OFFICIAL 2010 LOS ANGELES DODGERS THREAD [79-82] : The losing season

Bro, it's a blast up there. From A-Z it has LA beat because IMHO it's a TRUE CITY. I stayed at a now closed hotel off of Van Ness and Geary. A nice walk from Union Square Park, surrounded by shopping (Macy's, NTSF) , Chinatown, THSF isn't too far off on Polk and HUF is on Sutter.

I was there from Friday afternoon and flew back Sunday morning. Hit up the wharf, Haight, Golden Gate Park as well as the bridge. It was my first time up there so I had to get the touristy stuff out of the way. Since we beat that @#* that weekend I didn't get much heat for being Dodger'd out all weekend
laugh.gif
. The fans are dedicated, they'll jab ya but nothing like they'd experience out here if they did the same.

You're going the last weekend in July? I wanted to, but too much uncertainty with family stuff to be able to do that.
 
I much rather see the Dodgers go after Cliff Lee than Oswalt.

Lee is due what $7-9M (forgot) and he really hasn't gotten it going with the Ms.

Possibly sign him to a long term deal since Kurodas deal is up.
 
Originally Posted by bright nikes

I much rather see the Dodgers go after Cliff Lee than Oswalt.

Lee is due what $7-9M (forgot) and he really hasn't gotten it going with the Ms.

Possibly sign him to a long term deal since Kurodas deal is up.

I think Lee would be better for you guys than Oswalt too....but I dont understand something.  Last year, I made it obvious to all of you guys that I thought it would be smart for you guys, the way your team was constructed, to sell the farm for Halladay.  For the most part, you guys all told me that wasnt a good idea.  It was either you didnt have or want to give up the prospects, concerned Halladay was too old, or didnt have the money to give him a long term contract that he would demand.
Now, you guys all want Oswalt or Lee.   I dont quite understand you guys.  Lets analyze something real quick.

AGE - Your excuse to not want Halladay because he was and old pitcher you were worried about breaking down.  He just turned 33.  Roy Oswalt turns 33 this summer, and Lee turns 33 next summer.  So Halladay is too old, but Oswalt or Lee arent......um...ok.

COST - Neither pitcher is quite as good as Halladay, so it wouldnt require quite as much.  But both are still top tier pitchers in the Major Leagues.  If both are indeed on the trading block, it is safe to say that other teams would be interested too.  So the excuse was you didnt want to give up any sort of prospects for Halladay, but now all of a sudden you would want to for Lee or Oswalt?  Maybe there would be a trade that can be worked out by the Dodgers involving a bunch of prospects, maybe not.  But if you didnt want to part with prospects for Halladay, why now for Lee or Oswalt?

MONEY - You guys didnt want to give a huge contract extension to Halladay, and in order to acquire Lee, he would likely require one.  Oswalt might not want an extension, but he makes 15 mil this year and 16 mil next year.  The excuse was the Dodgers didnt have the money to sign Halladay to an extension, but now all of a sudden they would have the money to extend Lee or pay Oswalt for the next season and a half?  Thats completely putting aside the fact that in the beginning of last offseason (when Halladay was being shopped), your financial situation was not NEARLY as bad as it is now with this whole divorce thing.  

One of those three things was the reason behind most of you guys not wanting to get Halladay.  So whats the difference?  I am not trying to hate or anything, just talk some baseball.  Anyone care to share your opinion on the difference?
 
Originally Posted by dland24

Originally Posted by bright nikes

I much rather see the Dodgers go after Cliff Lee than Oswalt.

Lee is due what $7-9M (forgot) and he really hasn't gotten it going with the Ms.

Possibly sign him to a long term deal since Kurodas deal is up.
laugh.gif
Dland, at this point most are willing to do whatever it takes under the McC "ownership". Think of it as someone who knows they're going to declare bankruptcy and decide to max the cards out just before they file
laugh.gif
 
But why werent you willing to do whatever it takes with Halladay is what I am saying. How has much changed?
 
I will dive into it later but it is not the same.

Lee will be a free agent at the end of the season. He has expressed his desire to test the open market.

I don't believe an extension is required. Plus, the hang up with any Halladay talk hinged on the Hays wanting Kershaw.

I know you were adamant about giving up Kershaw or Billingsley in order to get Halladay which is foolish.

All you have to look at is the packages that the blue jays and the Indians received for Lee and Halladay. Not that impressive. Yet people always want players off our major league roster.

It's funny that the Indians traded everyone fro
their 2007 ALCS roster and the best player they received was not a part of the sabathia deal, Lee deal or Martinez deal. The beat out the bunch was received in exchange for Casey Blake (Santana).

No one has really mentioned a Lee extension and I don't think it will be a provision of any trade he is involved in. He does not have 10-5 rights so he can't veto either. Lee has no leverage ad opposed to Halladay.

You also have to add the fact that Halladay wanted to play for an East Coast team that trained in Florida.

It's not that we didn't want to give up prospects, there was no need to give up Kershaw or Bills. They are not prospects.

Bottom line is it will be easier to get either Oswalt or Lee. Unless Houston picks up the tab. They will not receive premium prospects. As I stated earlier. Lee has no leverage. Whatever team gets him will be getting him on a rental basis (think Randy Johnson w/Astros).
 
I will dive into it later but it is not the same.

Lee will be a free agent at the end of the season. He has expressed his desire to test the open market.

I don't believe an extension is required. Plus, the hang up with any Halladay talk hinged on the Hays wanting Kershaw.

I know you were adamant about giving up Kershaw or Billingsley in order to get Halladay which is foolish.

All you have to look at is the packages that the blue jays and the Indians received for Lee and Halladay. Not that impressive. Yet people always want players off our major league roster.

It's funny that the Indians traded everyone fro
their 2007 ALCS roster and the best player they received was not a part of the sabathia deal, Lee deal or Martinez deal. The beat out the bunch was received in exchange for Casey Blake (Santana).

No one has really mentioned a Lee extension and I don't think it will be a provision of any trade he is involved in. He does not have 10-5 rights so he can't veto either. Lee has no leverage ad opposed to Halladay.

You also have to add the fact that Halladay wanted to play for an East Coast team that trained in Florida.

It's not that we didn't want to give up prospects, there was no need to give up Kershaw or Bills. They are not prospects.

Bottom line is it will be easier to get either Oswalt or Lee. Unless Houston picks up the tab. They will not receive premium prospects. As I stated earlier. Lee has no leverage. Whatever team gets him will be getting him on a rental basis (think Randy Johnson w/Astros).
 
dland i would have gladly given billingsley up. the team didnt want to for obvious reasons. what cincoseisdos says is true. at this point you have to put something together to try to win now because if these morons hang on to ownership, who knows what will happen in the coming years.
 
Originally Posted by In Yo Nostril

mrjordan, make sure you hit up the tenderloin while you are up there. i hear its poppin in july.
what is the tenderloin?

and 562, did you rent a car? how econveniant/not is the public transportation?
  
 
Originally Posted by MR RASKATRIPAS

Originally Posted by In Yo Nostril

mrjordan, make sure you hit up the tenderloin while you are up there. i hear its poppin in july.
what is the tenderloin?

and 562, did you rent a car? how econveniant/not is the public transportation?
  
tenderloin is like the beverly hills of SF. check it out.


if you are staying in the city, do not rent a car. your hotel will charge you like 40 a day to park it and you wont need it unless you are planning on going far. fly into oakland/sf and take the bart into the city and walk to the hotel. take public transportation anywhere you need to go.
 
562 more info on this spicy dodger dog you posted about in that other thread? how have i never seen this. whats on it?
 
thanks iyn.
some of these hotel prices tho
grin.gif
, but i was kinda expecting it
is the bart direct from the airport to union square?

and the giants have a new thing this year selling tickets at "market price"
smh.gif
 
Spicy Dodger Dog was brought back due to popular demand. They have them at every level except the pavilions.

The only time I rented a car in SF was when I flew into Oakland. Waste of money IMO.

I flew into SFO last time and our hotel was on Powell. We took the BART directly and just rode the cable cars or used taxi's to get around.

The Giants have had tiered pricing for some time now.
 
Originally Posted by MR RASKATRIPAS

Originally Posted by In Yo Nostril

mrjordan, make sure you hit up the tenderloin while you are up there. i hear its poppin in july.
what is the tenderloin?

and 562, did you rent a car? how econveniant/not is the public transportation?
  
Strictly BART and cab. That's what I loved most about the city, no real need for a car up there. dial 511 when youre up there if you need help
laugh.gif
free BART assistance!


Originally Posted by In Yo Nostril

562 more info on this spicy dodger dog you posted about in that other thread? how have i never seen this. whats on it?
No special toppings, just a spicy superdog
smokin.gif


The flavor itself puts it over the top
 
Back
Top Bottom