from DePodesta. Also, DePodesta gave several radio interviews.

It is notable that Plaschke/Simers, the most notorious "journalists" in the city, either didn't bother to check or decided to selectively quote him for their own purposes.

Understand, BT&T, Plaschke/Simers are men without desire for anything deeper than what they perceive to be true. An incoming GM would do well to get on their good side--whatever that means--because after day one, it's too late. They've already pigeonholed your identity and good luck trying to shake it.

Me and my bro were looking at some old Dodger cards on ebay right now. I showed him one of the 1954 Topps Duke Snider cards that they have. (I own one)......

In my brother's words..

"Didn't they trade him too?"

As much as I believe the Internet is, to quote Noah Cross, "the future, Mr. Gittes!" I sure wish some MSN newspaper would publish the essay Jon wrote above. Even with its even-handed, reasoned tone, it is a hard slap across the face to ignoramuses like Plaschke who keen and moan about a "Dodger tradition" that they have criminally misrepresented.

If the White Sox are McCourt's new model (is there any evidence of this?), then fine. Go out and get pitching for next year like they got this year. But he must bear in mind: Of their starting four, two were developed from within--Buerlhe and Garland. Garland was a .500 pitcher until this season, when he experienced significant improvement in ERA and walks allowed. A third, Contreras, was acquired from the notoriously impatient Yankees, who would surely love in retrospect to have given Contreras a little more time to develop.

I'd love for McCourt to ask Tommy to explain how the Sox got Konerko, who managed to hit .294 with 24 home runs and an .862 OPS in 1999, the year after he was traded from the Dodgers. Protecting that prospect from being dealt for short-term help might have helped LA win a couple more division titles by now. Just as Bobby Jenks looks like a steal from an Angels' management that didn't do enough to protect a prospect who could've helped them a lot this year. Much to learn from those stories.

He might also want to check out the luck factor. The '05 Sox are the mirror image of the '05 Dodgers. Career years from many players. Not free of injuries, but the core team we saw in the playoffs played most of the year. A change here and there in the hoodoo, and it's quite possible the '05 Dodgers could have been much better, and the Sox much worse.

The White Sox were, basically, a team of absolute nobodies on the baseball scene. The PR department, I'm sure, threw up their hands at this collection of guys from the minor league system like Crede, Rowand and Garland, castoffs like Konerko, Uribe and Contreras and said, "Kenny? WTF?" Then the GM traded for some new players--and the PR guys probably said: "Scott Who? Podsednick? That old retread Jermaine Dye? AJ Pierzynski, who couldn't even hang onto his job in San Francisco? You're kidding, right? Those are your big moves?"

The Sox of '05 were built according to a plan quite comparable to DePodesta's. In carrying it out, there was a need for patience. There was frustration. There were things that didn't work. But Williams was given the time he needed, by an owner so mean and arrogant he could eat both McCourts on a shishkebob.

So, yes, Frank & Jamie, study the White Sox.

I usualy post my opinions on this bligsite at least once or twice a day, I havent posted or had access to the internet or a news source at around 6p.m. The firing of Depo is not the ened of the world for the Dodgers, I may not have had this same reaction had what happened friday night never occurred, on friday around 6 p.m a neighbor of mine was screwing around with butaine when it suddenly exploded in his face and caused a massive chain reaction of high heat chemical burn eventualy making his house go up in flames as well as mine, luckily he survived with only 25% of his body destroyed from 3rd degree burns, my wife and i were able to salvage most of our possetions closest to our hearts, thank God. I guess the point I'm trying to make is this, when something as trivial as a GM being fired happens, remember about those who arent fortunate enough to be able to care about a baseball team, remember those affected by the hurricanes and every day disasters, have faith and remain strong, hey at least Gagne hasnt been fired yet.

Paul Oberjuerge's column in the SB Sun.

http://www.sbsun.com/sports/ci_3166220

Today I am doing much better then yesterday. I watched the press conference and Mccourt should be embarrassed about not being prepared for it. He was almost as bad as Bush at the beginning of his presidency.

I really liked Depodesta a lot. His moves made sense and I had the feeling that we finally had someone who had a plan and was rational and preparing us to be great for a very long time. His inability to communicate and do the little things bothered me a little bit you cant have everything.

If Hersisher becomes a part of the front office and Valentine comes in, we may be okay as long as they think long term and not short term and trade off all of the prospects for a win now situation. I look forward to Laroche at third and Guzman in left with Loney at first with Billingsley and Jackson dominating in the rotation.

I am not going to waste any time sharing thoughts on McCourt. Everyone has already said enough. I cant believe MLB let this guys become an owner of an MLB team. He is not only an embarrassment to Dodger fans but to MLB as well.

124

I'm very sorry Curtis. At least you are in one piece. You have to start from there and then work you're way up. I think you have the right perspective.

Great piece Jon.

Today's LA Times reads like a cruel sabermetric nightmare. Did I overlook the bonfire of 5,000 copies of Moneyball outside the Stadium Club?

5 writers weigh in without a single counterpoint. Unless you consider "Why fire him now?" a thoughtful analysis. Or "Why hire DePodesta at all?" Not one of the 5 writers questions whether Lasorda is a qualified architect of a winning team in 2006. Or whether it's actually possible to improve a roster and still lose 22 more games.

Curtis, I'm sorry to hear about those horrible events. You're right, arguing about sports is trivial compared to real-life tragedy. I'm glad to hear you and your family are OK and hope your neighbor recovers from his injuries.

Nice to hear you and your family are safe Curtis.

Thanks for the comments, and please pray for us to any diety you feel comfortable with, my post shouldnt make anyone sad but should instead help put things into perspective so that noone gets to worked up over it or loses any sleep, hopefuly our favorite club can come out on top, till we talk again,

Curt.

I miss Icaros, usually he has some humor to help in moments like these. Has he taken a winter sabbatical?

That warms my heart, Molokai. I started a new job last week and am in the process of moving from my parents' place in the suburbs to a tiny-yet-cozy apartment in San Francisco.

I've been lurking, but mostly after-hours.

I wish I had something fun to say about all of this, but I'm pretty bummed. No matter who the GM is, firing a guy after less than two years of an admitted long-range plan makes zero sense.

Hey, there was one sensible opinion piece in the LA Times by a noted member of SABR, Jules Tygiel.

http://tinyurl.com/8bavl

However, he was writing about the California initiative process.

But still....

wow, that really sucks curtis. i'm glad your family escaped unharmed, and i wish you the best as you try to put things back together. good luck, man.

Given the turmoil at the LAT, would Plaschke be so joyous if he were given his walking papers by the publishers, I wonder?

Let's see...single-sentence paragraphs translate into .002 readers per word...not good enough, boyo!

Here's my dilemma.
I have family members who work for newspapers. It's their livelihood. My family has grown up reading the paper all the time. I grew up in a househould that subscribed to usually two papers at a time. We all would read the paper in the morning before we went to school or work. I even get a little check from a newspaper every couple of weeks.

And now, I really don't want to get the LA Times anymore. I hate it. I just hate it. Can I, in good conscience, just cut the cord?

116 - heh, simply brilliant. BTW, how many minutes after the McCourts announce that they've hired Gillick do they turn around and announce he's fired?

The Plaschke synthesis is hilarious and spot-on, by the way.

123 - I didn't believe the 2005 Chisox were any good, and I still don't; they're one of the luckiest teams in the history of the World Series (measured by difference between actual winning percentage and Pythagorean standings).

- Dye? An injury risk.
- Contreras? A 33-year-old having a bounceback season away from the Bronx.
- Pierzynski? Career year.
- Freddie Garcia? Didn't you hear the parties they were throwing down at U.S.S. Mariner when he got traded?

http://ussmariner.com/?m=200406&paged=5 (scroll to the bottom)

Of the four players above, I expect every single one will have a significant regression. If your plan is called "sign a bunch of castoffs and hope for miracles from your pitching coach and career years from the offense", sure, it's a great idea...

[136] yes, you can. as i've said, a couple years ago i really loved the LAT. and it'd been my favorite paper since i was a kid. but by 2004 i couldn't in good conscience continue to support them any longer, so i convinced my family to cancel their subscription. i don't have a favorite paper any more. i mainly read the news on the internet now (mainly the economist, slate, and articles from google news), and i listen to NPR in the car.

136 Here's how you cut the cord.

Get yourself a copy of an RSS reader. NetNewsWire on the Mac, or the equivalent for the PC.

Subscribe to this feed: http://tinyurl.com/a3aga

This will get you all the news for "Los Angeles". You can (obviously) make it more or less specific by doing Google News searches for your local hometown, etc.

This feed: http://tinyurl.com/7cvm9

...gets you all the news for "Dodgers".

I have a list of about fifteen of these sorts of Google News feeds that completely replaces the LA Times.

Whoops. In my previous post, the second tinyurl just points at the page. You need to click on the RSS link on the left to have that go into your RSS reader.

136: just do it Bob. I'm on a business trip in Asia and the only thing that has kept me from going off the deep end over this whole mess is the fact that I haven't been able to read the LA Times. I have every intention of cancelling my subscription when I return this next weekend. Maybe there's a message to be sent if we all cancel.....I can get boxscores from my Ventura County paper and analysis from here, 6-4-2 and Andrew's (need a new name) site.

I have to admit that I had thrown away my allegiance to the team when I heard this news. but it's Jon's insightful analysis and the passionate posts from other readers who may just keep me around. I hate McCourt and what he's done to our team...but perhaps a 40+ year love affair is too hard to quit.

rgds, will

The deed has been done.

I don't know if this has been said here, but i believe depodesta got fired because him and mccourt didn't agree on the new manager.
I believe with mccourt's opinion about dodger history and tradition, he wants a former dodger player to be the manager and depodesta wanted someone who would manage with depodesta's philosophy.
Plus in the press conference mccourt said he wanted everyone to be on the same page, pulling in the same direction, so i believe mccourt and depodesta were not on the same page as far as the new manager is concerned.
Anyways, mccourt is an idiot, he let someone with the right vision go and now he's going to bring in old fashioned manager and gm, which means an overhaul of the roster which means a couple bad seasons for the dodgers, and if you believe in sabermetrics and not old fashioned baseball, then bad seasons for years to come.
We know mccourt will have a 90 something million dollar payroll if that, and the only way to be sucessfull with a low payroll is to get the best that you can out of that low payroll, efficient use of the money, by using sabermetrics, and its clear that mccourt doesn't believe in sabermetrics, otherwise he would have kept depodesta, so get use to mediocre players playing for the dodgers (mcgriff,jordan types) guys past their prime, hello dan evans era again, and probably a mixture of the dan evans era and the kevin malone era.
My prediction is that the new gm will get "past their prime" free agents that don't cost much and he will trade the farm for quality guys in their prime, with the end result being we will have some quality players and some past their prime players AND NO FARM.
What a shame.

136 Check out the November issue of LA Magazine, Kevin Roderick's article on the Times' recent management changes. There is a very telling conversation he has with a local civic activist, David Abel, who reads news every day, but admits that, nowadays, he can go days without reading the Times, "and I don't miss it."

I still get it, too, but I'm thinking the same way as you. It's not really a protest. Every newspaper I've ever read regularly had a columnist I hated, more than one. It's that the product is so lacking in importance, depth. It doesn't have the old newspaper values, but it lacks the immediacy and interactivity of this medium. It's simply outmoded.

Other newspapers like the Wall Street Journal, NY Times and USA Today have maintained their relevancy and value, somehow. Not the LA Times. I predicted it will be the first major metro daily to fold, leaving its home city without one--"and (as Don Adams would say) loving it!"

Pierzynski? Career year.

AJP had anything but a career year. In 5 years as an every day player, he had his lowest OPS, second lowest SLG, lowest OBP, second lowest OPS+, lowest BA, highest strikeouts, and lowest amount of doubles. He hit a few more HRs than usual (playing in a HR friendly park), and drew a few more walks than usual. Other than that he had a bad season by his standards.

Contreras? A 33-year-old having a bounceback season away from the Bronx.

He's played two and a half seasons. I agree that he won't have the same season again, he didn't really have anything to bounce back from.

Freddie Garcia? Didn't you hear the parties they were throwing down at U.S.S. Mariner when he got traded?

Garcia had his third worst ERA+ of his seven year career. He had two very good years, one good year, and two mediocre years in Seattle, then was traded in the middle of a third very good year and finished up with a better than good year. He had another good year in 2005.

You're not giving those three players the proper credit for their seasons, whether it be too much credit or not enough.

Is there any better example of an organization that has become a prisoner to its own history than the Dodgers? And a missinterpeted view of history at that. Why is it that baseball is so afraid of the "cutting edge", almost every other business and organization would pride it self on being a leading innovator in their field, but in baseball its best to just keep doing things the same way theyve all ways been done? With Depodesta we had the Dodgers had a chance at becoming something new and improved, something based on new ideas. Im afraid that now the Dodgers will now be run with some-sort of cockeyed mythology that has begun to be taked as fact.

So, Mr. McCourt, let me get this straight, in the shadow of the World Series, one that saw Paul Konerko lead the White Sox to victory, and one year after Pedro Martinez wins a ring, you deside to listen to Tommy Lasorda's sage advice? Ya, I think you need to do a little more study on Dodgers history.

Im sure this has probably already been brought up here, but it seems very likely to me that Depodesta ends up in San Diego soon with Sandy Alderson in charge. I dont really want to think to much about that.

Great post Jon, and if you could get an interview with DePodesta that would be fantastic. By the way this whole story illustrates why annonmyous sources are bad. At some point you need to know both who said it and why. Much of what I want to have said has been said. In an earlier post, I pointed out and a few others as well: ascribing all evil to Lasorda is a big mistake and lets McCourt off the hook way too easily. Sadly many in the LAT seem to be doing this especially Newhan, and while the San Bernadino Sun article is great, I think it is in correct partially since Lasorda was on board with Collins a decision which in my mind made the most sense as a managerial candidate that could meet all points of view within the Dodger organization.He got along with DePodesta and also had a good sense of the prospects that would be coming up.

As many have noted what we are really seeing is a reactive strategy by an owner who I think has never really been honest about his finances or expectations for the Dodgers and at what point we will see a coherent management policy and philosophy is unclear and I doubt the present owner is capable of one. I just hope we don't go down the road of the Clippers...But on the bright side there is an old tired cliche that it is better to be lucky than good maybe next year we can be lucky.

But how do I keep track of my favorite comic strips now?

124 Curtis, how terrible. All of my prayers and good wishes are with you and your wife, and I hope the resultant chaos subsides for you soon.

I'll do my best, as will everyone else I'm sure, to keep DT a little vacation from reality, which we all need.

I'm too disheartened to read through all the comments. I've always been willing to give McCourt a chance, but it's clear now that that was a chance to make himself look like a fool.

With all that said, we still have a great farm system, and we're still the Dodgers. If we can get a competent GM, I think we may end up fine, with no credit to the McCourts, but the Dodgers are more than just ownership. Gillick or Ng would both be okay as GM, and Orel as field manager (I must assume that's what will happen) should hopefully work out. I don't think I'll ever forgive the McCourts for what they've done here, but I think the franchise may in the end weather all this, although we may be in rough sledding for 06.

WWSH

143. Did you get a chance to listen to McCourts press confrence, its on their mlb.com page? McCourt didnt seem to know why Depodesta got fired, and when asked what qualitites he wanted to see in the new GM, McCourt claimed he wanted someone with experience. When a reporter asked him if that meant he wanted someone with experience as a GM, he seemed a little confused and rambled that experience as a GM is not neccessary but that it means he wants someone that convinces him that he can do the job. McCourt really seems overwellmed.

If i have to hear the stupid quote, supposedly attributed to Lasorda, about everyone pulling on the same end of the rope, im going to hang myself with said rope. Im sure it a great motivational approach for ballplayers and a manager, but is there nothing to be said for a diversity of opinion. A good manager should have a wide array of opinions to consult, not a group-think mentality that saves people the effort of innovation and experimentation.

Cut to Winter meetings,
In an exceptionally busy trading time in the winter meetings,Dodger marionette...er GM Jamie McCourt assisted by puppeteer..er "consultant" Tom Lasorda set to work transforming the team and "undoing failed GM,Paul Depodesta's work" in Lasorda's words.
In a move to shore up the leadoff spot,center fielder Dave Roberts was re-acquired from the Padres for minor league pitchers Chad Billingsley,Chuck Tiffany and Greg Miller along with outfielder J.D. Drew ."The kid's got wheels like Maury Wills",Lasorda said of Roberts currently recovering from hamstring surgery on both legs."We didn't need Drew because we got Grabowski and I love this kid Repko.He's a 5 tool star in the making,reminds me of *&%^$# Jose Gonzalez"
The trades continued with Brad Penny,Dioner Navarro and Russell Martin going to the Marlins for catcher Paul Loduca and outfielder Juan Encarnacion"I never understood what Depodesta was thinking trading solid vets like that.Lasorda said"adding"the catching will be fine with Paulie and recently signed free agent Mike Piazza"He's my godson you know Bill"Lasorda told an admiring beat writer Bill Plaske.
In a further return to the fabled "Dodger Way",manager Bill Valentine's staff was fleshed out with hitting coach Franklin Stubbs,pitching coach Doug Rau,bench coach Steve Sax,bullpen catcher Dave Sax and infield instructor Jeff Hamilton.

My biggest regret of this whole thing is that the McCourts didn't get behind Depo and try to work as a group to prove the LA Times wrong in their combined hatred of the McCourts and Depo. Now I have to root for a team that if it succeeds, the Plaschke's of the world will take credit. That is the sour pill I had to swallow this morning.

137
That is just plain silly. Other then pitchers the only CWS hitter who had a career year was Konerko. Rowand / AJ / Podboy / Uribe all didn't come close their previous highs judged by VORP. They missed their best hitter all season. Just because the team is advertised as a small ball team does not mean it is. It played very much like a Earl Weaver team with great pitching, great defense and big time home runs. It is true that Ozzie handicapped the team by going small ball much to often but he made up for it with the best use of a pitching staff I've ever seen in post season. Even BP has admitted that they just whiffed on how important the defense was to the WS pitching staff. You don't march through the Red Sox / Angels / Astro's/ and go 11-1 by being lucky. Why can't anyone admit this was a good team just because a saber savvy GM didn't build it.

151
Yep i watched the press conference.

""""McCourt didnt seem to know why Depodesta got fired, and when asked what qualitites he wanted to see in the new GM, McCourt claimed he wanted someone with experience."""""

mccourt didn't wanna just come out and say depodesta got fired because we disagreed on the new manager. And "someone with experience" means an old fashioned gm.

""""""""McCourt really seems overwellmed""""

that's because he's caving into the pressure to get a former dodger player as the manager, which means an old fashioned manager. And he wants the gm and manager on the same page, which means an old fashioned gm.
Get ready for old fashioned baseball as far as the dodgers are concerned and put that together with a low payroll and you get mediocre teams and mediocre results.

Sorry if it's already been mentioned, but from the LA Times/Henson report, " DePodesta learned that he would be fired from a reporter Friday."

That's real classy. That's the "Dodger way." Wasn't one of the gripes that DePo didn't treat people well? That he didn't communicate well? That he wasn't good with PR? That he didn't have good people skills.

Sounds like the McCourts are hypocrites and should be firing themselves.

I'm well aware that is is a form of ad hominem attack, and that it doesn't go to the substance of the charges against DePo. It's just annoying, and indicates to me that (1) I don't know if the charges against DePo are true, (2) but even assuming they are, it sounds like an excuse an scapegoating.

It just keeps getting worse and worse.

The McCourts are clueless. Maybe they'll hire good people. But I have a feeling that they're just clueless reactionaries with huge egos who are in way over their heads.

It's going to be hard to continue to be a Dodgers fan.

154 My worst regret is that the McCourts are the owners. They are clueless.

I've said it before, but I'll repeat it. Tracy drove me crazy, but I think there are many managers who are worse. I'd venture to say that Tracy is in the top half at least. I fear that we may end up someone worse.

If you're going to fire DePo, keep Tracy unless you KNOW you have someone better lined up. If you're going to let Tracy go, keep DePo.

But clearly, the McCourts don't have a plan, and they don't have a clue. Getting rid of both is prima facie evidence of this, and I haven't seen anything to rebut this.

Again quoting from the LA Times article, "McCourt ... did not invite DePodesta to a dinner interview with Hershiser"

Again, one of the charges against DePo is false, if we can believe Henson's reporting.

The more I learn, the worse it is.

Another quote from Henson that is evidence of McCourt as a reactionary and incompetent:

"Injuries played a huge role in the team's disappointing finish, a factor McCourt indicated weeks ago absolved the front office of blame.

But somewhere along the way, he changed his mind."

Get ready for old fashioned hit and run bunting, moving the runners over baseball and a mixture of dan evans (signing free agent past their prime mcgriff,jordan type players) and kevin malone (trading the farm for quality players), but overall mediocre teams and mediocre results, 500 ball or below 500 ball.
GOODBYE FARM.

Maybe we only have to put up with the McCourts for another 3 years or so.

Here's something to consider (borrowed from Baseball Prospectus, "The Daily Prospectus: Depreciation Madness" , by Derek Zumsteg, Jan. 7, 2002.

...in the United States tax code, there's a provision that allows teams to write off the salaries of players when they acquire the team on a limited schedule as depreciation. It's an easy, fun way for them to show massive losses while they make tons and tons of delicious cash money. The write-off lasts five years, and then you sell the team for its increased value and find something else to do, like buy an arena football team, or make a nuisance of yourself in another sport."

(Skipping down a ways to this next paragraph, which is amazingly similar to the current situation.)

"* Dodgers, bought in 1998, are suddenly the object of sale rumors as News Corp, having established Fox Sports Los Angeles, has run out the tax break and wants to use the money elsewhere. Also, I don't think they ever really figured out how to run the team."

(and finally)

"But there's your pattern - only one franchise currently known to be up for sale was in the same hands for more than seven years. It makes sense: there's a huge financial incentive to buy a team, and then when that incentive is gone, why hang around? Charge someone else, who has a brand new huge financial incentive to get in on the action."

For BP subscribers, the entire article is posted at:
http://tinyurl.com/8bflq

The worst situation for a team is to have a non sabermetrics gm and a low payroll.
We allready know we have a low payroll, and i'm afraid we are about to get a non sabermetrics gm.
Dark days are coming.

153 - why does everyone assume that any and all criticism of the Sox is automatically from a saber perspective?

Going back on Pierzynski, clearly I was shooting from the hip on him as he's had far better seasons in Minnesota than either of his SF or Chicago ones. And 145 is also right -- Garcia, who I mostly remember for his 2003, was better than all that, but the M's fans were nonetheless very happy to be rid of him. I take DMZ pretty seriously, and when he's pleased to see someone go, I have to believe there was a reason for him to leave. As for Dye, well, his injury history speaks for itself.

Dye's problem is that he keeps getting hit by pitches on a part of his arm so much that the bones sound like wood.

161 I think it's pretty ridiculous to say that the Dodgers have a low payroll. It might not be as high as we'd like, or as McCourt "promised," but it's still one of the highest in the league.

That said, playing baseball the Steinbrenner way only works if you have his money. And even if $80-100M is high, it ain't $220M.

161. I believe the Dodgers will dump payroll big-time this year.

They'll use the return of the Dodger Way (Lasorda, Valentine, Hersheiser) as an excuse to trade the big contracts, and force feed the young guns on to the MLB roster. Plaschke and Simers will buy into it because Tommy and Orel and Bobby V will make it look like a good baseball decision. Play the kids! Teach them old time Dodger baseball. So what if we lose 90 games a year for the next two or three years. At least we'll give out good quotes and slap you on the back and say howdy whenever you show up in the clubhouse.

We're going to look like the Royals for a while.

The reason: The McCourts are highly leveraged. They've got a huge note held by BofA with the Dodgers as collateral. But they must be nervous because now they're seeing a slowing of real estate prices, higher interest rates, etc. affecting the local economy.

How can you assure that your base revenue streams - ticket sales, parking, concessions, all keep coming in at a steady pace so you can service the debt? Well, you can't ask your GM to guarantee a successful season. Stuff happens! Injuries, trades that don't work out, more injuries, lousy PR.

To hedge your bet (excuse me, investment), you slap some new paint on the old house, do some weeding, water the lawn, and bingo, you've got curbside appeal. Now, when your depreciation runs out, and the roster is mostly young with a low base payroll, and the stadium's all spruced up, you sell high and leave for home (Boston).

164
There are plenty of teams with 115-130 million dollar payroll.
To me, 90 something or less is low payroll.
Everytime i say low payroll, everyone jumps to conclusions and is assuming i'm wanting a yankee type 200+ million payroll, and i'm not.
I'm talking about 115-130.

Does it seem to anyone else a little odd that McCourt would fire Depodesta, but retain Kim Ng and Roy Smith, Smith was hired by Depo and Kim Ng seemed to be on his side as well. Also, didnt Depodesta and his front office just finish planning for the offseason last week?

What im wondering here is, how much of Depo's firing is a reflection of McCourts PR problem and how much is a reflection of McCourts view on his "plan" for the team. And on the subject of this mysterious "plan" or "direction" that the Depo and McCourt like talking about, what exactly is this plan? Ive never heard what this plan is supposed to be, just that everyone needs to stick to it and be on the same page; what is the plan?

I hope that depodesta was fired because McCourt felt that his public image was so bad that it inhibited his ability to be the GM, and that McCourt would feel more confident with a new face executing Depodesta's general philosophy and ideas. Maybe Kim Ng or Roy Smith or maybe even Logan White will take over and basically run the team in the same way, generally speaking, that Depo would have. Unfortuatly, I think McCourt believes all this crap about tradition. People seem to think that Pat Gillick or someone like him will take over, he's a slimy backhanded politico just like Lasorda, so it make sense. I dont remember when cronyism became part of the Dodger way.

However, I think that we should hold off predictions for the future untill at least McCourt names a new GM. I thinks its been proven by now that we shouldnt beleive anything that McCourt says publicly, so who knows what direction he's going in. Because we cant take anything he says seriously (could this be part of the PR problem?), we're going to have to let his actions speak for itself.

Here's to hoping that McCourt hires someone with an eye to the future, becuase we know there are many people looking to the past. If he doenst, Im not sure how im going to root for this team.

161 What was the White Sox payroll this year?

148 Bob, for political cartoons there's Slate; for all the others there's Comics.com

http://www.comiczone.com/

[166]

from USA Today, the top 10 payrolls in 2005:

1. New York Yankees $ 208,306,817
2. Boston Red Sox $ 123,505,125
3. New York Mets $ 101,305,821
4. Los Angeles Angels $ 97,725,322
5. Philadelphia Phillies $ 95,522,000
6. St. Louis Cardinals $ 92,106,833
7. San Francisco Giants $ 90,199,500
8. Seattle Mariners $ 87,754,334
9. Chicago Cubs $ 87,032,933
10. Atlanta Braves $ 86,457,302

(the dodgers were 11th at $ 83,039,000 )

that doesn't look like "plenty of teams" to me. in fact, only the red sox are in the $115-130 million range.

the bottom 11 teams are in the $30-56 million range, and the 8 in the middle are in the $60-77 million range

[168]

white sox: $ 75,178,000

170 Those numbers are low, Angels had to pay the luxury tax didn't they? And I'm pretty sure that's above $97 mil. That may not include money payed to other teams, as Rangers are pretty high when fatoring in Arod's contract

The McCourt gameplan, as I think it should be:

1. Hire a GM and manager who everyone can recognize. Gillick/Valentine certainly fit the bill. Hire Orel as assistant to somebody important.

2. The theme for '06 isn't championships, it's about improvement. And, oh yeah, have reporters plant the idea that this is all DePo's faults. Try to get this kind of message out: "It's only now that I see how misguided this direction truly was. I'm very happy to have Gillick/Valentine in the fold, happy to have Orel back where he belongs and I'm looking