The Dodgers have reached a deal with Time Warner Cable on a television contract worth between $6 billion and $7 billion dollars, according to Bill Shaikin of the Los Angeles Times, but that’s not the most interesting part to me.

The Dodgers have agreed with Time Warner Cable on a new television contract that will provide the team with a channel of its own, according to two people familiar with the deal but not authorized to discuss it.

The Dodgers’ deal is expected to be finalized and announced Thursday. The team has not yet submitted the deal to Major League Baseball for approval, but the control of the channel is expected to rest with the Dodgers’ owners rather than with Time Warner.

The Time Warner Cable deal is believed to be worth between $6 billion and $7 billion.

Most are focused on the staggering amount of money, which is certainly amazing, but we already sort of knew the total would be around there since it was rumored that the team was close with FOX on a deal. However, the news to me is that the team will now have its own channel on Time Warner Cable.

—–

I’m interested for a couple of reasons: one revolves around whether or not this means the Dodgers assume part ownership of the channel, like the courts and MLB apparently want them to (increases their risk), and one revolves around how the hell they are going to fill that channel with content.

From the ownership perspective, does this mean the Dodgers will be forced to take on a share? And if so, how much?

The league believes — and there are indications the court might agree — that the Dodgers must take some element of risk with any money not subject to revenue sharing.

In other words, this deal seems far from over, as there are still a lot of questions to be answered and a lot of details still to come out. Nevertheless, this eases concerns about the payroll going forward, I think.

From the programming perspective, how does this work? Have you ever watched Prime Ticket when there’s no Dodgers on? There’s basically nothing on that channel, so I don’t understand why the team needs their own channel or what they’re going to do with the rest of the time blocks. My hope is that they come up with exclusive content and interesting programs, but judging by the current state of television, I highly doubt it.

This can all be redeemed by giving A.J. Ellis his own show for “Between Two Palm Trees“, where he continues to troll teammates.

—–

Update

Bill Shaikin now writes that the deal is in the $7 billion to $8 billion range.

MLB.com: The Dodgers are making extensive upgrades to Dodger Stadium, and I have to say that it all sounds awesome.

The most obvious upgrade — and the one senior vice president of planning and development Janet Marie Smith mentioned first — is the replacement of the scoreboards located above the right- and left-field pavilions with larger, 1080 high-definition LED boards, as well as replacement of message boards, including ribbon boards at the Loge level and outfield wall.

The rectangular one that has been in left field since the last All-Star Game is being returned to the hexagon shape of the original. The boards will be 22 percent larger with an active viewing area 66 percent larger, allowing for more video and statistical information to be displayed.

A new, sharper sound system comes with it, designed to direct sound to each seating section and minimize echoes.

Worried that it’ll look too modernized and lose its charm? Don’t. The changes are actually quite subtle and they aren’t gaudy or ridiculous.

Responding to complaints from fans, a state-of-the-art Wi-Fi and cellular antenna system will go live to support cellphone and Internet connectivity.

There also is major work being done to widen concourses, expand and renovate restrooms, enhance food service, build new entry plazas and create bullpen overlooks for standing-room views of the game. Restrooms will be installed under the outfield pavilions and more wheelchair locations will be created.

The Wi-Fi has long been a complaint among people covering/attending Dodger games, so I’m guessing this will be a welcome fix.

For the players, a new clubhouse is being installed, along with an expanded weight room and underground batting cages.

“That was a hot-button issue for Mark [Walter, chairman],” said Kasten. “He wants the finest training center in all of sports.”

For the on-the-field product, this is the one improvement that could actually have an impact, so at least it isn’t all superficial.

Playground areas will be created for children in the pavilion and Reserve Level that will include life-size bobbleheads.

Smith said the franchise’s history will be celebrated by displaying retired uniform numbers at the Top of the Park, giant World Series rings representing the six World Series championships and a display of Gold Glove, MVP and Cy Young Awards at the Dugout Club as “an inspiration to fans and players.”

Like most things the new owners have done so far, it all sounds great, so hopefully the honeymoon ends up lasting.

Los Angeles Times: Bill Shaikin has an update on the ongoing Dodgers television contract negotiations.

Whether the Dodgers keep their television broadcasts on Fox Sports or move them to Time Warner Cable appears to be a “50-50″ proposition, according to a person familiar with the team’s TV negotiations but not authorized to discuss them.

The Dodgers’ discussions with MLB center on whether all of their guaranteed television revenue should be subject to baseball’s revenue-sharing program. At issue in a $6-billion deal: whether the team’s contribution to the program would be about $1 billion or about $2 billion.

The league believes — and there are indications the court might agree — that the Dodgers must take some element of risk with any money not subject to revenue sharing.

The Dodgers must contribute 34% of the annual rights fee to baseball’s revenue-sharing program. The team plans to launch its own regional sports network, in part to avoid the prospect of Fox or TWC paying a much higher rights fee.

However, in order to get dividends from a regional sports network, the league believes the team should be required to take the accompanying risk of ownership. The Dodgers are looking at other ways to structure a deal that would shield that money from revenue sharing and satisfy MLB as well.

I feel more uncomfortable now than before, when it was basically reported as a done deal with FOX, but it does appear that the team will be getting their due windfall at some point, regardless.

Of course, none of this will likely affect 2013 anyway, but if the team is asked to take on extensive risk or if there’s a $1 billion difference in revenue from what the owners thought they would get out of the deal, I would have to think it would affect payroll somewhat.

—–

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Somebody has to hit leadoff … right?

—–

FanGraphs: HGH testing in baseball? Public relations.

So what we see here appears — to my admittedly skeptical self, at least — less MLB and MLBPA joining hands to do what is right and rid the game of a great evil and more an appeal to doping fears and the court of public opinion. Personally, I just hope its intrusion into the game is minimal.

The public thinks HGH is a big deal, so why wouldn’t the MLB do testing and appear concerned as well? That way the MLB can beat their chest about being serious on PEDs, even though it makes basically no impact at all.

It’s an idiot test to me anyway, as I’m not sure why an athlete would waste their time with it. Placebo effect, I guess.

FanGraphs: David Laurila with the quotes of the year that he’s gathered. An interesting read.

Grantland: Jonah Keri on the riches of the Dodgers and the curse that comes along with it.

That, in a nutshell, is The Curse of Plenty. The Dodgers have more money to spend than anyone, without enough top players to go after. They’ve clogged their roster with merely decent talent at multiple positions because their general manager is impulsive and overeager to spend that money without properly gauging the market for the few elite talents out there. One great way to find those top players is to develop them yourself, but the Dodgers have shipped away several strong prospects to make reactionary trades, such as the Gonzalez deal.

This is still likely to be a good team, one that’s in the hunt for a playoff spot. But because of a few shortsighted moves and a market that can’t provide the great players they crave, the Dodgers may well find themselves back in familiar territory next fall: looking up at the Giants, and wondering where it all went wrong.

Been saying for a while now that all the hype and excitement is nice, but when it comes down to game time, the 2013 Dodgers are no lock, just like the 2012 Dodgers weren’t a lock after all the trades.

Did they get better? Yes, absolutely. However, even on paper, it’s nowhere near the best team in baseball, and it’s certainly no certainty to even win the division. That’s just the reality of the current team.

Now this situation is absolutely preferable to the previous situation, but optimism shouldn’t breed delusion.

—–

Feelin’ Kinda Blue: Dustin Nosler points out that for all the improvements in the off-season, the Dodgers bench is still mediocre.

—–

True Blue LA: Looking at A.J. Ellis and arbitration. He seems to be looking at around $3 million. A deserved raise.

True Blue LA: Analyzing Ronald Belisario and arbitration. He seems to be looking at a range between $1 million and $1.5 million. That is, of course, assuming the Dodgers think he can make it back into America. Who knows what his status is since he recently got kicked off his Winter League team in Venezuela.

—–

Baseball Prospectus: Do you scoff at all those horrid FOX “scouting reports” for pitchers? Of course you do. Well, Sam Miller has got you covered.

“If you are what you say you are…”

—–

Dodgers Now: Bill Shaikin reveals that the Dodgers are no longer exclusively talking with Fox, as they’ve met with Time Warner now.

The Dodgers and Time Warner Cable have met to discuss a potential deal for the team’s television rights, according to two people familiar with the talks but not authorized to comment on them.

The Dodgers are considering at least three options for their next television home: the Prime Ticket cable channel owned by Fox Sports, the SportsNet cable channel owned by TWC or a new channel owned by the team.

Not sure whether this is a positive or a negative in terms of potential television money, but I figure competition rarely generates a lower return.

Baseball Prospectus: Maury Brown had an interview with Stan Kasten at the Winter Meetings.

—–

Los Angeles Times: Bill Shaikin warns about the perils of long-term big-money contracts.

But…

They do take players to 2017, and beyond. If the Dodgers win in 2013, well, who cares?

…that’s always the rub. If they win, even if the players start to implode in the context of their contracts, it’s justifiable. Flags fly forever, after all.

But they have to win.

FanGraphs: Jeff Sullivan reminds us that even if the Dodgers literally had an unlimited payroll and bought every top player they could on the free agent market, it still wouldn’t have resulted in a division winner in 2012.

Smarts still matter. The limit though becomes roster spots.

—–

FanGraphs: Dave Cameron questions why people assume prospects are always unknown quantities but are fine assuming that veterans always provide consistent results.

Wil Myers is a risk, but so is James Shields. So is Albert Pujols. So is Justin Verlander. So is everyone.

When we start using labels like “prospect” or “proven veteran” to describe players, we lose that reality. Myers and Shields both have the chance to be good, bad, or anything in between. Let’s not let the terms we use to describe player types obscure that fact. The Royals didn’t trade a lottery ticket for a paycheck; they traded a few lottery tickets for a scratch-off card. They probably did reduce their overall performance risk for 2013, but it didn’t go to zero. Let’s not pretend that we know so much about projecting the future of Major League players that we create an artificial divide where one does not exist.

Prospects come with uncertainty, but so do Major League players. Everyone is a risk. You weigh that risk against the potential rewards, and you figure out which trade-offs are worth making. Once you cross over into treating some players as non-risks, though, you’ve stopped evaluating players properly. And then you make trades like the one the Royals just made.

This is precisely how I’ve thought since I started blogging. Everybody has a percentage of relative success, and things can always go against that, but what you want to try and do is play the odds as best you can and hopefully the cards go your way.

The Dodgers television contract will total between $6 billion and $7 billion over a 25-year span, thus potentially tripling the sale price of the team, according to Deadline‘s Nikki Finke.

Insiders tell me that Fox Sports is close to clinching the exclusive TV rights for the Los Angeles Dodgers by paying between $6 billion and $7 billion over 25 years to put the team on its regional sports network in Southern California and of course its national Fox Broadcasting Company. Fox already shows the games on its Prime Ticket local cable channel but also has Fox Sports West here.

So for those counting, just by taking the middle ground of that estimate, it puts the Dodgers television revenue at $260 million per year or $220 million more per year than they had been receiving annually ($40 million).

If true, that sort of makes a mockery of all the people who were borderline outraged at the $2.15 billion price tag of the team when it was awarded to Guggenheim Partners.

—–

The deal is still at risk of not getting done though, as FOX has apparently set a deadline.

I’m told a deal came “very close” to being done about a week ago “and then it went a little bit south”. To rattle Guggenheim’s cages, Fox Sports delivered an ultimatum that a deal had to be done by the end of this month or else it would stop negotiating. (Terms like “It’s dead” and “We’re out” were used.) The Fox Sports gambit worked. Because it would have left Guggenheim in a terrible situation without multiple bidders and with little leverage for next-in-line Time Warner Cable since CBS, Comcast/NBC, ABC/ESPN and even the MSG Network (controlled by the owners of Cablevision) never materialized. Of course, Guggenheim could have opted for the Dodgers to start its own network, as the Mets and Yankees have done. But big rewards come with big risks.

While I’m not sure the situation would be as bleak as Finke tries to paint it, it certainly seems a tad insane to be paying the rumored price, and I doubt they could get that kind of a money from anybody else, so FOX probably does have the leverage to make the demand in question.

—–

With that said, while I realize Finke is Deadline’s editor-in-chief, I have no idea how credible she is, but stuff like this makes me more skeptical than I want to be:

But the sheer greed of Guggenheim’s ask on this new deal is staggering, especially when you consider it will all get passed down to the cable systems, advertisers, and ultimately consumers. The alternative for Guggenheim included higher ticket prices which would serve to only further alienate fans. Plus the new owners claim to need the money to bribe talented players to come to the mediocre Dodgers. And then there’s the sad fact that Major League Baseball teams are shifting from broadcast TV to cable networks – so fewer games will be available on free TV. Fox Sports expects to broadcast only one or two Major League Baseball games a week for the national audience next season.

The amount of editorializing in that news story is … weird. She has a point, sure, but it’s not as if this is a new trend started by the Dodgers with FOX or something, as Mike Petriello pointed out in his own writings on the subject.

Heck, she points out as much in her own story:

Freer really knows this business – he ran the Fox regional sports networks for nearly half a decade – and knows not to overpay. He’s not when you consider that the Dodgers will play 162 games when the season starts in April. And yet TV rights to the Lakers who play 82 games just sold to Time Warner Cable for $3B over 20 years. And Fox just paid $3B for 49% of the YES Network which owns TV rights to the New York Yankees for 20 years. Considering that Fox also has the right to own 80% of YES (and will surely exercise that option), then $6B-$7B for this Dodgers deal sounds about about right given the hyper-inflated finances of sports TV rights. In the era of DVR, Hulu, Netflix and other ways to watch TV, sports viewers (overwhelmingly male) watch live and therefore don’t always skip through ads.

So I’m not seeing the reason for outrage at this specific deal.

—–

As far as the team goes, this would go a long way to assuaging any doubt or apprehension about the team’s payroll both now and in the future. The Dodgers would be setup to spend and spend big for a long while, and when the ink hits the paper, it’ll truly mark the beginning of a new era.

Up until now, people have just been doing a lot of optimistic assuming, but if this story holds up, it looks like all that optimism will finally be justified.

With the Los Angeles Dodgers in the news for the impending bidding war over the ownership of the team, I thought this would be as appropriate a time as ever to run through the publicly declared bidders, as the deadline for submission has come and gone.

Bill Shaikin of the Los Angeles Times breaks down the specifics of the bidding process in nice and tidy parts.

If McCourt has the final say on the new owner, what role does Major League Baseball play in the process?

MLB has agreed to approve up to 10 bidders. Yet Blackstone is unlikely to clear even that many bidders for MLB consideration, given the time needed for the league to investigate the structure and financing of each potential ownership group. To cover the costs of the investigation, MLB will charge $25,000 to each bidder cleared by Blackstone.

If MLB rejects a prospective bidder cleared by Blackstone, does McCourt have any recourse?

Yes. He can appeal to the mediator who brokered his settlement with MLB.

Do the other MLB owners have a say?

Yes. They can approve or reject any bidder that passes the MLB investigation. However, once the league informs Blackstone of which prospective buyers have been approved by MLB owners, McCourt conducts the final round of bidding and determines the winner. If the winning bidder’s final offer is dramatically higher than the initial offer, MLB reserves the right to review the financing.

When will this happen?

There is no set date, but the calendar suggests the end of March. McCourt has agreed to select the winning bidder by April 1 and disclose the winner to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court by April 6.

Outstanding stuff, as always.

Regarding the bidders themselves though, who are the groups and what good or bad traits do they bring to the table?

Let’s find out.

=====

Mark Cuban

The Good: A charismatic fan favorite of an owner, basically the exact opposite of Frank McCourt. His tenure as the Dallas Mavericks owner has obviously been a successful one, as he turned a joke of a franchise into a perennial contender. While his money has often been cited as the reason for the change, he has proven that he will explore any avenue that could potentially give his franchise an advantage. As such, he is unlikely to be as sabermetrics averse as the current Dodgers front office, as evidenced by his implementation of analytics in basketball to score his first NBA Championship.

The Bad: I’m not convinced he’s that legit of a threat to win. He’s not an idiot and he’s unlikely to go over whatever he has the Dodgers valued at, as he showed in the bidding for the Texas Rangers. While I’m confident he would find quality baseball men to run the franchise, he’s not going into the process with anybody in place.

My Take: I would love for him to be owner, as his history suggests he would make winning a priority and would explore the most efficient ways to do so. Unfortunately, I think it’s a long shot.

—–

Magic Johnson/Stan Kasten/Mark Walters

The Good: Magic Johnson instantly becomes the face of the ownership and it should go over extremely well with fans. Stan Kasten employs his experience with the Atlanta Braves and Washington Nationals to run the baseball operations. Mark Walters could use his eleventy trillion dollars to supplement the payroll and buy elite players. Seriously, Guggenheim Partners has over $100 billion in assets and he’s the CEO.

The Bad: Uh…none?

My Take: My current preference to win the bidding. I can’t see a better combination.

—–

Steven Cohen/Steve Greenberg/Arn Tellem

The Good: Founder of SAC Capital Advisors and a hedge fund manager, Steven Cohen is worth over $8 billion. The group’s baseball experience will come from Steve Greenberg, who served as a deputy commissioner of baseball, and Arn Tellem, who is a player agent for the Wasserman Media Group. Get to use puns on Arn Tellem’s name.

The Bad: In today’s political environment, it’s not exactly ideal in the public relations department to have a hedge fund manager as an owner, and especially not one whose company is under investigation by the SEC. Went through an ugly divorce that led to lawsuits. Sound familiar?

My Take: Do. Not. Want. I don’t want to deal with yet another owner with baggage. Haven’t Bud Selig and the other owners learned their lesson yet? Yes, other ownership groups could have drama, but this one has already been confirmed to have been involved in messes before, so why bother? My fear is that the Blackstone Group, which is in control of the sale, is a significant investor in SAC Capital Advisors, and that could give the latter a gigantic advantage.

—–

Rick Caruso/Joe Torre/Byron Trott

The Good: Joe Torre becomes the face of the franchise and has a ton of baseball experience. Despite his tenure with the Dodgers, I get the feeling that fans love him, and given that he just left a position with the MLB, he and Bud Selig should have a solid working relationship. Byron Trott, named by Warren Buffett as the only banker he trusts, heads BDT Capital Partners and was previously the vice chairman for Goldman Sachs. I would have the same concerns with him as I do with Steven Cohen, but he has no legal issues with his comapny and Buffett’s word carries weight. Rick Caruso is a local developer who is worth around $1.7 billion and has tons of local popularity.

The Bad: Honestly? Torre as the baseball man frightens me. A lot. He’s not progressive with his thinking at all and he never seemed to have a problem with Ned Colletti, leading me to believe he just might keep him around. Disastrous.

My Take: I don’t necessarily have a problem with the group, but the risk that Torre could regress the Dodgers to decades old thinking and retain Colletti is too much for me to bear. Out.

—–

Dennis Gilbert/Larry King/Jason Reese/Randy Wooster

The Good: Both Larry King and Dennis Gilbert are Dodgers fans, which is always a plus. King’s name carries weight, though I’m not sure he has any name value as a sports personality. Gilbert has extensive baseball experience as a former player agent, former player, and current special assistant to Jerry Reinsdorf, who owns the Chicago White Sox. Jason Reese and Randy Wooster are Chairman/CEO and President of Imperial Capital, a Los Angeles area investment bank, and the two will be providing the financial thump in the group.

The Bad: Not much public motivation, honestly. No idea if they actually have the money to compete.

My Take: If they have the money to spend competitively, then I have no issue with the group, but as of now, that’s a big unknown. There are rumors that they might have to hook up with Fox or Time Warner to get the finances to work. Ugh.

—–

Leo Hindery/Marc Utay

The Good: Leo Hindery is a Managing Partner at private equity fund InterMedia Partners, and he founded the YES Network for the New York Yankees and served as Chairman & CEO until 2004. Marc Utay is a Managing Partner at private equity firm Clarion Capital Partners. The pair of them tried to buy the Chicago Cubs back in 2009, so there’s a history there.

The Bad: They’ve been under the radar, and as a result not much has been revealed as to their finances or plans, so the biggest downside right now is the uncertainty.

My Take: Hard to judge what you know little about, so I can’t provide much positive or negative feedback until more is revealed.

—–

Steve Garvey/Orel Hershiser

The Good: Their resume in baseball speaks for itself, though little is known about their actual qualifications as executives. They certainly figure to have local support and can become the faces of the franchise.

The Bad: They don’t seem to have funding. Last time they spoke on the Dodgers, they were still looking for investors and it’s unknown who they found.

My Take: Not enough information to endorse two former players with unknown finances and unknown executive experience.

—–

Josh Macciello

The Good: He’s not a hedge fund manager or a banker or an executive, he’s a regular guy like you or me. He’s the CEO of ArmItal Sports and plans to use the gold mines he owns, which are valued in the tens of billions, as collateral for the purchase, so he says he has the financial backing.

The Bad: He’s a regular guy like you or me. The lack of baseball connections, the lack of executive experience, the lack of community support, and the legitimate questions about whether he would even be taken seriously by the commissioner and fellow owners. All of those are negatives.

My Take: I understand why fans might want to side with him, but I just can’t. It has little to do with his looks or his spelling or whatever else. It has more to do with the lack of experience in everything that I think an owner should be about.

—–

Stan Kroenke

The Good: Stan Kroenke is the largest shareholder in Arsenal F.C., owns the St. Louis Rams, Colorado Mammoth, and Colorado Rapids, and he formerly owned the Denver Nuggets, Colorado Avalanche, and Colorado Crush, all of which he transferred to his son to comply with NFL ownership rules. Needless to say, he has experience with this sort of thing and his teams have generally performed well under his tenure in charge.

The Bad: Perhaps his money will be spread a bit thin and I’m wondering if this has more to do with trying to move the Rams to Los Angeles than actually caring about the Dodgers. No idea about the baseball side of things.

My Take: I’m okay with this in theory, but I’m going to hold off on endorsing the move until more is revealed. We know a lot about him as an owner, but not a lot about his interest in the Dodgers.

—–

Potential Mergers And/Or Group Joiners

Peter O’Malley: Submitted an ownership bid himself, but has been rumored to be in discussions to link up with the bid of Stanley Gold & Roy Disney’s Family and/or Tony Ressler. A throwback to the good old days of Dodgers family ownership, but it’s probably not gonna help that he was talking about how terrible McCourt was as an owner considering McCourt will hold the ultimate decision.

Stanley Gold/Roy Disney’s Family: Submitted an ownership bid as their own group, but have been rumored to be linking up with Peter O’Malley and/or Tony Ressler. Gold is the President & CEO of Shamrock Holdings and has local popularity, but his financial clout is not known. Not much is known about what Roy Disney’s Family brings to the table either, I assume it’s money but nobody knows. Group is short on baseball experience.

Tony Ressler: Rumored to be linking up with either Stanley Gold & Roy Disney’s Family or Peter O’Malley or either or both. Co-founder of local investment firm Ares Capital, which has in excess of $40 billion in assets.

Tom Barrack: Chairman & CEO of investment firm Colony Capital has a net worth over $1 billion. Has been rumored to join several groups, but no specifics have popped up yet.

Fox: Seriously? No. Please no.

Time Warner Cable: They haven’t actually done anything wrong, but why get involved in this type of ownership situation again? Fool me once…

—–

Rumored Bidders

Alan Casden: A real estate developer worth over $1 billion, he might have more interest in the property the Dodgers own more than the team itself, which is disconcerting. Remember, this is the guy who tried to buy the team last time around and had plans to move Dodger Stadium to a different location. MLB didn’t want him last time because of an investigation into illegal campaign contributions to local politicians. Why deal with the headache?

Ron Burkle: Worth over $3 billion dollars, he is the current co-owner of the Pittsburgh Penguins. While no baseball people are rumored to be on board yet, he seems to carry a lot of weight locally. Divorce was…uh…messy.

Fred Claire/Andy Dolich/Ben Hwang: Fred Claire has experience as an executive with the Los Angeles Dodgers and Andy Dolich has experience as an executive with the Oakland Athletics. Ben Hwang, former executive at Life Technologies, will provide the finances for the group. The question mark revolves around money and whether they have enough of it.

Tom Golisano: Founder of Paychex is worth $1.4 billion and is the former owner of the Buffalo Sabres. Was preparing a bid, but it’s unknown whether he followed through or not. Worth noting is that Sabres fans criticized his lack of spending, and he’s on record as saying that the biggest payroll doesn’t lead to championships, which is correct in theory, but seems like code for not wanting to spend much.

Los Angeles Dodgers: Reliever Blake Hawksworth had surgery on Wednesday to remove bone spurs and scar tissue. Probably going to be a bit late to Spring Training.

Los Angeles Dodgers: Clayton Kershaw was named the 2011 Sportsman Of The Year by the Los Angeles Sports Council. Well deserved.

—–

Los Angeles Times: Tom Barrack‘s interest in purchasing the Dodgers confirmed.

Tom Barrack, a former USC rugby player who launched a real estate fund that has expanded into international sports and entertainment investments, is interested in pursuing the Dodgers.

Barrack heads Colony Capital, a Santa Monica firm that controls $34 billion in assets, according to Forbes. Barrack’s interest was confirmed by two people familiar with the matter but not authorized to comment.

Don’t know anything about him.

Los Angeles Times: Alan Casden, whose name was thrown in the ring earlier, wants in on the Dodgers.

In 2003, Beverly Hills developer Alan Casden tried to buy the Dodgers from Fox. The company ultimately sold the team to Frank McCourt.

Casden now would like to buy the team from McCourt. And, with its legal hostilities against the Dodgers ceased, Fox would like to buy back part of the team.

That note about Fox wanting a minority stake in ownership frightens me.

—–

Baseball Nation: Yeah, MLB‘s policy on baseball videos absolutely blows.

Until then — and this is the important part — how does the availability of such a game do anything but help Major League Baseball?

The existence of a grainy, straight-from-Betamax video of the 1980 Giants isn’t something that’s going to make me say, “Well, so long MLB.tv subscription! Joe Pettini videos are online!” It’s something that I’ll send to my dad with a note asking if he remembers when Pettini gave me an autograph that one time. It’s something that will make me look up Pettini’s stats on Baseball Reference. Say, did you know that the only home run in Pettini’s career came against Willie Hernandez, future Cy Young winner?

It would keep me engaged with baseball-related activities in the winter. It would allow me to share my memories of the game.

But until MLB Advanced Media realizes that a draconian zero-tolerance policy is something that only made sense in 2000 before they could figure out a better policy, I’m keeping this guy’s YouTube channel to myself. If you really want a link, wear a carnation on your lapel, and meet me in front of the library at noon. I can’t tell you which library. That would give away too much.

Just go there and wait. And wait. And wait. Any minute now, and you’ll get to enjoy completely insignificant baseball history that isn’t available anywhere else at any price. Keep waiting. Keeeeeeeep waiting …

Even if they won’t allow videos on YouTube, at least make videos embeddable. They can still run ads on those clips and everything.

FanGraphs: How does a hitter’s power age? Not well, apparently.

Matt Kemp had an awesome year this year, obviously, and at 26 it’s tempting to continue drawing a straight line through his ISOs — he’ll hit more than 40 out next year, right? This research suggests that it’s likely the 26-year-old is on the wrong side of his power peak. 27-year-old Ryan Braun may see a power dip, and it might not have anything to do with his recent positive test. Look up and down last year’s qualified ISO leaderboard, and you’ll only see Stanton and the 23-year-old Justin Upton definitively on the correct side of their power peaks.

Some aspects of a hitter’s game do age like wine — he’ll walk more and strikeout less every year until he’s close to 30 years old at least. But power? Power ages like cheese. Don’t leave your slugger in the fridge past 26 years old, or you’ll see the mold spores beginning to form. Don’t throw it out (all cheese has some mold in it anyway), but remember these curves when projecting performance.

Surprising considering the long accepted age for power emergence was mid-to-late 20s.

Baseball Prospectus: Do AAAA players actually exist?

Los Angeles Times: Tony Ressler and Stanley Gold throw their hat into the Dodgers ownership ring.

Los Angeles Times: Disney is in too.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello has the most comprehensive look at the pros and cons of all the Dodgers ownership candidates.

—–

Los Angeles Times: The Dodgers and Fox have settled their dispute over television rights.

The settlement means that McCourt has reached agreement with his two primary adversaries in U.S. Bankruptcy Court — MLB and Fox — and can proceed to meet an April 30 deadline for the sale of the Dodgers.

Thank you.

Los Angeles Times: Steven Cohen is quickly becoming a player in the Dodgers ownership sweepstakes.

Steven Cohen, a billionaire eight times over, is bidding for the Dodgers in a process tilted toward the high bidder.

Money? Awesome.

Wait…

Two former SAC fund managers have pleaded guilty to insider trading as part of a wide-ranging federal investigation in which the company’s records have been subpoenaed, according to the Wall Street Journal. No charges have been filed against Cohen or his company, according to the Journal.

Honestly, he seems to be trying to do his due diligence if you read the entirety of his plans, and I know he wasn’t the one under investigation, but his ownership just seems too similar to a combination of Fox and Frank McCourt for me to support.

Of course, we all know that this is who Frank McCourt will end up choosing.

—–

Dodger Thoughts: A reminder that money is not enough, it’s how you spend the money you have. Loved the analogy.

Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness: Mike Petriello highlights what the lack of international spending has cost the Dodgers.

—–

Shadows Of ’88: A new Dodgers blog has arrived on the scene, give it a shot.

As I covered yesterday, the Los Angeles Dodgers are going to be put up for auction in bankruptcy court, thus ending Frank McCourt‘s embarrassing reign as Dodgers owner. However, while we’re busy celebrating his demise, fans need to be aware of the next owner’s credentials, lest history repeat itself.

For their part, Major League Baseball has committed to facilitating the process quickly and approving potential bidders as owners before the auction starts.

Still, nobody knows exactly who will be in the Dodgers sweepstakes just yet, but there are a ton of rumors to go around.

—–

So who are the rumored potential owners of the Dodgers?

Bill Shaikin has already ruled out former Dodgers owner Fox (thank god) and Oakland Athletics owner Lew Wolff, but there are many others showing interest, so let’s take a closer look.

==========
The Frontrunners
==========

Mark Cuban, the billionaire owner of the Dallas Mavericks, is often talked about as a potential buyer and is a popular choice with the fans. He has previously shown interest in purchasing an MLB franchise with the Chicago Cubs and Texas Rangers, so there’s not only current interest, but precedent as well.

That said, Ken Rosenthal reports that Cuban is not willing to go over 1 billion dollars on the Dodgers, while Jon Heyman says 1 billion dollars is the lowest price the Dodgers are likely to go for.

While it would be simple enough to dismiss Cuban’s price talk as not wanting to show his hand, he’s unlikely to overpay just for the sake of getting to own a baseball franchise, as he proved when he finished in second place for the Rangers.

—–

Dennis Gilbert, the current Chicago White Sox executive who made a run at the Rangers ownership, is getting significant buzz from the press, as his name pops up in the top 3 of almost every article talking about potential Dodgers buyers. Fans seem content enough when his name pops up, which I assume is primarily because he’s a fan of the Dodgers himself. However, not much is known about his investment group, or if he even has one put together.

==========
The Declared
==========

Former Dodgers GM Fred Claire has already publicly declared his interest in the team and he seems to have support behind him.

While true that he was the GM at the time of the last Dodgers World Series victory, it should be noted that his major baseball moves were signing Daryl Strawberry, trading for Eric Davis, and trading for Delino DeShields.

His investment group includes Ben Hwang, a former Senior Director of Life Technologies Corporation, and Andy Dolich, a former high ranking executive for many teams in many professional leagues.

—–

Peter O’Malley, former owner of the Dodgers, has said that he’ll pursue the team.

While it’s nice that he talks about restoring the franchise, fans must remember that he sold it to Fox in 1998 to begin with, which started this whole downward spiral. I’m happy that he says he reads Dodger related blogs, but there are significant concerns with his potential ownership, especially considering part of the reason he sold the team in the first place was that he believed he didn’t have the money to be in baseball anymore.

I suppose there’s always the possibility that the rest of the group he puts together could be financially stacked, but we don’t know anything about them yet, so all we can judge is the frontman.

—–

Former Dodgers players Steve Garvey and Orel Hershiser are fronting an investment group that plans to bid on the team.

The investors are unknown as of now, so it’s obviously hard to judge their credentials, but while I love Hershiser, Garvey was once broke and his personal affairs have been well publicized, so I’m not sure about the decision making of the investors if that’s the primary face for the group.

==========
The Sleepers
==========

Ron Burkle, a California born billionaire and co-owner of the Pittsburgh Penguins, lurks in the shadows a bit.

He has stated in regards to the Dodgers that he “would be proud to be part of its future“, but hasn’t said much else about the situation.

—–

Alan Casden, a real estate businessman, comes up in auction related articles primarily as a throw-in type of name, but he seems to have the means and had previously made a run at buying the team.

==========
The Unlikely
==========

Alec Gores, a billionaire businessman, keeps coming up in articles about the auction, but I can’t see any actual interest from him or reason for buying the team.

—–

Mark Attanasio, the owner of the Milwaukee Brewers, has been mentioned in articles, but I’m pretty sure the only reason is his ties to Los Angeles.

—–

Tom Werner, a businessman with stakes in the Boston Red Sox and Liverpool F.C. via New England Sports Ventures, is primarily mentioned due to his Los Angeles ties.

—–

Billionaire Eli Broad is included in the speculation of those who might bid on the Dodgers, but he has declined comment on the issue and the speculation seems hopeful at best.

—–

Billionaire businessman Larry Ellison has been included in the speculation as well, but he hasn’t commented either. Again, seems more hopeful than legitimate at this point.