Do McCourt attorneys hear the words coming out of their mouths?

"Jamie McCourt's lawyer said today that he didn't expect arguments about who owns the Dodgers to be heard until sometime next year," Dylan Hernandez of The Times says in his latest post.

That's the latest news, but that's not really the point of this post.

Hernandez adds a quote from Jamie's attorney, Dennis Wasser, that for me illustrates the ongoing tone-deaf quality of these proceedings.

"Of course she’s concerned [about the direction of the team in her absence]," Wasser said. "She is an owner of the team. She’s very concerned. This lady eats, lives, breathes Dodgers. She has always wanted to be an owner of the team. Besides her children, it’s the most important thing in her life."

I'm sorry, but who are you kidding? How can anyone expect us to believe that Jamie — or, for that matter, Frank — considers the Dodgers more important than their own self-interest?

I'm not saying Jamie needs to prioritize the Dodgers' welfare over her personal outcome in these court proceedings. It'd be nice, but life doesn't work that way. My own personal life is more important to me than the Dodgers.

But I don't pretend otherwise. And there's no reason to pretend otherwise. It doesn't help. It has no impact in a court of law, and the boldfaced dishonesty only serves to backfire in the court of public opinion.

A word of advice: If you can't say something with a grain of truth in it, if you can't say something remotely convincing, don't say anything at all. It is bad public relations and only does you harm.

Comments

[Jack Dawkins]

Does Jamie do a Guy Fawkes tonight?

[Craig88USC]

Jon, she did say besides her children.

Am I missing something? I'm sorry.

[Jack Dawkins]

I would submit that for a while (the trip to Europe during the season at the very least), the driver was more important to Jamie than the Dodgers.

[Jon Weisman]

Craig, I think it's very clear that if Frank or Jamie has to choose between personal luxury or the Dodgers' welfare, they'll choose personal luxury.

[Jon Weisman]

In case you missed it, Angels re-sign Bobby Abreu for two years.

http://bit.ly/2jAQHh

[Craig88USC]

Fair enough.

But I will add that owning the Dodgers
is quite a "personal luxury"that we would
all enjoy along with it's benefits and perks. :)

And the team has been winning under the McCourts.

[WBB]

Good for the Angels and Abreu. He had a great season.

On the Dodgers' side, I think Wolf should be the top pitching priority among free agents. I lean toward Padilla over Garland, but neither seems a long-term solution. One year max for Padilla in particular.

[Craig88USC]

"Per club policy, no financial terms will be announced."

Wh wh What? Why? I'm feelin' dumb today.

[Craig88USC]

No signing of Vicente until he can walk... ;)

[kinbote]

Craig--It's for as many dollars as Colletti's getting years in his new contract.

[kinbote]

It's difficult to make topical, trenchant comments when they take 10 minutes to appear. {submitted at 1:17 my time}

[kinbote]

That's a lot of dough for Abreu. I wonder if there's a bit of retroactivity built into that deal.

[dzzrtRatt]

It sounds like Jamie wasn't so concerned about the direction of the team most of last season. It sounds more and more like Jamie was given an office and a title so the McCourts could skim more money off the Dodgers' revenue stream instead of paying back their creditors or re-investing in the team or the "fan experience." Nice arrangment. I have no money. I want to buy a baseball team. Lend me the money, and in exchange I'll pay myself $8 million plus expenses to run the team, and if the cash flow suffers, hey, I only pay myself what I think I'm worth.

Statue of the fans. Right, Frank. Get these people out of town.

[regfairfield]

Problem with Wolf is you're looking at an age 33-35 commitment on a guy with a huge injury history who's had a very solid but not spectacular ~3.95 FIP since mid 2008. It seems like it would be the Lowe contract again without the he never gets injured part.

[icedamericano]

Yes, you are so correct. What they should have said was "Next to adequate oxygen to breath, a body capable of maintaining life-sustaining functions, sufficient water for hydration and food to not starve to death, adequate shelter from the elements, freedom from slavery and the obligation to work 20 hours a day just to survive, the right to walk the streets without covering herself with a veil without fear of being beaten, the right to own property and vote, necessary health care for herself and my family, and certain other things that bring her pleasure and entertainment and are of personal, sentimental, spiritual or other value, AND her children, the Dodgers are the most important thing to her.

Because that is so much more rhetorically effective.

I'm sure lawyers everywhere are copying and saving your perceptive article and taking your advice to heart.

[sarcastro]

Craig, I think it's very clear that if Frank or Jamie has to choose between personal luxury or the Dodgers' welfare, they'll choose personal luxury.

Posted by: Jon Weisman | November 05, 2009 at 12:55 PM

I agree, except that I'd change "if Frank or Jamie has to choose" to "when Frank of Jamie have had to choose". We can only hope that these people have enough shame to put them on their best behavior, and WILL start making more moves in the interest of the team. But I'm not too hopeful of that, based on what we've already seen from them.

[Phenomenal Smith]

*No signing of Vicente until he can walk... ;)*

Perhaps this is supposed to evoke the ending of "On the Waterfront." None of the longshoremen would go to work unless Terry (Marlon Brando) can walk on his own into the warehouse.

Terry: Get me on my feet.
[Father Barry and Edie help Terry stand up]
Father Barry: How're you doing?
Terry: Am I on my feet?

[regfairfield]

Because if there's anyone we can trust for 100% true statements, it's lawyers.

[Craig88USC]

I loved that scene. Still do.

[harry m.]

Please do NOT sign Padilla! He has never had a good year, and was so lucky down this stretch. The dodgers need quality pitching, i.e, John Lackey, whom the dodgers won't get due to the face that the McCourts are going thru their divorce at the perfect time, hence this incredible perfect storm of being so close to having an adequate playoff team (with a good starting pitcher)and an impeding divorce which could literally restaff the entire personnel and staff of the organization. Lackey is out there.

[Jon Weisman]

Posted by: icedamericano | November 05, 2009 at 01:26 PM

I dare say that's sarcastic at my expense.

[Craig88USC]

My 3 favorites...

"Lawyers are men whom we hire to protect us from lawyers."

"A Lawyer will do anything to win a case, sometimes he will even tell the truth."

"A lawyer with a briefcase can steal more than a thousand men with guns."

Sorry, DT Lawyers. All in fun. ;)

[DodgerBlueBalls]

This is really a great commentary, Jon. I'm glad the boys at TBLA mentioned your article and I took the time to visit and read this. Jamie's lawyer is really taking the general public to be naive beyond belief.

[kngoworld]

Jon, I have been reading Dodger Thoughts for many years at multiple sites and the "tone" that comes across reading your posts on the McCourt's divorce feels very different then anything you have written before. It is not a bad thing, I agree with you on the subject matter, it is just a little different. I think others will agree with me and you might get some reactions you don't like, but please, keep up the great work.

[Jon Weisman]

It's kind of deja vu - this is the tone I often found myself using when I wrote about the McCourts six years ago.

[AENewman]

Jon, there are comments made by attorneys, correct? I am surprised that you would take issue with anything an attorney would say, especially in the heat of a high stakes case. They are posturing, plain and simple, and nothing they say matters except to those judging the case. And the McCourts are no different than virtually all "high powered" executives, whose two most important attributes are accumulation of wealth and overinflating their own self importance.

[Ken Noe]

Just catching up--so in the end Ned gave up the D-Backs possible future second baseman for six regular season starts. Decent starts usually, I'll grant you, but still....as for Jamie, I hope she never again gets her well-manicured hands on my team.

[Jon Weisman]

I understand that the lawyers are posturing. My point is that I don't think it's effective posturing. I think it's the opposite.

There's spin, and then there's saying something that's so obviously untrue as it has the reverse effect.

I have also bent over backwards to make it clear that I don't think the McCourts are unique in wanting to accumulate money. However, I do think others are much more savvy with the press than they and their lawyers are.

[AENewman]

what I look forward to seeing during the divorce proceedings is information relative to the Dodger Dream Foundation, and exactly how much of all the money raised for charitable purposes were used as such, and how much was siphoned off for administrative uses and directors' fees...

[regfairfield]

Better than the Dodgers traded a possible second baseman for some 26 year old AA reliever after we DFAed him on April 15th. Because that's what would have happened if we would have kept Abreu.

[AENewman]

my point on the posturing of the lawyers is that they care not what you or I think or how what they say appears, they care only about winning and their fees...if we find fault with what they say, so be it

otherwise, who in their right mind would make a comment how Jamie has always wanted to own the Dodgers...I wonder if the Red Sox knew that when they tried buying them

[el serracho]

I guess I don't get all the hate for the McCourts on this blog. Despite their flaws, they have given us dodger fans a winning team. What's to hate? Lawyerly rhetoric?

[Craig88USC]

Don't cancel my dinner & race!! ;)

$125 Los Angeles Marathon--Sunday, March 21st, 2010

$35 Win Forever dinner with Pete Carroll--Saturday, March 20th, 2010, 5 pm. A pre-race pep rally and inspirational dinner with the coach of the USC Trojans football team

[Andrew Shimmin]

The Wasser quote wasn't given in court, right? It was a public statement. If the point wasn't to convince people that Mrs. McCourt is a terrific person, what was it? It's not Jon's fault he isn't biting. She should just sing the song from Man of LaMancha, next time:

"In my body; it's well known,
"There is not one selfish bone...
"I'm only thinking and worrying about [The Dodgers]!"

[Paul]

In defense of Jon, if this isn't the forum to call out attorneys on "posturing" or whatever pseudonym we want to come up with for lying, what is? I read this post for its candidness and honesty, and to ask Jon to simply ignore "lawyers being lawyers" goes against what good writing is all about.

[nsxtasy]

Jon, I rarely disagree with your posts. But in this one, you're taking issue with a statement that, while it may be silly if you look at it closely, it's the kind of thing people say when the feelings behind it are real, but what they say isn't. It's like saying "I'm so mad the Dodgers lost in the NLCS that I could kill someone." Any of us could easily say something like that. Do we mean it? Heck no (at least, I hope not). But it's an expression of emotion that we feel.

I'm not saying anything about how avid a Dodger fan Jamie is, as I don't know her, and I don't want to base an opinion on something written or quoted in the press. But picking apart a statement like that is merely a game of semantics, and just seems petty to me - something quite the opposite of your typical posts.

[nsxtasy]

>> Problem with Wolf is you're looking at an age 33-35 commitment on a guy with a huge injury history who's had a very solid but not spectacular ~3.95 FIP since mid 2008. It seems like it would be the Lowe contract again without the he never gets injured part.

I don't think anyone is going to give Randy Wolf $60 million for 4 years. My best guess is that he will be lucky if he gets the offer the Astros reneged on a year ago ($28 million for 3 years, IIRC). And at that price, he's probably worth it.

[nsxtasy]

>> Right now the Dodgers have, what? Billingsly, Kershaw, and Kuroda? Then who? (and yes, I'd love to see McDonald get another chance as a starter). I'm guessing that Lindbloom and Winthrow aren't quite ready yet. So the rotation is kind of scary going into next year.

Which is why Ned and Joe are already quoted as saying that their top two needs are starting pitching and a first baseman.

Incidentally, there are additional options for starters that you haven't mentioned: Elbert, Stults, Haeger. I'm not saying they're great options; along with McDonald, I'd prefer to consider them as backup options in case my other starters get injured, and I'd hope that Ned signs/re-signs/trades for two more starters this winter rather than just one.

[Alex41592]

Rosenthal:

"The Boston Red Sox have acquired outfielder Jeremy Hermida from the Florida Marlins for Triple-A left-hander Hunter Jones and a second left-hander from Boston's Double-A affiliate, according to a major-league source."

http://tinyurl.com/yaw9d3g

[nsxtasy]

>> I think your comments were fine and they were good questions. I guess my answer is yes, I am sure there is a point where I would be disappointed enough in ownership to stop going, but I don't know what that would look like, since we have not gotten there yet.

I will stop going to games if and when the team is really bad. Not unlucky bad (e.g. Mets, Cubs), but purposely bad (e.g. Pirates, Nationals).

[AENewman]

if you are that mad when they lose that you could kill, make sure its a person and not an animal (or a fly?)...you can plead insanity and get off on the manslaughter charge, but on the other hand, PETA will never leave you alone...

[AENewman]

all this talk has gotten me all worked up, I vow not to attend any games for 5 months...I'll show them!!

[dzzrtRatt]

Jon, there are comments made by attorneys, correct? I am surprised that you would take issue with anything an attorney would say, especially in the heat of a high stakes case. They are posturing, plain and simple, and nothing they say matters except to those judging the case. And the McCourts are no different than virtually all "high powered" executives, whose two most important attributes are accumulation of wealth and overinflating their own self importance.

Posted by: AENewman | November 05, 2009 at 02:01 PM

Lots of attorneys in cases like this will say, "I'm not going to try my case in the press, we will tell our story in the courtroom." And while it doesn't endear them to the TV cameras, it serves the client better to have as little on the record as possible. It's hard to imagine now exactly how, but in the course of these legal proceedings, those words might suddenly become inconvenient to her case.

Not just this posturing but much of the courthouse steps posturing of lawyers is about the lawyers trolling for the next clients by raising their public profiles.

[AENewman]

so what you are saying is that the lawyers involved in this case fall into the "high powered" category as well?

[Horace Andy]

Perhaps Mr. McCourt will try to "go out with a bang" and sell the future for the present, acquire Halladay and some other front line starter in exchange for god knows what.

Or maybe he'll cheap out and keep things as they are (fine to medium fine for the MLB squad, not fine for the farm).

That's the problem with this divorce, and why I felt like I got punched in the gut when I heard about it-- not because I care who Jamie's doing and how Frank feels, but the impact it will have on the team.

Jon Weisman was one of the few people in LA 6 years ago who really questioned who was buying the team, what their motives were, and what MLBs motives were. I believe the site was on blogspot back then, and as today it was essential reading. I am very happy that he is now with the Times and can express what so many other Dodger fans would like to say.

[Troy]

"I don't think anyone is going to give Randy Wolf $60 million for 4 years. My best guess is that he will be lucky if he gets the offer the Astros reneged on a year ago ($28 million for 3 years, IIRC). And at that price, he's probably worth it."

I think he was saying the contract Lowe signed with the Dodgers, and I can definitely see him getting something like that. If that's the case, I think the Dodgers are better off getting the draft picks and going in a different direction.

"Which is why Ned and Joe are already quoted as saying that their top two needs are starting pitching and a first baseman."

They said they need a first baseman? How have I missed this?

[Eric Enders]

Hereby presenting the Top Ten Colossal Screw-Ups of the McCourt Era.
(Your mileage may vary, and I'm sure I forgot some stuff.)

1. Backing out of the Vladimir Guerrero deal.
2. The Carlos Santana fiasco.
3. The abandonment of international scouting.
4. Fighting over the team in the divorce. (Placement on list subject to change.)
5. The DePodesta Firing, featuring special dysfunctional guest appearances by Tommy Lasorda and Orel Hershiser. (DePo was given one-and-a-half years to operate. If you weren't going to let him put his plan in place, then you shouldn't have hired him at all.)
6. The Juan Pierre signing. (Admittedly, probably not the McCourts' fault.)
7. "Ross Porter, security will accompany you to collect your things."
8. Take a hike, Kyle Blair.
9. The Hochevar-Boras fiasco.
10. Jeanne Zelasko.

Admittedly, 9 and especially 10 are stretches, but I had trouble filling out the bottom of the list.

There are some items on the good side of the ledger, too, of course. The Manny trade is one of the Dodgers' greatest ever. Camelback Ranch is probably a positive thing. The McCourts have managed not to screw up Dodger Stadium or Vin Scully.

[Jon Weisman]

Posted by: nsxtasy | November 05, 2009 at 02:28 PM

We can disagree, but I don't see how it this is petty.

It's a statement that seems obviously disingenuous to me, and it's my view that obviously disingenuous statements are bad PR.

You saying "I'm so mad the Dodgers lost I could kill someone" in the Dodger Thoughts comments vs. Jamie's lawyer saying "she doesn't care about anything more than the Dodgers" at a press conference are not at all analogous to me.

I'm quite confident that there isn't anything coming out of the lawyers' mouths, in or out of the courtroom, that isn't a calculated statement. I happen to think they calculated badly on this one, just as they did in the court document that said Jamie "was the face of the Dodgers." There's posturing, and then there's saying something that's so laughable on its face, that it invites derision.

I think that's a bad idea.

The point of my post isn't to take gratuitous shots at anyone. If there's a possibility for Jamie McCourt to retain ownership, I think she's going to want to have some credibility. And I don't think the posturing is helping. People are welcome to disagree with me, but I don't make my argument casually or to nitpick.

[AENewman]

maybe the Dodgers can trade to get Abreu back to play second

[nsxtasy]

>> Garland has pretty clearly been superior to Padilla by almost any time period you can cite except for about a two-week period in October 2009.

I don't see how you can say that. The past two years, Padilla's numbers are overall very similar to Garland's, even though Padilla spent most of 2009 in the hitter-friendly AL while Garland spent the whole season in the NL:

Garland 2009 11-13 W-L 4.01 ERA 1.40 WHIP
Padilla 2009 12-6 W-L 4.46 ERA 1.43 WHIP
Garland 2008 14-8 W-L 4.90 ERA 1.51 WHIP
Padilla 2008 14-8 W-L 4.74 ERA 1.46 WHIP

If you want to look at a longer period, their career numbers are virtually identical too; Padilla has a slight edge in ERA (4.33 vs 4.42), but they are both 1.39 WHIP, and their W-L percentage is 2 points apart (.534 vs .536).

[AENewman]

on the other hand, Jamie's lawyers, when in court, can now refer to prior statements evidencing their client's lifelong devotion to the Dodgers...doing for the community, incorporating women into the fold, etc etc...they will use what we see as ridiculous as basis for their legal argument

[nsxtasy]

>> "Which is why Ned and Joe are already quoted as saying that their top two needs are starting pitching and a first baseman."

Sorry, I meant to say, starting pitching and a SECOND baseman. My error.

[Jonny (TAFKAJ)]

Hey guys.....just a thought here....

What if all of us here on DT pooled our money and bought the Dodgers?

1. We all love the Dodgers....
2. We all love "perks".....like Jamie and Frank....
3. Great seats right by the dugout.....
4. I, for one, would keep my hands off of my personal driver..... ;)

One problem though....We can't make personnel moves via this blog as we'd miss the trade deadline by a good 10 minutes.....(the lag time it takes for comments to actually post sometimes)...... :-)

[nsxtasy]

>> Hereby presenting the Top Ten Colossal Screw-Ups of the McCourt Era.

How can you omit Andruw Jones AND Jason Schmidt???

[AENewman]

us buying the Dodgers is do-able, as long as the McCourts give us terms similar to those given them by Fox

[sarcastro]

"Which is why Ned and Joe are already quoted as saying that their top two needs are starting pitching and a first baseman."

You mean SECOND baseman- nothing wrong with James Loney now, and he's almost certainly going to get better!

FYI, for everyone expecting Randy Wolf (who may be back) and Orlando Hudson (who almost certainly won't be) to accept nothing less than a multi-multi year deal, consider that Bobby Abreu just re-signed for a measly TWO YEARS, after some speculated that since he was such a bargain this year, he was gonna get SO much money and SUCH a huge long term contract. I think/hope that the days of giving out long term contracts after a player has a career year (and with another team, no less) are officially over.

As for what the Dodgers need, I doubt that it's much more than a mentally/physically composed Billingsley, maturing Kershaw, healthy Kuroda, and 2 out of Wolf/Padilla/Elbert/MacDonald for the starting rotation...and yes, a 2nd baseman. Whoever's gonna pay for Lackey is probably gonna overpay. At this point, I'd settle for the guys who are here NOW to be well compensated for.

[nsxtasy]

What I mean is, any one of us might say, "Besides our children, the Dodgers are the most important thing in our life. We eat, breathe, live the Dodgers." Is it true? I hope not. We all have things we do in our lives, people we know in our lives, that are more important to us than how well a team of well-paid athletes do their jobs. Still, it's something we might say, in exaggeration, to convey to someone that we do indeed care about how the Dodgers do - and not a statement we would want to get taken to task for.

[regfairfield]

11. Parking fees double during the regime, system turned into a labyrinth that encourages me to run over low level employees.

12. Cheap seats phased out for crappy deals (The right field pavilion is great for those of us that can double fist Dodger Dogs.)

13. Classicism firmly locked down. You want to go from the top deck to the reserve to get food. Go to hell, pleb.

[Eric Enders]

"How can you omit Andruw Jones AND Jason Schmidt???"

Andruw Jones wasn't a screw-up, just a calculated risk that didn't work out, which is a very different thing. Same thing, to a certain degree with Schmidt. They were very high-risk, high-reward moves. Perhaps unwise, but of a different ilk altogether than the other items on the list.

For the most part, I tried to refrain from putting GM mistakes on the list. (Hence the omission of Werth, Victorino, etc.) The one exception is Pierre which was such a glaring mistake that it deserves mention. Unlike the Schmidt and Jones signings it was not high risk/high reward. It was high risk/no possible chance of reward.

[regfairfield]

I don't think teams are lining up to pay a 36 year old with an .825 OPS and terrible defense.

[regfairfield]

Oh, not Dodger related but buys the LA Marathon, changes the date three months in advance. You don't need more than three months to train for a marathon, right?

[nsxtasy]

>> As for what the Dodgers need, I doubt that it's much more than a mentally/physically composed Billingsley, maturing Kershaw, healthy Kuroda, and 2 out of Wolf/Padilla/Elbert/MacDonald for the starting rotation...

We already have all of that. I just don't think that Elbert and McDonald - the two out of Wolf/Padilla/Elbert/McDonald we already have - are enough to plug the holes in the rotation. I would like to see at least one and preferably two more pitchers who have already shown that they are capable of being MLB starters. Whether it's Wolf, Padilla, or someone else.

[Jonny (TAFKAJ)]

Sarcastro.....

You asked for a "mentally/physically composed Billingsley".........PROBLEM!

The Dodgers traded their team hypno-therapist, and other "employees-to-be-named-later" away in a package deal to pay for Jamie's "flowers on desk" request in her court papers.
Sorry. :)

[AENewman]

perhaps the hiring of Ned Coletti should be considered for the list...that would encompass all those signings gone bad, the descent of the farm system, and perhaps the international effort as well...unless I am mistaken as to what a GM's role is...

[KG16]

In defense of Wasser, lawyers often say things in court that would seem otherwise tone deaf outside the courthouse. Most lawyers don't deal with cases that are in the news every day. Typically, we argue the facts and the law as best we can to improve our clients' position.

In this case, if the statement about Jamie living for the Dodgers was made in court, my guess is that it was made in order to lay the ground work for future proceedings. And this would be perfectly ordinary in a case that wasn't being reported on daily. In this case, it may turn out to be a bad move, but I'm not on the inside, so I'm not going to be overly critical of legal strategy just yet.

[Eric Enders]

I'm as anti-Colletti as the next guy, but he has done some good things alongside his screw-ups, and I would be flabbergasted if it was his choice to dismantle the farm system and international scouting program.

[jujibee]

What is the general concensus given the current situation?

Would you prefer:
a. Frank McCourt retaining ownership with Jaime becoming a memory
b. Jaime somehow retaining the ownership with Frank becoming a memory
c. the sale of the Dodgers to new ownership
d. Frank and Jaime somehow making amends and continuing the co-ownership

While I think none of these possibilities are going to be the best for the Dodgers in the short, I think that the sooner either a or c get done, the better for the team. I see the McCourts ownership having been pretty good, with several bad decisions being made, most noteworthy their decision to raise all prices for the current fan. After decent tickets, parking, and concessions, it costs a family of four ~$150 to enjoy one baseball game. I think that is just ridiculous considering the money is seemingly being spent on their luxury lifestyle and not going back into the team. So I go for option C, and the sooner the better.

[sarcastro]

"It was high risk/no possible chance of reward.

Posted by: Eric Enders | November 05, 2009 at 03:08 PM "

Pierre STILL not gettin' the love from some Dodger fans, huh? I mean, sure, they overpaid for him. But you'd put him as a bigger "mistake" than Andruw Jones and Jason Schmidt, even AFTER what Pierre did this year?! Andruw Jones batted .222 the year BEFORE the Dodgers got him, let alone what he did afterwards. And Juan Pierre helped the Marlins win a title in 2003, so I think it's fair to say there would be SOME reward in signing him (and there has been), yet he still seems to get no credit from some quarters (whereas others, mainly in the media, want to retire his number for 2 or 3 blazing hot weeks after Manny's suspension, but the critics definitely outnumber the overzealous fans).

Look, I understand he's got a noodle arm, no power, and doesn't walk. But he also has a .300+ lifetime batting average, is one of the fastest men in baseball, and as been a good mentor for Kemp. I think that should count for SOMETHING...

[AENewman]

I would be as well, maybe I just don't understand what the actual role and responsibilities of the GM is...

[regfairfield]

Average cost for a family to attend a Dodger game jumps from $150 in 2003 to $230 in 2008.

[AENewman]

the price of a team's success......

[Eric Enders]

I'm not going to subject the site to yet another rehash of the Pierre signing. We can just agree to disagree.

[bhsportsguy]

I would say that Jon is correct and those who point out the roles of lawyers in a litigation are correct. I will add that generally both legal filings and arguments/statements are not usually made so public like it is in this matter and while there is no questions both sides deserve to be represented to the best of their ability, both sides lack a sense of how this would play in the court of public opinion (where have we heard that before).

[AENewman]

I am not disagreeing at all, I am curious as to what the GM's role and responsibilities are...I honestly do not know...

[Jon Weisman]

Posted by: nsxtasy | November 05, 2009 at 03:03 PM

It's not like I don't get the concept of exaggeration.

But if I said I live, eat and breathe the Dodgers a couple of weeks after filing a court document that spelled out in explicit detail how much I actually live, eat and breathe many, many other things that came at the expense of the Dodgers, I should think more than a few people would take me to task.

[Jon Weisman]

Posted by: KG16 | November 05, 2009 at 03:13 PM

It was not stated in court, for what that's worth.

[Jon Weisman]

Joshua Fisher of Dodger Divorce will be on 830 KLAA in Southern California at 3:40 p.m.

[Eric Enders]

Average cost for a family to attend a Dodger game jumps from $150 in 2003 to $230 in 2008.

And yet despite that, they presided over arguably the greatest attendance boom in franchise history. I'm not going to ding them for nudging the price of the product closer to its actual market value.

                         

Year   Attend/G      Rank

2009      46440 1st of 16

2008      46056 2nd of 16

2007      47618 1st of 16

2006      46402 1st of 16

2005      44489 1st of 16

2004      43065 1st of 16

2003      38748 2nd of 16

2002      38657 3rd of 16

2001      37249 4th of 16

2000      35559 7th of 16

1999      38214 4th of 16

1998      38139 5th of 16

1997      40982 3rd of 14

1996      39364 2nd of 14

1995      38420 2nd of 14

1994      41443 3rd of 14

1993      39141 3rd of 14

1992      30534 2nd of 12

1991      41335 1st of 12

1990      37067 1st of 12

1989      36354 2nd of 12

1988      36793 2nd of 12

1987      34536 3rd of 12

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 11/5/2009.

[regfairfield]

True, McCourt did have to account for a payroll that shot from a meager ~105 million in 2003 to an astonishing ~105 million in 2009, so I can totally see why he had to jack up prices by 60%.

[Horace Andy]

The point is not that it's bad to say you love the Dodgers. It's when you've spent the past 4 years living high on the hog on the Dodgers dime, while selling off prospects, raising prices, and failing to have a big market payroll, it doesn't come off as very sincere.

[Jon Weisman]

Fisher coming on now:

http://amber.streamguys.com:5350/listen.pls

[Jon Weisman]

Lincecum cited for pot after traffic stop.

http://tumblr.com/xb83viya8

[Eric Enders]

I just heard a Home Depot radio ad that I'm pretty sure was narrated by John Doman, aka Major Rawls of "The Wire" fame. Needless to say, that was a bit unsettling.

[Eric Enders]

Posted by: Jon Weisman | November 05, 2009 at 03:44 PM

Oh, the stories I wish I could tell...

[bhsportsguy]

For years and years, Simers main complaint about the Dodgers wasn't about the team, manager, or ownership, it was no matter what, people still went to games. Team fades in September, parking, ticket price increases, multiple front office firings, it just didn't matter.

[kinbote]

Darn longhairs . . .

[Horace Andy]

To me the attendance thing is just more proof that the Dodgers are a civic treasure, an institution, and something incredibly valuable to the city of LA.

[Horace Andy]

Who is Joshua Fisher? What is his background? Does he post on this site?

He's great.

[LAprGuy]

Attendance increase can be attributed to a commitment to corporate sales -- and, actually, one (or both) of the McCourts (either the owner or the CEO) should get credit for that. Really figured out how to maximize ticket revenues.

But a glance at the stands on any given game can plainly show that actual "in the park" attendance has not been up. I always gringe when I hear Vin Scully claim there's 55,000 in the house ... when he and we know there is not.

[Andrew Shimmin]

Lowe's still has to have the edge with Gene Hackman. OSH is reportedly in talks with Vincent Pastore, which could turn the whole market on its ear.

[Jon Weisman]

New post up top.

[Craig88USC]

d.

[Craig88USC]

Craig's Official Defense of Defendant Frank McCourt:

1 West Division title and best NL record 2009

2 West Division title 2008

3 West division title 2004

4 Wild card berth 2006

5 Dodger Stadium improvements

6 Camelback Ranch state of the art facility

7 Keeping the legends on: Scully, Jarrin, Valenzuela, Lasorda and White

8 Aggressively landing/SIGNing Manny, Kuo, Kuroda, Saito, Blake, Raffy, Wolfy and more...

9 The Kid Movement: Loney, 'Dre, Brox, Martin, Kersh, Kemp, McDonald, Elbert and soon, Lindblom and several others

10 Hiring HOF Manager Joe Torre and GM of the Year Ned Colletti

11 (Bonus) Single handedly keeping the LA real estate market afloat

I'm tired. Before I rest my case, what other good things am I missin' ??? ;)

[Doug Minnick]

"Which is why Ned and Joe are already quoted as saying that their top two needs are starting pitching and a first baseman."

Posted by nxstasy at 2:34

I've not been paying as much attention as usual. Did Ned and or Joe publicly say they needed a first baseman? That's pretty big news, if so.

[Against Hypocrisy]

My prescription for restoring the Dodgers to being world class contenders:

1.The biggest problem, finding a buyer. He/she and/or investors/consortium should go to Frank McCourt and lay out the money for the team and tell him and his old cougar soon to be ex-wife to get the hell out of Dodge.

2.Pay Ned Coletti the balance of his contract and tell him the same thing just said to the McCourts. Make Kim Ng the new General Manager, and give her the money she needs to get the best talent.

3.Do the same as above with Joe Torre. Then place a call to Kirk Gibson and offer him the job. He won't tolerate slackers or silliness.

4.Pay useless Manny Ramirez the balance of his contract also and tell him and his roid ridden body and slacker attitude to get lost. Him and Barry Bonds can spend time finding a new roid dealer.

5. Pay Andre Eithier, James Loney, Russell Martin, and Matt Kemp salaries consummate with their professional status. They more than deserve pay raises.

6. And finally, straighten out the morass at Dodger Stadium that hinders fans from enjoying the games to the fullest. Cut concession, parking, and ticket prices and put an end to the madness that is the parking lot!

[88]

are the people complaining about ticket and parking prices being too high the same people complaining that the dodger payroll is too small? does it not make sense that for the dodgers payroll to go up ... prices would have to go up as well?

[68elcamino427]

Prices have gone up, but the payroll hasn't

[bumsrap]

My opinion of the McCourts is that they would rather own the Red Sox and live in Boston. They do love baseball and they also equally love the visibility ownership gives them.

They have obtained ex-Red Sox players just because they were ex-Red Sox players and not because their hired baseball minds said they were the best. I would try to get ex-Dodgers on a team I would buy as well.

O'Malley(sp) already told us that family ownership of a team was a thing of the past and McCourt's lack of sufficient financial strength and penchant for raising prices, only adds credibility to O'Malley's opinion.

[Sandy]

The proof is in the pudding - if you laughed "yeah, sure", as I did, when first reading that statment, then making it was not a good idea. The McCourts making themselves a topic of public ridicule is what will outlast any franchise ownership.

[artieboy]

"She’s very concerned. This lady eats, lives, breathes Dodgers. She has always wanted to be an owner of the team. Besides her children, it’s the most important thing in her life."

Rememeber the lawyer said that. Unless you can prove in a court of law that the Dodgers are not the most important thing in her life after children...then it stands as valid, much to our chagrin.